Buppy

This is what I meant in saying you don't understand reality and blow things out of proportion. While I'm certain you won't get it, I'll explain some things anyway on the off chance that someone else reading can benefit. First, you acknowledge that you don't have problem with anything that's been done so far, but you're still bitching about Holland, about things that haven't even happened. Much like last year when you were calling Holland an idiot because someone else predicted he might do something, even though that thing (drafting Pettersson) would have been a solid move. Secondly, the basic premise that the Wings need to change any philosophy is wrong. But that debate could be a whole thread by itself, so I won't go any further. Then there's the specifics of your hypothetical manual, which in reality are simply the ways things work in the NHL. It's all but literally impossible to do things any different: College and European UFAs are signed at this time of year, because this is the time of year when they become available. Aside from maybe a few breakout college stars (and since there are so few of those, almost every team misses out almost every year) most of these players are mostly unknown, because if they weren't they would have been drafted and already signed, so thus unavailable. Most of these players, being low-end prospects, will never make it to the NHL, some not even the AHL. But you can't criticize Holland for that. There aren't enough high-end prospects available to do things any different. And you're dead wrong about the "gets buried, never make it and split after their contract" stuff. Take your own advice and go back and look at our history. Coreau, Glendening, Campbell, Hicketts, Russo, Renouf, Sulak...all still with the organization, almost all got at least a couple games in the NHL. Hicketts and Sulak might still become full-timers. Machovsky is the only one who fits your profile. (You have a tendency to exaggerate things that happen once, or even not at all...like your "typical Holland pick" thing. Wait, do YOU have a manual?) Finally, you selectively ignore things that don't fit your anti-Holland narrative. Yes, he's said we need to get bigger and tougher to play against, among other things. Take a look at our recent draft history and try to tell me that size hasn't been a priority. Why would you think drafting one smaller defenseman would negate all the size we have drafted recently? Despite what I suspect is your strong desire to classify Hughes/Boqvist as "European style", they probably have a lot more in common with Bouchard/Dobson than they have differences. Neither of the bigger guys project as particularly physical players. Not likely to be punishing guys in the corners or bulldozing the crease. Nor, if the more in-depth scouting reports are to be believed, should we think of Boqvist and Hughes as defensive liabilities. Basically, your entire "metaphor" boils down to your typical "Boo, Holland! Because stuff!" ridiculous freakout. The one and only page in your book.

Has there been a decision on Sambrook? I know he's not yet signed, and only a week left, but haven't seen anything definite. That said, I wouldn't care too much either way. 40 pts in the OHL isn't anything to get excited about, and he didn't improve (maybe even regressed a little) from last year.

Everyone understands it. We're just mocking it because it's stupid.... I bet he's going to draft a bunch of kids in June, just like always does. ...See.

He does a radio show with Ken Kal, which is likely the extent of his "insider"-ness. I wouldn't call him "just some schmuck", but I wouldn't put all that much stock into the exclusion of Bouchard, if that's what you're asking. You're just going to keep pushing this 'Hughes isn't a worthy choice' thing, aren't you. I bet by the middle of June he's going to be "a typical Holland off-the-board pick".

It isn't true. The Wings did not sign a player to an NHL contract, pay a $92,500 signing bonus plus $70,000 minor league salary, and bring him over from Europe just to f*** with the guy and not play him. Machovsky is an idiot. Probably why he didn't get more games. As has already been said, the Wings want to have 5 goalies, plus one usually on a minor league deal for Toledo. That's exactly what they did last year. The guy ******* about it and now we're actually going to entertain the idea that it was a mistake to not sign someone s***tier than McCollum to give this diva less competition. So he had to start in Toledo. Cry less and work more. That's what Coreau did and a few years later he was starting the Centennial Classic. He could possibly be our backup next season. Several NHL goalies spent time in the ECHL. Jonathan Quick spent most of his first pro year in the ECHL, but instead of crying and going home, he stuck it out then won a couple Stanley Cups. Machovsky will never sniff the NHL. He's the last person Rybar should be taking advice from.

Just imagine what it would have won with an LED roof. Nobel prize for buildings, I bet.

