All Star Defenseman Rasmus Dahlin

[LGR4GM]

I think Dahlin will earn this. 

[bob_sauve28]

If he played on a really good team he’d be a bigger star and unquestionably an all star pick 

[Eleven]

Well, there's his change of scenery.

[Weave]

10 hours ago, SwampD said:

Don't care. He will fit right in, skill-wise.

And let's hope that being around all that talent will give him the kick in the ass he needs to take ownership of just how good he is.

He already looked different tonight.

I agree he has the skills to represent well.  He should shine in that format.

Edited January 14, 2022 by Weave

[Pimlach]

17 hours ago, Zamboni said:

That requirement is clown shoes

 

But then again the All-Star game has been a joke for decades. 

I think the requirement is a good one.  To promote the game in all the NHL cities is a good thing.  Somewhere in WNY a young person will watch the game to see Dahlin play.  Dahlin is the best player on the team.  Tage is next.    

I remember the 70’s Sabres had so many good players deserving of getting on the team, but the requirements to represent all teams was there.   It was a good rule then and now. 

[Stoner]

14 hours ago, dudacek said:

I agree.

But I think Donnie is already giving him the kick to take ownership. I think he’s been looking different for a month now. The talent is there. The character is there.

The fanbase is going to be slow to come around; I suspect they won’t until the team does.

The pieces are coming together.

 

Correct on the fanbase. And it's a reasonable position for them/it to take. We don't know what Dahlin is when the games really matter. Like so many teams of the past when out of contention, he looks pretty good in the ether. In that respect, if the next 10 years are like the last 10 years, he will be a 31-year-old prospect. A forever prospect.

It's also reasonable for fans not to care about Dahlin hype when it has meant exactly nothing where it counts.

[Weave]

2 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Correct on the fanbase. And it's a reasonable position for them/it to take. We don't know what Dahlin is when the games really matter. Like so many teams of the past when out of contention, he looks pretty good in the ether. In that respect, if the next 10 years are like the last 10 years, he will be a 31-year-old prospect. A forever prospect.

It's also reasonable for fans not to care about Dahlin hype when it has meant exactly nothing where it counts.

[Zamboni]

2 hours ago, Pimlach said:

I think the requirement is a good one.  To promote the game in all the NHL cities is a good thing.  Somewhere in WNY a young person will watch the game to see Dahlin play.  Dahlin is the best player on the team.  Tage is next.    

I remember the 70’s Sabres had so many good players deserving of getting on the team, but the requirements to represent all teams was there.   It was a good rule then and now. 

Ok. Agree to disagree. 👍🏼

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

Correct on the fanbase. And it's a reasonable position for them/it to take. We don't know what Dahlin is when the games really matter. Like so many teams of the past when out of contention, he looks pretty good in the ether. In that respect, if the next 10 years are like the last 10 years, he will be a 31-year-old prospect. A forever prospect.

It's also reasonable for fans not to care about Dahlin hype when it has meant exactly nothing where it counts.

It's also reasonable for fans to appreciate talented, good kids for what they are instead of suspicion and scorn.

The Sabres franchise is your cheating ex-wife, not Dahlin.

But hey, everyone is free to enjoy their fandom in their own way.

[IKnowPhysics]

16 hours ago, calti said:

otherthan eichel--who was the last true sabre all star? Briere?

Not sure what your threshold is at for gatekeeping "true Sabre all star."  Briere was 07.  There have been plenty of qualified Sabres since then.

• Jeff Skinner 2019 in the middle of his 40 goal campaign, finished 12th in league.  He went along side Eichel, so the "one player per team requirement diluting the all star game" or whatever doesn't apply.
• Pominville 2012 in the middle of a 73 point campaign, finished 19th in the league.
• Vanek 2009 in his second 40+ goal season, 8th in NHL.
• Campbell 2008 in his 62 point season, 3rd in NHL.

