HFBoards

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

2012-13 Colorado Avalanche Prospects Thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-16-2012, 09:28 AM
  #576
Zandar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
I'm not sure why you feel the need to nitpick at the players selected. I'll take Niemo or Richardson (who is still in the NHL) over 4th line role players that couldn't stick in the NHL like Willsie and Larrsen any day of the week. I don't consider them anything other than injury plug ins, where as Niemo and Richardson played specific roles and did them well.

Niemo has a cup, and played very well with Forsberg and Drury against LA, and later on with Drury and Hejduk where he made contributions on the line rather than just being a winger riding the coat tails of two great players.

Radi probably should have been bolded based on the sheer number of games he played despite never really settling into a consistent role, but other than that I don't see any players you should be up in arms about not being included. Feel free to point them out and make a case for them if you feel strongly.
Again, my point was that you were qualifying an NHL level player as someone who could be a top 6 forward or quality third line checking player. How long is the average NHL career? How many of the Avs draftees have had careers around the average? I'm not debating who are better players as that can sometimes come down to personal opinion but rather who could be considered NHLers.

On one side note, Richardson was a scratch for most of the finals and saw limited time the rest of the time. That doesn't make him much different than others you have written off. So is he an NHLer in your eyes because of his role, stats or games played? I'm still unsure if it was right place at right time or something else? And I am aware of his surgery earlier on but despite that he still played the role of a depth energy forward. His only 2 regular season goals in 2012 came in the same game playing at wing with Kopitar and Brown.


Last edited by Zandar: 12-16-2012 at 11:59 AM.
Zandar is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 10:04 AM
  #577
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,629
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
Are you referring to me? I'll respond with the assumption that you were.

If you look a couple of posts back, I very explicitly wrote "A lot of times, young players do improve. No question." I've never once said that all young players always get worse. But the simple fact is that some players do get worse, others simply coast at their current level, and others get better as they gain experience. My point is that it isn't a given - or even "likely" - that that third option is the one that will happen, which is how I interpreted your original statement. It might happen that way with the Avs young players, and that would be great. But it also might not, and I simply put forth a trifecta recent example that occurred on our own team as evidence that 'getting better' isn't a given, and that some of us are going to need more than blind faith to believe it. I'm particularly concerned about it here and now, given the team's coach.



I can't have an opinion and respectfully discuss it without being targeted?

A perfectly reasonable debate flushed away for no apparent reason. Yes, a very disappointing response.........especially given its author.
Well, I WAS going to dig up every single NHL player that fell under the conditions I mentioned: played a 'significant' role on and NHL team between the ages of 18-21 and show that, for the most part (80% - improvement to 20% - stagnate or get worse) these players tend to get better. But then I thought, why should I waste my time, it's just going to fall on deaf ears anyways. You will believe whatever the hell you want to believe irregardless of whatever I write. I don't enjoy endless debates on topics that I KNOW I'm right about, especially when deep down, I am pretty sure you know the right answer as well.

What gets me though is that you never pronounce yourself on anything. You pick arguments or 'debates' about what other people write but make sure you stay on the fence never really stating your position. The last time I saw you do that, you were disagreeing with almost every Avs fan when we were saying that Quincey sucked and needed to be dealt. I believe you stated he was our best d-man and you'd hate to think of what our defence would be without him. Next thing we know, he's gone to Detroit and now all of THEIR fans hate him and want him gone too.

I don't care that you disagree with me, that's fine. If you're going to do that, at least state what YOU think is going to happen with this team in the future. Don't just sit on the fence, start endless debates that go nowhere, without ever providing YOUR VERY OWN opinion on the topic at hand.

At least I put myself out there, for better or for worse, I state my absolute opinion, usually backed up with facts and stats, and there is generally no question where I'm coming from.

Bender is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 12:21 PM
  #578
Foppa2118
Release Evertroll
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 22,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zandar View Post
Again, my point was that you were qualifying an NHL level player as someone who could be a top 6 forward or quality third line checking player. How long is the average NHL career? How many of the Avs draftees have had careers around the average? I'm not debating who are better players as that can sometimes come down to personal opinion but rather who could be considered NHLers.

