HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Nashville Predators
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2014 NHL Draft - Philadelphia - Rounds 2-7 9:00 AM NHLN

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-12-2014, 06:36 PM
  #76
Ranskyre
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 78
vCash: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by kypredsfan View Post
Didn't Nystrom have a 4 goal night against the Flames and we still lost?

One word: Dubnyk

Ranskyre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2014, 11:32 AM
  #77
predshabs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Lyles,TN
Country: United States
Posts: 758
vCash: 500
1st round hopefuls
Michael Dal Colle
Leon Draisaitl
Nick Ritchie
William Nylander
Jake Virtanen


Later round hopefuls
John Quenneville
Marcus Pettersson
Aaron Haydon
Jared Fiegl
Beau Starrett
Christian Dvorak
Nolan Stevens
Parker Bowles

predshabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2014, 12:52 PM
  #78
predshabs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Lyles,TN
Country: United States
Posts: 758
vCash: 500
ISS top 30 for March released today.

http://www.isshockey.com/iss-top-30-released-march/

predshabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2014, 10:04 PM
  #79
Gnashville
Never trade Weber
 
Gnashville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 4,573
vCash: 500
If this team keeps winning Fleury will be the pick. Really need to tank it.

Gnashville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2014, 11:09 PM
  #80
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,517
vCash: 500
2 of the top 10 rated players are defensemen. The Predators need to trade up and get the guy they want unless he is projected at their pick.

__________________
- Enoch -
Enoch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2014, 06:23 AM
  #81
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 12,963
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnashville View Post
If this team keeps winning Fleury will be the pick. Really need to tank it.
there is no player on that list that is worth destroying the morale of this team and/or the fan base.

we will pick somewhere between 6 and 10, barring an epic win streak. We will get a good player, but its a crapshoot as to whether the guy taken at 6 ends up better than the guy at 10

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2014, 04:32 PM
  #82
jwhouk
Cheesehead Pred
 
jwhouk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 1,937
vCash: 500
Ah, you read my ADV posts over at the stat forums. Good.

The truth is, picks 5-10 produce nearly as much (though just a bit less) of approximate draft value as the top four picks combined. The problem is that draft value drops dramatically after the fourth overall pick, and the ninth overall is about half the value of a number one overall pick. And, any pick outside of the top 10 is almost a lock to be less valuable than a top 10 pick.

jwhouk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 01:22 PM
  #83
Joe T Choker
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwhouk View Post
Ah, you read my ADV posts over at the stat forums. Good.

The truth is, picks 5-10 produce nearly as much (though just a bit less) of approximate draft value as the top four picks combined. The problem is that draft value drops dramatically after the fourth overall pick, and the ninth overall is about half the value of a number one overall pick. And, any pick outside of the top 10 is almost a lock to be less valuable than a top 10 pick.
Yup, '03 was an anomaly

Joe T Choker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 01:41 PM
  #84
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
there is no player on that list that is worth destroying the morale of this team and/or the fan base.
Yeah, because the Penguins really regret losing those few games back in the spring of 2004.

They would totally trade Sidney Crosby in order to go back and have beaten the Capitals on March 30th 2004.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 01:56 PM
  #85
Iron Duke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
Yeah, because the Penguins really regret losing those few games back in the spring of 2004.

They would totally trade Sidney Crosby in order to go back and have beaten the Capitals on March 30th 2004.
Kind of an odd example. Sidney Crosby is a multi-generational talent, and was thought to be one going into the draft. Nobody from this class is close to that. Also, that draft was about as close to a complete lottery as the NHL will get. Pittsburgh definitely had a better chance to win than some other teams, but it was also some pretty good luck that they wound up there. The 2, 3, and 4 picks were all teams that would have been in the 8th+ range otherwise.

Iron Duke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 02:06 PM
  #86
jwhouk
Cheesehead Pred
 
jwhouk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 1,937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave is a killer View Post
Yup, '03 was an anomaly
2003 was a once-in-a-lifetime draft. The talent that came out of it was ridiculous compared to others in the last 25 years.

jwhouk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 02:59 PM
  #87
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Duke View Post
Kind of an odd example. Sidney Crosby is a multi-generational talent, and was thought to be one going into the draft. Nobody from this class is close to that. Also, that draft was about as close to a complete lottery as the NHL will get. Pittsburgh definitely had a better chance to win than some other teams, but it was also some pretty good luck that they wound up there. The 2, 3, and 4 picks were all teams that would have been in the 8th+ range otherwise.
You can replace my example with just about any draft with high end talent that you want.

