Brooks claimed by Jets

[Menzinger]

When we let a player of Brooks' age go, he's pretty old and most likely a finished product.

When we sign a guy like Bunting, he's still pretty young and has quite a bit of untapped potential left.

Well, Bunting scored more goals last season than Brooks has career NHL points. Perhaps one has shown more promise than the other

 

[kb]

He wouldn't have faced waivers if the cap was better managed.

This is untrue, and you know it. Nice try though.

 

[Menzinger]

and that's the point some of us are trying to make , we already know Amadio is trash but Brooks might be a serviceable depth player if given an opportunity

and this is my only problem waiving or moving guys like Brooks/Levio etc. , it seems the team has more desire to give other teams trash an extended look like Vessey and not our own guys

But Brooks has been a part of the Leafs organization since 2017. One would imagine the Leafs player development personnel, coaches, and front office folks ect would be fairly familiar with his strengths/weaknesses. It's not exactly accurate to paint him as this mystery box.

 

[hotpaws]

But Brooks has been a part of the Leafs organization since 2017. One would imagine the Leafs player development personnel, coaches, and front office folks ect would be fairly familiar with his strengths/weaknesses. It's not exactly accurate to paint him as this mystery box.

as has Liljegren but i'm guessing you still believe he'll be a quality player

Amadio has passed through 2 organizations and has been given a chance to prove himself while Brooks who still might amount to nothing hasn't so why are you so much higher on a player who has already failed on two other teams than Brooks ?

 

[DraftSchmaft]

Well, Bunting scored more goals last season than Brooks has career NHL points. Perhaps one has shown more promise than the other

Very high on Bunting myself have him down for 20 goals 20 assists floor.

At the end of the day it's unfair to pick and choose thresholds. 21 games is still a small sample. Brooks 4 in 11 earned him a bottom 6 role over Amadios career AHL numbers and pre-season performance against AHL lineups. He's more of a mystery than Amadio, so why not? We can recover an Amadio if the gamble fails.

Buntings small sample (21) gets him a top 6 run.
Brooks even smaller sample gets him a bottom 6 run.

Consistent yes?

 

[zeke]

as has Liljegren but i'm guessing you still believe he'll be a quality player

Amadio has passed through 2 organizations and has been given a chance to prove himself while Brooks who still might amount to nothing hasn't so why are you so much higher on a player who has already failed on two other teams than Brooks ?

Both Amadio and Brooks have been available on waivers the past few years.

 

[zeke]

Very high on Bunting myself have him down for 20 goals 20 assists floor.

At the end of the day it's unfair to pick and choose thresholds. 21 games is still a small sample. Brooks 4 in 11 earned him a bottom 6 role over Amadios career AHL numbers and pre-season performance against AHL lineups. He's more of a mystery than Amadio, so why not? We can recover an Amadio if the gamble fails.

Buntings small sample (21) gets him a top 6 run.
Brooks even smaller sample gets him a bottom 6 run.

Consistent yes?

It's consistent, but do you really want the manager of your team making decisions based on small sample goals and points?

 

[Menzinger]

as has Liljegren but i'm guessing you still believe he'll be a quality player

Amadio has passed through 2 organizations and has been given a chance to prove himself while Brooks who still might amount to nothing hasn't so why are you so much higher on a player who has already failed on two other teams than Brooks ?

Considering there's a three year age gap between Liljegren and Brooks (and the fact that defencemen tend to take longer to develop), I'm more inclined to think one of those guys has a better chance of cementing himself as a full time NHLer than the other. This is a pretty irrelevant comparison.

Where did I say I was high on Amadio? He and Brooks are likely around the same level of being a replacement level 4th liner. Coaches and other staff seem to prefer one over the other, and I don't see any reason to criticize it

I find the outrage over Brooks being waived to be confusing given the type of player that he has been so far and likely will be in the future.

 

[DraftSchmaft]

It's consistent, but do you really want the manager of your team making decisions based on small sample goals and points?

The fact we can recover an Amadio is the deal breaker for me.

We technically don't need either of these guys to be an elite team so I'd rather go with the one we've been developing and the key to it alll: earned a bottom 6 look.

I'd like managers who stay the course. If Brooks earned another look, give it to him. If he fails, you have your answer. Move on.

What I don't want is a team that discards players who showed some promise unless it's worth it.

Where we are at odds is if Amadio is worth not seeing if Brooks would have built on last season. I don't think so.

Before I start commotion we do have managers like that. I was answering the general question.

 

[ACC1224]

This is untrue, and you know it. Nice try though.

Strange reply. How is it 'untrue'? Why would I post something 'untrue' if I knew differently?
I could be mistaken. Are they carrying 23 players to start the season?

 

[zeke]

Last 2yrs, expected goals for percentage, relative to team:

(Bolded = still with team)

Kase +2.7
Amadio +2.0
Bunting +1.3
Ritchie +1.2
Petan +1.1
Spezza +0.1
Engvall -0.1
Kampf -0.2
Mikheyev -0.4
Simmonds -0.5
Brooks -0.5
Galchenyuk -0.8
Thornton -0.8
Vesey -1.0
Malgin -1.4
Kerfoot -2.0
Boyd -3.0

 

[hotpaws]

Considering there's a three year age gap between Liljegren and Brooks (and the fact that defencemen tend to take longer to develop), I'm more inclined to think one of those guys has a better chance of cementing himself as a full time NHLer than the other. This is a pretty irrelevant comparison.