On one side note, Richardson was a scratch for most of the finals and saw limited time the rest of the time. That doesn't make him much different than others you have written off. So is he an NHLer in your eyes because of his role, stats or games played? I'm still unsure if it was right place at right time or something else? And I am aware of his surgery earlier on but despite that he still played the role of a depth energy forward. His only 2 regular season goals in 2012 came in the same game playing at wing with Kopitar and Brown.
You're off on pretty much every point you made here.

On that list were Pahlsson, Moore, and Gali, who are not top six forwards, and Richardson, McCormick, Hahl, Niemenen, Yip, Hinote, Olver, and Parker who are 4th liners or borderline 3rd line players if they're on their game.

As for Richardson, I didn't say anything about his play in the finals. I said Nieminen played a solid role in the cup run, and has a cup under his belt, which accounts for a fair bit in my book. He played in all 23 of the playoff games, and notched a very respectable 10 points (4 goals 6 assists). He also played in all 24 games of Calgary's run a few years later, and contributed 8 points (4 goals 4 assists).

Richardson on the other hand is still in the NHL, and playing a defensive role with LA.

You're making a big deal out of two names on that list that I dont' agree should have been bolded on a list I made, and I already explained why I didn't put Larsen and Willsie weren't included. They achieved about what you would hope for players drafted where they were, but they were never NHL regulars. They were character, leadership type players that didn't provide much else other than a few brief periods of solid contributions.

You're trying to create your own point here just for the sake of argument.

Foppa2118 is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 12:22 PM
  #579
Nihiliste
Registered User
 
Nihiliste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,929
vCash: 500
@Bender

Not all things need to have an absolute position. I don't there's anything wrong with providing some food for thought that maybe this crop of young guys isn't that much different than our last crop of exciting young players. I personally think that Dutchy, O'reilly, Varlamov will continue to improve and get better. On the same token, I'm not really sure how much better a guy like EJ is going to get. I'm also not sure how much we can expect our prospects in Elliot, Barrie, and Siemens to improve and contribute at the NHL. Yes, one would expect them to improve with experience, and that is indeed the general trend with young players, but I don't think that a trend guarantees that these specific players are going to get dramatically better. It's possible, I believe and hope that they will in our case, but by no means do I think its a guarantee.

I can also remember a number of times where AB has come out with unpopular opinions (for instance, about O'reilly's offensive potential prior to last season).

Nihiliste is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 01:01 PM
  #580
ABasin
Asset management
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
Well, I WAS going to dig up every single NHL player that fell under the conditions I mentioned: played a 'significant' role on and NHL team between the ages of 18-21 and show that, for the most part (80% - improvement to 20% - stagnate or get worse) these players tend to get better. But then I thought, why should I waste my time, it's just going to fall on deaf ears anyways. You will believe whatever the hell you want to believe irregardless of whatever I write. I don't enjoy endless debates on topics that I KNOW I'm right about, especially when deep down, I am pretty sure you know the right answer as well.
Interesting line of thought. Perhaps your difficulty is that while I engage in debate to get and analyze as many thoughts on the table as possible - and maybe even learn something, you engage in debate to win (since you KNOW you're right and everything). And then when that fails, you focus on the poster rather than the posts. Perhaps that's the difficulty here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
What gets me though is that you never pronounce yourself on anything. You pick arguments or 'debates' about what other people write but make sure you stay on the fence never really stating your position. The last time I saw you do that, you were disagreeing with almost every Avs fan when we were saying that Quincey sucked and needed to be dealt. I believe you stated he was our best d-man and you'd hate to think of what our defence would be without him. Next thing we know, he's gone to Detroit and now all of THEIR fans hate him and want him gone too.
Every one of us in here who posts regularly have our moments of being correct and incorrect. There are only a very few in here, however, who seem to take perverted joy in pointing it out.

And for what it's worth, I still believe that Quincey is and will be a good, solid 2nd pairing defenseman. There's no question in my mind that Quincey was the Avs' best defenseman over the first 2 months of last season, and there's also no question in my mind that EJ played his best hockey as a member of the Avs when he was paired with Quincey.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
I don't care that you disagree with me, that's fine. If you're going to do that, at least state what YOU think is going to happen with this team in the future. Don't just sit on the fence, start endless debates that go nowhere, without ever providing YOUR VERY OWN opinion on the topic at hand.
Well, I don't think I'm shy about putting out an opinion when I have one (Forsberg's ridiculous ugly comeback is an obvious example), but sometimes I simply don't know the answer. When one doesn't know the answer, simply taking a hard line position seems a bit silly, don't you think? In those cases, discussion is a great thing, because it gives an opportunity to use others' opinions to come to a conclusion.

