jame
-
Posts
651 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by jame
-
-
3 minutes ago, SwampD said:
You are wrong.
Phil agreed with you
-
2 minutes ago, inkman said:
You don't always make a GT change due to GT play
That’s true. The context of not only the game, but the season is also important. Hutton is coming his two best games of 2019, if the Sabres have even a sliver of hope, it rests on him getting hot again... raking him for the play of his teammates was a stupid move by Housley who showed his tool box is empty
-
1 minute ago, SwampD said:
No way.
Yes way Ted
-
That is a really ***** goalie pull Housley...
-
1
-
-
Typical
-
Sheary was in good position to watch that goal
-
50 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
No, I'm saying the style they play helps goaltenders. Unless we suddenly think Greiss is good too.
Yes. I think everyone is in agreement on the incredibly successful system that a high quality coach implemented to ensure his young, talent deficient team could be successful and learn how to win. My point is nothing was preventing Botts from hiring good coaches who know how to build a young team... other than Botts himself.
or another way of putting it, is that the circumstances of Lehner success this year are not an excuse for Botts
-
I'm logging off so you guys can get back on track.
-
4 minutes ago, nfreeman said:
The bold text is a straw man. As you know, it's not a font issue. There is a general problem with your tone.
The nuggets below are all from the last few hours in just this thread. All of them are obnoxious and not OK.
I'm glad you are proofreading posts and trying to improve. Hopefully that will address the situation. We are not going to have valued members of the community get fed up and leave because you are incapable of friendly and respectful communication.
Wildcard made very clear how he interpreted the bold text.... it is not a strawman. You're trying to downplay his response. Just as you came to his defense when another poster called out his behavior.
1. What's wrong with asking questions to clarify someone's position?
2. What's wrong with challenging someone's position with logic?
3 and 4. Yea... total snarky sarcasm, but @LGR4GM has stated he is perfectly comfortable with this level of sarcasm.
-
5 minutes ago, LikeEich said:
Fedun is playing regular minutes for a playoff team...
it's a situation where Botts does a poor job of managing the edges of a roster... it's been the same story two years in a row.
-
4 minutes ago, Samson's Flow said:
That said, everything here is great content and supports the point that maybe it won't be a full tear down, even if they try to get out of the aging "star" contracts.
But there are still these little personal jabs that to me insinuate that you are better than us and were just daft for not getting it. It's tiring to engage with and makes it so I don't want to respond. Perhaps I need to get a tougher skin, but i've been here for almost 10 years and I have rarely felt so consistently personally attacked.
Yeah dont. You aren't even close to the only one who feels this way.
If you leave, i'm leaving too.
What little jab? I'm literally proof reading posts trying to make sure not a single thing can be interpreted as offensive, mean, dickish, whatever.... and some folks are still upset because i used bold text? And inferred something offensive from that?
-
Just now, IrwinNelson said:
I think part of it is that Botts doesn’t expect us to need replacement level fringe this season. Unlike the 2005-2006 tam who could have definitely used more replacement level d-men, Botts doesn’t see us making a run and in the case of an injury, he would rather give Borgen and company games than Fedun/Beaulieu
We could've had those guys next year... we're supposed to take one of these seasons seriously sooner or later right?
-
14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
Analytics say Beaulieu was a hair above replacement level. I'm not going to worry he's gone.
Do you miss the days of not having replacement level depth... and instead having Tennyson, Falk, etc (EDIT: Crap this is the type of sarcasm that gets me in trouble... lets see if my edit clears
Reality, Botts gave away two replacement level NHL defensemen in Beaulieu and Fedun for 6th and 7th rounders. It's not a great look.
Botts has demonstrated for 2 straight years that he lacks an appreciation for the "roster fringe". Last season, he put together a god awful 1/3 of the roster (I've said before, 1/3 of his roster is not in the NHL today). And throughout the year as replacement level talent passed through waivers he did nothing. Now he's giving that level away for fringe draft picks.
It's a small thing... but it's real.
2 minutes ago, Eleven said:Unrealistic to fire Housley last summer. Also, and I realize this is anecdotal, but in my experience, people who are in the dark place that Lehner was in often need a change of scenery. Anyway. About Beaulieu...
Agreed. I fault the initial hiring, not a lack of firing.
Agree on Lehner as well. My position is the change of scenery that a good GM should've identified, should've led to him going on waivers to Rochester. We either lose him on wiavers (doubtful) and we are in the same place today... or the change of scenery works, and we reap the benefits.
Just more small ball Botts fails
-
1 minute ago, Scottysabres said:
There are some solid points in your post. There is also some indications by the Ducks organizations decisions over the past year and 1/2 or so that they are rebuilding/retooling (call it what you will) their blue line. Even if that rebuild/retool is in a state of flux.
After all, you don't leave Theodore exposed as the sacrificial lamb for the expansion to protect Montour (which is exactly what happened) and move Vat's, then move Montour shortly there after without some decision to go in a different direction. That in and of itself, is more than sufficient data to say they are rebuilding/retooling their blue line at least, even if on a smaller scale.
But outside of that, over all, yes, I concur, their forward core is staying largely intact and they have the complimentary pieces at prime age to continue on. However, with that being said, and given the length's on those Perry, Getzlaf and Kesler contracts, it is reasonable to question what they do plan to do, since their secondary piece core (and let's face it, those you listed, that is what they are, as of now) will be around the 28 to 33 age when their core stars fizzle out completely.
