Jump to content


Photo

Reinhart, does he fit JBots mold?


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#1 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 03:42 PM

I have never been impressed with Sam's game. Does not have great speed. Is only ok defensively. Has scored half his goals on the PP.

I think Sam would return more than E Kane because of people seeing potential and he is still on ECL and wouldn't cost as much.

 

I think Chicago would be interested in getting him and move him to center P Kane or stay at RW with Toews. I just don't know what we could get from Chicago.

 

They may be shopping VanRiemsdyk since they won't be able to protect him.

 

Maybe Larsson and Reinhart and Chicago's 2nd to Chicago for VanRiemsyk, Krueger, and Hartman.

 

I 'm guessing on the value of each of these players, not sure if it is not enough or more than enough.

 



#2 SDS

SDS

    #7

  • SS Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,039 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 07 June 2017 - 03:53 PM

So a player that is not good enough for Buffalo would be of interest to one of the premier franchises in the NHL? Good thinkin' Lincoln.

#3 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 07 June 2017 - 03:54 PM

It's OK Sam, I still love you.

#4 d4rksabre

d4rksabre

    Playground King

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,776 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The big slide

Posted 07 June 2017 - 03:56 PM

I'm going to assume "talented" is one of JBot's qualifiers. So, yeah. 



#5 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 04:02 PM

I think Sam will be fine. I wouldn't trade him to Chicago. I'd trade him to Anaheim for Fowler or to Carolina for Hanifin and a pick but that's about it.

Edited by ShadowLiger, 07 June 2017 - 04:03 PM.


#6 mjd1001

mjd1001

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 355 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 04:08 PM

Reinhart doesn't 'look' like the most dominant player out there, he isn't that big, not the best skater...but he does produce pretty well for a top 5 pick.  He has 40 goals in his first 2 years in the NHL.  That is very close to, or better production than these other recent top 5 forward picks in their first 2 years:

 

Evander Kane (33)

Nathan McKinnon (38)

Jonathan Drouin (29 total goals in 164 NHL games over 4 years..but he LOOKS good doing it)

Aleksander Barkov (24)

Alex Galchenyuk (42 in his first 3 seasons, one being a short season)

Ryan Nugent Hopkins (47 in his first 3 seasons, one being a short season)

Jonathan Huberdeau (only scored exactly 20 goals once in his career, averages about 15 per year)

 

Sure, there are also players who did better (McDavid, Seguin) and also some I wouldn't take at all (Yakupov), but Reinhart I think is doing what you would expect him to do, maybe even slightly better. His biggest problem might be he just doesn't look 'dominant' in the way he produces.


Edited by mjd1001, 07 June 2017 - 04:09 PM.


#7 Taro T

Taro T

    It leads you here despite your destination under the MW tonight.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,127 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 June 2017 - 04:21 PM

I'm really hoping that JB takes a good look (like through November) at what he really has currently & doesn't make any major moves (unless some no-brainer comes up & bites him in the bippy) prior to having a good handle on what these guys can do being led by someone that ISN'T a Goober.

With a real coach this current lineup SHOULD be good enough to make the playoffs. Get the full picture & figure out how to have them better than that in the near future.

Throwing away Reinhart for a 3/4 D would be poor asset management IMHO.

#8 Derrico

Derrico

    First Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,803 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greater Toronto Area

Posted 07 June 2017 - 04:32 PM

I'm really hoping that JB takes a good look (like through November) at what he really has currently & doesn't make any major moves (unless some no-brainer comes up & bites him in the bippy) prior to having a good handle on what these guys can do being led by someone that ISN'T a Goober.
With a real coach this current lineup SHOULD be good enough to make the playoffs. Get the full picture & figure out how to have them better than that in the near future.
Throwing away Reinhart for a 3/4 D would be poor asset management IMHO.


Any other off-season and I would agree with you. But I think this expansion draft has turned everything upside down. I think there are d available this month that normally wouldn't be available. Only reason is teams are afraid of losing via expansion draft. Not because of salary, not because of talent. They're afraid they will be lost for nothing. JBot has some huge decisions to make here. Getting good young defesemen is nearly impossible. This offseason I think teams have a real chance at acquiring one if they are willing to give up a good forward asset AND have the room to protect them in the draft. Buffalo checks both boxes. Saying this, I hope they keep Reinhart unless a top pairing guy is coming back.

