Around the League Thread | Pre-Season Approaches

[krutovsdonut]

i see no reason to mock sevarelli's appearance. it's enough to consistently spell his name wrong.

 

[strattonius]

He insulted our fanbase by essentially calling us rich yuppies with no blue collar working class. Then the other morning he couldn't fathom why our 'overly sensitive' fanbase would take issues with such a statement. Basically gaslighting anyone that would be offended.

And it is offensive. This type 2 diabetic in his 30's is trying to insult an entire working class of people that live in one of the most expensive cities in the world. A blue collar class of people working their ass off to make ends meet and sustain a family. It's a jungle out here and life is really hard.

When you question people's work ethic and cast them as over privileged you're never going to be forgiven or forgotten. Brough can sit there and fake laugh and pretend everyone will come around but we won't.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

This is just asinine.

First of all, so much that a coach does is an 'intangible' from the perspective of a fan who isn't there day to day.

You can also evaluate it based off of performance.

If the only thing you have as a counter argument is 'well, he's got great intangibles' it's probably not a good sign.

I'm aware of what role a coach plays, but if we're talking about a guy who, according to you, was a defensive stalwart, is a 'student of the game', and, according to the other guy, 'focuses on the little things', a defensively poor team that is undisciplined and loses a lot does not support it.

It's also utterly bizarre 2 of you have been asked to answer what is a 'good' coach and all you're focusing on is puffing up Green.

Surely you don't think that just because you don't see it in the 2 minute fluff pieces the team occasionally puts out that it doesn't exist right?

Surely you don't have gigs of child pornography on a hard drive at your home, right?

This is the sort of loaded (stupid) question that isn't applicable to the discussion. I hope by providing an equally loaded example you'll be able to understand the point I'm trying to make.

I've said nothing about '2 minute fluff pieces', I said nothing about whatever nonsense you're attributing to me. All you're offering up is speculation with zero basis for it beyond wishful thinking.

Further, half of 'intangibles' that computer boys mock is just things regarding human psychology. You know, things that acknowledge that each member of the team is a unique human with varying degress of motivation, drive, purpose, sense of community, etc and not automatons.

None of which really applies to what I was saying. Again, if your answer as to why is he a good coach is because of intangibles, and then you acknowledge that they aren't things I can see, how the f*** are you able to make that determination, presuming you also cannot see these things?

Is it so hard to ask for people to back up their claims instead of having people cherry pick minor details and twist them like they're taffy?

From what I understand is Travis Green is a good coach for reasons we cannot see or fathom. There is no proof of this because it is unknowable and impossible to see and there is no way to actually demonstrate this.

Sounds like bullshit to me.

 

[Brookbank]

their pk was actually pretty good last year. average goaltending some depth scoring besides mcdrai.but they lost a ton of speed.. unless stan bowman finds some "fast players" it will be a tough task for them to go back to the finals. quite funny how vancouver and edmonton complete opposites. vancouver did get fast with the additions of debrusk,heinen/sherwood,sprong forwardwise.

The thing about the goaltending is, there was no depth last year. And they faked it till the made it to the final. There was no excuse for it last year. And yet, when goalies like Lankinen are available for sub a million bucks, they do the exact same this year.

 

[Kickassguy]

Swayman finally signs -- 8x8.25 with Boston.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Swayman finally signs -- 8x8.25 with Boston.

Very risky contract imo. I thought their UFA signings were quite good but when you add up Swayman, Zadorov and Lindholm it's a lot of cap tied up in players who could regress.

 

[StreetHawk]

Very risky contract imo. I thought their UFA signings were quite good but when you add up Swayman, Zadorov and Lindholm it's a lot of cap tied up in players who could regress.

Risky in terms of goalies inconsistency these days. He's what like 25/26 so it's not a deal that you are concerned about him breaking down at the end of it. But, he's hasn't shouldered a big load before.

 

[Jerry the great]

Very risky contract imo. I thought their UFA signings were quite good but when you add up Swayman, Zadorov and Lindholm it's a lot of cap tied up in players who could regress.

Lindholm has regressed since 21/22, the Bruins are paying an insane price to bet on him bouncing back. The other two contracts aren't bad IMO, though I don't see the Bruins as a legitimate contender unless Poitras and Lohrei are both home runs.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Very predictable outcome for the Swayman saga, everything works out at the end