Wyldnwoody44 Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 I used to. I don't anymore. But I've been very glad for Flagg being here. He really puts in good work.Absolutley!! I honestly don't even know where I'd find half of this information, that's why I've been here for so long, and just quiet down during turbulent times and riffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 (edited) But I've been very glad for Flagg being here. He really puts in good work. Yep. I'm not sure anyone's doing it - hopefully not - but it's right sh1t when I see output like that decried with words to the effect of "wow - you sure have a lot of time on your hands." Like I said, I'm not saying it's happening here, but you see that sort of thing on teh interweb from time to time. Following hockey is more than idle pastime for some (it's almost only that, for me (this board pushes it beyond that level)); to many it's a true hobby. People nerd-out on their hobbies, and it's awesome when they do. I haven't even had time to read all of Flagg's most recent Eichel exposition. On that subject, there's a microstat guy I follow on Twitter, and he dissected the Buffalo-St. Louis game. I thought it was insightful stuff. Here's one of his graphs: Oh, and the fact that ROR carried the puck into the O-zone ONCE could be further proof that he's playing injured. Or it might be proof that he faithfully plays in Dreary Dan's system. Edited February 23, 2017 by That Aud Smell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Yep. I'm not sure anyone's doing it - hopefully not - but it's right sh1t when I see output like that decried with words to the effect of "wow - you sure have a lot of time on your hands." Like I said, I'm not saying it's happening here, but you see that sort of thing on teh interweb from time to time. Following hockey is more than idle pastime for some (it's almost only that, for me (this board pushes it beyond that level)); to many it's a true hobby. People nerd-out on their hobbies, and it's awesome when they do. I haven't even had time to read all of Flagg's most recent Eichel exposition. On that subject, there's a microstat guy I follow on Twitter, and he dissected the Buffalo-St. Louis game. I thought it was insightful stuff. Here's one of his graphs: Oh, and the fact that ROR carried the puck into the O-zone ONCE could be further proof that he's playing injured. Or it might be proof that he faithfully plays in Dreary Dan's system. The last time I saw one of these, Jack didn't have nearly that many zone entries, regardless of type. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 The last time I saw one of these, Jack didn't have nearly that many zone entries, regardless of type. My sense (eye test!) was that he had a very good game against St. Louis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 The last time I saw one of these, Jack didn't have nearly that many zone entries, regardless of type. I had the same thought. These charts always leave me with more questions, though, like, how many of Jacks carries did he lose possession of, how many of ROR's dumps did he regain possession of, how many of all the dumps and carries did we maintain possession of, etc. The answer to those questions might tell use why each player does what they do (or why DD sucks). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Late to the party, but great post Flagg. It helps to put in perspective how young the players that we are relying on still are, and they still have lots of growth and maturation to do before reaching peak output. We all want the Sabres to be competitive right away, but unfortunately we continue to wait for our young players to mature and peak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 I had the same thought. These charts always leave me with more questions, though, like, how many of Jacks carries did he lose possession of, how many of ROR's dumps did he regain possession of, how many of all the dumps and carries did we maintain possession of, etc. The answer to those questions might tell use why each player does what they do (or why DD sucks). Aye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 I had the same thought. These charts always leave me with more questions, though, like, how many of Jacks carries did he lose possession of, how many of ROR's dumps did he regain possession of, how many of all the dumps and carries did we maintain possession of, etc. The answer to those questions might tell use why each player does what they do (or why DD sucks). The answer to those questions exist in the full articles from which the charts are taken. But it's not every game, so really can't draw conclusions from it. How about this: we get utterly shelled every game, even in wins. Our possession sucks. Therefore, I conclude that coaching is at least some of