In the case at hand, I'm not even disagreeing with your final assessment. I'm having difficulty with your methodology, as I simply don't believe that just because players are young, they'll automatically get significantly better - and I provided recent factual data from our own team as an example as to why I feel the way I do.

You seem to want to string me up for having that opinion. I'm sorry you feel that way, but that's my opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
At least I put myself out there, for better or for worse, I state my absolute opinion, usually backed up with facts and stats, and there is generally no question where I'm coming from.
I agree. I find you (current tantrum notwithstanding) to be one of the better people in here with which to debate and discuss issues. Perhaps we could get back to that?

ABasin is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 01:07 PM
  #581
ABasin
Asset management
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihiliste View Post
Not all things need to have an absolute position. I don't there's anything wrong with providing some food for thought that maybe this crop of young guys isn't that much different than our last crop of exciting young players.
Exactly. I don't see a problem with this at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihiliste View Post
I can also remember a number of times where AB has come out with unpopular opinions (for instance, about O'reilly's offensive potential prior to last season).
But so what? Again, all of us have our moments of correct insightful opinions and incorrect brain-dead "how did we miss it?" opinions - but whether said opinions are popular or unpopular isn't the least bit relevant, IMO.

ABasin is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 01:53 PM
  #582
chewey
dmitri
 
chewey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Near You!
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,876
vCash: 500
What's that AB? You have an opinion, eh? Well then ........


chewey is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 03:32 PM
  #583
Zandar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
You're off on pretty much every point you made here.

On that list were Pahlsson, Moore, and Gali, who are not top six forwards, and Richardson, McCormick, Hahl, Niemenen, Yip, Hinote, Olver, and Parker who are 4th liners or borderline 3rd line players if they're on their game.

As for Richardson, I didn't say anything about his play in the finals. I said Nieminen played a solid role in the cup run, and has a cup under his belt, which accounts for a fair bit in my book. He played in all 23 of the playoff games, and notched a very respectable 10 points (4 goals 6 assists). He also played in all 24 games of Calgary's run a few years later, and contributed 8 points (4 goals 4 assists).

Richardson on the other hand is still in the NHL, and playing a defensive role with LA.

You're making a big deal out of two names on that list that I dont' agree should have been bolded on a list I made, and I already explained why I didn't put Larsen and Willsie weren't included. They achieved about what you would hope for players drafted where they were, but they were never NHL regulars. They were character, leadership type players that didn't provide much else other than a few brief periods of solid contributions.

You're trying to create your own point here just for the sake of argument.
Richardson was brought up because you said he played a specific role but I was confused why he would be considered an NHL level player while others were not. I was just referring to his recent season with LA now having more quality depth and his role diminishing. Would he still be getting the ice time he has if not for being on the young team of LA's? Some players have better opportunities.

I'm not looking for an argument...just trying to understand why a few made your list while others have not. I didn't even bring up the fact guys like TJ and Yip have struggled to maintain their place in the NHL which made it harder for me to understand what you were using for your basis. I just focused on two who woud be easier to explain reasoning on rather than breakdown each and every choice. Neither you or I have the time to debate a few let alone a bunch of meaningless items.

Clearly what we consider an NHL level player differs between us. I was just looking more for insight and you have expressed your opinion of the two I brought up so I will leave it at that.

Zandar is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 05:53 PM
  #584
Foppa2118
Release Evertroll
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 22,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zandar View Post
Richardson was brought up because you said he played a specific role but I was confused why he would be considered an NHL level player while others were not. I was just referring to his recent season with LA now having more quality depth and his role diminishing. Would he still be getting the ice time he has if not for being on the young team of LA's? Some players have better opportunities.

I'm not looking for an argument...just trying to understand why a few made your list while others have not. I didn't even bring up the fact guys like TJ and Yip have struggled to maintain their place in the NHL which made it harder for me to understand what you were using for your basis. I just focused on two who woud be easier to explain reasoning on rather than breakdown each and every choice. Neither you or I have the time to debate a few let alone a bunch of meaningless items.

