Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Countdown to play Resuming
- Thread starter Mr. Canucklehead
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Mr. Canucklehead
Kitimat Canuck
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 17,717
- 17,201
He's not even worth picking up his first goal puck.
Baby Pettersson
Moderator
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 17,717
- 17,201
Don't worry man its just a implicit cognitive bias that has existed through 4 of his 7yrs failure seasons.
He's really just fine and should be considered a young Wayne Gretzky. It's all clear as day
Mr. Canucklehead
Kitimat Canuck
In fairness, he's been really good in Abbotsford of late. But IMO, Karlsson has been better.
Also, wonder if Silovs coming up means Demko isn't ready to go yet.
Random rant here: Recently I find some of the talking points surrounding to team to be rather baffling.
First it's Bure coming out to shit on management for the Miller/Petey situation. I'm one of the first to say that our front office's PR team feels like it's run by Dimbo's clones, showing shocking incompetence and a complete detachment from reality. But attributing the failure of two multi-million dollar professional athletes' inability to simply put their petty feud aside and work towards a greater goal all on the management feels rather disingenuous at best. Like with many other things, this situation had multiple contributing factors. Miller's departure and team's string of decent games showed that he was certainly not free from blame.
And then of course is the oh Boeser didn't get his extension but Metey did oh that's such a slap in the face. Seriously? That's what these hockey media freaks are running with? Yeah never mind the fact that team might still be negotiating because it will be a pretty big contract. Never mind the fact that Boeser might be outside of the team's budget and the team is looking at all options. Never mind that Boeser himself may also be considering his options. No no, never mind ALL of that and let's just put these emotionally charged bullshit headlines out there and see what happens.
First it's Bure coming out to shit on management for the Miller/Petey situation. I'm one of the first to say that our front office's PR team feels like it's run by Dimbo's clones, showing shocking incompetence and a complete detachment from reality. But attributing the failure of two multi-million dollar professional athletes' inability to simply put their petty feud aside and work towards a greater goal all on the management feels rather disingenuous at best. Like with many other things, this situation had multiple contributing factors. Miller's departure and team's string of decent games showed that he was certainly not free from blame.
And then of course is the oh Boeser didn't get his extension but Metey did oh that's such a slap in the face. Seriously? That's what these hockey media freaks are running with? Yeah never mind the fact that team might still be negotiating because it will be a pretty big contract. Never mind the fact that Boeser might be outside of the team's budget and the team is looking at all options. Never mind that Boeser himself may also be considering his options. No no, never mind ALL of that and let's just put these emotionally charged bullshit headlines out there and see what happens.
Szechwan
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2006
- 6,525
- 7,165
We've tried yapping about it on message boards for a year without luck, I say we trying shutting the f*** up for a few weeks and see what happens
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
- Mar 6, 2010
- 19,265
- 20,251
SopelFanThe3rd
Cock of the Walk
Happy D-Pet is back up... worried me they'd keep him down with Hughes back...
Also I think Aman deserved more time. He looked good with his buddy Hog.
Also I think Aman deserved more time. He looked good with his buddy Hog.
Bobby9
Registered User
- Feb 10, 2019
- 3,169
- 4,173
Yeah, I don't think today's practice is going to be particularly instructive. Whichever practice they have before Saturday's game will give us a better idea of Demko's health.
Skipped the entire previous thread 'cause of the league break.
Any actual rumors during that time or just random conversation?
Any actual rumors during that time or just random conversation?
@Bleach Clean , I brought this post over from the last thread.
In terms of downside risk for Norris, there is also upside risk for him that isn't really there for Lindholm. Norris is 25 years old and could actually improve throughout most of the balance of his contract. He could become a point per game player. For Lindholm, the opposite is true. Its more likely than not that his play will continue to drop as he ages into his thirties, and his play would be dropping from a point where he is already a negative value asset. Obviously there is considerable risk with Norris' injury history, and as I have already said, I'm not even necessarily advocating acquiring him. But between the two players, I'd rather roll the dice on Norris.
For sure, its a bad result as I have acknowledged multiple times. But again, its a way better result than having a third line centre for next six years at seven million a year.
I don't really disagree that from a production perspective they are not comparable in some ways. But one is 30 with an extra year on his contract, and the other is 25. And that difference both affects projecting their future production, but also should colour our analysis of their past production (i.e., it isn't fair comparing Norris' 22-25 year seasons to Lindholm's 27-30 with the latter being closer to the players' primes._
Player decline, in terms of age, is pretty difficult to predict, and you are always going to have outliers and exceptions. But there is a massive difference in ages 30-36, and 25-30. I just have no idea why anyone would even entertain acquiring Lindholm, whereas I get the idea of acquiring Norris and rolling the dice on his injury history. And with Lindholm, we are literally already seeing his age related decline. And we saw it last year too. And sure, he could turn things around, but it actually looks like he has already had the big age related decline already. This isn't like JT Miller where you are hoping the drop comes much later into the contract, but instead, the drop has already come. Of course he can decline further, but that's a scary proposition. He's already only a 40 point player currently. Can you imagine what his production may look like for his 33-36 seasons. 20 points? Unplayable?
