WildCard Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Why would we compare a hypothetical to real numbers when we have those real numbers. This years team is better. Next years team needs to be better. Should we compare next year team to the Sabres if they had made the playoffs this year? I don't understand this notion that last years team wasn't real and therefore can't be compared to. They played 82 games and were terrible. Even if they were designed to be that way it is still a starting point to compare to. We were at spot X last year and this year we made it to Y. Would you describe last year as successful? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) Would you describe last year as successful? It would depend on how you describe the goal of last year. However I stand by the fact that last years team offers a baseline. Every comparison needs a baseline and even though ours is a god awful, it still gives us a starting point. Edited March 3, 2016 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 It would depend on how you describe the goal of last year. That's the point though, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 That's the point though, isn't it? My point is why use a hypothetical when I can look at last years team and say we were bad. This year we are less bad. Even if we all agree that last years team was specifically designed to tank, it still is a logical start point for every year post tank. Just because Ford now builds a shelby mustang with all the trimming, doesn't mean you can't compare it to a Model T and say "look where they once were". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 My point is why use a hypothetical when I can look at last years team and say we were bad. This year we are less bad. Even if we all agree that last years team was specifically designed to tank, it still is a logical start point for every year post tank. Just because Ford now builds a shelby mustang with all the trimming, doesn't mean you can't compare it to a Model T and say "look where they once were". There's a massive difference in the intentions of both Ford's products and both teams. The intention and purpose are directly conflicting in the latter. At the same time I can't say you can't justify where we are because of last year's tank. It would be like taking the wheels off and only finding the money to replace 2 of them. Sure, it's will drive further, but it's still going to suck because you ripped off all 4 wheels to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Of course this team is better, it has to be. Last year's team was historically bad. The kind of bad that when people look back on NHL history, it will stand out as one of the worst ever. Just because it's not a Model T doesn't mean it's not a 1976 Matador. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 However I stand by the fact that last years team offers a baseline. Every comparison needs a baseline and even though ours is a god awful, it still gives us a starting point. I would say that this year is our baseline Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 This is exactly why we have no business comparing this team to last season's team. The beginning of this conversation came when somebody implied this team hasn't improved. If we're talking about improvement how do we do it if we can't use last year? What is the improvement target? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 The beginning of this conversation came when somebody implied this team hasn't improved. If we're talking about improvement how do we do it if we can't use last year? What is the improvement target? From the beginning of this year to now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 I would say that this year is our baseline It's our baseline for next year yes. It is another data point. Think of it this way then. You are restoring an old car so you tear it all apart down to the frame. That's the baseline. You wouldn't should somebody the car with all new sheet metal on it and say "hey this is where I started" because it isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 From the beginning of this year to now That's not the conversation, to this point. That's a fair conversation to have, but it's an entirely different one. But to start that conversation: the team currently has 58 more points than it did at the beginning of the season. :p I think there are improvements over the course of the season and things they've gotten "worse" at and bad habits they've developed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 From the beginning of this year to now I would say overall this team is better now than they were in October. Sam, Jack, and Johan certainly are. I mean Zemgus has been hurt here and there, Ennis and ROR are hurt now. I think Rasmus is injured. Lehner is back and defying what I thought he would do. If we were healthy then yes we would be a better hockey team compared to October. I just don't think that is the best way to go about things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 WGR 550 @WGR550 9m9 minutes ago MURRAY: "There's lots of good stuff happening. We're better, we're closer to where we want to be, but we're not there yet." WGR 550 @WGR550 10m10 minutes ago MURRAY: "At some point the pick is not enough or is too far out." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 WGR 550 @WGR550 10m10 minutes ago MURRAY: "At some point the pick is not enough or is too far out." What does that even mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Best guess: Picking at 6 or 7 isn't part of his plan this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Best guess: Picking at 6 or 7 isn't part of his plan this year. So we're tanking again? Is that it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 No. My guess is he's saying that he'll keep a high pick, deal a not so high pick. Planning for either scenario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 No. My guess is he's saying that he'll keep a high pick, deal a not so high pick. Planning for either scenario. I thought he meant far out years wise. Even he knows that eventually he is going to have to get players not picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) I thought he meant far out years wise. Even he knows that eventually he is going to have to get players not picks. Yup that's how I read it. He's saying that at some point high draft picks aren't what we need, or it'll take too long for that player to get here. Edited March 3, 2016 by Thorny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Yup that's how I read it. He's saying that at some point high draft picks aren't what we need, or it'll take too long for that player to get here. Hmmm. I understand they need help now, but at some point you have to invest wisely in your future. Sounds like the plan is for a top 5 pick this season, tank you very much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 Hmmm. I understand they need help now, but at some point you have to invest wisely in your future. Sounds like the plan is for a top 5 pick this season, tank you very much. Sure. But that better be the extent of the high draft pick plan. I sincerely hope this quote was not merely lip service, and that GMTM's strategy no longer involves "drafting high" after this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 I thought he meant far out years wise. Even he knows that eventually he is going to have to get players not picks. Yea. Depending on how he views the tiers of talent in the draft, I think he's open to moving it if he's not in a slot he finds acceptable on a timetable basis. Hmmm. I understand they need help now, but at some point you have to invest wisely in your future. Sounds like the plan is for a top 5 pick this season, tank you very much. Maybe I'm picking nits, but I got the sense that the preference, not the plan, is for a top-5 pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 3, 2016 Report Share Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) It's our baseline for next year yes. It is another data point. Think of it this way then. You are restoring an old car so you tear it all apart down to the frame. That's the baseline. You wouldn't should somebody the car with all new sheet metal on it and say "hey this is where I started" because it isn't. There're different baselines here. One for the organization, and one for the current team. I believe last year applies to the former, whereas not the latter, because of such a drastic difference in, well, eveything; core, coach, intention, etc. That's not the conversation, to this point. That's a fair conversation to have, but it's an entirely different one. But to start that conversation: the team currently has 58 more points than it did at the beginning of the season. :P I think there are improvements over the course of the season and things they've gotten "worse" at and bad habits they've developed. Very true, I'll admit I just kinda jumped in there in the middle :D Curious to get your view on the 'bad habits' part. I would say overall this team is better now than they were in October. Sam, Jack, and Johan certainly are. I mean Zemgus has been hurt here and there, Ennis and ROR are hurt now. I think Rasmus is injured. Lehner is back and defying what I thought he would do. If we were healthy then yes we would be a better hockey team compared to October. I just don't think that is the best way to go about things. I definitely think they're better from when they started this year, which is all I can ask for. That's been the mantra all year, continued development from a brand new core Yea. Depending on how he views the tiers of talent in the draft, I think he's open to moving it if he's not in a slot he finds acceptable on a timetable basis. Maybe I'm picking nits, but I got the sense that the preference, not the plan, is for a top-5 pick. Not pucking nuts, that's the entire crux of it. Tank = plan, high draft pick is just a natural part of some rebuilds, and every action Murray has had this year with points to the latter Edited March 3, 2016 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude_Verret Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I wonder how the 2014/15 team would have performed in terms of total points, total goals, and goals against had ownership, management and coaching wanted to win as many games as possible, instead of intentionally tanking? If management, the only variable that matters here, wanted to win last year then I suspect it would have been different because we would have iced a non-tank roster. Ownership is only involved up to giving a thumbs up to the plan to tank, and of course we all know by now that coaches and players don't ever tank, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted March 4, 2016 Report Share Posted March 4, 2016 I would say overall this team is better now than they were in October. Sam, Jack, and Johan certainly are. I mean Zemgus has been hurt here and there, Ennis and ROR are hurt now. I think Rasmus is injured. Lehner is back and defying what I thought he would do. If we were healthy then yes we would be a better hockey team compared to October. I just don't think that is the best way to go about things. I'm not sure we are better than we were in October. Sam sure is. Larsson, probably. Jack..... he's up and down. I'm not sure. Risto's game has not improved. I think we won't be able to say we are better now. ROR is out and our only top 6 RW is gone. If they were still here, I think we might be better than in October, but it's no slam dunk. I thought he meant far out years wise. Even he knows that eventually he is going to have to get players not picks. Yes. A t some point our rentals will be more highly valued because we won't be able to wait 4 years for the return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.