putting aside the many predictions he's made that were borne out contrary to his prognostications - has the guy ever admitted that he could be wrong about his "understanding" of a players capabilities, limits, and proper deployment?
has he ever given a shred of credence to the notion that maybe Zibanejad as a RW on a line with Kreider and Rempe as a centre might be, if not outrageously misguided, at least abstruse enough so as to not deserve the 100% impregnable assurance that accompanies it and it's ilk every single time?
or is it always just pure infallibility?
Overall:
1. No one gets them all right all the time, bern included
2. That said, my track record is good and I'm confident many more hits than misses so the insinuation of your first phrase is erroneous.
3. In support of #2 above are MANY instances which I have called out in real time or even ahead, and were proven right, not just after the fact. Just a couple of concrete illustrations: should have traded Buch early on to max value, not given away picks w/idiotic win now approach, should have drafted dobson inst of Krav, etc etc etc.
4. So while any of us COULD be wrong, at any time, about anything subjective not confirmed by past objective criteria suggesting current/projected results, on totality overall, your charge is bogus.
Current:
A - At the time I suggested trying Boo as pivot there was min alternate Fs of sufficient quality that at least an experiment can/should be attempted. Fair proof: after we got Panarin, we saw the ordinary Strome have exceptional chemistry there not visible in other combos. So esp w/out solid basis to try otherwise an experiment was warranted, not to be dismissed.
B - No one is saying at sq 1 now put rempe w/Kreider + Zib. Unless we can do some variant of
Zib + Shesty +
for
Nylander ++
there will remain a need to find something that works b'c wonder twins are not consistent.
There is no reason that cannot eventually be an Edstrom, who is proving to be more polished now,
and once he gets more polished, even possibly Rempe. Then.
Open, not closed minds, work best esp at outside the box, which like it or not, admit it or not, is necessary when solutions to problems do not present themselves quickly at sq 1