the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 The answer to those questions exist in the full articles from which the charts are taken. But it's not every game, so really can't draw conclusions from it. How about this: we get utterly shelled every game, even in wins. Our possession sucks. Therefore, I conclude that coaching is at least some of the problem. I'm only just getting into understanding some advanced stats, and I find this fact every time I try to google a new one infuriating. Oh, great, here's that stat I'm looking for! Oh, it's embedded in an article about a Leafs/Sens game in November. Aaaaaaand I can't find any source that has it for every game. Sigh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 (edited) I'm going to list NHL centers under the age of 25, as well as a few kids looking to be drafted/not in the NHL yet. These will be Jack's peers throughout his career. Blue players are younger than Jack. I've separated them into tiers that I imagine they'll fall in. Bold players are established in the tier that I placed them, the un-bolded players are in the tier to which I project them, and the order listed is the general order I'd prefer them if all were to hit their prime right this moment. For players comparable to Jack, near the top of this list, I'll give their stats through their 20 year old season. The starred players played their first full season immediately after being drafted, and I only starred those that did this and are above the 2C category. For reference, Jack Eichel has 120 GP, 37 G, 89 P, 0.74 PPG, with a sophomore season (19, 20 years old) of 39 GP, 13 G, 33 P, 0.85 PPG. Generational ⋆Connor McDavid:105 GP, 36 G, 115 P, 1.10 PPG. Sophomore season (19, 20 years old) 60 GP, 20 G, 67 P, 1.12 PPG Top 10 Centers (old guys like Crosby, Malkin, Seguin, Tavares should still be on this list in these guys' primes) ⋆Auston Matthews: 59 GP, 28 G, 52 P, 0.88 PPG ⋆Aleksander Barkov: First two seasons 125 GP, 24 G, 60 P, 0.48 PPG ⋆Nathan MacKinnon: First two seasons 146 GP, 38 G, 101 P, 0.69 PPG 1C on a Playoff Team Mark Scheifele: First two full NHL seasons, starting Draft+3, 145 GP, 28 G, 83 P, 0.57 PPG. At Jack's age he had 11GP, 1G, 1P. ⋆Alex Galchenyuk: (thru 19/20 year old season) 113 GP, 22G, 58 P, 0.51 PPG ⋆Leon Draisaitl: (thru 19/20 year old season) 109 GP, 21G, 60 P, 0.55 PPG Evgeny Kuznetsov: Starting three years post draft, 21-22 and 22-23 yr old seasons: 97 GP, 14G, 46 P, 0.47 PPG Ryan Johansen: spent post draft season in Jrs, first two seasons after that (thru 21 years old): 107 GP, 14G, 33 P, 0.31 PPG Nolan Patrick 1C but-you'd-rather-they-be-the-2C William Nylander: First two seasons, but didn't play D+1 in NHL, so 19-21 years old: 80 GP, 23 G, 55 P, 0.69 PPG Samson Reinhart: Same as Willy: 146 GP, 36 G, 80 P, 0.55 PPG Bo Horvat: Same as Sam/Willy, but drafted in 2013. 150 GP, 29G, 65 P, 0.43 PPG in his first two seasons, no D+1 NHL action. ⋆Sean Monahan: 156 GP, 53 G, 96 P, 0.62 PPG Dylan Larkin: Same situation as Reinhart/Nylander: 138 GP, 35 G, 64 P, 0.46 PPG Sam Bennett: Same situation as Larkin/Reinhart/Nylander: 136 GP, 28 G, 57 P, 0.42 PPG ⋆Ryan Nugent-Hopkins: 102 GP, 22 G, 76 P, 0.75 PPG (best stretch of his career was his 52 P in 62 GP to start it) Dylan Strome 2C Vincent Trocheck Sean Couturier Tomas Hertl Alex Wennberg Victor Rask Christian Dvorak (love this guy) Mikael Granlund Mika Zibanejad Rickard Rakell Charlie Coyle Elias Lindholm (plays a lot of wing) Travis Konecny (should play wing) Robby Fabbri Boone Jenner Pavel Zacha Kevin Fiala Nick Bjugstad Radek Faksa Brayden Point Bottom 6/Other Nick Petan - Lots of work, can jump up. Ryan Strome Vladislav Namestnikov Markus Granlund Andreas Athanasiou Mikhail Grigorenko Matthias Janmark Ryan Dzingel J.G. Pageau Joacim Nordstrom William Karlsson Jacob Vrana Vincent Hinostroza Tyler Graovac Frank Vatrano Joseph Blandisi Analysis So, for U25 centers in the NHL, the only ones that played as early as Jack and outproduced him are Connor and Auston. To find more centers that have done this, you need to look for guys that are 5 years older than Jack or more. The only centers that fall in this category, and have a higher PPG than Jack does this year are: Crosby, Malkin, Backstrom, Seguin, Carter, Pavelski, Tavares. As Jack enters his prime, Carter and Pavelski will be gone. Toews, Giroux, and Stamkos are names that might still be around too. So let's look at the first two seasons of Crosby, Malkin, Backstrom, Seguin, Tavares, Giroux, Toews, and Stamkos. Crosby: 160 GP, 75 G, 222 P, 1.39 PPG. Generational. Malkin: missed year due to lockout and then another year playing in Russia, first two after that: 160 GP, 80 G, 191 P, 1.19 PPG. Better than Jack will do, though we haven't seen Jack's 3rd and 4th post draft season yet. Tavares: 161 GP, 53 G, 121 P, 0.74 PPG. Incredibly similar production. Jack had 2 more points his rookie year and is pacing for a hair more in his second. Physical skills are better, hockey sense worse. Harder to get points in Jack's NHL. Stamkos: 161 GP, 74 G, 141 P, 0.88 PPG. Had a disappointing rookie year and utter explosion in second year. Injuries mean he will not be a top 10 player in 5 years most likely. Seguin: 155 GP, 40 G, 89 P, 0.57 PPG. Developed fairly slowly. Backstrom: Didn't play post draft year, rookie year at Jack's age: 82 GP, 14 G, 69 P, 0.84 PPG. Exploded next season, Ovie scored 121 goals his first two seasons, inflating his point totals by a lot. Giroux: First two full seasons not until his D+3 season, his stats those seasons: 124 GP, 25 G, 74 P, 0.60 PPG Toews: Didn't play til D+2, first two seasons: 146 GP, 58 G, 123 P, 0.84 PPG. Jack's D+2 season has a slightly higher PPG and Toews point totals were only at their peak for a season or two after, and haven't approached since. These are the guys that I imagine may still hang around when Jack is at his best. Between these two lists, there are only 9 players that had a higher first-two-years-points-per-game than Jack. Of those, only 6 can say they did it in their immediate post draft seasons, and others took longer, so we don't have Jack's comparison season yet. Adjusting for era, linemates, and injuries makes me think Backstrom, RNH, Stamkos won't be in the discussion for top centers in Jack's prime. McDavid, Matthews, MacKinnon, Barkov, Crosby, Malkin, Tavares, Seguin, maybe Giroux as the top centers that Eichel has to compete with? Jack's pace blows Seguin and Giroux and Barkov's out of the water and he's trending better than MacK and adjusting for era leaves a decent gap between himself and Tavares. And Jack has so much more room to grow. I don't see any reason why Jack won't be a top 5 center in the NHL, with Matthews, McDavid, Crosby, Barkov, or a magically un-injured old Malkin, or maybe a Seguin. For me, he slots in pretty much equal to Matthews among the U25 guys. Only clearly behind Connor. The growth potential that will come with becoming a better possession player in a better possession system, learning the d-zone, and having teammates cash in on his scoring chance generation, while producing NHL-leading shots on goal per game - We have a superstar on our hands. This is a good post. Sorry i don't really have the time to do as detailed a response. I agree I am pessimistic and probably overly so. I honestly thought we were on track to get a generational player. The teams that were cited as examples to follow were Pens and Hawks. They each got their generational players. I will be honest, I am not sure we got a single one from the tanking seasons. We cheered Arizona when they scored in our stadium because we knew what that meant. It was guaranteeing us one of Eichel or McDavid. Everyone knew McDavid was going to be the most special player since Crosby; but there was a lot of talk about Eichel being equivalent to Malkin. Eichel has a frustratingly fast skating style - it looks like he is wading through treacle but he is lightning quick, so that isn't why I call him a coaster. I wanted a player that had the ability and drive to put a team on his back and carry them. As Crosby does for the Pens, as Toews does for the Hawks. That special player who makes a difference. Right now ROR is a hell of a lot closer to being that guy than Eichel. It might well be a maturity problem and in 5 years he will be that guy. But i'll tell you what, it pisses me off to no end that Toronto started a year later in the tank and both their star and team are out performing our equivalents. Our prospect cupboards are pretty thin, with but a few exceptions this is the team we are stuck with for the next 5+ years. Based on nothing but his stats (and comparing those to his brother's in the A) Nylander seems like your standard middle 6 guy. This is our core and most nights I agree with Lehner - they haven't done anything at all but act as though they are champions. I am being unfair to Eichel, and as your thorough post shows, he is not doing badly compared to his competition. I wanted a special player, and I truly am not sure we got one. We haven't made the playoffs in 6 years. Do people really see this team as perennial contenders? If after all those years of tanking we get a team that slips into the playoffs in March in a wild card slot how is any of this worth it? Do you think we are closer to the Pens or the Oilers (pre this season) in rebuild? 