In 2006, for example, the difference between Boston selecting Phil Kessell and Columbus picking Derek Brassard was a ROW tiebreaker. How would those teams look different now?

I bet most Cbus fans can't tell you what thier record was in the last 10 games of 2005-06, but I think all of them would tell you they would rather have been in a position to pick Kessell than Brassard.

In 2004 - the difference between the Caps picking Ovechkin and the Hawks getting Cam Barker was another tie breaker. If the Caps win one more game - they don't get Ovechkin.



This is all hindsight of course - but it also reinforces a simple unarguable fact - drafting higher is better.

No one's morale is going to be shattered by dropping a couple of points in a season that's already down the drain.

But the benefits of picking higher can reap huge rewards.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 03:18 PM
  #88
Preds33
Registered User
 
Preds33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,201
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
You can replace my example with just about any draft with high end talent that you want.

In 2006, for example, the difference between Boston selecting Phil Kessell and Columbus picking Derek Brassard was a ROW tiebreaker. How would those teams look different now?

I bet most Cbus fans can't tell you what thier record was in the last 10 games of 2005-06, but I think all of them would tell you they would rather have been in a position to pick Kessell than Brassard.

In 2004 - the difference between the Caps picking Ovechkin and the Hawks getting Cam Barker was another tie breaker. If the Caps win one more game - they don't get Ovechkin.



This is all hindsight of course - but it also reinforces a simple unarguable fact - drafting higher is better.

No one's morale is going to be shattered by dropping a couple of points in a season that's already down the drain.

But the benefits of picking higher can reap huge rewards.
But unless you can draft 1 or 2 there is no point in dropping the games. If you are in position to possibly get 1 or 2, I can see it, but otherwise why?

Preds33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 03:29 PM
  #89
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preds33 View Post
But unless you can draft 1 or 2 there is no point in dropping the games. If you are in position to possibly get 1 or 2, I can see it, but otherwise why?
Because having more to choose from is better than having your draft pick decited for you by the teams ahead of you.

The difference between 5th and 7th is usually just a couple of points.

If we end up 7th, and get stuck with a wing or a D-man because the top centers went 2-3 and 5-6 - is that worth a couple of meaningless points here and there?

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 07:45 PM
  #90
Predsrule
Registered User
 
Predsrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,564
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
Because having more to choose from is better than having your draft pick decited for you by the teams ahead of you.

The difference between 5th and 7th is usually just a couple of points.

If we end up 7th, and get stuck with a wing or a D-man because the top centers went 2-3 and 5-6 - is that worth a couple of meaningless points here and there?
Id rather draft the d man then set the we want to lose mind set of droping games. We have to many young players on this team and id rather lesser prospect then to show them we don't want to win. IMO thats one of the big problems in edm now. The young kids have been aloud to lose for so long. Its hard to get that must win mind set back.

Predsrule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 08:15 PM
  #91
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Predsrule View Post
Id rather draft the d man then set the we want to lose mind set of droping games. We have to many young players on this team and id rather lesser prospect then to show them we don't want to win. IMO thats one of the big problems in edm now. The young kids have been aloud to lose for so long. Its hard to get that must win mind set back.
The young kids in EDM are the only ones producing. They're not the problem, nor is it a "culture of losing," it's inept team management that's built a team that is basically a perfect reverse of Nashville: A cupboard stacked with high-end forwards, a few so-so defensemen\decent prospects, and junk in goal.

It's a little easier to win with all defense and poor offense, but in the end the net result is "not enough" either way.

I get the sense that if Trotz\Poile are here beyond this summer, they may finally be ready to do some soul searching as to what "Predator Hockey" is, how a team is built around it, and if they truly believe it still works. That's the sense I got from a lot of what Poile said leading up to and at the trade deadline.