#9 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 04:41 PM

Any other off-season and I would agree with you. But I think this expansion draft has turned everything upside down. I think there are d available this month that normally wouldn't be available. Only reason is teams are afraid of losing via expansion draft. Not because of salary, not because of talent. They're afraid they will be lost for nothing. JBot has some huge decisions to make here. Getting good young defesemen is nearly impossible. This offseason I think teams have a real chance at acquiring one if they are willing to give up a good forward asset AND have the room to protect them in the draft. Buffalo checks both boxes. Saying this, I hope they keep Reinhart unless a top pairing guy is coming back.

Here's my issue, getting Reinhart level players happens basically only in round 1. Getting good top 4 guys round 1 and 2. Just because Murray didn't draft any shouldn't mean trading Reinhart.

#10 Taro T

Taro T

    It leads you here despite your destination under the MW tonight.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,127 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 June 2017 - 04:45 PM

Any other off-season and I would agree with you. But I think this expansion draft has turned everything upside down. I think there are d available this month that normally wouldn't be available. Only reason is teams are afraid of losing via expansion draft. Not because of salary, not because of talent. They're afraid they will be lost for nothing. JBot has some huge decisions to make here. Getting good young defesemen is nearly impossible. This offseason I think teams have a real chance at acquiring one if they are willing to give up a good forward asset AND have the room to protect them in the draft. Buffalo checks both boxes. Saying this, I hope they keep Reinhart unless a top pairing guy is coming back.


And that's the rub. Nobody really knows how the Vegas draft will shake out. But I'd not be at all surprised if an Anaheim-type team that's close now & stands to lose a much more valuable asset than a team further away (such as the Sabres - does anybody really care who they lose other than Ullmark, and even he won't be universally be bemoaned if he's gone) ends up making a side deal to give up prospects to Vegas to keep an unprotected player protected.

That's the way past expansion drafts worked. Even if the league had a mechanism in place to prevent those deals, they'd be VERY hard to enforce. "We didn't want Vatannen, he's old & injured. Prove we took x ONLY because we also swapped pick y for prospects A&B."

Many here are hoping for the easy snag of a top D. I'd like to see that too, but don't have terribly high hopes for it unless the Sabres pay close to normal rate because the Sabres aren't the only team bidding for that/ those assets. And the top price will be better than the 2nd best offer by definition. (Well, duh. Thanks for that nugget Sherlock. :lol:)

Is there any reason to believe another team that wants Brodin (just as an example) will make so low an offer that the Sabres can scoop him up for a song? The price will likely be lower than a normal year, but it's doubtful it will truly be a buyer's market. (Again, hoping the Sabres can get the cheap upgrade. Just not expecting it.)

#11 FuhrFury

FuhrFury

    Fourth Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 07 June 2017 - 04:50 PM

Neither Reinhart nor Kane should be traded unless a definitive top-50 NHL defenseman is part of the return. And this is not very likely, even with the expansion draft complicating things.

 

Just think about what we sacrificed for each of these guys:

 

1. Reinhart: the entire 2013-14 tank season.

2. Kane: essentially 4 1st round picks, a high 2nd round pick, and Bogosian's awful contract.

 

Both have their flaws, but they are still major talents who have proven that they can produce at the pro level. Moreover, they are both very young and still have plenty of room to grow, especially with better coaching.

 

I'm inclined to keep talent rather than get rid of it. Enough with the stupid trade proposals.



#12 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 04:58 PM

Reinhart has room to grow. Kane is the player he will be.

#13 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:02 PM

Reinhart won't be going anywhere. Regardless of his lack of speed (and yes, it does show), if the right players surround him (as a center, not a RW'er) he would undoubtedly be a superstar. His vision on the ice, patience with the puck and overall positioning are a thing of beauty most nights.

Our centers aren't the problem. Our wingers are. We need that HUNGRY chemistry for Jack, Sam and Ryan.
Baptiste, Bailey, Nylander and Fasching will fill out a couple of those RW slots, and hopefully Okposo fully recovers (I more than suspect he will).
Where are the LW'ers going to come from?

