Jump to content

If you're able to attend a training camp session, please post your observations here.

Eleven

By Eleven
in The Aud Club

 Share

Recommended Posts

dudacek Hall of Famer

dudacek

Posted
Posted (edited)

Respectfully, while I agree with some of this post, I disagree with much of it.

 

First, I find the bolded statement revolting and a borderline crime against nature, although in a large enough nation, there is a theory for everyone.

 

More importantly, although you are certainly right that we all bring our individual baggage to our opinion-forming processes, and that winning and losing plays a big role as well, I think that those factors play out on the margins. You don't think Larsson is a #1 or #2 center. I don't think Pysyk belongs in the ECHL. Pi had us all going last year, but he doesn't really think Moulson is a 30-goal guy any more.

 

I also think that while the offseason may be a time for people believing what they want to believe, once the ammo is live, most here evaluate what they see with a respectable degree of fairness.

I won't get sidetracked into the Vanek argument (yet), because I agree with most of this post and I don't want to get distracted from its central point.

We certainly are talking a matter of degrees here, and one of the things I value most about this board is how the guys I disagree with still have fair takes and are able to present excellent arguments supporting their views.

 

But let's talk about the way you and I reviewed Reinhart's last game. I saw outstanding positioning and decision-making and gave him a thumbs up. You saw a lack of noticeable plays and gave him a thumbs down.

 

Neither of us were "wrong" in what we saw, but we came to very different conclusions. Why? I say it's because we were looking at (for?) different aspects of his game,

Edited by dudacek
nfreeman Hall of Famer

nfreeman

Posted
Posted

So none of Minnesota's teams won the President's trophy, and that means they weren't SC contenders?

 

Who said anything about the PT?

 

Pommer was on Minny for 5 playoff runs -- 3 1st-round losses and 2 2nd-round losses.

 

That's not a serious SC contender.

 

 

I won't get sidetracked into the Vanek argument (yet), because I agree with most of this post and I don't want to get distracted from its central point.

We certainly are talking a matter of degrees here, and one of the things I value most about this board is how the guys I disagree with still have fair takes and are able to present excellent arguments supporting their views.

 

But let's talk about the way you and I reviewed Reinhart's last game. I saw outstanding positioning and decision-making and gave him a thumbs up. You saw a lack of noticeable plays and gave him a thumbs down.

 

Neither of us were "wrong" in what we saw, but we came to very different conclusions. Why? I say it's because we were looking at (for?) different aspects of his game,

 

Regarding Reino:  yes, we had differing impressions, but that was on a 1-game sample size.  I think that after a full season of (hopefully) #3C under a (hopefully) competent coach, there will be enough data such that our opinions converge, if not all the way.

WildCard Hall of Famer

WildCard

Posted
Posted

Who said anything about the PT?

 

Pommer was on Minny for 5 playoff runs -- 3 1st-round losses and 2 2nd-round losses.

 

That's not a serious SC contender.

Minny ran into mid-dynasty Chicago 3 times in the first round. They weren't a powerhouse in the west, but they also weren't as bad as they look.

If that 07 team lost in the 1st round, which they easily could have, they wouldn't have been SC contenders?

 

qwk is right, look at how they ran in to. In those 5 playoff runs, they had

 

2013: 55 pts (lockout), lost 4-1 in the QF to the eventual champion Blackhawks

2014: 98 points, lost 4-2 to the Blackhawks in the 2nd round, who lost the WCF in game 7 OT to the Kings

2015: 100 points, swept by the Blackhawks in the 2nd round, Chicago also won the Cup again

2016: 87 points, lost in the first round to the Stars

2017: 106 points, lost in the first round 4-1 to the Blues

 

Out of all of their runs, they were very serious contenders every year, except for 2016.

That Aud Smell Hall of Famer

That Aud Smell

Posted
Posted

Same here, but only because I didn't see MAY DAY live.

 

I witnessed May Day in a packed bar on Comm Ave in Boston (Brighton?), Mass.

 

That was amazing, of course.

 

But there was something about 2006 that made the whole proposition seem like it was leading somewhere. The sweep of the Bruins, to me, almost immediately felt like a stand-alone accomplishment.

shrader Hall of Famer

shrader

Posted
Posted

I witnessed May Day in a packed bar on Comm Ave in Boston (Brighton?), Mass.

 

That was amazing, of course.

 

But there was something about 2006 that made the whole proposition seem like it was leading somewhere. The sweep of the Bruins, to me, almost immediately felt like a stand-alone accomplishment.

The scary thing is that I probably know exactly which bar you’re talking about.

shrader Hall of Famer

shrader

Posted
Posted

Nearest cross street was ... Allston, maybe? Or maybe it was more back toward the Brighton area.

I’d say the name but it has changed a couple times in the last ten years or so

Derrico First Liner

Derrico

Posted
Posted

Coming into training camp I felt like 82 would have a better year than 93. In the limited showings I have had, 93 has looked like the better player.

Weave Hall of Famer

Weave

Posted
Posted

Coming into training camp I felt like 82 would have a better year than 93. In the limited showings I have had, 93 has looked like the better player.

I dont know these numbers yet. It seems you are comparing Foligno to Gilmore but I'm not sure either of those two are on the current roster.

Thorner Hall of Famer

Thorner

Posted
Posted

Bowl-U is 82.  Antipin in 93.  And I agree, I think Antipin is much more suited to Housley's up-tempo attack.

I actually think Beaulieu will fit the system too. To be honest I think I'm really going to like our new D corps, once everyone is in there. Surely it benefits from comparisons to the atrocious groups of late, but, there you have it.

Taro T Hall of Famer

Taro T

Posted
Posted

I actually think Beaulieu will fit the system too. To be honest I think I'm really going to like our new D corps, once everyone is in there. Surely it benefits from comparisons to the atrocious groups of late, but, there you have it.

When that happens they should be in good shape. Hoping it happens by Thanksgiving. (The US version; would be shocked if we're there by the Canadian version sadly.)

Thorner Hall of Famer

Thorner

Posted
Posted

When that happens they should be in good shape. Hoping it happens by Thanksgiving. (The US version; would be shocked if we're there by the Canadian version sadly.)

Which is super early this year, too.

 

Ya, I mean, it's so hard to say. We have no info on Bogosian. Scandella situation is so unpredictable as he has been practicing but hasn't played a single game yet. Even McCabe's is a bit odd as they said "week-to-week" but that they were hoping he'd play Game 1.

 

So who knows.

pi2000 First Liner

pi2000

Posted
Posted

Beaulieu and Antipin both look good offensively, but very bad in their own end.

 

Hope Housley can fix that, and quick, otherwise it could be a rough start for this club.

dudacek Hall of Famer

dudacek

Posted
Posted

Beaulieu and Antipin both look good offensively, but very bad in their own end.

Hope Housley can fix that, and quick, otherwise it could be a rough start for this club.

For firewagon hockey to work, you have to be able to score.

LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
Posted

Beaulieu and Antipin both look good offensively, but very bad in their own end.

 

Hope Housley can fix that, and quick, otherwise it could be a rough start for this club.

Disagree about Antipin in his own end. He's very aware and has taken huge strides.
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...