TrueBlueGED Posted February 9, 2015 Report Posted February 9, 2015 Detroit took 2 -- both of whom are more highly valued by NHL GMs than Stafford (I'll assume you agree with this) -- in 17 years, while Darcy took 12. That's a huge difference. Detroit only taking 2 forwards is in part why it's so damn difficult to say they're better at drafting them than Regier was. If Grigorenko or Armia make it, Regier is batting about 50%--exactly what you'd expect in that draft range. If Mantha and Larkin make it (which naturally is not close to being known), Detroit has a very high hit rate...but they also only swung a few times, and there's no real reason to believe their next 3 swings will be as successful--they have enough whiffs on their defenseman picks to put their forward success in question. Secondly, of course Mantha and Larkin are more highly valued right now...but what about a more appropriate comparison, such as where Stafford was at that point in his career? Mantha has 18 points in 34 AHL games...Stafford had 44 in 34 games his first year in the A. Currently, both Grigorenko and Armia (who is a year older, so not a totally fair comparison) are both out-performing him.
nfreeman Posted February 9, 2015 Report Posted February 9, 2015 Detroit only taking 2 forwards is in part why it's so damn difficult to say they're better at drafting them than Regier was. If Grigorenko or Armia make it, Regier is batting about 50%--exactly what you'd expect in that draft range. If Mantha and Larkin make it (which naturally is not close to being known), Detroit has a very high hit rate...but they also only swung a few times, and there's no real reason to believe their next 3 swings will be as successful--they have enough whiffs on their defenseman picks to put their forward success in question. Secondly, of course Mantha and Larkin are more highly valued right now...but what about a more appropriate comparison, such as where Stafford was at that point in his career? Mantha has 18 points in 34 AHL games...Stafford had 44 in 34 games his first year in the A. Currently, both Grigorenko and Armia (who is a year older, so not a totally fair comparison) are both out-performing him. Well, I agree that Detroit presents a small sample size -- but you were the one who brought up Detroit! Zing! Also, if Griggy or Armia hits, that's 4 out of 12, which is well shy of 50%. And while I recognize the shortcomings of the "who would GMs rather have now" in the Stafford-Mantha/Larkin debate, I think the "compare their stats at relative career stages" approach is just as flawed -- and probably more flawed -- because the whole point of the debate is whether Darcy stunk at drafting forwards who would become good NHL players. Right now, we don't know how good Mantha and Larkin will be, but I think you would admit that most GMs think both will develop into better NHL players than Stafford. I hope you're not getting tired! I'll be here all day! This is all that this miserable season has left me to get fired up about, at least until some trades happen. Thanks Darcy.
TrueBlueGED Posted February 9, 2015 Report Posted February 9, 2015 Well, I agree that Detroit presents a small sample size -- but you were the one who brought up Detroit! Zing! Also, if Griggy or Armia hits, that's 4 out of 12, which is well shy of 50%. And while I recognize the shortcomings of the "who would GMs rather have now" in the Stafford-Mantha/Larkin debate, I think the "compare their stats at relative career stages" approach is just as flawed -- and probably more flawed -- because the whole point of the debate is whether Darcy stunk at drafting forwards who would become good NHL players. Right now, we don't know how good Mantha and Larkin will be, but I think you would admit that most GMs think both will develop into better NHL players than Stafford. I hope you're not getting tired! I'll be here all day! This is all that this miserable season has left me to get fired up about, at least until some trades happen. Thanks Darcy. Bring it on! (And by bring it on, I mean this is my last post until late tonight due to class + drive, but whatever) 1) Touche. 2) Paille (this is at least a half hit, as he's a quality NHL player, even if his 20 goal season left us all with higher expectations), Vanek (always disappointing to some, but a consistent 60 point player is nothing to sneeze at), Stafford, Ennis, Girgensons, Grigorenko/Armia. 3) I would agree that most GMs would hope for Larkin and Mantha to become more than slightly above average 2nd line wingers, but expect? I'm honestly not as sure of that. They might expect more consistency, but I don't think either of them are expected to be 1st liners (ceiling, sure, but not expectations). 4) I can't believe I'm even somewhat defending a GM whose firing brought me more joy than all of Buffalo sports in the last five years :lol:
woods-racer Posted February 12, 2015 Report Posted February 12, 2015 STAFFORD FIRST. Are you ready now? D4rksabre, you like messing with old guys! I finally find Hodson must go under Dirty crusty handkerchief must go. Then as I'm flippin through all of a sudden it's called Cranky Hangnail needs to go.
darksabre Posted February 12, 2015 Author Report Posted February 12, 2015 Are you ready now? D4rksabre, you like messing with old guys! I finally find Hodson must go under Dirty crusty handkerchief must go. Then as I'm flippin through all of a sudden it's called Cranky Hangnail needs to go. :P
Jsixspd Posted February 12, 2015 Report Posted February 12, 2015 Sooooooo.... It would have been a PERFECT day had Hodgson been shown the door too. However, he helps the Tank, even more so than did Leino. So get rid of him in the off-season, once he's done his part to help us secure the draft pick.
dudacek Posted February 12, 2015 Report Posted February 12, 2015 Cody is going to get a second chance next year on McEichel's wing with a coach that understands his game... He'll be gone in five years in a deadline trade for a 35-year-old Drew Stafford.
LGR4GM Posted February 12, 2015 Report Posted February 12, 2015 Cody is going to get a second chance next year on McEichel's wing with a coach that understands his game... He'll be gone in five years in a deadline trade for a 35-year-old Drew Stafford. lol Cody will be gone by the time the deadline hits or he will be gone at the draft. Both will be packaged deals. Cody is not the type of forward GMTM wants. The only plus side to keeping him... he is a RHS and we could use a couple of those until Bailey and Baptiste are g2g
nfreeman Posted February 12, 2015 Report Posted February 12, 2015 Cody is going to get a second chance next year on McEichel's wing with a coach that understands his game... He'll be gone in five years in a deadline trade for a 35-year-old Drew Stafford. As much as I am filled with contempt and loathing for Hodgy at this point, I think there is a pretty good likelihood that (i) the Sabres will have a different coach on opening night and (ii) GMTM will want to give Hodgy another chance under the new coach.
woods-racer Posted February 12, 2015 Report Posted February 12, 2015 Cody is going to get a second chance next year on McEichel's wing with a coach that understands his game... He'll be gone in five years in a deadline trade for a 35-year-old Drew Stafford. Sarcasm? ..... rrriiight?
Kristian Posted February 12, 2015 Report Posted February 12, 2015 It would have been a PERFECT day had Hodgson been shown the door too. However, he helps the Tank, even more so than did Leino. So get rid of him in the off-season, once he's done his part to help us secure the draft pick. He definitely stepped up in his role as Tank Commander, when the Commander-in-Chief was bought out.
bunomatic Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 LOL. Coney Hotdog. HA HA HA . Eventually this thread title will work its way back to Cody Hodgson needs to go.
inkman Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 GMTM vision is too cogent to let Hodgson's bargain basement buyout slip through his fingers. He can walk away from that albatross with a cap hit under $800k for the next short while. Done.
LGR4GM Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 LOL. Coney Hotdog. HA HA HA . Eventually this thread title will work its way back to Cody Hodgson needs to go. This thread is awesome... lol love it. Just remember that Coney may end up on the team a little longer. It depends on if Murray can actually trade him with that contract.
Drunkard Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 This thread is awesome... lol love it. Just remember that Coney may end up on the team a little longer. It depends on if Murray can actually trade him with that contract. There's always the option to buy him out at 1/3 value rather than waiting another season and being stuck having to buy him out at 2/3. I know the blue print is to be like the Kings but I'm hoping Murray doesn't make the same mistake they did with Mike Richards and wait too long to buy him out. Unless it turns out that Hodgson has been dealing with a season long nagging injury that we don't know about then his play has completely fallen off a cliff this season and Murray needs to give serious thought into moving on from him. At the center position we're likely looking at 4 of McEichel, Reinhart, Girgensons, Grigorenko, and McCormick and we still have guys like Ennis or even Foligno who can man the pivot in a pinch. And while our right side is pretty thin after losing Stafford and Armia, Ennis has proven capable to fill in on that side and we still have Gionta plus Kaleta who I think will be re-signed. Personally, I hope we trade Stewart at the deadline for a good prospect (rather than a pick) then resign him in the offseason so he and Kane can bookend our prized newly drafted stud center. We also have the ability to put one of the extra centers on the right side or obtaining someone through trade or free agency. We shouldn't have any trouble finding someone who would easily out produce Hodgson's numbers for less money, shorter term, or both.