And address the defense?
A daunting task for Boterill indeed.

#14 dudacek

dudacek

    ...browsing the internet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Listening to offers — eyes and ears

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:05 PM

MJD Has it correct: Sam's performance outstrips his reputation.
He still projects as a core piece and should only be traded for a core piece or projected core piece.
The kid needs a publicist.

Years three and four are typically the breakout years for young skill forwards.
I can't wait.

#15 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:18 PM

I'm calling 60pts for Reinhart this season

Edited by ShadowLiger, 07 June 2017 - 05:19 PM.


#16 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:25 PM

I'm calling 60pts for Reinhart this season


You can dial the number all you'd like, doesn't mean you'll get an answer. :P

This team needs to finish out the core rebuild. With the Expansion Draft, 8th over all and deals that Boterill can swing, we shall see come October where Reinharts numbers end up.

#17 We've

We've

    Self-appointed Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,816 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in your head

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:27 PM

Neither Reinhart nor Kane should be traded unless a definitive top-50 NHL defenseman is part of the return. And this is not very likely, even with the expansion draft complicating things.

 

Just think about what we sacrificed for each of these guys:

 

1. Reinhart: the entire 2013-14 tank season.

2. Kane: essentially 4 1st round picks, a high 2nd round pick, and Bogosian's awful contract.

 

Both have their flaws, but they are still major talents who have proven that they can produce at the pro level. Moreover, they are both very young and still have plenty of room to grow, especially with better coaching.

 

I'm inclined to keep talent rather than get rid of it. Enough with the stupid trade proposals.

 

+1 would read again.

 

Do you have a newsletter?  If so, how does one go about subscribing to said newsletter?  Is Paypal cool?



#18 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:37 PM

You can dial the number all you'd like, doesn't mean you'll get an answer. :P

This team needs to finish out the core rebuild. With the Expansion Draft, 8th over all and deals that Boterill can swing, we shall see come October where Reinharts numbers end up.

We will see come April where his numbers end up  :flirt:



#19 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:39 PM

Neither Reinhart nor Kane should be traded unless a definitive top-50 NHL defenseman is part of the return. And this is not very likely, even with the expansion draft complicating things.
 
Just think about what we sacrificed for each of these guys:
 
1. Reinhart: the entire 2013-14 tank season.
2. Kane: essentially 4 1st round picks, a high 2nd round pick, and Bogosian's awful contract.
 
Both have their flaws, but they are still major talents who have proven that they can produce at the pro level. Moreover, they are both very young and still have plenty of room to grow, especially with better coaching.
 
I'm inclined to keep talent rather than get rid of it. Enough with the stupid trade proposals.


Ah, but there in lay the Achilles heel. "Both have their flaws" you say.
Given the owners emphasis on "character", in conjunction with the subsequent coming contract of 1 Evander Kane (his demands, which whether acknowledged by fans or not are going to hefty), can you honestly attest that re-signing him is a foregone conclusion based merely on his 25 goal per season (averaging) with the Sabers? Do you not believe the new management team competent enough to address both what the owner desires as well as addressing team needs?

When you commit with such statements you close doors to other possibilities.

We will see come April where his numbers end up  :flirt:


Perhaps, but the start of the season line up will be a metric with which to gauge the new coach, whomever that may be.

#20 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:42 PM

The start of the season lineup doesn't gauge the coach but the gm.

#21 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:44 PM

The start of the season lineup doesn't gauge the coach but the gm.


The GM sets up the chess board, the coach moves the pieces, this is fact.

#22 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 05:59 PM

The GM sets up the chess board, the coach moves the pieces, this is fact.

Okay and in October the pieces will barely have moved anywhere. I'm not judging a brand new coach off of the start of the season lineup. By the end of January I think we will have a good gauge of the coach. A fact is that a newbie coach shouldn't be judged because of his opening lineup but by his record in April. 


Edited by ShadowLiger, 07 June 2017 - 06:00 PM.


#23 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 06:11 PM

Okay and in October the pieces will barely have moved anywhere. I'm not judging a brand new coach off of the start of the season lineup. By the end of January I think we will have a good gauge of the coach. A fact is that a newbie coach shouldn't be judged because of his opening lineup but by his record in April.

