Thorner

I’m not sure if I’m willing to even go there anymore before going to “straight ineptitude”. But I’ve long hypothesized Adams chose the plan upon arrival specifically based on which modus operandi would result in the longest runway, with the least expectations how many times have we heard the “Young team” excuse this year? How many times have I said that’s nothing to write home about, because being the “youngest team in hockey” is a freebie accomplishment? ANYONE can do that. Is this deal not a re-upping of that punt-happy timeline? Why can’t we be good NOW

Is Byram going to get more than Dahlin and Power? Casey would have been among the team leaders in I’ve time regardless of Tage and Cozens. You aren’t ever getting the limited minutes the “3rd line C” connotation implies: if you are a top forward you are among the leaders in minutes.

I came up with that theory lol

This take isn’t even grounded in statistical reality Even if Casey was our third best C, if he’s our third best F, he’s not getting “3rd line minutes”. Thats not how the nhl works i appreciate the factual statement that you are specifically taking one side by choice, but when you lock yourself onto a side regardless of merit you’ll have some takes that shoot for the moon yet fall among the stars

Right now? Objectively Casey

This part stings. What we we developing them FOR? To parlay into further pieces we can develop?

I’m so tired of the “well, this guy CAN play his offhand” narrative. You can’t do that with every guy lmao. We can’t be throwing away little bits of value everywhere haha, like we have *any*!at all to spare. I fail to understand why we were in a position with Casey where we need to sacrifice one iota. Biggest trade chip and we take a willing positional hit? Why?? the, “this guy CAN do it” stuff only works if that’s not your entire D core

His numbers apparently torpedoed on the right

Considering that statistical deep dive we saw this offseason that suggested Dahlin on his off hand dropped off a little, but not a lot, I find the move to be somewhat puzzling. I understand teams occasionally get by with D men playing their offhand on top pairs, but it’s not common, and *aiming* to do so, right off the bat, and basically pigeonholing yourself into needing to do so across the board, seems fairly questionable. We are measuring a value in value out trade that’s a risk by first IMMEDIATELY spotting the “lost value” side by our looming positional requirements. Very risky. On the plus side, I’ve been begging for a hockey trade. This is that. I also spoke a lot about how we even may need to “lose” a trade by value to address a position of need. So I am actually ok with this type of deal in theory. But then you see it was for a..left shot D. Our position of greatest strength. It admittedly doesn’t make much sense to me based on the parameters I’m using to evaluate. Maybe we need to admit to different parameters. Maybe we really just are a budget team Maybe we really are just Terry’d. Can we make a strong argument that Adams thinks this will improve the team, in the NOW term? Cause even if we didn’t agree with him, that would be preferable Are the options clueless GM or inept owner? Someone tell me why this trade makes us better right now. Actually asking, cause that would be best.

A left shot D man, eh

Yep. You got me.

Lol edited for brevity ie “deleted” since all my posts were lumped into one indiscriminate mass of text at the top of the page out of context Have at it

True

Up almost the whole game and lose by 3 ffs

That blew my gasket

6 on 5 and Cozens was battling against 2 guys alone in the offensive zone corner wut

Heck of a save

We’ve been good with comebacks lately

Both teams on back to back to be fair

Need a save there, kid!

Nice save

He’s always been a big baby

Lol he put Scheifele on his arse too

Dahlin crushed Nino

Triple double No assists