TrueBlueGED Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 I don't think Hodgson gets bought out unless Murray plans on keeping Nolan long term. Yes, he's having an astonishingly bad season, but he did have several productive years in a row. Get a coach who understands how to maximize his abilities and I think you see that return. We also need help on the right side with trading Armia. This doesn't mean Hodgson plays out his contract, but I think he'll be put into a situation to recuperate his value so he can get a trade return.
Drunkard Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 I don't think Hodgson gets bought out unless Murray plans on keeping Nolan long term. Yes, he's having an astonishingly bad season, but he did have several productive years in a row. Get a coach who understands how to maximize his abilities and I think you see that return. We also need help on the right side with trading Armia. This doesn't mean Hodgson plays out his contract, but I think he'll be put into a situation to recuperate his value so he can get a trade return. I guess we'll see, but I just don't see the need for him on the roster next season. LW - Kane, Moulson, Foligno, Deslauriers, Ennis (who has shown to be able to play RW with no issues) C - McEichel, Girgensons, Grigorenko, McCormick, Reinhart (right handed shot who could probably play right wing if he can't nail down a pivot spot initially) RW - Ennis, Stewart (hopefully), Gionta, Kaleta (possibly) So while yes Hodgson could possibly slot in on the right wing, there are better alternatives in Stewart, Reinhart, Ennis, or even Mitchell or Flynn just when looking at the people currently on the roster to go along with Gionta and Kaleta. Add in the possibility of outside free agents and trading for a RW and I don't see the need for him or the risk in keeping him an extra year and having to buy him out at 2/3 rather than 1/3. His production could be replaced by an AHL call up at this point so it shouldn't be hard to roll the dice and bring in just about anyone that will play better than him without his anchor of a contract (thank you Darcy) possibly hindering this team going forward. Or maybe Murray will take the gamble and hope for a rebound season. I imagine he'll rebound and play better next season (it would almost be impossible not to) but I imagine him eventually being traded down the line while we retain a portion of his cap and salary to move him. Luckily we have plenty of cap space to play with.
nfreeman Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 There's always the option to buy him out at 1/3 value rather than waiting another season and being stuck having to buy him out at 2/3. I know the blue print is to be like the Kings but I'm hoping Murray doesn't make the same mistake they did with Mike Richards and wait too long to buy him out. Unless it turns out that Hodgson has been dealing with a season long nagging injury that we don't know about then his play has completely fallen off a cliff this season and Murray needs to give serious thought into moving on from him. This is, IMHO, an underappreciated factor in the decision. I don't think Hodgson gets bought out unless Murray plans on keeping Nolan long term. Yes, he's having an astonishingly bad season, but he did have several productive years in a row. Get a coach who understands how to maximize his abilities and I think you see that return. We also need help on the right side with trading Armia. This doesn't mean Hodgson plays out his contract, but I think he'll be put into a situation to recuperate his value so he can get a trade return. OTOH, this is also compelling, especially because I am pretty close to convinced that Nolan is gone within 48 hours after the season ends. At this point, I think I'm calling it 60/40 in favor of buying out Hodgy, but certainly wouldn't be surprised either way.
LGR4GM Posted February 13, 2015 Report Posted February 13, 2015 We could see (unlikely) Bailey or Baptiste make the roster. Both are RW
Hoss Posted February 14, 2015 Report Posted February 14, 2015 Am I the only one that didn't know that his last name isn't pronounced "Hodge-son?" It's "Hahd-Son." The ?
bunomatic Posted February 14, 2015 Report Posted February 14, 2015 Am I the only one that didn't know that his last name isn't pronounced "Hodge-son?" It's "Hahd-Son." The ######? I've been calling him Hodgey. I guess I'll switch it up to Hahdey. Wait a minute. On second thought...
biodork Posted February 14, 2015 Report Posted February 14, 2015 I've been calling him Hodgey. I guess I'll switch it up to Hahdey. Wait a minute. On second thought... :lol:
Hoss Posted February 14, 2015 Report Posted February 14, 2015 I've been calling him Hodgey. I guess I'll switch it up to Hahdey. Wait a minute. On second thought... :w00t: :lol:
Eleven Posted February 15, 2015 Report Posted February 15, 2015 Am I the only one that didn't know that his last name isn't pronounced "Hodge-son?" It's "Hahd-Son." The ######? I think, at this point, you might be the only one. I take no pleasure in saying this, but it's been "Hodson" since he got here.
Recommended Posts