PerreaultForever Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 1 hour ago, Dr. Who said: In the olden days, I always equated that term with the likes of Sophia Loren and Raquel Welch. (And the groaner jokes in the early Bond films were cool, etc.) Sucks to get old . . . lol, that is really weird to me. You have some fine looking toilets wherever you live................. Farm boys that's what we need. One year we were pretty good in high school hockey and won the city (Hamilton) championship. Went on to play the provincial regionals and met this team from the rural area around Hagersville and all these guys were freaking huge. Arms like our thighs from pitching those hay bails I guess. We were far more skilled and fast but they just pummeled us. They were all built like brick sh*thouses. Marty McSorley country. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 4 minutes ago, dudacek said: Peterka doesn't have a lot of "size" but he has a hockey player's low centre of gravity and powerful legs. Coupled with his speed and hockey sense, his lack of "size" will never be an issue. Quinn is "bigger" but his lack of strength is a question mark. His hands, his skating and his sense certainly overcome that an AHL level, but might not at an NHL level. "Size" is not an issue. Strength is, but he has the size to add strength. Ruotsalainen lacks size, but more importantly, he also lacks strength and quickness. Does he have the size to add enough strength without sacrificing quickness, or vice-versa? Can't disagree with any of this. Also think Cozens needs to keep getting stronger (which I think he will) not because he is soft or weak but because of the style he plays demands it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 49 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said: You're purposely ignoring my comment So yes, obviously genetics is only one thing and not a guarantee, it's a combination of things. There are always exceptions to every rule but overall you can tell but you have to look at the whole package, you have to consider EVERYTHING and if you have players ranked similar in skills, I'm taking the bigger meaner ones cause we need more of that. And there is the logical fallacy that bigger and meaner go together. That's one thing I am driving at is that we have to stop equating size to attitude. JJ Peterka has a mean streak. Krebs has a mean streak. Pekar has a mean streak. Justin Bailey.... not really. Sure we should consider everything but if everything is equal and I have a big guy who can't skate but is mean and a smaller guy who can skate and is mean... I am taking the smaller guy. Sure if everything else was equal (which is a fallacy in itself because that will never happen) I would take the bigger player for sure. Savoie or Geekie, that is the perfect litmus test for this. Do you take Geekie because he is big or do you take Savoie because he is the better player? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 40 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said: lol, that is really weird to me. You have some fine looking toilets wherever you live................. Farm boys that's what we need. One year we were pretty good in high school hockey and won the city (Hamilton) championship. Went on to play the provincial regionals and met this team from the rural area around Hagersville and all these guys were freaking huge. Arms like our thighs from pitching those hay bails I guess. We were far more skilled and fast but they just pummeled us. They were all built like brick sh*thouses. Marty McSorley country. What the ***** are you on about? The were more physically developed but again 18 year olds will be at various spots. This is the strangest anecdote ever because it is completely irrelevant to drafting. If you are suggesting we only draft "farm boys" you are out of your mind considering that rural farm boys are assuredly not getting the level of training that city kids with wealthy parents are. Hockey is one of the most affluent sports on the planet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said: Mitts is soft as butter. But he has bulk. That's been your point, find bulky guys and add size to the lineup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 5 hours ago, LGR4GM said: Wildly false? lol. Right, all 18 year old kids can't build muscle and to say otherwise is wildly false. Isak Rosen will always be 160lbs, the poor bastard... Jack Quinn should be traded now, he is only 176lbs, it would be "wildly false" to state he can add muscle. I stopped reading here because you’re intentionally playing dumb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 3 hours ago, LGR4GM said: And there is the logical fallacy that bigger and meaner go together. That's one thing I am driving at is that we have to stop equating size to attitude. JJ Peterka has a mean streak. Krebs has a mean streak. Pekar has a mean streak. Justin Bailey.... not really. Sure we should consider everything but if everything is equal and I have a big guy who can't skate but is mean and a smaller guy who can skate and is mean... I am taking the smaller guy. Sure if everything else was equal (which is a fallacy in itself because that will never happen) I would take the bigger player for sure. Savoie or Geekie, that is the perfect litmus test for this. Do you take Geekie because he is big or do you take Savoie because he is the better player? Nice to finally have a hockey team again isn't it? Now we can spend our time on pointless arguments about size and attitude. Question: Is the current Sabres roster (players and prospects all) in your opinion big enough? or tough enough if you want to get picayune and separate that. Cause that is the real question. You know my answer, what's yours? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 3 hours ago, LGR4GM said: What the ***** are you on about? The were more physically developed but again 18 year olds will be at various spots. This is the strangest anecdote ever because it is completely irrelevant to drafting. If you are suggesting we only draft "farm boys" you are out of your mind considering that rural farm boys are assuredly not getting the level of training that city kids with wealthy parents are. Hockey is one of the most affluent sports on the planet. Lighten up buddy. Its an amusing anecdote from playing actual hockey. If you'd been on the ice back then as a scrawny teen like I was you'd get it. Pity we lost ex Sabre Ron Roscoe at the time as he was too good for high school hockey. Now he was tough. and if you thought Marty McSorley was tough, you should have met his relatives. Crazy the lot of them. 3 hours ago, LGR4GM said: But he has bulk. That's been your point, find bulky guys and add size to the lineup. Not my point. Please stop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 2 hours ago, Hoss said: I stopped reading here because you’re intentionally playing dumb. Please just block me. I'm sick of your fake arguments and semantics and you're sick of me so let's just call it quits. 1 hour ago, PerreaultForever said: Nice to finally have a hockey team again isn't it? Now we can spend our time on pointless arguments about size and attitude. Question: Is the current Sabres roster (players and prospects all) in your opinion big enough? or tough enough if you want to get picayune and separate that. Cause that is the real question. You know my answer, what's yours? They are big enough. Define what you mean by tough enough and I'll answer that. Big doesn't equal tough. 59 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said: Lighten up buddy. Its an amusing anecdote from playing actual hockey. If you'd been on the ice back then as a scrawny teen like I was you'd get it. Pity we lost ex Sabre Ron Roscoe at the time as he was too good for high school hockey. Now he was tough. and if you thought Marty McSorley was tough, you should have met his relatives. Crazy the lot of them. Not my point. Please stop. I'm not your buddy pal. ... wondering if he'll get the joke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 How about this, who's better Savoie or Geekie? Use whatever criteria you want as long as you explain it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 6 minutes ago, LGR4GM said: Please just block me. I'm sick of your fake arguments and semantics and you're sick of me so let's just call it quits. I actually think you’re one of the better posters here but you handle disagreements terribly (pot meet kettle, I know). You acted like I said it’s impossible for ANY teen to put on muscle when I clearly stated it is not the easiest task for ALL teens to do so. It’s a waste of everyone’s time to completely ignore the argument being made and instead attack an argument that doesn’t exist. 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Hoss said: I actually think you’re one of the better posters here but you handle disagreements terribly (pot meet kettle, I know). You acted like I said it’s impossible for ANY teen to put on muscle when I clearly stated it is not the easiest task for ALL teens to do so. It’s a waste of everyone’s time to completely ignore the argument being made and instead attack an argument that doesn’t exist. Every single teen will put on muscle. All of them. It is easier to go hit the gym and add strength than it is to fix any other flaw a prospect has. I'll maintain that and you calling it "wildly false" isn't disagreeing, that's hyperbole because we know it's not wildly false. What's more likely? A 6ft 165lb 18 year old can't add muscle or a 6'4" 199lb 18 year old can significantly improve his skating? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 And you're both ignoring the elephant that a physically mature player might use that advantage on his peers making him look better than he is until he plays other physically mature players and his game doesn't work anymore. Again, Geekie or Savoie? Feel free to respond but I've made my case and can't add anything further. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted November 18, 2021 Report Share Posted November 18, 2021 1 hour ago, LGR4GM said: They are big enough. Define what you mean by tough enough and I'll answer that. Big doesn't equal tough. You're avoiding that. Tough is tough, what's to define? Are they tough enough? No, emphatically they are not. Disagree? 1 hour ago, LGR4GM said: How about this, who's better Savoie or Geekie? Use whatever criteria you want as long as you explain it. Haven't watched enough to be definitive. At this moment Savoie would be the better/higher pick. Both imo will be NHL players. Either would improve the Sabres but if both were there I'd take Savoie before Geekie. 