__________________
www.thepredatorial.com

barrytrotzsneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 08:17 PM
  #92
GeauxPreds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 708
vCash: 500
I would be absolutely shocked if the preds drafted a dman in the first round this year. There are only two worth drafting in the top 10 and so many skilled forwards with high offensive upside that poile and the scouts would have to be blind to take Fleury over one of the many forwards that will still be available by the time we pick.

GeauxPreds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 08:25 PM
  #93
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,385
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
You can replace my example with just about any draft with high end talent that you want.

In 2006, for example, the difference between Boston selecting Phil Kessell and Columbus picking Derek Brassard was a ROW tiebreaker. How would those teams look different now?

I bet most Cbus fans can't tell you what thier record was in the last 10 games of 2005-06, but I think all of them would tell you they would rather have been in a position to pick Kessell than Brassard.


Yeah, um, no. We desperately needed another C to go with Brule at the time, and we already had Rick Nash on the roster and Alex Picard in the minors. We had no need whatsoever for Phil Kessel.

Would he be nice to have now? Sure he would. But this isn't just revisionist history, it's poor quality revisionist history.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
This is all hindsight of course - but it also reinforces a simple unarguable fact - drafting higher is better.
Columbus has drafted higher than the Predators literally every year of our shared existence save two. Who's gotten the better players out of that again?

Higher isn't inherently better - it just offers more opportunities for hype.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
No one's morale is going to be shattered by dropping a couple of points in a season that's already down the drain.
You might be surprised.

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 08:57 PM
  #94
CaptainKishimoto
=-{Astral Finish}-=
 
CaptainKishimoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 561
vCash: 500
As much as I think it'd be best to address the need of a big, skilled center (because who doesn't want/need one of those?), I wish they'd take Nylander. I think with what he lacks in size, he more than makes up for it with his offensive skill. If not a center, I'd like them to take Ho-Sang (for kind of the same reasons). Hopefully they can grab another 1st round and get both, but that's way too optimistic.

CaptainKishimoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 08:27 AM
  #95
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post


Yeah, um, no. We desperately needed another C to go with Brule at the time, and we already had Rick Nash on the roster and Alex Picard in the minors. We had no need whatsoever for Phil Kessel.

Would he be nice to have now? Sure he would. But this isn't just revisionist history, it's poor quality revisionist history.


Again, even if it made sense at the time, wouldn't you rather have had the opportunity to pick Kessel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post

Columbus has drafted higher than the Predators literally every year of our shared existence save two. Who's gotten the better players out of that again?

Higher isn't inherently better - it just offers more opportunities for hype.

First, you do realize that there are more teams in the NHL than Columbus and Nashville, right?

Every one of your arguments is some variation of "Well, Columbus did it worse, so...".

Yeah, great. Personally, I'd rather this franchise aim higher than the bar set by the Blue Jackets.

Second, I don't know if I can have a rational discussion with someone who honestly thinks that having a higher draft pick vs having a lower draft pick isn't better when it comes to the ability to acquire talent, it's just "hype".



Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post

You might be surprised.
I highly doubt that any professional athlete is going to be scarred for his career by dropping a game here or two in a season.

As if one game or two in this lost season is the fork in the road that will cause Seth Jones to either wash out of the league or find himself with a Norris 5 years from now.

I would think that our youngsters would benefit from playing with better talents that we could acquire with a top 5 pick vs the scrubs that are left at 9-10-11, etc.


And if that's really a huge concern - we're losing anyway. Send the kids to Milwaukee - they'll be shielded from the losing and we'll be in a better position to "earn" a better draft slot.

Being on crappy teams haven't seemed to hurt guys like Stamkos, Tavares ,Jeff Skinner, etc.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 11:59 AM
  #96
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,385
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
Again, even if it made sense at the time, wouldn't you rather have had the opportunity to pick Kessel?

...didn't I just point out all the reasons why the answer would be "no"?

Kessel has become the better overall player than Brassard; that much can be seen. But that sort of decision cannot be reasonably judged by this kind of "if only" hindsight, because there's so many other factors involved. Would Kessel have been the same player if he was drafted by the MacLean-era Jackets, for example? Highly questionable, given that his personality type is one that MacLean was very efficient at crushing. Further to that point, would Brassard have been the same sort of player if he'd gone to Boston? He had (still has) a lot of skill with the puck, and perhaps that could have been better realized in a better developmental system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
First, you do realize that there are more teams in the NHL than Columbus and Nashville, right?

