RonHextallsShoulderPads Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 It's carrier. a behind the scenes deal is already speculated to have been brokered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabel79 Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 And point out to me where I or anyone else has said anything more than "Carrier scored 8 in 40, but played better than Ennis and the other AHL wingers". Because those can be backed up with all the facts, stats, and charts that you could ever ask for, and nobody has said anything different. I've even said I think his ceiling is lower than each and every one of the other AHL forwards in discussion. So show me where this concept of Carrier as an all powerful top 6 winger is coming from, I'd love to read it and laugh at it too. 1. Lighten up, Francis. 2. The angst over this... it's disproportionate to the facts of the situation. This is the ooze from whence the CONCEPT is berthed. Everybody loses somebody tomorrow. Ennis, Carrier, somebody else. Do I think that you think he's going to be a star? Nope. But he is JAG, and bemoaning the putative loss of JAG is not something I'm compelled to either do or understand when others do it. Maybe he's slightly above JAG by the slimmest of margins. Should he be chosen (which I still do not think will happen) then there will be, like the mythical hydra, three more JAGs rushing in to try to take his place. maybe one of them works out better, who knows. 3. Ennis is immensely more talented and if healthy adds more to the team. The "if healthy" is where that train of thought dies, but still, JBOT rolled the dice. (Ennis is also garbage, but whatever, maybe he surprises us) 4. I've been up for 30 hours and need to go to bed so I can go to work tonight, but I'll happily pick this back up this evening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 I think we've developed the concept of Carrier at this point Because a few of us think he's clearly better than the guy who would have been the worst forward on the team if we didn't also ice Nic Deslauriers? Ennis was worse than Matt Moulson by a considerable amount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 It could be the case that the last protected slot had to go somewhere, and the veritable conucopia of meh available to JBOT means that Ennis gets it because why not? I also firmly believe that we're coming dangerously close to "Concept of Carrier" territory. Plenty of other questionably talented rookies willing to skate through walls... Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 What about this: it's not Ullmark that McPhee covets, it's Carrier. We exposed him so they will trade us Scandella for Moulson and #38? That's the kinda deal I'm hoping for. Re: Carrier vs Bailey: I see Bailey as a boom or bust. Murray and Bylsma were trying to make him into a two-way middle-six guy, but I don't think that's his game. I think he's either a 20-goal second-liner or a career AHLer. Carrier has a lower ceiling but is a safer pick. He will be a useful bottom-six NHLer, like Foligno. His speed and forecheck is the way the game is going. I actually think that Bailey profiles as a modern 4th liner, to borrow Flagg's phrasing, his head and hands don't catch up to his feet. He'd need to play with better mates defensively, but he can wreak some level of havoc with his speed, even if the puck isn't going into the net much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 (edited) My bad, I looked at the "career total" line just below for that, which was 40. but 4 points in 32 games is worse than 8 in 41. And again, we've repeatedly emphasized that the problem isn't the loss of Carrier - it would mean that a group of people who had a horrid thought process that came to this conclusion will be continuing to make moves that shape this team going forward. I don't think that's the case Randall. I think JBOT knows Vegas isn't touching Ennis. It's therefore Ullmark or Carrier. They chose Ullmark. Edited June 20, 2017 by Derrico Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 Because a few of us think he's clearly better than the guy who would have been the worst forward on the team if we didn't also ice Nic Deslauriers? Ennis was worse than Matt Moulson by a considerable amount. Show me the stats! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 1. Lighten up, Francis. 2. The angst over this... it's disproportionate to the facts of the situation. This is the ooze from whence the CONCEPT is berthed. Everybody loses somebody tomorrow. Ennis, Carrier, somebody else. Do I think that you think he's going to be a star? Nope. But he is JAG, and bemoaning the putative loss of JAG is not something I'm compelled to either do or understand when others do it. Maybe he's slightly above JAG by the slimmest of margins. Should he be chosen (which I still do not think will happen) then there will be, like the mythical hydra, three more JAGs rushing in to try to take his place. maybe one of them works out better, who knows. 3. Ennis is immensely more talented and if healthy adds more to the team. The "if healthy" is where that train of thought dies, but still, JBOT rolled the dice. (Ennis is also garbage, but whatever, maybe he surprises us) 4. I've been up for 30 hours and need to go to bed so I can go to work tonight, but I'll happily pick this back up this evening. 1.) F*ck yo couch! 2.) Let's try and quantify this angst. I'm not seeing very many posts in this thread before the word "concept" was thrown out there. I've seen far more elaboration on this "concept" than I've seen posts where I've said that Ennis is worse than Carrier (which he is). I just looked - before I defended myself in here, I posted about Carrier being on the list before Ennis a whopping two times, and saw the word "concept" five or six. Remember when a "concept" of a player like Kassian or Stafford took years to develop? WTF is this "concept" now? Like I've explicitly reiterated several times, the problem isn't the net loss of Carrier and what it would mean for the team. That is small. The problem is that the people who made a very obvious bad decision made that decision, and will continue to be making roster decisions. And for the fifth time, this is only a problem if that was the decision made in a vacuum, which we still don't know, so I'm still giving the GM the benefit of doubt. This is why I've reacted sharply to the "concept" accusation. If we're talking "concept" like other real, actual concepts that have existed here, well that's ridiculous. 3.) But Ennis has always been a possession drain. His hands are gone and his agility is gone. He's 28. He's not regaining his 23 year old no-injury form ever again. He's going to be scrambled eggs. Carrier already has elevated the play of other players more than Ennis ever will, statistically, and was used 8 minutes a game on his tiny contract. 4.) Damn, get some rest my dude! I don't think that's the case Randall. I think JBOT knows Vegas isn't touching Ennis. It's therefore Ullmark or Carrier. They chose Ullmark. I've already said, if Botterill uses this line of reasoning I'm OK with it, even if it isn't the choice I would make. Before the concept of "concept of Carrier" was created, the Carrier - Ennis thing had been mentioned in probably 7 total posts on this board. Twice by me. With emphasis that side deals will probably make it make more sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabel79 Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 Randall, my dear friend and fellow Bonnie, it's not always about you. Also, do not disrespect my couch or you will be bleeding from yo chest... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 Randall, my dear friend and fellow Bonnie, it's not always about you. Also, do not disrespect my couch or you will be bleeding from yo chest... Right, I provided the total number of posts I made (2) and am looking frantically for more, and I'm still finding more "zomg concept of Carrier" posts than I am "hey it was a bad idea to protect Ennis over Carrier" posts, so I asked for some help, ya know? I just read the first page of our expansion list thread - the discussion was had in there, and I missed it because I didn't get home until almost dinner time Sunday. But still, I see absolutely nothing over the top in either direction, and am baffled as to why the mythical concept of the concept was born. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 (edited) Show me the stats! All numbers at evens. Moulson Ennis Ennis 14-15 GF/60 1.81 1.47 1.76 GA/60 2.05 2.20 2.33 GF% 46.94 40.00 43.04 CF/60 52.77 54.41 41.49 CA/60 51.90 57.14 69.80 CF% 50.41 48.83 37.28 CF%/rel 3.77 1.56 0.26 PLUS/MINUS: Moulson: -4 Ennis: -7 Edit: Just because I'm already here, I'm adding Ennis' 2014-15 season, the last time he was useful. 46 points in 78 games while skating 19 minutes per night (I'd honestly mostly ignore the raw corsi stats here, cuz yea, tank). This is the Ennis people think he can become again. SPOILER ALERT: He was bad then, too. "Good stats bad team" guy. That's right, the Tyler Ennis we all romanticize about, was still a bad player. What about when the team was good? In 2010-11 Ennis had his best statistical season, but his relative statistics were both negative (GF%rel -0.39, CF%rel -2.09). And that was 7 years ago, before many injuries zapped him of his speed/quickness, and before the league as a whole became much faster (so he's slower relative, even without the injuries). At his best, Ennis was an entertaining and useful PP scorer, while being utterly replaceable at even strength. Even if you think Ennis can regain form physically, he's not getting those prime PP minutes with our forwards. I repeat: Tyler Ennis is the exact type of player who puts up good stats on a bad team, but is in no-man's land on a good team. He simply isn't versatile enough to play a different role, while not being good enough to play a primary scoring role. Edited June 20, 2017 by TrueBlueGED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 PLUS/MINUS: Moulson: -4 Ennis: -7 This settles it And Ennis had better linemates more often, no? Because a few of us think he's clearly better than the guy who would have been the worst forward on the team if we didn't also ice Nic Deslauriers? Ennis was worse than Matt Moulson by a considerable amount. Are you saying that you don't want to watch another year of this magic on the 4th line??? Just watch it. 4 feet away, some glorious sauce that hit Ennis right in the funny bone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 (edited) Umm... I think the better debate might be over the concept of Tyler Ennis. From what we've seen the past two years, Will Carrier is bigger, faster, better without the puck, causes turnovers instead of making them, is entering his prime rather than leaving it, and is much, much cheaper. He also created a similar amount of offence in much less ice time. And that ignores the fact they are on opposite ends of the analytics spectrum. It's not that Carrier is so great, or isn't replaceable. It's just that Ennis has been sooo bad. Sure, there is a faint hope he might return to form, but betting on that to the extent you are afraid Vegas might take him is not good asset management. Like Flagg, I believe there is another shoe to drop here because the alternative is Jason Botterill isn't very smart. Edited June 20, 2017 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 It's carrier. a behind the scenes deal is already speculated to have been brokered. By Hamilton and Harrington, who are both bozos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgia Blizzard Posted June 20, 2017 Report Share Posted June 20, 2017 (edited) Umm... I think the better debate might be over the concept of Tyler Ennis. From what we've seen the past two years, Will Carrier is bigger, faster, better without the puck, causes turnovers instead of making them, is entering his prime rather than leaving it, and is much, much cheaper. He also created a similar amount of offence in much less ice time. And that ignores the fact they are on opposite ends of the analytics spectrum. It's not that Carrier is so great, or isn't replaceable. It's just that Ennis has been sooo bad. Sure, there is a faint hope he might return to form, but betting on that to the extent you are afraid Vegas might take him is not good asset management. Like Flagg, I believe there is another shoe to drop here because the alternative is Jason Botterill isn't very smart. If it came down to protecting Ennis and leaving Carrier exposed vs. protecting Carrier and leaving Ullmark exposed, I'm more comfortable losing Carrier vs. Ullmark. That seems to be the Buffalo media scenario. I'm still hoping JBot negotiated a way to lose a bad contract, hopefully BOGO or maybe Moulson Edited June 20, 2017 by Georgia Blizzard 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.