|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 5, 2019 12:35:47 GMT -4
Columbus is a much more structured team defensively than Florida, at least from what I have seen. All shots are not necessarily equal. Florida did have not have good goaltending, no doubt, but they also have a group of forwards that isn't great defensively or at least they play a run and gun style and give up too many high quality chances. Not having good goaltending means more shots against. They could actually improve on their already top 1/3 of the league standing in shots against due to the huge goaltending upgrade. There's nothing indicating otherwise based on who they lost and are bringing in. Using your own logic Florida shouldn't have been anywhere near Columbus in that statistic. If you were saying Columbus won't repeat it...nobody would disagree. But you keep shifting the goal posts with Florida now from Bob seeing more rubber to not all shots being equal and their forwards aren't great defensively. Did they have a top 10 shots against with awful goaltending and no good defensive forwards? Their D isn't that good. So something has to give. Either the forwards are way better then you're giving credit for...or the D is the most under-rated in the entire league. How am I shifting the goal posts? Florida adding Bob doesn't guarantee a 100 point team. CBJ losing half their forwards plus their starting goalie guarantees they WON't get 100 points. The shots alone doesn't tell the whole story, half those shots can be grade a scoring chances while another team might give up more shots but give up outside shots and clog the middle. If I was to bet money, Montreal and Florida would both be in and CBJ would be out along with one of Carolina or NYI. I think those two will drop off. None of those teams are a lock, even Toronto isn't a lock, they only made it by 4 points last year. If Andersen misses 2-3 months, they are screwed.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Sept 5, 2019 14:49:50 GMT -4
Not having good goaltending means more shots against. They could actually improve on their already top 1/3 of the league standing in shots against due to the huge goaltending upgrade. There's nothing indicating otherwise based on who they lost and are bringing in. Using your own logic Florida shouldn't have been anywhere near Columbus in that statistic. If you were saying Columbus won't repeat it...nobody would disagree. But you keep shifting the goal posts with Florida now from Bob seeing more rubber to not all shots being equal and their forwards aren't great defensively. Did they have a top 10 shots against with awful goaltending and no good defensive forwards? Their D isn't that good. So something has to give. Either the forwards are way better then you're giving credit for...or the D is the most under-rated in the entire league. How am I shifting the goal posts? Florida adding Bob doesn't guarantee a 100 point team. CBJ losing half their forwards plus their starting goalie guarantees they WON't get 100 points. The shots alone doesn't tell the whole story, half those shots can be grade a scoring chances while another team might give up more shots but give up outside shots and clog the middle. If I was to bet money, Montreal and Florida would both be in and CBJ would be out along with one of Carolina or NYI. I think those two will drop off. None of those teams are a lock, even Toronto isn't a lock, they only made it by 4 points last year. If Andersen misses 2-3 months, they are screwed. If any team misses their #1 goalie for 2-3 months they are screwed. That's not exactly a point that anyone is arguing here. But it's the perfect example of how you shift the goal posts by constantly changing the discussion. Nobody said Bob guarantees them 100 points. All that was said was that he improves their team and when the shots factor was brought up I showed how both teams actually seen similar shots last year. Where shots come from are irrelevant when evaluating the total shots against a team over 82 games. That stat completely killed your argument about those 2 teams so now you're trying to say you can't trust the stats but apparently should trust your gut feeling about the situation? What type of money are you betting on NYR or Philly? They could both be better then Montreal. But if you're betting money on Montreal getting in and teams like Toronto not being locks because their goalie could miss 3 months you're probably already poor and not betting very much money on anything.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 5, 2019 15:51:50 GMT -4
How am I shifting the goal posts? Florida adding Bob doesn't guarantee a 100 point team. CBJ losing half their forwards plus their starting goalie guarantees they WON't get 100 points. The shots alone doesn't tell the whole story, half those shots can be grade a scoring chances while another team might give up more shots but give up outside shots and clog the middle. If I was to bet money, Montreal and Florida would both be in and CBJ would be out along with one of Carolina or NYI. I think those two will drop off. None of those teams are a lock, even Toronto isn't a lock, they only made it by 4 points last year. If Andersen misses 2-3 months, they are screwed. If any team misses their #1 goalie for 2-3 months they are screwed. That's not exactly a point that anyone is arguing here. But it's the perfect example of how you shift the goal posts by constantly changing the discussion. Nobody said Bob guarantees them 100 points. All that was said was that he improves their team and when the shots factor was brought up I showed how both teams actually seen similar shots last year. Where shots come from are irrelevant when evaluating the total shots against a team over 82 games. That stat completely killed your argument about those 2 teams so now you're trying to say you can't trust the stats but apparently should trust your gut feeling about the situation? What type of money are you betting on NYR or Philly? They could both be better then Montreal. But if you're betting money on Montreal getting in and teams like Toronto not being locks because their goalie could miss 3 months you're probably already poor and not betting very much money on anything. Some teams their goalie is one of their best players(Toronto Montreal Boston Washington etc) while others have no dominant goalie regardless of who plays(NYR Carolina Phillie) so it’s not such a big dropoff. My argument was that Florida gave up better chances than CBJ did. If they keep playing run and gun they won’t make the playoffs. NYI made it last year because Trotz forced them to play defense and Lehner came in and gave them all-star goaltending, those two factors dropped their GAA by 100 goals. NYR has added some very good players but they also are coming from a long ways, same for NJ. I’m not sure they are 90+ point teams but stranger things have happened. Phillie mosly made lateral moves, their defense is too young and their goaltending(Hart) also, they are another year or two away.