That, is a very questionable strategy by the Ducks management team, at least, imho.
Agreed across the board.
I think the strategy for the forward core will be similar to what SJ has done, transitioning Joe and Pavs down the lineup as Couture, Hertl, etc take over. Sure, if the opportunity comes to rid themselves of Perry or Kesler they'll take that opportunity....
My main argument was to counter the position that Anaheim was doing a tear down. They are absolutely not doing that.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
Lehner doesn't make us a playoff team. We've covered the difference in our style of play versus the islanders.
Are you saying Botts was prevented from hiring a better coach?
-
3 minutes ago, WildCard said:
It doesn't offend me, it just makes you a dick
You could've stuck with "fair point. Good post" but you just had to find something to be offended by/angry about.. to the point that bold text is what you're left standing behind. I hope the mods can see that it's not all me.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, LGR4GM said:
We've covered Lehner. He was never going to make it here. He also looked about the same in the game we played them so, glad he's gone.
I would've preferred being a playoff team
-
1 minute ago, WildCard said:
Fair enough. And it's a good post. We're not challenged though so quit the bullsht with making a sentence bold and hop off your high horse. You're not somehow the smartest person to ever post on here
Careful... they are really serious about this type of stuff here. I don't want you to get banned.
Sorry the use of the bold format offended you.
-
3 minutes ago, Eleven said:
So is your complaint that Botterill didn't get enough for Beaulieu or that he didn't trade the defenseman you prefer he would have traded?
Both. He did the worst of all options. Got rid of a controlled asset for nothing. Seriously, he got UFA value for an RFA.
It's not the first time... hopefully Beaulieu doesn't go on to be a Norris contender lol (Lehner)
-
5 minutes ago, WildCard said:
The thing is all of those deals you're referring to were signed and created when they thought they had a contending team. In the past 6 seasons the Ducks have cracked 100 points 5 times (the 6th being a lockout season where they easily would have). Things change. They fired Carlye, they moved a defensemen for a 21 year old prospect and a 1st round pick when that d-man is right in their contending window
You're acting like the fact that they signed young player to long term deals when they were good, and that they have a very good young goaltender, completely excludes them from a tear down. Their core players are old, expensive, and useless. They are not going to be the core going forward for long. If you told Anaheim they can move all 3 of those guys this summer they'd do it in a heartbeat. Can they? Maybe not, but they're going to try
What facts do you have to support your claim? A few young contracts, ignoring their fired coach, and attendance? As if attendance ever precluded a team from a tear down
You're acting like the trading of a 24 year old defensemen indicates that they've completely changed their plan?
1. They signed a 28 year old pending UFA to a 5 year extension... 5 days ago. (Silfverberg). I mean that alone should be enough to sink your argument right? Instead of going to the trade market to get a 1st or prospects for Silfverberg... they re-signed him
2. Here is a list of the prime aged talent and long term deals they have: Rakell (25), Gibson (25), Lindholm (25), Kase (23), Fowler (27), Silfverberg (28), Manson (27). Do you honestly think they are going to tear down? Please note, that the attempted removal of Kesler and Perry is not a tear down in and of itself.
3. What the above is meant to illustrate is that Anaheim has already identified it's new core, they don't need a tear down to build one. The fact is that they identified that Montour was not part of that core. We can debate the reasons for that.... for sure, that's all subjective. But Anaheim has given zero indication they are doing a tear down.
-
2 minutes ago, LTS said:
So, Botterill should get Petan for a the C Nathan Beaulieu? Is that how it works?
Do you believe that Winnipeg would make that trade? You just assume Botterill didn't ask for more?
Stop with the agenda. It's ridiculous. You make some good points at time, but when then you follow it up with garbage like this.
Do you guys get warnings from the mods for stuff like this? Just curious.
Yea, Par Lindholm is a pending UFA. If Winnipeg was willing to give away Petan for a 13th forward rental, then Botts should've been able to get him.
-
3 minutes ago, Eleven said:
He can't really keep ten defensemen in rotation.
I mean, PH certainly could've done a better job. Scandella stayed in the lineup beyond his effectiveness. Not to mention Scandella does not fit Housley's system at all, while Beaulieu with all his flaws, does.
-
Just now, LTS said:
So, you are in other threads not even caring about late 1st round picks and then you are in here talking about 3rds and 6ths?
Also, do you think the Sabres would have qualified Beaulieu this summer? I don't. He was done. You know he was done. He was clearly not endearing himself to the proper people. So, to put all the blame on the GM when the player is at least as culpable is misplacing your blame.
It's all relative right?
A good GM would've done some more to ensure Beaulieu got some deserved ice time.
I would've qualified Beaulieu... because it would've maintained the depth from which to trade Scandella or McCabe, trades that would've potentially provided more impactful returns.
-
Man..... Toronto gets Nic Petan from Winnipeg for Par Lindholm.
Botts sucks... that would've been a great return for Beaulieu
GDT: Sabres at Leafs 2-25-19 7PM
in The Aud Club
Posted · Edited by jame
Cool. That would’ve been an equally poor decision on housley’s part