Clearly what we consider an NHL level player differs between us. I was just looking more for insight and you have expressed your opinion of the two I brought up so I will leave it at that.
The difference in my eye is Richardson, TJ, and Yip (barely) are in the NHL right now. If this was a few years from now and they had fallen into the AHL like Larsen and Willsie and never made it back, I wouldn't have included them.

Foppa2118 is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 06:43 PM
  #585
Nihiliste
Registered User
 
Nihiliste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,929
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
Exactly. I don't see a problem with this at all.



But so what? Again, all of us have our moments of correct insightful opinions and incorrect brain-dead "how did we miss it?" opinions - but whether said opinions are popular or unpopular isn't the least bit relevant, IMO.
I agree, I simply meant to point out that Bender's characterization of you as someone afraid to put his own views forward was not accurate

Nihiliste is offline  
Old
12-16-2012, 07:26 PM
  #586
Trebek
Mod Supervisor
 
Trebek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,741
vCash: 500
Guys, let's stop with the passive flaming. Thanks!

Trebek is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 08:21 AM
  #587
Drizzt1
Registered User
 
Drizzt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 373
vCash: 500
From my perspective here, everyone's comments and opinion's potentially are both correct, and incorrect, because one fact alone is true, and that is some players regress, some players do not regress, and some players improve.

I often suggest that as Avs fans, maybe we should err on the side of caution, because we don't really know how a player will turn out, and honestly, I face a lot of criticism for that. It is deemed to be negative. BUT, that's my opinion.

I still think Avs are really, really good at drafting and trading middle quality talent - even better than most other clubs.

We sorely need a marquee player or three both on, but also off the ice for various reasons.

I have this conundrum though. Expectations for a season in the unlikely event a very short season DOES occur. I could almost tolerate a dreadful season, for the chance of landing someone like Mckinnon. Mckinnon "might" just be that Stakos style of player we sorely need. Then again, are we in a position to contend? I wonder what people's thought's on that were.

A footnote with that is that I'm NEVER on the tank train. Won't condone it. Never have, never will. BUT, I'd rather us be a high end team, or a very low end team. I don't think there's any doubts The Oilers will be destroyers one day, but man, I'd hate the grind to get there.

Drizzt1 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 09:43 AM
  #588
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,629
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
Interesting line of thought. Perhaps your difficulty is that while I engage in debate to get and analyze as many thoughts on the table as possible - and maybe even learn something, you engage in debate to win (since you KNOW you're right and everything). And then when that fails, you focus on the poster rather than the posts. Perhaps that's the difficulty here?

In the case at hand, I'm not even disagreeing with your final assessment. I'm having difficulty with your methodology, as I simply don't believe that just because players are young, they'll automatically get significantly better - and I provided recent factual data from our own team as an example as to why I feel the way I do.

Perhaps we could get back to that?
Maybe it's the way it's presented that gets to me, I don't know. I remember having a debate with you (and others) about 2-3 years ago about Galiardi. I thought he had top-6 potential whereas you stated you thought he did not. It would now appear as though you are correct (although there is still time, it's not looking good for T.J.). I have ZERO problem in admitting your were right and I was wrong. At THAT time, you were making valid points and arguments and clearly stating your case. I disagreed but had no problem with that.

With this particular situation, I feel that I made a statement about a 'generally accepted concept' within the hockey community about young players and (also please note, I said they would get better, I never said by how much better and I never claimed outright dominance by these individuals) and I feel that your comments were just nitpicking to actually 'provoke' a debate. That is why I 'went off' like I did, in case you are interested and I apologize.

Truth be known, I actually enjoy you as a poster on these boards, I feel that you keep a lot of us 'homers' (for lack of a better term) in check, to ensure we don't get too far ahead of ourselves with our enthusiasm for our players. [I just wish it could be the opposite as well...as in to make sure we don't get too down]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihiliste View Post
@Bender

Not all things need to have an absolute position. I don't there's anything wrong with providing some food for thought that maybe this crop of young guys isn't that much different than our last crop of exciting young players. I personally think that Dutchy, O'reilly, Varlamov will continue to improve and get better. On the same token, I'm not really sure how much better a guy like EJ is going to get. I'm also not sure how much we can expect our prospects in Elliot, Barrie, and Siemens to improve and contribute at the NHL. Yes, one would expect them to improve with experience, and that is indeed the general trend with young players, but I don't think that a trend guarantees that these specific players are going to get dramatically better. It's possible, I believe and hope that they will in our case, but by no means do I think its a guarantee.
So that would be 60% of that group, Avs would be unlucky if EJ or Stastny didn't continue to get better as they became veterans but that's the way it goes sometimes.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have about 3-4 hours of snow removal to take care of.