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Sept 5, 2019 17:27:29 GMT -4
Florida may have played run and gun last year, but it is a whole new coaching staff - Q should be a massive upgrade.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 6, 2019 9:24:15 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by hal on Sept 10, 2019 9:52:52 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 10, 2019 10:27:34 GMT -4
Moving Price and/or Weber might not be the worst thing they can do, it would allow them to build with their kids and not rush things.
|
|
|
Post by bois on Sept 10, 2019 10:38:08 GMT -4
not rush things?
they have never rushed things
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 10, 2019 11:32:58 GMT -4
not rush things? they have never rushed things Tanguay trade? Gomez trade? Signing Alzner?
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Sept 10, 2019 12:35:40 GMT -4
not rush things? they have never rushed things Tanguay trade? Gomez trade? Signing Alzner? Tanguay? Gomez? You're reaching if those are 2 of your 3 best examples.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 10, 2019 12:43:25 GMT -4
Tanguay trade? Gomez trade? Signing Alzner? Tanguay? Gomez? You're reaching if those are 2 of your 3 best examples. In what way is that reaching? It’s examples of a GM being in win now mode and making desperate moves.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Sept 10, 2019 13:00:01 GMT -4
Tanguay? Gomez? You're reaching if those are 2 of your 3 best examples. In what way is that reaching? It’s examples of a GM being in win now mode and making desperate moves. They were over a decade ago. You made the 3rd round in 2010 so clearly they were right in trying to add veterans at the time. Giving up McDonough for Gomez hurt but at some point you need to get over it a bit. Not like he was a game changing player that brought championships elsewhere. His prime was very good but Gomez was also close to a 60 point center in 2009-2010 and didn't start the downslide until the following season which came after basically 6 straight 60 point seasons. You gave up a mystery box for a 60 point player. The mystery box ended up as a solid 2nd pairing dman and the 60 point player only gave you 1 60 point season. Some times the mystery box ends up being nothing. That's the gamble you take. You could have not made the trades, kept the picks, had McDonough on mediocre teams, and never had that playoff run. Are you really further ahead? Some times we need to accept that what we have/had might actually be the best it can be at the time. Not every team is always in position to do nothing until they're on the verge of winning. This stuff happened 10+ years ago...really time to move on unless you have 1 hell of a better point to make.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 10, 2019 13:27:53 GMT -4
In what way is that reaching? It’s examples of a GM being in win now mode and making desperate moves. They were over a decade ago. You made the 3rd round in 2010 so clearly they were right in trying to add veterans at the time. Giving up McDonough for Gomez hurt but at some point you need to get over it a bit. Not like he was a game changing player that brought championships elsewhere. His prime was very good but Gomez was also close to a 60 point center in 2009-2010 and didn't start the downslide until the following season which came after basically 6 straight 60 point seasons. You gave up a mystery box for a 60 point player. The mystery box ended up as a solid 2nd pairing dman and the 60 point player only gave you 1 60 point season. Some times the mystery box ends up being nothing. That's the gamble you take. You could have not made the trades, kept the picks, had McDonough on mediocre teams, and never had that playoff run. Are you really further ahead? Some times we need to accept that what we have/had might actually be the best it can be at the time. Not every team is always in position to do nothing until they're on the verge of winning. This stuff happened 10+ years ago...really time to move on unless you have 1 hell of a better point to make. Why does it matter when it happened? Just making a point that a desperate GM is not a good thing. I’m sure I could have scoured the league and found examples over the last 4-5 years. I just posted Habs ones.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Sept 10, 2019 13:57:28 GMT -4
They were over a decade ago. You made the 3rd round in 2010 so clearly they were right in trying to add veterans at the time. Giving up McDonough for Gomez hurt but at some point you need to get over it a bit. Not like he was a game changing player that brought championships elsewhere. His prime was very good but Gomez was also close to a 60 point center in 2009-2010 and didn't start the downslide until the following season which came after basically 6 straight 60 point seasons. You gave up a mystery box for a 60 point player. The mystery box ended up as a solid 2nd pairing dman and the 60 point player only gave you 1 60 point season. Some times the mystery box ends up being nothing. That's the gamble you take. You could have not made the trades, kept the picks, had McDonough on mediocre teams, and never had that playoff run. Are you really further ahead? Some times we need to accept that what we have/had might actually be the best it can be at the time. Not every team is always in position to do nothing until they're on the verge of winning. This stuff happened 10+ years ago...really time to move on unless you have 1 hell of a better point to make. Why does it matter when it happened? Just making a point that a desperate GM is not a good thing. I’m sure I could have scoured the league and found examples over the last 4-5 years. I just posted Habs ones. It matters because a GM in charge for say 12 years making 2 moves 11 and 10 years ago doesn't prove he's rushing anything when the moves also preceded playoff success. Alzner was a depth FA signing. Not depth as in 7th Dman but depth as in an average veteran FA given a veteran FA contract. Wasn't earth shattering money wise...just paid a premium for what he was. But $4.625 as a cap hit isn't any panic move or rushing anything. It was signing a #4 guy that turned out to be a #6 in your organization due to lacking the talent around him which made him so good elsewhere. Using Alex Tanguay, Scott Gomez, and a #4 defenceman FA signing to prove Montreal is or has rushed anything in 2019 is just pathetic. You'd have albatross cap hits and nothing in the system if you were rushing anything. The only thing you're exposing is your own lack of patience while trying to prove they're rushing anything to tell you the truth. Scouting for more examples might be a better way to proving your point.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Sept 10, 2019 14:01:06 GMT -4
(still waiting for someone to point out Bergevin can only own the Alzner thing which over 8 years or so...is a hell of a good track record if thats his only "rushing things" example)
|
|