Lol. Quinton isn't Latin for five. I'll just leave it at that.

You don't need to keep providing examples of your inability to recognize reality. We're all well aware. I would explain some of the flaws in your logic, but I don't want to waste my time. You wouldn't get it.

So it's a book about you ignoring reality and blowing things way out of proportion? Christ, I hope you never print that book out. There aren't enough trees on the planet to produce that much paper.

Revisionist history. Fluery has been around average for his whole career. No GM in the league would protect a 33yo backup with a .912 career save%, .908 in the playoffs, over a 23yo with a .925/.928 who had just won them a second Cup in as many tries. Maybe if Fluery had been an actual star in the past (though still doubtful), but he wasn't. The only ones who would have protected him are you, his mom, and around 50% of a large enough group of chickens.

Fleury is the definition of a cast-off. Older, expensive, relegated to backup, never been much more than average and coming off a sub-par season. Good playoff that year but still finished as a backup and had a history of weak playoffs before that. Barely anything more than Howard. Pens couldn't afford him, even if they had wanted to keep him. (And they may easily have wanted to dump him even without the cap to worry about). The only reason he was "known" to be a Vegas pick is because the trade was known. The only reason it only cost a 2nd to get Vegas to pick him is because Pitt's other options weren't that good either. All in all a very similar situation to the one that put Vanbiesbrouck in Florida. Marchessault and Smith, Perron, and probably Neal, were money saving moves. Theodore and Karlsson were at least partially motivated by money. All of them might have still happened under the old rules. (Albeit Theodore and Karlsson highly unlikely.) Haula, Tuch, Schmidt, McNabb, Miller, Sbisa, and Engelland probably don't happen under the old rules, but all those guys (and Karlsson) were 4th line/3rd pair players. Tuch and Theodore weren't even full-time NHL players yet. While it's true that things almost certainly wouldn't have turned out as well with the old rules, suggesting that they were guaranteed (or even at all likely) to have any notable success is what's ridiculous. If all their selections had performed at the levels they had prior to this year, Vegas would have finished near the bottom of the league, and no one would have been at all surprised or considered them a failure.

They are a roster of cast-offs.

Fluke. Half the team having career/breakout years. I mostly expect they'll regress next year, and wouldn't be at all surprised if they missed the playoffs. Even if you assume that all the players are really as good as they've performed this season, it's still a flukey amount of luck to have them all suddenly "get it" at the same time. No doubt Gallant is a good coach who well deserves the Adams, and a great deal of credit, but only so much. In fairness to Chaps, many of those deals wouldn't have been made if teams had more protection slots. Take away a few of Schmidt, Miller, Sbisa, Haula, Tuch, Perron, Neal, Karlsson, McNabb, Theodore, or Fluery...hardly a stretch to think Vegas would be drastically worse under the previous expansion format. Florida is the only team that looks particularly bad. Some look bad in hindsight, but were reasonable enough. Giving up a 1st and 2nd to get rid of Clarkson is pretty steep (easy to say when it's not my $15 million), but Karlsson had 18g, 50p in 180+ games. No good reason to think he'd be any major loss, and if he'd had another 8g, 25p season it would look like a decent deal to dump some dead weight and protect Anderson. Haula was nothing special either. Tuch was a good prospect, but not a huge price to protect Dumba. Anaheim was going to lose a good youngish defenseman no matter what, and it could be argued that all of Fowler, Lindholm, Vatanen, and Manson were as good as Theodore this year. Theodore allowed them to get rid of Stoner. Worth it or not is debatable, but with the defense the Ducks have I don't think they'll miss him too much.

Train wreck of an AHL season and did next to nothing in his stint with the Wings. What could possibly make you think "he'd be overvalued around the league right now"? I'd expect the exact opposite if anything. Even if there is something there to see that would lead you to the conclusion that he won't be any good, I'm sure all the scouts around the league have seen it as well. They've probably seen more of him than you have.

I've always been a fan of Oregon. I tried to go there once but my wagon tongue broke, a thief stole my oxen, and I died of dysentery.

