Do we give Holmgren enough credit?
View Single Post
10-12-2011, 04:22 PM
Join Date: May 2011
Originally Posted by
You're missing the point. I'm not saying we needed more goals or anything like that. The poster that was directing that at is saying Roloson is better so therefore would have done better. I am saying that just sticking a better player into a position doesn't mean that player will have a better impact. Stick Ovechkin or whomever you want on that line instead of Umberger and it is by no means a guarantee that he puts up better numbers. You can speculate that he might, and it might even be more likely that he would, but that doesn't make it a guarantee. He also could have done worse. Just like putting a player that isn't as good as Umberger on that line and he may have done better.
The point I've been making is that speculative results cannot possibly be worth as much, and certainly not more than, actual results, but many posters on here appear to be giving more credit to the speculative results rather than the real ones.
In the World of Pro Hockey, when a GM puts a team together, drafts players, signs free agents, trades players. Aren't the results of those moves always speculative? So what is the GM basing those moves on, what reasons does he have for making those moves? What the player has done in the past. So one can reasonably say, although with some speculation. That upgrading a position can produce better results for his team in the future.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by VanSciver