No one is judging anything. Merely pointing out that the moves made by the coach will be indicative of how Reinarts (or all players on the roster for that matter) will turn out. And yes, while it is true we don't have a clue as to the adjustments that may be made as injuries occur, the chemistry that may develop, the maturity of the youth that may be gained or the impact of rebounding veterans, one thing is a constant, coaching will be the pivotal factor in much of that, which, in turn, will equate to players stats.

#24 pi2000

pi2000

    The Church of Mouls... er Matthews

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,329 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 June 2017 - 06:17 PM

I think Reinhart is a keeper.    Not sure about a guy like Fasching or Girgensons tho... or Larsson... or Rodrigues.. 



#25 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 06:27 PM

No one is judging anything. Merely pointing out that the moves made by the coach will be indicative of how Reinarts (or all players on the roster for that matter) will turn out. And yes, while it is true we don't have a clue as to the adjustments that may be made as injuries occur, the chemistry that may develop, the maturity of the youth that may be gained or the impact of rebounding veterans, one thing is a constant, coaching will be the pivotal factor in much of that, which, in turn, will equate to players stats.

What moves made by the coach? Who he thinks should go to Rochester? Also you literally said metric with which to gauge... which is another way of saying judging. 

 

Perhaps, but the start of the season line up will be a metric with which to gauge the new coach, whomever that may be.

 

This is what you said and what I responded too. That is absolutely not a metric (preseason lineup changes) to gauge the new coach. 


Edited by ShadowLiger, 07 June 2017 - 06:28 PM.


#26 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 06:30 PM

What moves made by the coach? Who he thinks should go to Rochester? Also you literally said metric with which to gauge... which is another way of saying judging.



This is what you said and what I responded too. That is absolutely not the metric (preseason lineup changes) to gauge the new coach.

Come now, let's not play the "I have no idea what you're talking about" game. I've watched you post. You know. But, if you persist, look at the last coach's player usage as an example.

Edited by Scottysabres, 07 June 2017 - 06:30 PM.


#27 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 06:41 PM

Come now, let's not play the "I have no idea what you're talking about" game. I've watched you post. You know. But, if you persist, look at the last coach's player usage as an example.

I know what you are saying I am disagreeing. The lineup changes and the lines and that crap doesn't tell us much about a coach who will have limited knowledge of his players by that time (October). By January sure. Saying that start of the season, meaning first game lineup, will be a gauge of the new coach is IMPO not correct. Our coach at that stage might have had 2-3 preseason games with his full roster. All it will gauge is who the Gm and coach think is NHL ready and what the GM did to fix the team. The start of the season is not when you gauge the coach.


For example if on opening night he has Reinhart on Jack's wing I am not going to judge that the coach is right or wrong. Idk the new system, idk how players will work in it, idk if he will move lines often or not at all, idk if he wants the player to transition to another spot after learning the system. My point is I am not gauging the coach on anything for a bit. The first month of Bylsma I didn't think much of him but still had to give him a chance. Same goes for this. 



#28 Derrico

Derrico

    First Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,803 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greater Toronto Area

Posted 07 June 2017 - 06:41 PM

And that's the rub. Nobody really knows how the Vegas draft will shake out. But I'd not be at all surprised if an Anaheim-type team that's close now & stands to lose a much more valuable asset than a team further away (such as the Sabres - does anybody really care who they lose other than Ullmark, and even he won't be universally be bemoaned if he's gone) ends up making a side deal to give up prospects to Vegas to keep an unprotected player protected.

That's the way past expansion drafts worked. Even if the league had a mechanism in place to prevent those deals, they'd be VERY hard to enforce. "We didn't want Vatannen, he's old & injured. Prove we took x ONLY because we also swapped pick y for prospects A&B."

Many here are hoping for the easy snag of a top D. I'd like to see that too, but don't have terribly high hopes for it unless the Sabres pay close to normal rate because the Sabres aren't the only team bidding for that/ those assets. And the top price will be better than the 2nd best offer by definition. (Well, duh. Thanks for that nugget Sherlock. :lol:)

Is there any reason to believe another team that wants Brodin (just as an example) will make so low an offer that the Sabres can scoop him up for a song? The price will likely be lower than a normal year, but it's doubtful it will truly be a buyer's market. (Again, hoping the Sabres can get the cheap upgrade. Just not expecting it.)

Oh no, I agree the asking and purchase price will be high. To me reinhart is a huge ask if he's the one to go. But I think guys that were not even close to available may be for a high price.

As for the Vegas side deals, what's Mcphee big incentive other than a second round pick. Why wouldn't he think about it and then say nope in a week or two. Why would Vegas take a second round pick and a lesser player than a great young d? Is he afraid Anaheim or Minnesota or whoever will unload those guys before the draft? The d the ducks are going to have to expose are going to be worth way more than a second rounder so why would he let them off the hook?

Edited by Derrico, 07 June 2017 - 06:42 PM.


#29 Taro T

Taro T

    It leads you here despite your destination under the MW tonight.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,127 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 June 2017 - 06:54 PM

Oh no, I agree the asking and purchase price will be high. To me reinhart is a huge ask if he's the one to go. But I think guys that were not even close to available may be for a high price.
As for the Vegas side deals, what's Mcphee big incentive other than a second round pick. Why wouldn't he think about it and then say nope in a week or two. Why would Vegas take a second round pick and a lesser player than a great young d? Is he afraid Anaheim or Minnesota or whoever will unload those guys before the draft? The d the ducks are going to have to expose are going to be worth way more than a second rounder so why would he let them off the hook?


The big incentive would be to grab a blue chip prospect or 2 (no idea on who that would be, sorry) that will be coming into his/their own right about the time an expansion team is ready to stop playing like an expansion team.

It lets an Anaheim continue to play for the ST while realizing LV should be looking LT & @ setting up to be a powerhouse in more like 4 years down the road.

And all Anaheim or Minny lose in expansion in worst case is 1 D-man. They trade away a good one for a package of youth & then they end up losing 2 good D. Maybe the youth that Anaheim expects to be ready is worth losing 2 or Minny considers their playoff futility a call for a rebuild & losing 2 guys, but IMHO it isn't close to a given.

#30 Randall Flagg

Randall Flagg

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,998 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WNY

Posted 07 June 2017 - 06:56 PM

I think Reinhart is a keeper.    Not sure about a guy like Fasching or Girgensons tho... or Larsson... or Rodrigues.. 

Find some combo of those guys and picks and go get the unheralded defenseman that won't break out until after the trade happens. It's hard to do, but we're due for some pleasant surprises. 


The only guys I would trade Reinhart for are guys that those teams wouldn't give up. I would be able to stomach Reinhart for Hanifin but would probably try to add to get Slavin. 

Let's get wild - Reinhart & Ristolainen for Slavin & Aho. 



#31 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 06:59 PM

Find some combo of those guys and picks and go get the unheralded defenseman that won't break out until after the trade happens. It's hard to do, but we're due for some pleasant surprises. 


The only guys I would trade Reinhart for are guys that those teams wouldn't give up. I would be able to stomach Reinhart for Hanifin but would probably try to add to get Slavin. 

Let's get wild - Reinhart & Ristolainen for Slavin & Aho. 

That trade makes me want to barf...  I was shown to be wrong so i barf on myself. 

 


Edited by ShadowLiger, 07 June 2017 - 07:52 PM.


#32 TrueBlueGED

TrueBlueGED

    #fancystats

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,785 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 June 2017 - 07:01 PM

Neither Reinhart nor Kane should be traded unless a definitive top-50 NHL defenseman is part of the return. And this is not very likely, even with the expansion draft complicating things.

Just think about what we sacrificed for each of these guys:

1. Reinhart: the entire 2013-14 tank season.
2. Kane: essentially 4 1st round picks, a high 2nd round pick, and Bogosian's awful contract.

Both have their flaws, but they are still major talents who have proven that they can produce at the pro level. Moreover, they are both very young and still have plenty of room to grow, especially with better coaching.

I'm inclined to keep talent rather than get rid of it. Enough with the stupid trade proposals.


I really hope Botterill isn't using what the previous GM did/paid to get players to determine whether he keeps them long term. The only thing that should matter is if we're better keeping them than moving them.

