PerreaultForever

I did have fun. Thanks. You only like it when it's in one direction though don't you? Tough to look in the mirror sometimes isn't it? Definitely not, but it's also kind of useful to block a goalie's vision as much as possible and in general it takes a bigger body in front, or at least a tough and unafraid one, but bigger is better. It's still a really funny image to look at Skinner trying to screen a goalie who is simply looking over his head. That was the comment that started this, and it's a funny image and always will be.

Yes, I would like to see VO Tage and Asplund again to see if the early season chemistry was real or a fluke. I thought the combination of that line worked. I'd try Mitts between Tuch and Skinner but it seems Granato wants Mitts paired with the most speed so the whole line can play very up tempo rather than balancing them more. I personally would rather see the top 3 lines balanced as much as possible. Line chemistry is important though. I'd really like to see some stability with the players that they plan to bring back next year. Create those lines, pairings, roles, slot the people in them and build the base of real continuity. It's time.

Wrong Wrong Partly right Correct

Could be though. Might have been done in an IOU sort of way, allowing Buffalo to pick up less money in total and allowing Vegas to keep that body on the roster until Eichel was ready. It's possible.

Well first, I wouldn't miss the point if you actually articulated it rather than just taking snipes. Second, who said anything about point shots???? Third, I could have said our PP was better when Kreuger stuck Risto in front, but the Scotty Bowman reference was just more fun to make. So to sum, if you're still missing he actual point, a good PP is about puck movement, speed, possession and unpredictability. Having a big body in front to tip shots, tie up the D and/or grab a rebound is ideal, especially when he can impede a goalie's vision. Skinner doesn't shy from getting in tight, but he is of limited effectiveness in that role, and as such our PP isn't all that powerful. But you knew that.

I guess they argue that Gretzky carried the other two, or elevated them above where they'd have been. Kind of silly imo. Trottier line should be higher.

So if we can be the team that takes on one of their contracts for next to nothing do we add that guy into the trade? Cause in a way it would. imo KA should certainly be discussing it.

Sure. Crazy idea. Nobody puts big guys in front to block the goalie's vision. Unheard of. Sticking Larry Robinson in front should have disqualified Scotty Bowman from the Hall of Fame. What a dumbass he was.

I'm hoping. I'm really just speaking for myself personally. I almost gave up on being a fan this year. I had it in my head that although I've had enough, if they tear it down (right or wrong) I can put the blame on the Eichel Reinhart Risto core group and bad leadership, bad coaching, bad management, and we can have one last redo, one more let's get it right this time. If they'd continued as it was I'd already be gone. So to me, again just personally, this is the bottom for me and the rebuild is in full swing. Multiple picks, multiple prospects, a new attitude (hopefully) and we start to rise back to where we should be step by step. If this falls apart I don't think I can take any more, and I've been a fan since the 70s.

I agree we should a decent veteran goalie to play with UPL but I don't think this year would have gone a whole lot better with a goalie unless it was Hasek. We weren't going to make the playoffs. In the most optimistic scenario we might have been on the outside looking in with Detroit, but that's at best so I guess better for us fans week to week but ultimately just a worse draft choice. From KA's perspective I think this year was only about trading Eichel and creating a foundation to build on. Tanking (in a way) was just fine with them and in the long run this will be better for us. BUT, this is it for me personally. Next year no more waiting, no more excuses. If we can't start moving up next year we never will.

Just one? 🙂

I'm sorry, but cherry picking stats can spin things in any direction you want. We also are the 2nd worst in terms of giving up shots on goal and deep in the lower third in terms of shots on goal. So if we don't cough up the puck at center ice who gives a crap? Now having said that, even that doesn't mean a lot unless you consider where the shots come from, how many rebounds you give up, how many are actual scoring chances, how many get blocked and so on. If you want to play with stats, you need to look at ALL of them. We are NOT a hard team to play against.

Is this the same guy? https://www.nelsonstar.com/sports/around-the-bchl-b-c-junior-a-league-dominates-team-canada-west-roster/

Care to elaborate?

Oh please, in today's game, you want/need defenders with strength and reach. At 6'7" he has that possibility. We already have speedy puck movers, we need more defenders. We are talking about a very late first rounder here not a top 10. But here's the real question. Do you not think he is comparable to Samuelsson and could be of similar worth? (You were probably against picking him when we did too I'd guess)

Power.

Seriously? Must be the Pittsburgh thing. Seems everybody these days is smitten by anybody who ever worked for them.

Nah, not at all. Maybe it reads that way unintentionally. Should read as complete indifference. A few years from now we won't even remember he was here.

Don't you argue that +/- is an outdated meaningless stat? Guy is 6'7" strong and a decent puck handler. He's ranked anywhere from 15 to 50, sportsnet and Bob MacKenzie have him around 28, 29, which is where I'm putting him. He would need time and development, but I see him as another Samuelsson but on the right side. What we need. He'd be a 2nd round steal, but I'd jump on him with the late 1st because of the positional need. and his name's Maveric. That's worth moving him up a few slots just for the sheer joy of being able to talk about him.

So by your reckoning Bjork is one of our best players? Stats - phht. So many ways to lie with them or distort what's actually happening. We play crap team D. Full stop.

Maybe you feel that way, but I don't see pro sports that way. There's periodic discussions of why do these guys get so much money compared to doctors or other actually important societal contributors, and part of that argument goes to they have short careers and can get injured. Sometimes it happens, but he got a boat load of money for his short career (if it is short) and he really didn't deserve it, so he will be fine. Can go into coaching if he wants to stay in the game. Guy made more money in one year than many people earn in a lifetime and you want me to feel sorry for him because his career might end? Sorry, just can't do it.

Why? Why not: https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/578989/maveric-lamoureux I'm also thinking Jiricek would be good around that 5th spot.

This is true. We are not a difficult team to play against, and the concept of team defense seems to be beyond us. I'm not sure what the long term strategy is, and while I don't want to play Bylsma hockey next year, I am hoping for more continuity and the introduction of a solid defensive system. Not sold on Granato just yet.

They don't need extra incentive, they get paid millions to be GMs and deconstruction can be a plan they sell the owners on. The only question to me would be are the coaches ever in on it. I mean in our first tank Ted Nolan was a sacrificial lamb, and he knew it I think, but the relationship between a GM and a coach of a tank team has to be unusual at the very least. Ya, that was my point earlier. The Pegula plan is get rid of all goalies and that's why I think this year was a tank too. I just don't think the players lose on purpose.