I mean, I doubt Boston retains anything on a contract with six more years on it, especially given that their current management signed that contract. But the 750K retention isn't going to tip the scales either way in this debate, in my view.
In terms of downside risk for Norris, there is also upside risk for him that isn't really there for Lindholm. Norris is 25 years old and could actually improve throughout most of the balance of his contract. He could become a point per game player. For Lindholm, the opposite is true. Its more likely than not that his play will continue to drop as he ages into his thirties, and his play would be dropping from a point where he is already a negative value asset. Obviously there is considerable risk with Norris' injury history, and as I have already said, I'm not even necessarily advocating acquiring him. But between the two players, I'd rather roll the dice on Norris.
For sure, its a bad result as I have acknowledged multiple times. But again, its a way better result than having a third line centre for next six years at seven million a year.
Its definitely not disingenuous since I have never taken that position, as far as I can recall. But I tend to agree with you that many posters seem to discount mostly or entirely powerplay production.
I don't really disagree that from a production perspective they are not comparable in some ways. But one is 30 with an extra year on his contract, and the other is 25. And that difference both affects projecting their future production, but also should colour our analysis of their past production (i.e., it isn't fair comparing Norris' 22-25 year seasons to Lindholm's 27-30 with the latter being closer to the players' primes._
That's the argument I have continually made. Its the extra year on the contract for Lindholm plus him being five years older that makes Norris much more desirable notwithstanding his past injuries.
Player decline, in terms of age, is pretty difficult to predict, and you are always going to have outliers and exceptions. But there is a massive difference in ages 30-36, and 25-30. I just have no idea why anyone would even entertain acquiring Lindholm, whereas I get the idea of acquiring Norris and rolling the dice on his injury history. And with Lindholm, we are literally already seeing his age related decline. And we saw it last year too. And sure, he could turn things around, but it actually looks like he has already had the big age related decline already. This isn't like JT Miller where you are hoping the drop comes much later into the contract, but instead, the drop has already come. Of course he can decline further, but that's a scary proposition. He's already only a 40 point player currently. Can you imagine what his production may look like for his 33-36 seasons. 20 points? Unplayable?
Lindholm is a massive negative asset, and Norris may actually have some positive value. They aren't really comparable on that front.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 18,065
- 10,878
i infer the call ups are to run practices with missing roster players. plus they are going to give demko and maybe others a full rest.
Mr. Canucklehead
Kitimat Canuck
@bossram
I've said it before, but the Eichel / Pettersson comparison isn't great in the sense that Eichel was never playing as poorly as Pettersson is currently. Eichel was still essentially a point per game player in his last year. The big problem for him, with the Buffalo Sabres, is that the team and Eichel couldn't agree how to best move forward with his neck injury which led to the relationship between player and team to deteriorate leading to the trade. Obviously it was a bad trade for Buffalo, and they shouldn't have made the trade, and the lesson is probably that you need to shutup an keep your star player happy. Or perhaps Eichel was always going to want out of Buffalo? Wouldn't surprise me.
So, with Eichel, you don't have this situation where a player is playing poorly and you give up on them because he is playing poorly, and then the player turns it around. That's the potential Pettersson situation, but not the Eichel one. Eichel was always playing well, and strictly from an on ice perspective, should never have been traded.
I've said it before, but the Eichel / Pettersson comparison isn't great in the sense that Eichel was never playing as poorly as Pettersson is currently. Eichel was still essentially a point per game player in his last year. The big problem for him, with the Buffalo Sabres, is that the team and Eichel couldn't agree how to best move forward with his neck injury which led to the relationship between player and team to deteriorate leading to the trade. Obviously it was a bad trade for Buffalo, and they shouldn't have made the trade, and the lesson is probably that you need to shutup an keep your star player happy. Or perhaps Eichel was always going to want out of Buffalo? Wouldn't surprise me.
So, with Eichel, you don't have this situation where a player is playing poorly and you give up on them because he is playing poorly, and then the player turns it around. That's the potential Pettersson situation, but not the Eichel one. Eichel was always playing well, and strictly from an on ice perspective, should never have been traded.
- Aug 28, 2011
- 18,909
- 24,493
Ad
Upcoming events
-
CHAMPIONSHIP - Canada vs United States - TD Garden, BostonWagers: 9Staked: $32,955.00Event closes - 2 days from now- Updated: