View Single Post
Old
11-03-2012, 08:05 PM
  #78
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Third most used forward might mean sixth or seventh most useful player overall, once you add Doughty, Scuderi, Quick, etc.
Sure, it could also mean the third most useful player, it could also mean the most useful one in many different games.
I doubt LA wins the cup without Richards, he played a very key role. Saying he only had a supporting role is really selling it short.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Yes we do, for me primary cast are the three or four most useful players on the team, not the sixth, seventh, and eighth most useful players.
The guy that you use 20min a game to shutdown the opponents, manages to do so, and on top of it produce at a 75% rate, is what I consider primary role as well.
Looking only at ice time will give you a flawed observation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
From wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dustin_Penner
On February 28, 2011, Penner was traded from the Edmonton Oilers to the Los Angeles Kings in exchange for Colten Teubert, a first round draft pick in 2011, as well as a conditional second round pick in 2012.

By your logic, this is a bad trade for Edmonton. Penner did play well in the playoffs where they won the cup, 11 points in 20 games. He has a cup. Edmonton has won nothing yet and there is no guarantee they will ever win anything.

By the way Jeff Carter was never traded from Philadelphia to Los Angeles. The fact he won a cup in Los Angeles is a total non-sequitur as to the merits of the Philadelphia-Columbus trade. He was traded from Philadelphia to Columbus for Sean Couturier and Jacub Voracek, where he was not going to win the cup. He was then traded from Columbus to Los Angeles for Jack Johnson and a 1st rounder, where he was actually very helpful to LA, with 15 goals and 25 points in 39 games, helping them make 8th place.
How is that following my logic? Penner wasn't succeeding all that great in Edmonton.
By the way I didn't say the Philly trade was bad, just that moving those guys didn't necessarily make them better, at least not for now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Right, and most of the changes between the team that started last season and the team we have now are of downward changes.
Yes, they are. Not a reason as to why we should move Plekanec.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
We have replaced Cammalleri, AK46, Darche, and Gill with Prust, Armstrong, and Bouillon. Therefore we are to rationally expect a declining performance.
Yes. But again, those are changes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
If you have more certainty, you have less potential. It's a simple value rule, you get more value from both more certainty or more potential, so you're unlikely to get both.

A good example is the Lars Eller trade. In that trade we gave up certainty (Halak) for potential (Eller). Eller was unproven, but he had the potential to be a 2nd line center with good two-way ability and size; i.e. the potential to be worth more than an excellent starting goalie.

I suspect you disliked that trade.
No I thought we got fair value in return. But most importantly, we didn't move Halak without knowing if Price could fill the #1 role, and we also needed a big center with good upside. Trade made sense.
Moving Plekanec for picks (unless it's top picks+) doesn't really make much sense at this point. Unless a full scale rebuild is the plan, which I don't think it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
But that was only one of the arguments for trading Plekanec.
The only argument to trade Plek is that you want to stock up on high picks/prospects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Subban, Price, MaxPac, Eller, Emelin, had roster spots because there was zero probability of getting better players at those costs on the UFA market. Subban, etc were being played because they were the best option for the present.

DD did not start the season as a 1st line center. He was the third line center last year, where he played better than we could ever get from the UFA market at comparable value. He then became 1st line center because Gomez was doing nothing.
So, I don't get it. We make them play, as they progress they earn higher roles. And this is not the way it's supposed to be?
We made them play and gave them roles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
You are correct about Diaz. In that case, they were giving a young player ice time even though they could get better short-term value on the trade market. This is an example of investing in the future.
You don't know if we could have gotten better short-term value. We did the same with Emelin, and management opted not to re-sign certain players in order to make room for youngsters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
There's very little evidence to support the players need a daddy theory.
Sure, other than it being the case for every job in the world. You always learn more when you have someone with a lot more experience giving you tips and pointers, and observing them do what you want to do.
You really gonna deny this...

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote