TrueBlueGED
-
Posts
29,076 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TrueBlueGED
-
-
2 hours ago, ... said:
Explain what's good about this guy. Why was he your guy? I know this info is buried in the draft thread...let's start fresh.
In my mind, everyone after Kakko is basically a game of "pick your preference" and are essentially the same talent-wise through the top-10. Not everyone will agree with that, but I don't think any gaps that are there are large enough to be worth arguing about. With that as my base, I think Cozens brings a potential high end two-way game that is completely absent in the organization at center. He'll never be in the All-Star game due to raw offensive output, but we don't need that now or in the future because we have Jack and (hopefully) Mittelstadt.
-
3
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Weave said:
A better skating Sean Couturier?
Funny, Couturier and Horvat were the guys in my mind when reading up on Cozens. We don't have anyone like that in the organization. Gimme.
-
1
-
-
On the one hand, he was my guy. On the other hand, I'm sad that Botterill has killed my American/NCAA jokes.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, WildCard said:
I can't find it but McKenzie also has a quote saying something to the affect of the belief around the league is the Sabres ruined Risto, and he can still improve/grow if instructed well
This is why he should be traded. You have GMs, competing against one another, who actually think he's a top pairing Dman? Trade that man while you have this market. Trade him!
-
11 minutes ago, nfreeman said:
I'm calling NFW on PK to the Leafs.
I tend to agree, but if it happens it'll be fun to see the Marner fireworks, because he's definitely gone in a separate trade (assuming he's not gone for Subban).
-
Just now, WildCard said:
Yeah it's been around for the last couple of days, slowly rising. Basically the belief is Risto was gone before Krueger came in and took a look. Krueger likes a challenge and thinks he can turn him around, so they're going to keep him unless we get a deal we can't refuse
If true (big if), Botts continues to dig his own grave.
-
1
-
-
Just now, ... said:
I guess that's a fair metric. I fail to see how this translates into Botterill seeing value in trading for Vesey, unless you think part of the reason the team's place in the standings are because Botterill is an idiot. And I sincerely mean that, no snark. Because, if we do trade anything for Vesey, I will fully and completely agree that Botterill is a legit idiot.
I'm just at the point where I'm skeptical of Botterill's player evaluations. He's turned over most of the roster to, at best, neutral results.
-
I'd much rather take a flyer on Burakovsky than Vesey.
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, ... said:
I thought the consensus was that he only screwed up one trade, and there's not consensus on whether he was forced to make it..?
But, seriously, even JBot must know trading anything more than a 7th for Vesey is stupid.
He's had two years to make the team better and has failed. Although I think the trade that shall not be named was a disaster, I'm purely focused on place in the standings. By that metric, there's no evidence he knows how to improve a hockey team.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, Derrico said:
Don't you stat today. There's way too much potential for a big trade I'm focusing on. This next big move will really sway my thoughts on JBotts.
I'm not sold he's a failure or anything, I just think his first two seasons probably should have burned his benefit of the doubt.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, ... said:
Do we not trust Botterill to recognize this, too?
I don't see why we should trust Botterill at all.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Happy to see the McCabe for Vesey debunked. I'm not a huge McCabe fan, but that would be a brutal trade.
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, GASabresIUFAN said:
He got Sheary for a 4th, why would you pay more then a 3rd for Vesey?
Vesey is an American who played in the NCAA, Botterill's cocaine.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, tom webster said:
Ok, now that I would not like.
Didn't you just say yesterday GMs aren't stupid? ?
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, triumph_communes said:
Only if you aren’t paying attention. Jason literally said that Tage’s problems were best fixed playing in the NHL, whereas Nylander had yet to prove he could even produce in the AHL.
Tage had already proven he could PPG in the AHL. Tage’s problem was that his cute moves didn’t work against NHL defenders like they do in the AHL and he needed to experience that first hand or ride the bench. He immediately produced in the AHL when eventually sent down—- proving he was not ‘ruined’, he just needs to find a way to make his game work without the cute moves
Nylander was was a summer removed from being a healthy playoff scratch in the AHL. A skill player with opportunity to play first line who can’t produce in the AHL doesn’t magically produce in the NHL Only role players get away with that progression. Or some college freshman, etc in the more physical leagues.