Where did I say I was high on Amadio? He and Brooks are likely around the same level of being a replacement level 4th liner. Coaches and other staff seem to prefer one over the other, and I don't see any reason to criticize it

I find the outrage over Brooks being waived to be confusing given the type of player that he has been so far and likely will be in the future.

what does it matter what there ages are ? both have been with the team the same amount of time so the the team has had the same time frame to evaluate both players and at this time believe neither are NHL players

where do you see the outrage over waiving Brooks ? myself and others are just saying it would be nice if some our prospects are given an opportunity over players that have failed in other organizations if/when the opportunity presents itself

but you're right , god forbid anyone dare criticizes any move the all knowing Kyle Dubas makes since he's the sole reason anyone follows the team or the sport

 

[zeke]

The fact we can recover an Amadio is the deal breaker for me.

We technically don't need either of these guys to be an elite team so I'd rather go with the one we've been developing and the key to it alll: earned a bottom 6 look.

I'd like managers who stay the course. If Brooks earned another look, give it to him. If he fails, you have your answer. Move on.

What I don't want is a team that discards players who showed some promise unless it's worth it.

Where we are at odds is if Amadio is worth not seeing if Brooks would have built on last season. I don't think so.

Before I start commotion we do have managers like that. I was answering the general question.

I dunno. Brooks has never even dominated the AHL.

 

[hotpaws]

Last 2yrs, expected goals for percentage, relative to team:

(Bolded = still with team)

Kase +2.7
Amadio +2.0
Bunting +1.3
Ritchie +1.2
Petan +1.1
Spezza +0.1
Engvall -0.1
Kampf -0.2
Mikheyev -0.4
Simmonds -0.5
Brooks -0.5
Galchenyuk -0.8
Thornton -0.8
Vesey -1.0
Malgin -1.4
Kerfoot -2.0
Boyd -3.0

what was Brooks p/60 compared to Amadio/Kampf ?

 

[zeke]

Strange reply. How is it 'untrue'? Why would I post something 'untrue' if I knew differently?
I could be mistaken. Are they carrying 23 players to start the season?

There is room on the roster for Brooks right now. They can carry 23 players at the moment.

 

[zeke]

what was Brooks p/60 compared to Amadio/Kampf ?

It was very high.

 

[ULF_55]

Strange reply. How is it 'untrue'? Why would I post something 'untrue' if I knew differently?
I could be mistaken. Are they carrying 23 players to start the season?

it is neither untrue or true, it is unknown and cannot be proven either way.

They might have waived him regardless.

 

[DraftSchmaft]

I dunno. Brooks has never even dominated the AHL.

Would you trade 4 NHL goals in 11 games for better AHL numbers?

The NHL goals is what puts a non blue chip on the radar. There's no amount of AHL numbers that can trump it unless we're talking actual high ceiling guys. Amadio again doesn't fit this criteria: Stick with Brooks find another Amadio next season if Brooks is bust. Turnover is always huge for guys like this.

 

[zeke]

what does it matter what there ages are ? both have been with the team the same amount of time so the the team has had the same time frame to evaluate both players and at this time believe neither are NHL players

where do you see the outrage over waiving Brooks ? myself and others are just saying it would be nice if some our prospects are given an opportunity over players that have failed in other organizations if/when the opportunity presents itself

but you're right , god forbid anyone dare criticizes any move the all knowing Kyle Dubas makes since he's the sole reason anyone follows the team or the sport

I don't get the comp - Lilly was scoring as much as a 20yr old Dman in the AHL as Brooks did as a 24yr old center. Even with less PP time. And Lilly was getting all the defensive and PK matchups as well.

 

[zeke]

Would you trade 4 NHL goals in 11 games for better AHL numbers?

The NHL goals is what puts a non blue chip on the radar. There's no amount of AHL numbers that can trump it unless we're talking actual high ceiling guys. Amadio again doesn't fit this criteria: Stick with Brooks find another Amadio next season. Turnover is always huge for guys like this.

Are you actually being serious with this argument?

 

[Guided by Veseys]

I read an old article on Matt Moulson a few weeks ago and he called Amadio one of the smartest players he’s ever played with (it was on the Reign). I forgot the leafs had signed him so I thought it was pretty cool to watch him in camp to see if he would live up to that quote. Brooks is good but I think Amadio will have everyone realizing what a good choice it was to stick with him.

 

[DraftSchmaft]

Are you actually being serious with this argument?

Which part of it is not serious?

You are over rating Amadio at this point now.

 

[hotpaws]

I don't get the comp - Lilly was scoring as much as a 20yr old Dman in the AHL as Brooks did as a 24yr old center. Even with less PP time. And Lilly was getting all the defensive and PK matchups as well.

i still believe in Lilly , it's the team that isn't giving him an opportunity so maybe you can send a shout out to KD and Keefe

and what does a meaningless stat like raw points have to do with anything ?isn't it all about p/60 or is it expected points or goals or maybe it's expected something something per something on even days of the month in games that are played in the eastern time zone ?

 

[DraftSchmaft]

Are you actually being serious with this argument?

Also answer the question. Would you trade Brooks 4 goals in 11 NHL games for better AHL numbers for Brooks?

 

[zeke]

i still believe in Lilly , it's the team that isn't giving him an opportunity so maybe you can send a shout out to KD and Keefe

and what does a meaningless stat like raw points have to do with anything ?isn't it all about p/60 or is it expected points or goals or maybe it's expected something something per something on even days of the month in games that are played in the eastern time zone ?

If you want to make decisions based on 11gms of p/60 with a 40.0sh%, that's up to you, but you can't be upset when people disagree.