Every one of your arguments is some variation of "Well, Columbus did it worse, so...".

Yeah, great. Personally, I'd rather this franchise aim higher than the bar set by the Blue Jackets.
And yet the majority of the methods you advocate for "improvement" and their justifications are exactly what and why the Jackets did to achieve the same thing, and all of them not only failed, but failed badly, making things much worse.

There's a reason I keep throwing that comparison out there, and it's not due to some sort of lack of awareness of the rest of the league.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
Second, I don't know if I can have a rational discussion with someone who honestly thinks that having a higher draft pick vs having a lower draft pick isn't better when it comes to the ability to acquire talent, it's just "hype".
We've seen it happen, hon. Many, many times. If you're talking about the broad sense, such as "second rounder instead of fourth rounder", then you have a point. But this is a discussion of tanking to improve by one or two ranks, whereupon the difference is marginal at best and certainly not worth the cost.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
I highly doubt that any professional athlete is going to be scarred for his career by dropping a game here or two in a season.

As if one game or two in this lost season is the fork in the road that will cause Seth Jones to either wash out of the league or find himself with a Norris 5 years from now.

I would think that our youngsters would benefit from playing with better talents that we could acquire with a top 5 pick vs the scrubs that are left at 9-10-11, etc.


And if that's really a huge concern - we're losing anyway. Send the kids to Milwaukee - they'll be shielded from the losing and we'll be in a better position to "earn" a better draft slot.

Being on crappy teams haven't seemed to hurt guys like Stamkos, Tavares ,Jeff Skinner, etc.
No, but it has hurt guys like Gagner, Eberle, Yakupov, RNH, and Schultz. And Neiderreiter. And Burmistrov and Bogosian. And Kadri and LSchenn. But, hey, guys like Voracek, Doughty, and Duchene ultimately turned out OK.

Then there's the guys who started out on really good or even great teams and it was screwing them up. Like, oh, JVR and Seguin...

There's a little bit more nuance to this sort of thing than you seem to blithely assume.


Oh, and while we're at it - perhaps you should clarify what you mean by "top-5" pick. I assume that means 4 or 5 (otherwise it'd be called "top 3", and that ain't happening), but we've had some interesting semantic debates already w/r/t these sorts of vague proximity identifiers, so I'd like to be certain that I'm not up against a moving target (deliberate or inadvertent) when I take a shot at that one.

Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 12:51 PM
  #97
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post

...didn't I just point out all the reasons why the answer would be "no"?

Kessel has become the better overall player than Brassard; that much can be seen. But that sort of decision cannot be reasonably judged by this kind of "if only" hindsight, because there's so many other factors involved. Would Kessel have been the same player if he was drafted by the MacLean-era Jackets, for example? Highly questionable, given that his personality type is one that MacLean was very efficient at crushing. Further to that point, would Brassard have been the same sort of player if he'd gone to Boston? He had (still has) a lot of skill with the puck, and perhaps that could have been better realized in a better developmental system.
You pointed them out, but they still make no sense. I'm giving you the benefit of hindsight, and you're still arguing that you'd take the inferior NHL player.

Using that logic - All picks are equal 1st through 7th round - since you never actually know what the player will do in a given system/injuries/etc.

Heck, why bother with 1st rounders. Poile shold just trade our 1st and 2nd rounders for 7th's. Because you never know, right?





Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
:

And yet the majority of the methods you advocate for "improvement" and their justifications are exactly what and why the Jackets did to achieve the same thing, and all of them not only failed, but failed badly, making things much worse.

There's a reason I keep throwing that comparison out there, and it's not due to some sort of lack of awareness of the rest of the league.
I know what the Blue Jackets tried didn't work. I know what the Preds are trying isn't working. What's the difference - other than a few playoff flameouts and a couple more regular season points?

I'm not advocating any particular methods for improvement. I have no idea, else I'd be an NHL GM or coach.

I do know that 15 years without much success is usually grounds for letting another person(s) give it a shot.

