PerreaultForever

lol, well I was right, it's been quite a while.

No, they've won games late in the year but not in the critical phase after Christmas. We have started fast several times and then faltered but won again late in the year when once again it's the back up goalies and meaningless games.

Oh I almost forgot, it was all great and everything BUT Pilut absolutely sucks and needs to be removed from this roster. Absolutely useless.

I think they've actually won 3 in a row. I say it changes things because it shows we have evolved into a team that can beat playoff teams above us. Obviously we would have to continue that down the line against Detroit and Florida and so on. There has been a shift in play recently, partly because of injured D men returning (mostly Samuelsson) but mostly because of Cozens seemingly turning into our missing 2C. It's made a huge difference so one presumes it continues and then this team should be better her on in. Pittsburgh is the real first test. Goaltending and lack of depth will still likely sink us.

He's certainly developed in an unexpected way over the last 2 years and become an offensive force. He seems to be a true legit goal scorer who can turn a game at any moment from any spot. I guess the lesson here is don't give up on prospects in their early 20's.

I don't think they're making the playoffs. We've picked up points against many back up goalies and weaker opponents. Historically we falter in the second half when teams tighten it up and things get more serious. I will perhaps rethink this if we win the home and home against Pittsburgh.

I honestly don't remember when we were last on the right side of a blow out like that. I think it's been a long time. So good it almost got boring at the end. Another thing I haven't felt in a while - bored by it being too easy. (but really just a little) Beat Pittsburgh and I might start to believe.

These are the sort of games the team simply should win. There is no reason not to be better than them.

I don't disagree with this in general, but I have one basic issue. The usage of this term "the plan". What exactly is the plan? Is there a timeline? How long is the plan? When do you get to say it's going too slowly or alternately it's ahead of schedule? What is it measured against? I see guesses and assertions but nowhere do I see the actual "plan". Most specifically, if the "plan" involves winning, how on earth can you logically say not getting a solid NHL goalie in place is a good "plan"????

Definitely could be.

Not ALL.

I actually spent some time looking and failed to find it BUT you guys should all go back several years and look at some of your comments. The enthusiasm for the upcoming season threads are hilarious in hindsight. I think my favourite comment of all was " Nylander and Mitts seem to have a little bit of chemistry. " from 2018. I won't post links to hilarious comments so as not to single out or embarrass people still here but really, go back and look at some of the stuff from 3 or 4 or more years ago. It'll be humbling and if you take it the right way, hilarious.

What I'm saying is I'm not going to anoint people, they have to earn it. For example, right now the kid line is showing signs of being very good, but the sample size is way too small and all the bandwagon jumpers proclaiming the job as finished (only the third line needs fixing now) could hurt themselves falling off real soon. Let's see how they do against pittsburgh for example. Dominating San Jose this year isn't a huge accomplishment.

I forgot, Moulson was also signed to be a 20-30 goal winger. There were many bad signings and we all know it failed miserably but you can see the theory and idea. Two top centers, two checking centers, gritty bottom end, puck moving D men paired with tougher stay at home types and a budding star goalie. Veterans and kids. No need to go over how and why it failed, but when it was first assembled hopes were VERY high.

No.

Yes, in hindsight, but on paper it appeared that we had assembled 2 lines at that time with two top centers. You can't measure the failure against that any more than you can assume that we have 2 solid top lines now. Kid line had a good week with Cozens having a breakout week. Will this continue for all 3? No idea. Not to mention Skinner could crap out at any time, one never knows. We MIGHT have the makings of 2 top lines, and I hope we do, but it's far too early to say.

It's unreasonable either way as it was years ago but whatever the case, just assume I was on crack and hallucinated it. That's fine.

Cocky is fine, but it can be arrogance. The question is what happens when adversity hits. As for snarl, I don't mean bad temper (Krebs seems to have a bit of that but it's not helping him) but more of what Dahlin has developed. Give me a shot or a hit on a shift and I'm going to give you a harder one first chance I get. That sort of thing.

That's not wrong. So send him to Rochester, just like they sent Thompson.

I remember reading it and laughing. I know it was somewhere on Sabrespace but it's funny you took the time to dig. I feel happy that you consider arguing with me that important. Lol, maybe I hallucinated it.

lol, be reasonable man, it was YEARS AGO. Prove me wrong. or don't.

All I'm saying is I don't believe until I see it at an NHL level. Someone says "problem will be solved next year, next year we will have.............eg. Rosen" I'm simply saying problem MIGHT be solved, MIGHT NOT. No guarantees prospects become what we hope. That's all.

I don't equate them either. We simply could use a little more snarl on this team and if Peterka could add that to the line it would be an even better unit.

Well on paper I think they did, but in hindsight of course they were not good or we wouldn't have been where we were would we? Kane was certainly supposed to be a top winger. In a way he was. When Okposo was brought in he was supposed to be a 20-30 goal a year guy. I don't remember the line combinations but we had enough (supposed) talent at the time to say 2 top lines. Losing games we juggled personnel a lot. Cozens is getting good, but he's not ROR yet.

Did they not have 2 legit lines when Eichel and O'Reilly were here with Kane and Reinhart as well. I think they did. It was different, but I think those lines were "legit" regardless of how that ended. The optimism is fine, and I hope the believers have it right, but we aren't really beating the good teams yet. We have a long way to go. We kind of have half a team, which is better than what we had before.