1 hour ago, LGR4GM said: Big doesn't equal tough. Time for you to go watch some dreaded Zdeno Chara highlight reels. (and of course it doesn't, big guys can just be giraffes, don't be obtuse) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted November 18, 2021 Report Share Posted November 18, 2021 2 hours ago, LGR4GM said: Every single teen will put on muscle. All of them. It is easier to go hit the gym and add strength than it is to fix any other flaw a prospect has. I'll maintain that and you calling it "wildly false" isn't disagreeing, that's hyperbole because we know it's not wildly false. What's more likely? A 6ft 165lb 18 year old can't add muscle or a 6'4" 199lb 18 year old can significantly improve his skating? Liger Im betting the latter... I couldnt put on significant weight til I turned 30... I could think about exercise back then and loose weight. Had to eat 5 meals a day and a pint of ice cream to keep weight on when I consistently worked out. PS I worked as a bicycle courier in college in DC.. 50 miles of sprint work a day... For some it isnt easy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 18, 2021 Report Share Posted November 18, 2021 3 hours ago, North Buffalo said: Liger Im betting the latter... I couldnt put on significant weight til I turned 30... I could think about exercise back then and loose weight. Had to eat 5 meals a day and a pint of ice cream to keep weight on when I consistently worked out. PS I worked as a bicycle courier in college in DC.. 50 miles of sprint work a day... For some it isnt easy. ... so you were doing 50 miles on a bike a day and didn't gain weight. I want you to really think about that for second. This is perfect example of taking a situation you were in, replacing the context entirely and claiming someone will have that result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted November 18, 2021 Report Share Posted November 18, 2021 (edited) 5 hours ago, LGR4GM said: ... so you were doing 50 miles on a bike a day and didn't gain weight. I want you to really think about that for second. This is perfect example of taking a situation you were in, replacing the context entirely and claiming someone will have that result. Some of late teens early 20s but i didnt hit 180 til after 30. I am just saying these guys play hockey almost everyday... for some high metabolism guys it is difficult to put on weight... no you absoluted that everyone that age could put on weight and gain bulk... Im just saying for some teens and young adults its not so easy... rather eating that much pretty much sucked and I wasnt the only one. Yeh for some guys it wasnt a big deal and they could gain bulk but you painted a broad brush... Edited November 18, 2021 by North Buffalo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt Posted November 18, 2021 Report Share Posted November 18, 2021 57 minutes ago, North Buffalo said: Some of late teens early 20s but i didnt hit 180 til after 30. I am just saying these guys play hockey almost everyday... for some high metabolism guys it is difficult to put on weight... no you absoluted that everyone that age could put on weight and gain bulk... Im just saying for some teens and young adults its not so easy... rather eating that much pretty much sucked and I wasnt the only one. Yeh for some guys it wasnt a big deal and they could gain bulk but you painted a broad brush... During these years that you couldn’t add weight, were you working out with the goal of adding muscle mass? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted November 18, 2021 Report Share Posted November 18, 2021 Wasn’t Tyler Myers reportedly consuming like 7000 calories per day in an effort to gain weight? And having difficulty maintaining it? Its not an unfounded point. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted November 18, 2021 Report Share Posted November 18, 2021 The only thing I've gathered from this thread is that I have a craving for a Teen Burger from A&W 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted November 18, 2021 Report Share Posted November 18, 2021 I was 160lbs entering college, it was extremely difficult for me to add weight as a late teen. Outside of being on the ice nearly everyday I didn't do any other cardio. Spent hours in the gym each week trying to gain muscle mass but I struggled, maybe added 5lbs my freshman year (as a 20yo). Was considered scrawny for a 5'11 hockey player back then when the game was much more physical than it is now. I saw doctors, dieticians, tried all kinds of supplements and powders, etc... spent a summer doing Cybergenics and finally was able to bulk up a bit, eventually reaching 185lbs by my junior year. After my hockey career was over I quickly lost all that muscle mass settling back down to 170lbs were I'm still at today in my late 40s... some people just have a naturally high metabolism. That said, diet science is mich more advanced these days and I wouldn't expect these kids to struggle with it as much as I did. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted November 18, 2021 Report Share Posted November 18, 2021 5 hours ago, Curt said: During these years that you couldn’t add weight, were you working out with the goal of adding muscle mass? At times... I got stronger but didnt gain weight... was eating protein shakes etc but couldnt gain much... I probably had a body fat percentage of less 2%. One summer as a courier in DC heat dropped to 137 til it cooled down and I could gain some back... this was when I was 20. Normal times I could stay between 165-170 but that was my max... now almost 60 I weigh just short of 200 but I am not exercising the way I used to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 19, 2021 Report Share Posted November 19, 2021 He has 9 assists in 16 games in the Slovakia pro league. He's a rhd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted November 20, 2021 Report Share Posted November 20, 2021 58 minutes ago, LGR4GM said: He has 9 assists in 16 games in the Slovakia pro league. He's a rhd. There is an argument to take Him in the 4-6 range if He is still there 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 20, 2021 Report Share Posted November 20, 2021 Tucker Robertson is a player Buffalo should look at in the 2-4 round range. He's 19 on June 22 but is another OHL guy who got screwed last year. This is the type of overage guy you should look for and he's currently 2nd in the ohl in ppg. The person in first will be 21 in January for comparison. 16gp, 14g, 15a, 29pts. 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.