If your threshold is PHWA all star teams, then Miller 2010, Campbell 2008, and Vanek 2007 qualified, but Briere didn't.

If the metric is "highest achieving players in the NHL their respective years," it's easy to argue that Okposo, O'Reilly, and Z aren't "true all stars."

[start half-assed rant]

But this supposes that the All Star Game is some exhibition of pure skill and is exclusive to the highest performing players in the league.  It's not.  It never was.  Even back in the 1950s:

Quote

The defending Stanley Cup champions would win their first All-Star Game in 1950 by a 7–1 margin, thanks to Detroit's Production Line and the fact that five of the First and Second NHL All-Star teams were Red Wings. Because of the one-sidedness of the game, many fans and hockey insiders considered options on how to make the All-Star Game more balanced, including one where the All-Star Game was eliminated altogether in favour of a best-of-nine Stanley Cup Final with the proceeds of two of the games going to the players' pension fund, and one which saw a Canadian Teams vs. American Teams format (a somewhat flawed concept in that nearly all NHL players of the era, whether playing for teams representing American or Canadian cities, were Canadians). Ultimately, the 5th NHL All-Star Game saw the First NHL All-Star team battle the Second, with the players filling out the First team being from American teams and the Second team being filled with either Hab or Leaf players. 

The format and selection have always been *****.  Because it's not a competitive match, it's a marketing showcase dickaround pickup game comprised of a mix of the fans' favorite players and representatives from every team.

If you want good hockey, watch the Cup or Olympic finals.

[end half-assed rant]

[Thorner]

7 minutes ago, dudacek said:

It's also reasonable for fans to appreciate talented, good kids for what they are instead of suspicion and scorn.

The Sabres franchise is your cheating ex-wife, not Dahlin.

But hey, everyone is free to enjoy their fandom in their own way.

I thought PA was the "hockey cards" guy? Maybe Dahlin ripped him off 

5 minutes ago, IKnowPhysics said:

Not sure what your threshold is at for gatekeeping "true Sabre all star."  Briere was 07.  There have been plenty of qualified Sabres since then.

• Jeff Skinner 2019 in the middle of his 40 goal campaign, finished 12th in league.  He went along side Eichel, so the "one player per team requirement diluting the all star game" or whatever doesn't apply.
• Pominville 2012 in the middle of a 73 point campaign, finished 19th in the league.
• Vanek 2009 in his second 40+ goal season, 8th in NHL.
• Campbell 2008 in his 62 point season, 3rd in NHL.

If your threshold is PHWA all star teams, then Miller 2010, Campbell 2008, and Vanek 2007 qualified, but Briere didn't.

If the metric is "highest achieving players in the NHL their respective years," it's easy to argue that Okposo, O'Reilly, and Z aren't "true all stars."

[start half-assed rant]

But this supposes that the All Star Game is some exhibition of pure skill and is exclusive to the highest performing players in the league.  It's not.  It never was.  Even back in the 1950s:

The format and selection have always been *****.  Because it's not a competitive match, it's a marketing showcase dickaround pickup game comprised of a mix of the fans' favorite players and representatives from every team.

If you want good hockey, watch the Cup or Olympic finals.

[end half-assed rant]

IKnowResearch!

[IKnowPhysics]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

IKnowResearch!

IKnowI'mBoredAtWorkSomeFridayAfternoons!

[steveoath]

I like Marek's take. If you don't like it, that's cool. It's not for you. But there are plenty of people who do. And that's cool too. Why do we feel the need to get all angsty about it? It's a bit of fun eh?

Edited January 14, 2022 by steveoath

[IKnowPhysics]

Just now, steveoath said:

I like Mark's take. If you don't like it, that's cool. It's not for you. But there are plenty of people who do. And that's cool too. Why do we feel the need to get all angsty about it? It's a bit of fun eh?

Precisely.  It is what is it is, and to many people, it's a spectacle that's really quite enjoyable.