05/06 - Sid's first year - Pens finish 29th 06/07 - Sid's second year - Pens finish 10th (over 100 points) 07/08 - Toew's first year - Hawks finish 20th 08/09 - Toew's second year - Hawks finish 6th (over 100 points) 15/16 - Eichel's first year - Sabres finish 23rd 16/17 - Eicehl's second year - Sabres finish 22nd (assuming the standings remain as they are) Edited February 23, 2017 by ThirtyEight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Thanks for the kind words everyone. I luv u The last time I saw one of these, Jack didn't have nearly that many zone entries, regardless of type. I'm surprised he dumped it twice. He must have had to change (I listened to that game on the radio, was driving somewhere, so I didn't get to see any of it) I think the two others that I remember had zero dump ins from Jack. I had the same thought. These charts always leave me with more questions, though, like, how many of Jacks carries did he lose possession of, how many of ROR's dumps did he regain possession of, how many of all the dumps and carries did we maintain possession of, etc. The answer to those questions might tell use why each player does what they do (or why DD sucks). I've been meaning to watch games with a pad and paper to try and count all of this stuff, because you can only find bits and pieces of it for every few games. I'll try and remember for Saturday! Just a wild offhand guess, I'd say that around 55-60% of Jack's carry-ins result in a play that keeps Sabre possession, and probably similar to ROR when he dumps (ROR really, really likes to dump the puck in, I see him do it when he doesn't have to - and he's pretty damn effective with his stick, and I bet we'd see that style continue with any different coach). And when ROR played with Carrier and KO, adding in Carrier's speed, they had something ridiculous like a 60% CF%, which makes sense - KO and ROR can work the boards, and Carrier can do the same while beating all of the defensemen to the puck in the first place. Jack's possession numbers are still bad because while he seems to be a successful offensive player, as we can see, he's a chicken with its head cut off in the dzone as well. That's my take at least. This is a good post. Sorry i don't really have the time to do as detailed a response. I agree I am pessimistic and probably overly so. I honestly thought we were on track to get a generational player. The teams that were cited as examples to follow were Pens and Hawks. They each got their generational players. I will be honest, I am not sure we got a single one from the tanking seasons. We cheered Arizona when they scored in our stadium because we knew what that meant. It was guaranteeing us one of Eichel or McDavid. Everyone knew McDavid was going to be the most special player since Crosby; but there was a lot of talk about Eichel being equivalent to Malkin. Eichel has a frustratingly fast skating style - it looks like he is wading through treacle but he is lightning quick, so that isn't why I call him a coaster. I wanted a player that had the ability and drive to put a team on his back and carry them. As Crosby does for the Pens, as Toews does for the Hawks. That special player who makes a difference. Right now ROR is a hell of a lot closer to being that guy than Eichel. It might well be a maturity problem and in 5 years he will be that guy. But i'll tell you what, it pisses me off to no end that Toronto started a year later in the tank and both their star and team are out performing our equivalents. Our prospect cupboards are pretty thin, with but a few exceptions this is the team we are stuck with for the next 5+ years. Based on nothing but his stats (and comparing those to his brother's in the A) Nylander seems like your standard middle 6 guy. This is our core and most nights I agree with Lehner - they haven't done anything at all but act as though they are champions. I am being unfair to Eichel, and as your thorough post shows, he is not doing badly compared to his competition. I wanted a special player, and I truly am not sure we got one. We haven't made the playoffs in 6 years. Do people really see this team as perennial contenders? If after all those years of tanking we get a team that slips into the playoffs in March in a wild card slot how is any of this worth it? Do you think we are closer to the Pens or the Oilers (pre this season) in rebuild? 05/06 - Sid's first year - Pens finish 29th 06/07 - Sid's second year - Pens finish 10th (over 100 points) 07/08 - Toew's first year - Hawks finish 20th 08/09 - Toew's second year - Hawks finish 6th (over 100 points) 15/16 - Eichel's first year - Sabres finish 23rd 16/17 - Eicehl's second year - Sabres finish 22nd (assuming the standings remain as they are) S'all good man. I totally understand your pessimism and frustration watching the guys taken around Jack and thinking back to what we gave up (164 games) to get him. We all just have different outlets for it. (Mine is Dan, yours is Jack, Swamp's is his bass guitar probably) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 S'all good man. I totally understand your pessimism and frustration watching the guys taken around Jack and thinking