%$!^&!@*#!$%^!&#!%#$&*^#!@! Winter

Bender is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 09:52 AM
  #589
Avs71
Registered User
 
Avs71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drizzt1 View Post
A footnote with that is that I'm NEVER on the tank train. Won't condone it. Never have, never will. BUT, I'd rather us be a high end team, or a very low end team. I don't think there's any doubts The Oilers will be destroyers one day, but man, I'd hate the grind to get there.
A MacKinnon or Jones would definitely be a nice gift from the lockout. However, if the games ever do start, it is hard to say how the Avs will do. A losing season would be frustrating because that would mean a lot of regression in the core. Its not like a few years ago when the team was littered with players 28-40, and there wasn't a lot of hope for the future. That made it more bearable losing night after night because you knew this wasn't the team for the future. That doesn't seem to be the case anymore.

If the season begins, I'd be highly dissapointed if the Avs finished bottom 5 with a core of Landeskog, O'Reilly, Duchene, Stastny, Johnson and Varlamov. Those players alone are a nice making to the team, if they all figure it out, which hasn't been the case. We've seen them all have stretches where they have been really good, but then stretches where they have been disappointing. Unfortunately they haven't shown what the team plays like when everyone is on.

Imagine a team where Varlamov is playing like he is right now in Russia. Duchene back to his 67 point self. O'Reilly and Landeskog building off this past season. Johnson playing like he did after the groin pull last year. And of course, Stastny getting back to 70 plus points. I think a short season would yield the best chance of seeing something close to this. A few games into a short season and I would have high hopes for this team.

Long story short, a full season lockout will be the Avs only shot at a top 5 pick.

Avs71 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:39 AM
  #590
Nihiliste
Registered User
 
Nihiliste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,929
vCash: 500
I think the lockout is ultimately terrible for the team chemistry and identity they've been trying to build and bad for the development of our young guys. Landeskog would have been much better served by another year of NHL hockey than getting frustrated playing for Djugarden for example. But the guy I worry about most is EJ - 24 years old now with 2 seasons of development missed already.

Nihiliste is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:45 AM
  #591
Foppa2118
Release Evertroll
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 22,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihiliste View Post
I think the lockout is ultimately terrible for the team chemistry and identity they've been trying to build and bad for the development of our young guys. Landeskog would have been much better served by another year of NHL hockey than getting frustrated playing for Djugarden for example. But the guy I worry about most is EJ - 24 years old now with 2 seasons of development missed already.
Yea, I was thinking about the same thing yesterday. This is really stagnating any momentum he had to progress his game.

Another guy it's tough on is McGinn.

Foppa2118 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:48 AM
  #592
ABasin
Asset management
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
Maybe it's the way it's presented that gets to me, I don't know. I remember having a debate with you (and others) about 2-3 years ago about Galiardi. I thought he had top-6 potential whereas you stated you thought he did not. It would now appear as though you are correct (although there is still time, it's not looking good for T.J.). I have ZERO problem in admitting your were right and I was wrong. At THAT time, you were making valid points and arguments and clearly stating your case. I disagreed but had no problem with that.
Yes, as I indicated earlier, we all have our moments of correct and incorrect analyses, opinions, projections, etc. Discussing/debating it is the fun part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
With this particular situation, I feel that I made a statement about a 'generally accepted concept' within the hockey community about young players and (also please note, I said they would get better, I never said by how much better and I never claimed outright dominance by these individuals) and I feel that your comments were just nitpicking to actually 'provoke' a debate. That is why I 'went off' like I did, in case you are interested and I apologize.
No worries. But I wasn't trying to goad you into an argument or anything like that. My opinion is genuinely my opinion.

