monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"
Confirmed with Link: - Logan Stanley 2 years 1.25 million | Page 15 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
  • Xenforo Cloud upgraded our forum to XenForo version 2.3.4. This update has created styling issues to our current templates, this is just a temporary look. We will continue to work on clearing up these issues for the next few days and restore the site to it's more familiar look, but please report any other issues you may experience so we can look into. Thanks for your patience and understanding.

Confirmed with Link: Logan Stanley 2 years 1.25 million

Yup - the coaches have options but still play him. I'm seeing what they are. He's far from perfect but he does a lot of things right and the coaches (and stats - though I don't use those in my argument) seem to agree.

Again last night he was making smart decisions and good exit passes, a really underrated part of his game.

He also had a couple of gaffes - but show me bottom pair guys who don't. I'd understand the hand wringing if the coaching staff were playing him as a top 4 guy but they aren't.

I hope he keeps building on this and growing his confidence. Size is only one small part of what makes a defenseman effective, but all things being equal having size is an advantage and no one will ever convince me different - it's simply physics (if of course the size is being used properly).

Stan is getting better at using his size. He'll always get some penalties for being big, we saw that with Buff all the time.

Also, he was part of the team that absolutely shut down the Avs last night. Even when they had sustained pressure, the puck was always on the outside and they rarely got any gravy ice or opportunities in the middle.

Coghlan had a bit of a rough game cause guess what? He's a bottom pair/ 7 guy just like Stanely. I hope we can keep both of them because they have different skillsets and it's nice to have options.
The second line should take him out for a steak dinner, because we can focus on how much he “sucks” and not focus on them.
As we need something to complain about so may as well complain about tree, the bigger and worse the better. Hatred of Tree unites the fans.
I mean if we didn’t have that what’s there to complain about other than the dreaded playoffs results.
 
Sure. And that was the wrong thing to do. Somebody overrated Schmidt. I did express doubt about acquiring Schmidt. Pretty sure I mentioned Kovacevic though maybe not. Doubt anyone else did. So what? Were we given a vote?

Pretty sure I'm remembering this both accurately and objectively.
My point is that you've formed your opinion through hindsight, which is an unfair way to judge what the organization did at the time

Yes, the decision looks badly today. Sometimes decisions do. But that doesn't mean it was bad at the time, based on the info they had. We all do it in our lives all the time.

Nope. That's about where I see him. Problem is that he plays every game when we are healthy.
Fleury was ahead of him when he was healthy, and I hope he is again when he returns
 
Here's the thing -
When someone comes out and says Stan had a good game or a decent period, that is not defending him - that's a simply comment on a player that happens all the time around here and usually goes without someone jumping in to state his game was gawd awful.

It's not like this board is crawling with pro Stan fans that are making everyone's life miserable - lol

That's true. But there are a few determined defenders.

It is defending him when it comes as a reply to someone who said he had a bad game.
 
My point is that you've formed your opinion through hindsight, which is an unfair way to judge what the organization did at the time

Yes, the decision looks badly today. Sometimes decisions do. But that doesn't mean it was bad at the time, based on the info they had. We all do it in our lives all the time.


Fleury was ahead of him when he was healthy, and I hope he is again when he returns

I have not formed that opinion through hindsight. I think you have said that before. I said exactly the same thing at the time. That is not hindsight.

Fleury played well when Stan was out. As soon as Stan was healthy, Fleury was in the PB. Fleury played 2nd pair when Samberg was hurt but that doesn't mean he would play 3rd pair when Samberg came back. It means that Fleury was seen as more suited to moving up. But when all are healthy Stan plays. Or at least he has so far. We'll see what happens when/if we ever have JMo, Snerg, Fleury and Stan healthy at the same time.
 
Even when all the roster spots are fixed according to how some people want them, they'll start to complain about how the assistant equipment manager packs the players bags before road trips
Yes, during our first 15 games I was fixated on this exact problem that you identified.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top
-->->