back to what we gave up (164 games) to get him. We all just have different outlets for it. (Mine is Dan, yours is Jack, Swamp's is his bass guitar probably) If we go on a hot streak, even if we don't make the playoffs. I doubt Dan goes. So are we hoping for yet another tanking season to get us what we want? People hoped we would tank at the end of last year too, for a better pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 If we go on a hot streak, even if we don't make the playoffs. I doubt Dan goes. So are we hoping for yet another tanking season to get us what we want? People hoped we would tank at the end of last year too, for a better pick. Personally, I just want wins. Even if it means keeping Dan here this season. Mostly because I don't think even losing a bunch to close this year would get him fired. In Pittsburgh, the season that Therrien was fired, they managed to win the cup. They managed the same when they fired what's his face for Sullivan last year. So you can be stuck with a coach you don't like, eventually have to get rid of him, and not waste the season. That's what I am hoping happens here if we continue to perform poorly, and start next year terribly again. I want Dan to succeed and be the guy here, but with the underlying numbers we've had this whole time, I don't see sustainable winning in the near future regardless of what will realistically happen with the roster. If he ends up doing so, great, keep him. If not, he'll go, and we'll move on. My biggest worry is that next season becomes totally lost before it happens, but I'm not sure Murray would let it get to that point, because if we're definitely out of it next year his job is on the line too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Personally, I just want wins. Even if it means keeping Dan here this season. Mostly because I don't think even losing a bunch to close this year would get him fired. In Pittsburgh, the season that Therrien was fired, they managed to win the cup. They managed the same when they fired what's his face for Sullivan last year. So you can be stuck with a coach you don't like, eventually have to get rid of him, and not waste the season. That's what I am hoping happens here if we continue to perform poorly, and start next year terribly again. I want Dan to succeed and be the guy here, but with the underlying numbers we've had this whole time, I don't see sustainable winning in the near future regardless of what will realistically happen with the roster. If he ends up doing so, great, keep him. If not, he'll go, and we'll move on. My biggest worry is that next season becomes totally lost before it happens, but I'm not sure Murray would let it get to that point, because if we're definitely out of it next year his job is on the line too. I don't believe that will be the case. I'd say Murray is safe for another 3-4 years, regardless of what happens. If the team starts poorly next season with an improved roster... I'm guessing team speed, defense and scoring depth will be improved, then Bylsma goes for sure, and whoever else takes over should find success so long as they don't do anything absolutely stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 I'll bet that if the Sabres go into a mini-tank this year and end up near the bottom of the league, they trade that 1st rounder for a D prospect that's close to NHL-ready. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 This is a good post. Sorry i don't really have the time to do as detailed a response. I agree I am pessimistic and probably overly so. I honestly thought we were on track to get a generational player. The teams that were cited as examples to follow were Pens and Hawks. They each got their generational players. I will be honest, I am not sure we got a single one from the tanking seasons. We cheered Arizona when they scored in our stadium because we knew what that meant. It was guaranteeing us one of Eichel or McDavid. Everyone knew McDavid was going to be the most special player since Crosby; but there was a lot of talk about Eichel being equivalent to Malkin. Eichel has a frustratingly fast skating style - it looks like he is wading through treacle but he is lightning quick, so that isn't why I call him a coaster. I wanted a player that had the ability and drive to put a team on his back and carry them. As Crosby does for the Pens, as Toews does for the Hawks. That special player who makes a difference. Right now ROR is a hell of a lot closer to being that guy than Eichel. It might well be a maturity problem and in 5 years he will be that guy. But i'll tell you what, it pisses me off to no end that Toronto started a year later in the tank and both their star and team are out performing our equivalents. Our prospect cupboards are pretty thin, with but a few exceptions this is the team we are stuck with for the next 5+ years. Based on nothing but his stats (and comparing those to his brother's in the A) Nylander seems like your standard middle 6 guy. This is our core and most nights I agree with Lehner - they haven't done anything at all but act as though they are champions. I am being unfair to Eichel, and as your thorough post shows, he is not doing badly compared to his competition. I wanted a special player, and I truly am not sure we got one. We haven't made the playoffs in 6 years. Do people really see this team as perennial contenders? If after all those years of tanking we get a team that slips into the playoffs in March in a wild card slot how is any of this worth it? Do you think we are closer to the Pens or the Oilers (pre this season) in rebuild? 05/06 - Sid's first year - Pens finish 29th 06/07 - Sid's second year - Pens finish 10th (over 100 points) 07/08 - Toew's first year - Hawks finish 20th 08/09 - Toew's second year - Hawks finish 6th (over 100 points) 15/16 - Eichel's first year - Sabres finish 23rd 16/17 - Eicehl's second year - Sabres finish 22nd (assuming the standings remain as they are) You seem to be either stretching your definition of "generational" or slighting Eichel's potential. While Toews is a HoFer to be; it is a stretch to call him "generational" (Kane, too) IMHO. If they are meeting your definition of "generational" there has been nothing in Eichel's play to date to indicate he can't also be "generational." And ftr, Crosby & McClavicle are the only generational skaters in the league at present. (Again, IMHO.) Aside to Flagg: keep it coming Randy. Very nice work. :beer: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 You seem to be either stretching your definition of "generational" or slighting Eichel's potential. While Toews is a HoFer to be; it is a stretch to call him "generational" (Kane, too) IMHO. If they are meeting your definition of "generational" there has been nothing in Eichel's play to date to indicate he can't also be "generational." And ftr, Crosby & McClavicle are the only generational skaters in the league at present. (Again, IMHO.) Aside to Flagg: keep it coming Randy. Very nice work. :beer: Objection :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Wow, Flagg's takedown of ThirtyEight's Eichel position is the most brutal beating in the history of Sabrespace. Savage and unrelenting. I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm getting a little nervous that he's turned his attention away from Dan and on to other posters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Wow, Flagg's takedown of ThirtyEight's Eichel position is the most brutal beating in the history of Sabrespace. Savage and unrelenting.I'm glad someone did it. I've gotten so sick of putting down Jack and acting like he's below Matthews Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm getting a little nervous that he's turned his attention away from Dan and on to other posters. Hmm? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 I'm glad someone did it. I've gotten so sick of putting down Jack and acting like he's below Matthews I mean... statistically he is below him. Matthews is on track for a 40 goal season. I don't think it is ridiculous to suggest a player who is a year younger than him and out performing him is better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 I'm glad someone did it. I've gotten so sick of putting down Jack and acting like he's below Matthews Except he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 You seem to be either stretching your definition of "generational" or slighting Eichel's potential. While Toews is a HoFer to be; it is a stretch to call him "generational" (Kane, too) IMHO. If they are meeting your definition of "generational" there has been nothing in Eichel's play to date to indicate he can't also be "generational." And ftr, Crosby & McClavicle are the only generational skaters in the league at present. (Again, IMHO.) Aside to Flagg: keep it coming Randy. Very nice work. :beer: Yeah I should maybe use special rather than generational. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 I mean... statistically he is below him. Matthews is on track for a 40 goal season. I don't think it is ridiculous to suggest a player who is a year younger than him and out performing him is better. That's one stat. That's like saying Trumbo is better than Trout because of home run totals Except he is.No, he's not. His advanced stats are some of the best in the league under a coach who couldn't put together a 2 piece puzzle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Yeah I should maybe use special rather than generational. Fair enough. But it seems Eichel is very cloe to being "special" if he, in fact, isn't at present. 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.