But to further the discussion (if I may): Even if I put aside my belief that young guys don't always develop, I have concerns about the Avs young guys progressing in a big way, largely due to their coach. I'll admit up front that I am not a Sacco fan in the least, as I believe he dumbs down individual play (and thus, talent) to its least common denominator. I see the team often playing a basically system-less game, where 1st and 4th line players tend to play a similar simple dump-and-chase/go-to-the-net game with equal frequency, and where truly talented players simply don't get to display that talent very often.

With that in mind, what I fear is that only the young players who naturally play that grind it up/garbage goal/clear the puck up the boards game, are going to show meaningful improvement under Sacco. The good news is that O'R and Landeskog fit into that mold (though of course they are not limited to just that), and will likely show nice improvement. Ditto for Jones (though he's getting out of the age range of our discussion) and McGinn as well. The bad news is that Duchene and EJ - who IMO have the most innate skill at their position(s) on the team - don't fit into that mold (and from what I've seen, nor do Elliott or Barrie). And I believe both of their awesome innate skills could be wasted under this coach and his 'system' of play. In short, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if neither player got significantly better under Sacco - though I most surely hope they do get mucho better.

Drizzt has said a number of times that the Avs need players with top shelf talent. I would put forth the possibility that even if the Avs did get a player or two like that, would it matter, given the current coach and how he mandates his players play? Hell, we may even have said top shelf talent right now, for all we know.

As for Varlamov, I simply don't know. While I believe I can tell if a goalie has played a good game I just watched, I'm not that good at analyzing goaltenders from the perspective of development, so I tend to avoid those discussions. I do see that he has awesome quickness, lateral movement, and reflexes - but on the other hand his positioning is sometimes off, and his rebound control is his achilles heel right now, IMO. Are those two things that can be improved with age/experience? I assume so, but I'll let someone who knows goaltenders better than me assess that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
Truth be known, I actually enjoy you as a poster on these boards, I feel that you keep a lot of us 'homers' (for lack of a better term) in check, to ensure we don't get too far ahead of ourselves with our enthusiasm for our players. [I just wish it could be the opposite as well...as in to make sure we don't get too down]
Ditto, and as I said, no worries. I realize that at times my opinions can differ from the masses, but I really am only after the good debate....with no ulterior motives.

ABasin is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 01:19 PM
  #593
electricjib
Registered User
 
electricjib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 7,636
vCash: 500
On the topic of Prospects, Colin Smith now leads the WHL in scoring.

electricjib is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 09:11 AM
  #594
Bender
TheHockeyProspector
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,629
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
But to further the discussion (if I may): Even if I put aside my belief that young guys don't always develop, I have concerns about the Avs young guys progressing in a big way, largely due to their coach. I'll admit up front that I am not a Sacco fan in the least, as I believe he dumbs down individual play (and thus, talent) to its least common denominator. I see the team often playing a basically system-less game, where 1st and 4th line players tend to play a similar simple dump-and-chase/go-to-the-net game with equal frequency, and where truly talented players simply don't get to display that talent very often.
I obviously agree. I'm not a fan of Sacco at all. I also don't believe this is going to be the coach to bring them to the next level. My expectations have always been that we'd either stumble out of the gate this season or next season and really underachieve and once replaced, the team would take off.

I'm actually surprised they wanted to keep him and signed him to a 2 year deal. Apart from the year where Anderson was stealing games left and right, his track record is pretty bad.

I think the question then actually becomes, is it really the coaches fault or the people who hire him? There were some really good coaches available when Sacco was hired. Guys who had WON as coaches in various leagues (Kevin Dineen comes to mind, I remember Jori really wanted him) yet the Avs promoted a guy who's never even had a winning record as a coach ever? What kind of sense does that make?

While this may be unpopular, I believe the best coach that this team has ever had is Marc Crawford. I realize he is hated for the whole Moore-Bertuzzi thing and all that but as a coach, the decisions he made on the ice never really left me scratching my head. They always seemed to make sense to me. [I like Hartley just fine but he had some pretty nice pieces to work with and still ONLY won 1 cup and plus 'Steve Brule' on the top line to start the season? Nah, I won't ever forget that]

The last coach that the Avs had that actually had a positive impact and overachieved was Quenneville. Some of those teams had really no business making the playoffs and he was able to guide them to 3 straight 95 point finishes. For the quality of those teams, that's pretty darn good. Our coaching since that time has gone from abysmal to barely adequate.