Prior to coming to Buffalo, Tage had 20 points in 46 AHL games. So no, he hadn't proven anything.
I'm well aware of what Botterill said, I just think it's a bunch of hogwash. True or not, there's literally nothing else he can offer to explain Tage being in the NHL all year.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, darksabre said:
I'm honestly not sure I want Zucker. The cap hit is fine but the term is a little long. Minnesota really shouldn't be looking to trade him, which makes me nervous.
5 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:It's worth noting that Fenton appears to be a moron.
That Rask-Niederreiter trade was one of the goofiest trades I've ever seenYea I'm more interested in trading with Fenton than I am in acquiring Zucker.
-
1
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:
I'm as big a Nylander critic as anyone, but he was objectively a top 12 Sabre forward last season, and quite a bit better in his small time on the roster than both Mitts and Tage. I don't particularly like his game, but a reasonable NHL coach can turn him into a positive. There was nothing in his 12 games that indicated floating or effort or attitude issues. He actively contributed to offensive creation, if not as much in volume as a serious offensive threat like the top line, and wasn't a defensive nuisance, if not Johan Larsson.
Tage spending all season in the NHL while Nylander played in Rochester continues to be one of the great mysteries from last season.
-
2 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:
No because I'd rather give that package to Tampa
For Point, I assume?
-
12 minutes ago, Hoss said:
If 31 was enough to get Kapanen someone would've traded for him by now
I'm not entirely sure that's true. What Toronto will ultimately take when they know they have to trade him may be different than what they're willing to take before they know. I'm sure they'd prefer to still find a way to move Marleau and/or Kadri.
-
16 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:
I have no freaking clue why we would want Jimmy Vesey. He plays a position we don't need. He isn't a significant upgrade over what we have. He 3 years ago indicated pretty directly he did not want to play here. This is mind boggling dumb to trade assets for a 3rd line LW who has a history of wanting to play in 1 place and 1 place only. This is how you get guys on your team with bad attitudes. If he was really good, fine. But he is a 3rd line player with mediocre possession metrics.
He's a depth scorer and we could use more depth scoring. If Botterill thinks he's an answer in the top-6, however....
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, tom webster said:
Keeping if not keeping Teravainen had little to no impact on their record.
How about needlessly giving Seabrook a retirement contract when he was clearly in decline?
Anyway, I think one factor you're not fully taking into account is the elimination of backdiving congrats. The Hawks benefitted greatly from Keith and Hossa on deals that are no longer possible. Maybe you're right that it ultimately won't matter a lot, but I don't think that book has been written yet.
-
4 minutes ago, Derrico said:
I know but there were other factors that went into ROR decision I think.
Just now, darksabre said:Mhmmm
ROR aside (you have to admire my personal growth by not responding with fury!), thinking Berglund and/or Mittelstadt are suitable 2C options isn't exactly confidence inspiring, ya know?
-
3
-
2
-
-
Just now, Derrico said:
It's not about losing the impact player. It's about having the ability to surround the impact player.
I also think there's a distinction to be drawn between paying your stars not mattering to the cap versus the cap not mattering at all. Teams rarely, if ever, regret paying their top players. Overpaying the middle tier, however, regularly weakens teams as they try to stay under the cap.
-
55 minutes ago, Hoss said:
Arizona is so lost. They’re just moving dudes in and out with absolutely no semblance of a plan.
12 minutes ago, dudacek said:Analytics! ?
I tend to agree, but they had 6 more wins than we did last year.
5 minutes ago, tom webster said:I continue to wait for the first impact player to be lost due to cap restrictions. Maybe it will be Marner but I’m not betting on it.
I have been hearing the same thing since Andy Messersmith joined the Braves.
Teravainen wasn't traded all too long ago because of the cap.
Edit: And even if the Leafs manage to keep Marner (as I expect they will), losing Kapanen because of Marleau's contract isn't exactly a trivial loss. It doesn't always matter, but it shouldn't just be dismissed.
Pick #31 Ryan Johnson Defenseman
in The Aud Club
Posted
Should have traded it.