Thorner

I agree with all this. To me it’s definitely interesting as a discussion point under the context of there being a fair amount of talk this summer about whether we went too “status quo” with the forwards. I was kind of of the mind that made sense, internal improvement would be enough to offset any regression we MIGHT see. Quinn going down sort of takes a non negligible bite out of that “expected internal improvement” quotient, and, as you say, replaces him with a status quo output relative to last season, instead. So you are absolutely right. Adams might be sitting there saying we still have more than enough improvement coming from other roster spots it doesn’t ultimately matter! Ie, he had us so above the playoff line that whatever the loss of WAR amounts to in losing Quinn isn’t enough to endanger our position above that line

Yes, to not add a player as good as Quinn from the outside because it would prevent us starting out a rookie on a path, this year, where we hope he becomes what Quinn was going to be this year, NEXT. it’s an accepted downgrade for THIS season, though, in the name of not blocking a young player’s development. because it can’t be argued it’s in the best interest of the TEAM, this coming season, to ice a rookie instead of Quinn and what we were expecting of him this season (or a like replacement) We are literally just regurgitating the plan here

Under the idea where we aren’t really losing anything by moving guys up one spot, in order for that to make sense, the players moving up need to necessarily be very close in ability. Which we can grant, I suppose, for sake of argument. But then, by the time you get to the end, you are replacing the guy who was able to supposedly seamlessly replace the guy who we just said seamlessly replaced Quinn. So they are all theoretically Quinn level players. In which case, you are still ultimately replacing what Krebs was going to give you on a “lower” line, with someone likely significantly inferior unless your “next man up” is of the same ilk Ie the only thing that literally matters is the net: it’s Quinn out, rookie/Olofsson in

No, we are somehow replacing Quinn with Mittelstadt? I need a life preserver here

? You have to look at the net of the team, man. You can shuffle the lines but you aren’t making the absence disappear, it’s not a street trick. It’s Quinn out, rookie/Olofsson in Mittelstadt was already playing more than Quinn

As for the veteran designation @ElevenI was using the actual, official nhl definition The designations don’t matter to me

Right, that’s what I’m getting at. In your view, Quinn to Rousek/Olofsson isn’t a downgrade? Or it’s just not a sizeable enough one to really matter? *as Quinn contributed last year* if we are lucky no?

Regardless, the result of Quinn to WHICHEVER of those guys is still a likely downgrade, no?

I don’t really understand what the slant is here - the net is Quinn, out, Rousek/Olofsson, in I know it doesn’t need to be a rookie but I was actively discussing with someone talking about it being a rookie to replace him. Which Rousek Is suppose is

That’s what a team that believes in its depth and is naturally very conservative, would do. I think is more accurate He was on the team last year! Lol

This seems extreme. There’s definitely a middle ground where you believe in your depth but still think it’s ok to replace a guy externally when the in house option is very unlikely to provide the same value.

Wish it wasn’t seen that way but definitely true

I love a semantic discussion as much as anyone but truthfully his designation is besides the point obv. I think it’s probably fair to say it’s unlikely a rookie can contribute to record what Quinn likely would have.

So rare in season though, no? So much has to coincide. Jets can’t be on a winning streak, etc I bet it’s a deadline deal if anything if it lingers into season. But that’s certainly not the only option

And you would not be open to paying more than one so as to make up the difference?

I’m fine with you thinking this but if Adams thinks it, while I want no part of meeting his barber I’d certainly appreciate an introduction to his dealer

It ain’t 22-23 anymore buddy Times have changed

40 point pace last year for Quinn? What do we feel Adams was reasonably penciling in for this year? 50 points, and a reasonably likely extension to his growing 2-way game? Can Savoie step in and provide 50 points this year and a good two way game?

Well I mean dude, technically Quinn is officially designated as a Veteran, now You think the system is ready to pump out a player, for this season, who is likely to match what Quinn was to amount to, this season?

Are we thinking Savoie much more likely ends up at wing at the nhl level? See him slotted as a RWeR often even in lower levels

Because Quinn WAS a vet this season, at least relative to a rookie and the production we can reasonably expect from said

Not just best on team. Samuelsson is the best defender in the known universe. That’s what that tweet would have you believe - - - Advanced stats marks do argue differently, fwiw. And there’s the card

I’m starting to think Adams leans, like maybe perhaps a tad, ever so slightly to the conservative side of the spectrum.

Samuelsson is “complimentary” in thats he’s a real life human nhl body who can physically exist beside DahlIn, sure. He had the skill set to be capably assigned very limited duties on pair 1 because Dahlin holds most of it down, facilitating a player of Samuelsson’s ability being able complete the pair: we can ask so little of him. But again, what I took issue with was when you said Samuelsson “allows” Dahlin to be Dahlin. He doesn’t. Samuelsson, in particular, isn’t providing or unlocking anything your league average NHL defender doesn’t (I believe metrically he was below, actually). He’s assigned the duties we don’t lump onto Dahlin, so, sure, the assignments “allow” Dahlin to focus on being Dahlin. We can assign those duties to any second pair defender who’s actually a second pair defender “Look how much better Dahlin is without an ECHLer in Bryson tanking his stats. Samuelsson is the perfect compliment.” Ya, like, he’s perfect because he’s actually a good NHL player lol. *he did not provide stellar D*. He didn’t even provide GOOD D. What exactly is he complimenting Dahlin with, particularly? Actually asking. Point me to an actual stat that illustrates his value or something he’s first pair quality at - like actually, please create a statistics based argument for what he did at a first pair level, or even for what he provided that any other actual 2nd pair quality player might not provide. Not a rank, minuscule sized, correlation dominated, short stretch of overall team record Samuelsson did not provide anything special last season. Go argue with the stats. Or go figure out how strong and powerful Barbie is, whichever. You’re wildly off the mark on both

An exceedingly small sample size, you mean, where both correlation and causation are very quite clearly at play as options? Where only correlation can be considered the reasoned explanation because there isn’t a single other available statistical indicator that points to Samuelsson providing anything *close* to the value that one, single, anomalific outlier suggests? When there is only one potential indicator in his favour, and it’s easily explained by correlation, it’s correlation. The reason the record suffered so much during that stretch, aside from small sample size randomness, is a commentary on HOW BAD our depth D replacements were, that, even to a borderline 2nd pair quality player, maybe closer to ideally third pair, there was a chasm of a gap. - - - Of course complimentary skill sets are a thing: but the distinction here was the use of “allow” which I take to mean “facilitates “, which is something different. It’s not a small segment of the online population that thinks Samuelsson specifically was the key to not only unlocking Dahlin’s success, but, like you alluded to, hangs their hats continually on the stat of what our record was with him missing for a stretch, to the extent of literally making a case for Samuelsson being the team’s MVP last year. It’s not uncommon, I’ve seen it a lot here too, and posters were formulating arguments last season that, given the choice for 1 game, we’d sooner remove Dahlin from the lineup than Samuelsson Sooner remove one of the best hockey players in the world. In favour of Mattias Samuelsson. i dunno if we are grading on a curve or some such but it’s certainly lost the plot