Adams: we have an elite D corps

[GASabresIUFAN]

11 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Power is definitely baring the brunt of baby/bath water philosophy right now - almost shocking after 14 years of this 

He is the target because he is  a former top over all pick, carries a big contract and hasn't improved at all in 3 years in the NHL.  In many ways he is a worse player today than as a rookie.  The Athletic gave him a negative -3.5 mill contract deficit last season.  That basically means we are paying 8.35 for a 4.85 player.  Analytics aside, his game doesn't pass the eye test and Byram is a similar but better player for less money making Power a luxury we don't need to keep.

Could Power change the narrative this season?  Sure he could, but if we go through another season where he is inept defensively, these calls to move on are going to get louder and more frequent.

 

[Thorny]

1 hour ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

He is the target because he is  a former top over all pick, carries a big contract and hasn't improved at all in 3 years in the NHL.  In many ways he is a worse player today than as a rookie.  The Athletic gave him a negative -3.5 mill contract deficit last season.  That basically means we are paying 8.35 for a 4.85 player.  Analytics aside, his game doesn't pass the eye test and Byram is a similar but better player for less money making Power a luxury we don't need to keep.

Could Power change the narrative this season?  Sure he could, but if we go through another season where he is inept defensively, these calls to move on are going to get louder and more frequent.

 

This reminds me a lot of Reinhart tbh, I remember quite stupidly arguing that he “wasn’t even an nhl player” sometime in his 3rd year, or 4th year post draft, the season where he utterly flipped the switch after that outdoor game in some sweet jerseys 

We’ve been in this spot for so long and been spoiled by the like of Eichel and Dahlin, picking so many elite, all star level players (that we’ve failed to properly supplement) that we’ve forgotten a longer development curve is often the case, especially with D. Even top picks in a weak draft 

[PerreaultForever]

Too many "elite" players, not enough warriors. 

[SabreFinn]

17 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Too many "elite" players, not enough warriors. 

It is embarassing that Adams has stayed this long and still hasn't succeeded in building a well balanced roster. 

[PerreaultForever]

33 minutes ago, SabreFinn said:

It is embarassing that Adams has stayed this long and still hasn't succeeded in building a well balanced roster. 

Exactly. When he tore it down and removed the elite stars he had the moment to change the culture and change the make up of how they build the roster but they didn't. Still open ice speed and puck moving D. (more to it than that obviously, but you get the general idea). 

@Thorny gives me the big red X cause he doesn't like the idea but he has no point to counter it. You can of course argue that any team could use more "talent" but that's simply not how you construct a TEAM in reality. I mean Florida's 4th line was all waiver wire pick ups. We could have had all of them I think. As an example. 

I think it's gotten to the point where players here don't and won't buy in and they just don't care about the jersey. They just go for their individual stats and wait for their exit strategy. Many of them anyway. 

[SabreFinn]

17 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Exactly. When he tore it down and removed the elite stars he had the moment to change the culture and change the make up of how they build the roster but they didn't. Still open ice speed and puck moving D. (more to it than that obviously, but you get the general idea). 

@Thorny gives me the big red X cause he doesn't like the idea but he has no point to counter it. You can of course argue that any team could use more "talent" but that's simply not how you construct a TEAM in reality. I mean Florida's 4th line was all waiver wire pick ups. We could have had all of them I think. As an example. 

I think it's gotten to the point where players here don't and won't buy in and they just don't care about the jersey. They just go for their individual stats and wait for their exit strategy. Many of them anyway. 

I think the talent (read Kid line) are more willingto pay attention to details If their position on the team is treatened. Better coaching might have helped also ofcourse.

[PerreaultForever]

38 minutes ago, SabreFinn said:

I think the talent (read Kid line) are more willingto pay attention to details If their position on the team is treatened. Better coaching might have helped also ofcourse.

Of course coaching is an issue (and we've had that discussion before about Ruff not bringing his own new assistants) but there really never should have been a "kid line" and there shouldn't be one now. 

[Thorny]

5 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

@Thorny gives me the big red X cause he doesn't like the idea but he has no point to counter it. You can of course argue that any team could use more "talent" but that's simply not how you construct a TEAM in reality.