#33 LikeEich

LikeEich

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 45 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 07:04 PM

I think Sam will be fine. I wouldn't trade him to Chicago. I'd trade him to Anaheim for Fowler or to Carolina for Hanifin and a pick but that's about it.


I'm with you on Sam. Unreal anyone would be willing to ship hum for anything less them a absolute stud Dman. Trade anyone else but him and Eichel and Risto. Kid is going to be a damn good hockey player for years and years.

I'm usually impressed by your player evaluations but I think you're a tad too hard for Fowler. I mean he's sensational sure, however he's streaky and seems to only play hard nearing a new contract. Hanifin has significantly more value then Fowler IMO. A contract would help even it out a bit but still would much much rather hanifin

#34 Randall Flagg

Randall Flagg

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,998 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WNY

Posted 07 June 2017 - 07:07 PM

That trade makes me want to barf... 

 

Why? We get a defender who's clearly better (Seriously, I'm working on a project and watching a bunch of Canes games and he's utterly phenomenal) and Aho just put up a 49 point rookie season at 19, compared to Samson's 43 point rookie season and 47 point sophomore one.


Edited by Randall Flagg, 07 June 2017 - 07:08 PM.


#35 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 07:12 PM

Convince me Slavin is better then Risto. 

 

As for Aho, I love him but I am not sold on selling out on Sam.



#36 LikeEich

LikeEich

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 45 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 07:16 PM

Why? We get a defender who's clearly better (Seriously, I'm working on a project and watching a bunch of Canes games and he's utterly phenomenal) and Aho just put up a 49 point rookie season at 19, compared to Samson's 43 point rookie season and 47 point sophomore one.


Let me know when the project is done. I'd like to see how Slavin is clearly better then Risto. I like Slavins game but Risto has all kinds of offensive potential

Convince me Slavin is better then Risto.

As for Aho, I love him but I am not sold on selling out on Sam.


Sorry my bad

#37 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 07:17 PM

I know what you are saying I am disagreeing. The lineup changes and the lines and that crap doesn't tell us much about a coach who will have limited knowledge of his players by that time (October). By January sure. Saying that start of the season, meaning first game lineup, will be a gauge of the new coach is IMPO not correct. Our coach at that stage might have had 2-3 preseason games with his full roster. All it will gauge is who the Gm and coach think is NHL ready and what the GM did to fix the team. The start of the season is not when you gauge the coach.For example if on opening night he has Reinhart on Jack's wing I am not going to judge that the coach is right or wrong. Idk the new system, idk how players will work in it, idk if he will move lines often or not at all, idk if he wants the player to transition to another spot after learning the system. My point is I am not gauging the coach on anything for a bit. The first month of Bylsma I didn't think much of him but still had to give him a chance. Same goes for this.


If the new coach has "limited" as you put it it, knowledge of the assets he has to work with........he shouldn't be coach.

That dog don't hunt.

#38 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 07:24 PM

Let me know when the project is done. I'd like to see how Slavin is clearly better then Risto. I like Slavins game but Risto has all kinds of offensive potential

Sorry my bad

?

 

If the new coach has "limited" as you put it it, knowledge of the assets he has to work with........he shouldn't be coach.

That dog don't hunt.

Sure it does. How much can a coach learn about his players who aren't in town until September if he gets the job at the en of June? He'll have some knowledge but he won't be able to figure out the chemistry of that team for a little. 



#39 Scottysabres

Scottysabres

    Top Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 426 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 07:25 PM

?
 

Sure it does. How much can a coach learn about his players who aren't in town until September if he gets the job at the en of June? He'll have some knowledge but he won't be able to figure out the chemistry of that team for a little.


Babcock says hi

#40 ShadowLiger

ShadowLiger

    Third Liner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 June 2017 - 07:32 PM

Babcock says hi

I do not expect any coach to walk in on day 1 and know all the stuff about his team, so I can't judge him on day one which is the original context of this conversation. Babcock sure as hell took some time. His record in October... 2-7... so my point still stands. November 8-6. Babcock still took a month to figure his team out. So "the start of the season line up will be a metric with which to gauge the new coach" is still IMPO wrong. 


Edited by ShadowLiger, 07 June 2017 - 07:34 PM.