Of the top 5 longest-tenured NHL coaches:

3 have Stanley Cups.

the 4th has a President's trophy, is winning 63% of games, and has 2 trips to the WCF in in 5 year span

The other has a win % of 53%, and has only 2 trips to the 2nd round in 15 years on the job.

Guess which one is ours? We're reinforcing failure here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post


We've seen it happen, hon. Many, many times. If you're talking about the broad sense, such as "second rounder instead of fourth rounder", then you have a point. But this is a discussion of tanking to improve by one or two ranks, whereupon the difference is marginal at best and certainly not worth the cost.



No, but it has hurt guys like Gagner, Eberle, Yakupov, RNH, and Schultz. And Neiderreiter. And Burmistrov and Bogosian. And Kadri and LSchenn. But, hey, guys like Voracek, Doughty, and Duchene ultimately turned out OK.

Then there's the guys who started out on really good or even great teams and it was screwing them up. Like, oh, JVR and Seguin...

There's a little bit more nuance to this sort of thing than you seem to blithely assume.
So, let me get this straight - players have developed and failed to develop on bad teams. Players have developed and failed on good teams. And players have developed and failed on mediocre teams.

Well great! Which is what I said earlier - finishing with, say, 81 points, instead of 86 points isn't going to make a bit of difference in what our young players do in the 2017-2018 season.

But being able to choose from a better pool of players with the 5th pick rather than the 10th just might.

We still have to pick the right guys - which is where the Blue Jackets failed (and teams like the Hawks/Pens succeeded).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post


Oh, and while we're at it - perhaps you should clarify what you mean by "top-5" pick. I assume that means 4 or 5 (otherwise it'd be called "top 3", and that ain't happening), but we've had some interesting semantic debates already w/r/t these sorts of vague proximity identifiers, so I'd like to be certain that I'm not up against a moving target (deliberate or inadvertent) when I take a shot at that one.
There's no moving target here. Higher is better. Even if it's one slot.

Seth Jones looks like he's going to be a franchise defenseman for a long time. Elias Lindholm looks like a solid #2 playmaking center.

That's the potential difference in 1 slot.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 01:55 PM
  #98
Preds33
Registered User
 
Preds33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,201
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
There's no moving target here. Higher is better. Even if it's one slot.

Seth Jones looks like he's going to be a franchise defenseman for a long time. Elias Lindholm looks like a solid #2 playmaking center.

That's the potential difference in 1 slot.

What was the difference in 1-4 last year? I don't see a huge difference in 1 spot there.

Now look at 5-10 what's the difference there? (This is where we sit currently) I don't see too much difference. And if there isn't really too much difference, why preach failure and let's just give up to the team rather than give it your all regardless of the situation.

yes there was a drop off from 4 to 5 but not really a drop off in 1-4 and 5-10

Preds33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 02:17 PM
  #99
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preds33 View Post
What was the difference in 1-4 last year? I don't see a huge difference in 1 spot there.

Now look at 5-10 what's the difference there? (This is where we sit currently) I don't see too much difference. And if there isn't really too much difference, why preach failure and let's just give up to the team rather than give it your all regardless of the situation.

yes there was a drop off from 4 to 5 but not really a drop off in 1-4 and 5-10
Because you don't want to be that team on the other side of the talent drop off - no matter if it's at the 3rd spot, 5th spot, or 8th spot.

The way I see it, being able to acquire and develop out of a larger pool is more valuable than a few points gained at the end of a lost season.

Don't forget - for every spot we move up in the draft - that's a spot moved up in all 7 rounds. The difference between 6th and 8th is 14 picks over the course of the entire draft

They should have been "giving it thier all" back in November and December and January when it could have made a difference in the season.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 06:26 PM
  #100
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preds33 View Post
What was the difference in 1-4 last year? I don't see a huge difference in 1 spot there.

Now look at 5-10 what's the difference there? (This is where we sit currently) I don't see too much difference. And if there isn't really too much difference, why preach failure and let's just give up to the team rather than give it your all regardless of the situation.

yes there was a drop off from 4 to 5 but not really a drop off in 1-4 and 5-10
This year looks to be 1-2, 3-7, 8....

barrytrotzsneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:26 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.