 

“you need to build a balanced team.” No shite. It doesn’t mean you trade your most talented players to do it 

Trading Eichel and Reinhart wasn’t an “opportunity”, it was a horrendous step backwards. That’s already proven out 

“too many elite players, not enough warriors” is nonsense. There’s literally no meaning there, as they aren’t “either/or” propositions. The issue has never once been that we’ve had “too many elite players”, I promise you. That’s not possible on its face. The abilities you are alluding to that fall under the category of, for lack of a better word, “grit”, also are encompassed by “talent” and can factor into what makes an elite player elite as much as anything. The ability to play the game in winning fashion. Defensive ability is a talent. Being able to consistently work hard in a way that best facilitates your skills making an impact is also a talent.

- - - 

Also for the record, stop being such a baby about getting a “big red” X. Why is it so “big” to you?

Take it up with the moderators if you don’t like the feature. Frankly it’s an easy way to disagree with your posts when I oft-need to. The post I gave you that gargantuan X on hardly deserved these paragraphs. It was devoid of context with one sentence of erroneous logic - that’s what I was responding to, that it made intrinsically no sense.

- - - 

You were obv referencing my post above yours when you said “elite”, and you completely missed the point. “That we’ve failed to properly supplement”, I said. Of course you need balance. You didn’t make the connection to that I was talking about was the fact we aren’t *doing well* by the elite players we HAVE had by properly rounding out the depth of the team.

Any of the “elite” players you’ll deem to have failed will not have been brought up in an environment tailored to success if you are referring to any of the last 14 years, due to the lack of overall talent and balance and depth (ie - the make up of the team). That this is actually congruent with your musings, that escaped you at the time, no doubt.

Edited 9 hours ago by Thorny

[PerreaultForever]

9 hours ago, Thorny said:

 

“you need to build a balanced team.” No shite. It doesn’t mean you trade your most talented players to do it 

Trading Eichel and Reinhart wasn’t an “opportunity”, it was a horrendous step backwards. That’s already proven out 

“too many elite players, not enough warriors” is nonsense. There’s literally no meaning there, as they aren’t “either/or” propositions. The issue has never once been that we’ve had “too many elite players”, I promise you. That’s not possible on its face. The abilities you are alluding to that fall under the category of, for lack of a better word, “grit”, also are encompassed by “talent” and can factor into what makes an elite player elite as much as anything. The ability to play the game in winning fashion. Defensive ability is a talent. Being able to consistently work hard in a way that best facilitates your skills making an impact is also a talent.

- - - 

Also for the record, stop being such a baby about getting a “big red” X. Why is it so “big” to you?

Take it up with the moderators if you don’t like the feature. Frankly it’s an easy way to disagree with your posts when I oft-need to. The post I gave you that gargantuan X on hardly deserved these paragraphs. It was devoid of context with one sentence of erroneous logic - that’s what I was responding to, that it made intrinsically no sense.

- - - 

You were obv referencing my post above yours when you said “elite”, and you completely missed the point. “That we’ve failed to properly supplement”, I said. Of course you need balance. You didn’t make the connection to that I was talking about was the fact we aren’t *doing well* by the elite players we HAVE had by properly rounding out the depth of the team.

Any of the “elite” players you’ll deem to have failed will not have been brought up in an environment tailored to success if you are referring to any of the last 14 years, due to the lack of overall talent and balance and depth (ie - the make up of the team). That this is actually congruent with your musings, that escaped you at the time, no doubt.

To the first part - it was an unfortunate rebuild situation but there was no alternative as players wanted out or were ready to walk. So the "opportunity" is in starting over and doing it right this time. He didn't. He made a lot of the same mistakes and still is. I think you knew I meant that but wanted to argue for the sake of arguing. 

To the second - the rex X comment. Baby? Really? I can't use the appropriate expletive but you can guess what it is. The red X by you is a cheap and easy way to not make a counter point. It's just lazy. If I did the same it would be like two children going yes - no - yes - no - yes - no - and then likely devolve into I know you are but what am I. So you can keep doing it, and you'll have to live with me calling you on your laziness. Tough. 

To the third, that's what you should have said in the first place.