kipwinger

Member
  • Content count

    8,510
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    130

kipwinger last won the day on March 4

kipwinger had the most liked content!

About kipwinger

  • Rank
    Legend

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Washington, District of Columbia

Recent Profile Visitors

11,945 profile views
  1. Saw that coming.
  2. I'm just going to leave this here... http://www.stream2watch.cc/live-television/united-states/nbc-live-stream
  3. Lefty, you're being disingenuous here. People give you s*** because you said this over and over again about Franzen, to whom it never, ever, applied. He scored 59 pts. in his contract year, and then scored just as well or better over the next 5 years after the contract was signed. You incessantly harped on his "signing a big contract and then never playing up to it" while his points per game remained the same. The only thing that changed was the amount of time he missed due to injury. You're acting like you made a blanket statement and are now pretending to be vindicated. In reality, you said it repeatedly about one very specific case, and people gave you s*** because you were demonstrably wrong about it.
  4. Dude, that statement is WAY truer than you think it is. It happens to me ALL THE TIME.
  5. I do think that teams often promote home town heros to positions they haven't earned (yet), because they like the guys, want to take care of them, or think it will be popular. There's a reason why Sakic runs the Avs, Hull ran the Stars, Stevens was in charge in New Jersey, Lowe and McTavish in Edmonton, and so on. It does happen. But I don't think that means that other guys from outside the old boy network aren't getting chances either. Kyle Dubas, Ryan Martin, the aforementioned Chayka, are all on the rise right now in their respective organizations. I'm sure there are more if I dug in a little bit because analytics is on the rise and is ushering these guys into organizations. BUT, while these guys didn't play NHL hockey, they aren't exactly "average joes" either. They've all got years and years of training in things like statistical analysis, econometrics, organizational theory, etc. A regular fan lacks the experiential knowledge of the player, and has nothing close to the specialized knowledge these guys have. So it's unclear what equities they'd bring to bear on scouting (for example) beyond "well I watch a lot of hockey", which is true of all these guys too.
  6. This is my life. I spend about 14 hours a day doing policy analysis for the Federal Government, and you would be amazed how many goofballs think they know more about this stuff than they do, and want to argue with you about it. People don't realize the amount of information they AREN'T privy to because they (reasonably) spend all their time thinking about the information they ARE, and they begin to think they know a whole lot more than they do. Not their fault, you only know what you're capable of knowing. But there's likely quite a lot about playing NHL hockey that you need to have played at that level to understand. Information you and I aren't privy to because we can only speculate about it. For the casual fan, thinking about what makes a player successful in the NHL is almost entirely theoretical. And in some areas, like talent scouting in any industry, you need people with experiential knowledge IMO.
  7. I may have missed it but I'm curious who you like in the draft? Assuming we pick around the 7 spot that is.
  8. I don't think they wanted to create divisional rivalries as much as they wanted to utilize divisional rivalries to entice fans to watch the first couple rounds of the playoffs. People usually don't pay that much attention to other teams until the conference finals. I think having Pens/Caps (for example) earlier in the playoffs was just a way to get people to tune in to the earlier rounds.
  9. So you're in favor of bringing someone like Miller or Ott back or no? I'm confused. Because if something doesn't matter you can take two approaches. 1: Do it anyway, because it doesn't hurt anything. 2: Don't do it because there's no utility in doing so?
  10. The 13th forward spot IS A ROSTER SPOT. If I have to explain why having Ott as your 13th forward stops you from having Bertuzzi has your 13th forward then you're too obtuse to even bother with. Now you're advocating signing him only to then waive him? Brilliant. I'm done. You win.
  11. YES! Now you're catching on. Other teams, with better core players, might find our depth players more useful than we do. And since we don't have that kind of a team right now, it's more beneficial to us to play kids, see what we have in them, and move out veteran underachievers WHILE WE'RE REBUILDING OUR CORE. Not, as you seem to be advocating, bringing back aging veterans on the back end of their careers and leaving potential future Wings in the minors. It's really not that hard. I'll break it down for you really simply. Abby is a better player than Ott. So replace Ott with Abby on the fourth line. Then replace Abby with Svech (or Frk) on the 3rd line, since it's likely they'll produce better offense than he did. And have Bertuzzi as a spare forward, learning the pro game, and filling in during injuries. THAT would be an improvement because you've replaced two players with BETTER players in their given roles.
  12. Well, saying "we're not a better team with them" is not the same thing as saying they're "useless". They're NHL players. Obviously they aren't "useless". But we aren't a very good team with those guys. So maybe, just maybe, we should try to find different, better, players with which to rebuild our team and make it better. Again, novel idea.
  13. Yes. I would be 100% against bringing back either Vanek or Smith at this point. Sounds like you'd really like to just re-sign this year's team and give it another go eh? Smith, Vanek, and Ott. Good call. That worked wonders for us this year.
  14. You know which players I "like"? Good ones. Not washed up veterans. Our team is FULL of spare parts. Why sign another one? It would "hurt" because we have kids who are supposed to be part of our future. And to get them on the team we need roster spots. And you seem intent on giving one of those spots to a guy who obviously doesn't make our team better (we've already tried, remember?), and who definitely Isn't going to help us down the road. I"m not sure why this isn't clear. YES we absolutely should be "plugging" holes with kids to see which ones will work out. It worked with Jensen didn't it? MAYBE Frk or Bertuzzi won't pan out. That remains to be seen. But we aren't going to know whether they will or won't if they don't get the opportunity. We ALREADY KNOW that we're not a better team with Steve Ott. It's not like he's an unknown quantity.
  15. You're right. I have a personal vendetta against a man I've never met. That makes WAY more sense than that I don't see the point in needlessly signing an aging free agent who isn't noticeably better (or better at all) than anyone currently on our team and whose presence on the roster would prohibit a younger player from gaining much needed NHL development. Good thinking. I think it's hilarious that a guy who said "Stevie O is the man" is accusing me of having a personal bias. Nice try.