Lowest ice-time of his career this year, actually, but given the state of the team I'm inclined to agree he'd be in no hurry to leave. That said, Winnipeg could get in some cap trouble shortly, with Hellebuyck, Trouba, Morrisey, Stastny (assuming they want to keep him), Wheeler, Laine, Connor, and Myers all due in the next two summers. On the off chance he did want to leave, he likely wouldn't cost all that much. I don't think AA would be of much interest to them though. They'd likely want the #6, which I wouldn't do, and I'm not sure we have anyone they'd want. Maybe Cholo; I don't know what they think of their defense prospects. Maybe Dekeyser if we retained some salary. Add the Vegas pick plus a throw-away player for optics. He regressed a bit this year after looking like he was breaking out last year, and he's starting to look injury-prone, so it's probably the best time to trade for him. But again, that's all on the assumption that he wants to leave. I'd assume if he's traded it would be at the deadline, and they'd be looking for a package similar to what they got for Yandle. Significant risk for a pending UFA, but asset-wise would probably be a good deal. 2019 2nd, 2020 1st (lottery protected), good prospect, maybe a roster filler like Jensen if they need one. Probably throw some conditions in there for resigning him. I think I'd rather hope he'd go to a contender who couldn't resign him, and go after him as a FA, but the trade idea would be worth a look.

I'll save everyone else the trouble of reading the article: He forgot to include an off-season game plan in his off-season game plan article, instead choosing to sing the same "bad contracts" song we've heard 62 million times. Said "something something something shot differentials, something something something complete" a few times, and concluded with a projected roster where we apparently traded AA for OEL and signed a couple nobody forwards for the 4th line/press box. I had thought TSN had better standards.

Stop supporting racism. Whitewashed Charlie. Pygmy slavery. Glorification of white privilege. Not to mention Dahl's anti-semetism and body-shaming. SMH

Two more saves than Osgood made in the entire '98 Finals series against Washington. Not a bad night.

It's been updated recently. Yesterday it was indeed 3 goalies. But yesterday they didn't even have the correct order for the 2nd-7th rounds. I don't think it's even a real mock draft. Just a ranking of players, with picks based on that regardless of any consideration of the team. https://www.draftsite.com/nhl/mock-draft/2018/v19/

Pope is a winger. Most likely never going to amount to anything, but supposedly has a "very good shot" and decent size. Not a very good skater it seems. Still, nothing to complain about. I would assume anyone complaining is thinking he's a free agent being signed for the Wings rather than just a normal draft pick signing his ELC.

While it's maybe not common enough to draw a definite conclusion (and there will always be exceptions in any case), typically if a team is trading a top-10 pick they're going to want proven talent in return, not a pile of lower picks and prospects. Next year's 1st is probably more realistic, since it should be similar level just a year later. Though I wouldn't add even the Vegas pick or Nyquist alone, much less both. Nor any top prospects. Frk and a 3rd, and put some conditions on the 1st next year.

Nope. Several rankings list Hughes ahead of some or all of the other 2nd-tier defenders. "All the available data" doesn't say anything particularly conclusive, and there are good reasons to value all four of those kids (as well as the few top wingers who will be available). Also, considering that Holland has only ever drafted two Michigan natives, and only a few more from (or committed to) Michigan schools, assuming any kind of Michigan bias would be foolish.

More than ever because now in addition to having probably the highest skill he adds the benefit of making a crazy person go berserk, which is fun to watch. I don't care if you ( or anyone) want to rank one of the others ahead of him. I've been vacillating quite a bit myself. I don't even really have a problem with considering the concussions as something of a tie-breaker. However, again. The data (what there is available at least) just doesn't seem to support the idea that having a concussion history is some major career risk. Higher than really low is still really low.

Hey, I said I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. People in general are bad at risk assessment, certainly no surprise that you would be as well. (Although, you would have to be especially terrible if you still wouldn't want to take a top-5 talent in the 2nd round, unless there was some other contributing factor...) You gave a list of like 18 people, going back to the 90s. Probably another handful since that was published. So maybe slightly more than 1/year. Hell, call it 2. Still a very small risk. There's a bigger chance of him (or any of the others) just being a bust than there is of future concussion issues. I want Boqvist more than ever now.