Bender is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 09:17 AM
  #595
Lonewolfe2015
Registered User
 
Lonewolfe2015's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 12,692
vCash: 50
Wouldn't worry bout EJ, I think this lockout is great for his back problems.

Curious if anyone has seen Millan or Patterson play since they got in Denver? I always thought Patterson would be better... but Millan has nice stats.

Lonewolfe2015 is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 09:25 AM
  #596
ABasin
Asset management
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
I obviously agree. I'm not a fan of Sacco at all. I also don't believe this is going to be the coach to bring them to the next level. My expectations have always been that we'd either stumble out of the gate this season or next season and really underachieve and once replaced, the team would take off.

I'm actually surprised they wanted to keep him and signed him to a 2 year deal. Apart from the year where Anderson was stealing games left and right, his track record is pretty bad.

I think the question then actually becomes, is it really the coaches fault or the people who hire him? There were some really good coaches available when Sacco was hired. Guys who had WON as coaches in various leagues (Kevin Dineen comes to mind, I remember Jori really wanted him) yet the Avs promoted a guy who's never even had a winning record as a coach ever? What kind of sense does that make?
I am in complete agreement. I've long bemoaned the Avs management's incestuous internal hiring of obviously inferior 'yes men' (of course that last part is nothing more than conjecture on my part). What was even more telling than the Sacco or Granato hires, was the Deadmarsh hire. The guy never coached at any level in his entire life, yet they handed him one of 60 possible assistant coaching jobs at the highest level of the sport? Come on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
While this may be unpopular, I believe the best coach that this team has ever had is Marc Crawford. I realize he is hated for the whole Moore-Bertuzzi thing and all that but as a coach, the decisions he made on the ice never really left me scratching my head. They always seemed to make sense to me. [I like Hartley just fine but he had some pretty nice pieces to work with and still ONLY won 1 cup and plus 'Steve Brule' on the top line to start the season? Nah, I won't ever forget that]
I liked Quenneville. He was the only Avs coach (aside from Sacco) who wasn't handed mucho HOF talent in its prime, and he still won. Compared to what we have now, I liked any of the coaches. Except Granato, I guess.

ABasin is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 09:57 PM
  #597
AvsFanRCN
Registered User
 
AvsFanRCN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,045
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricjib View Post
On the topic of Prospects, Colin Smith now leads the WHL in scoring.
It really bothers me that he wasn't invited to the team Canada camp, he had the same point production as Lipon and he made it through the cuts, I fell Colin could have done the same

AvsFanRCN is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 10:12 PM
  #598
S E P H
@Krzysztof_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 6,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AvsFanRCN View Post
It really bothers me that he wasn't invited to the team Canada camp, he had the same point production as Lipon and he made it through the cuts, I fell Colin could have done the same
Even though Smith has much more potential than Lipon, Smith is a top 6 or bust player while Lipon can play as a bottom 6 in a versatile role.

S E P H is online now  
Old
12-20-2012, 03:33 PM
  #599
Avs_19
Peter the Great
 
Avs_19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 42,656
vCash: 500
Hishon update:

Quote:
First off, a bit of news: Billington skated this morning in Cleveland with Joey Hishon, the concussed 2010 Avalanche first-round draft pick. Hishon still has not been cleared to play. But he is with the Lake Erie Monsters on a regular basis now and is skating. Billington says it’s still a “day by day” thing. Really, I don’t want to read anything more into it than that. Nobody should say whether anything is positive or negative regarding Hishon’s condition. Well, I guess it can be classified as positive that he’s on skates and apparently feeling OK. But beyond that, nobody knows still when the talented forward will play again.
Billington also talk about the Avs' other top prospects:

http://blogs.denverpost.com/avs/2012...mpaign=twitter

Avs_19 is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:48 PM
  #600
Foppa2118
Release Evertroll
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 22,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs_19 View Post
Hishon update:



Billington also talk about the Avs' other top prospects:

http://blogs.denverpost.com/avs/2012...mpaign=twitter
Interesting. Is that legal? I'm glad he was there checking up on him but technically Billington works for the Avs, and Joey is under contract.

Foppa2118 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 11:55 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.