kipwinger

I don't mind the guy, I just wouldn't make a point of targeting him in any trades with Edmonton because I think our LHD prospects are as good or better. I'm super high on Shai Buium too. Another Yzerman pick that had me scratching my head. Now he's playing like a stud in the NCAA and I'm sold. This is probably the right time to admit how wrong I was about promoting Kris Draper to Director of Amateur Scouting. I thought it was baseless nepotism but holy hell has our drafting improved in the last three years.

I don't see that in Broberg. And I think you're undervaluing certainly qualities in our prospects that you're exaulting in Broberg. Both Johansson and Wallinder are A+ skaters too, and both have shown more offense than Broberg during their respective stints in the SHL. Additionally, unlike Wallinder and Broberg, Johansson has the added advantage of being really good defensively too. Remember this from last year? Yeah, Johansson is a stud. Know who's somewhere in that mass of players who AREN'T as good as Seider and Johansson? Broberg.

Broberg is not exactly performing well at the NHL level. He's got 1 point in 8 games, has been on the ice for 8 goals against. FWIW Cholowski was actually BETTER in his first 8 NHL games, so your cautionary tale is apt (but probably not for the reasons you mentioned it). Everything notable Broberg's done to date has been in the SHL and AHL, and we have have prospects at those levels who have performed as well or better than he has. Johansson significantly outperformed Broberg in the SHL last year (at the same age) and Edvinsson and Wallinder are both currently outperforming Broberg's best SHL season at a younger age. There's really no reason to think he's a better player than any of those guys except that he was drafted higher and is in the NHL sooner. Otherwise he's never outperformed them at any level. He's probably better than Sebrango, Viro, and McIsaac though. Probably not better than Buium, though that remains to be seen.

If I drank pop I'd obviously prefer Faygo, but because I have no interest in being morbidly obese I abstain. It's a free country though, so enjoy your diabetes water.

It's "Secretary a-State" you f*cking foreigner.

They've been speaking French in Quebec since before there was even a "Canada". So I'm gonna go ahead and say it's a native tongue even if it isn't the official national language. Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Language_Act_(Quebec)

Sure, but they're still native French speakers. I don't think it's unreasonable to want to hear about your team in your native tongue. Or at least I can understand the preference. Do I think the world would end if the Habs fired an English speaking GM/Coach? No. But I understand why they don't, and I'm sure their fans appreciate it as well.

The other thing that's lost in this conversation is that many teams have used this same management structure in the past when trying to slowly integrate an inexperienced GM. Off the top of my head, Columbus did it with Davison/Kekalainen, Toronto did it with Lamorello/Dubas, New York did it with Davidson/Gorton, Vegas did with with McPhee/McCrimmon, and Detroit with Devellano/Holland. The interesting part will be the division of labor between the two. Traditionally the President runs the broader organization while the GM manages the roster, negotiates contracts, and runs the draft. But that's not always the case. There was a cool article in The Athletic in the wake of the Kotkaniemi offer sheet that showed the extent to which Don Waddell has his hand in everything from hockey decisions, to social media, to public relations. It's easy to see a scenario where all business decisions were made by the French speaking GM, and hockey decisions where made by the President. It would allow Montreal to recruit from a much broader pool of French speaking executives without having their hockey related inexperience negatively impact the team.

Irrespective of whether or not it's a woman, I actually understand and agree with Montreal's position on the GM/coach speaking French. I'd be SUPER annoyed if the Red Wings GM or coach didn't speak English. Imagine not being able to watch pre/post game interviews, draft day thoughts/analysis, lineup decisions, or any other forums where key information is communicated to fans, without the use of a translator. It definitely makes the job of finding good talent harder for the Canadiens, but I get why they do it.

Again, I'm not saying what's correct or not (because I don't know). I just thought your suggestion was a bit skewed because the idea is not to hire a woman regardless of qualifications but rather to hire a qualified women, according to proponents of the thinking (which seems to include Molson). FWIW NFL teams have been flirting with this same idea vis-a-vis Condoleeza Rice for years. One potential pitfall of this strategy, at least when it comes to pro sports management, is that female managers are generally viewed as being more difficult to work with than their male counterparts. Not hard to see how that perception could negatively impact things like contract negotiations or GM/Coach relationships, though that's just one (of many) things to consider when making a decision like this.

If we are being fair, I think the rationale goes something like this: There are a bunch of very qualified people for the job, some of whom are female. Proponents of this thinking suggest that hiring a qualified female might yield additional benefits because research seems to suggest that management teams with diverse points of view perform better in some areas than less diverse management teams because women (minorities, LGBTQ, etc.) have different experiences, points of view, problem solving and social skills which may prove beneficial for the team. So I guess the question would be: Is there something specific about the female experience that would give a qualified female candidate an additional (and beneficial) dynamic which could improve team performance? Traditionally the thinking in pro sports has been the exact opposite; that because women cannot and have not played men's sports they're missing some vital experiential information which is essential for the job. I don't know who's right, but I don't think it's as simple as saying it's a "diversity hire".

Admittedly I'm basing this entirely off what I've heard/read from Edmonton folks and the fact that the SHL is generally considered a better league than the AHL. If you think he's better I'll take your word for it, but if he's generally in the same ballpark as Johanson/Wallinder/Buium then I don't know why we'd bother. It's not really a need and we'd end up just trading one of those guys for a center anyway since they can't ALL play for the big club at the same time.

I'd rather have a 1st than Broberg. He'd be 3rd or 4th on our LHD depth chart, and I recall reading recently that Edmonton is less than enthused by him so far. We need centers. I really don't want any premium assets that aren't centers or picks we can use on centers. We're absolutely stacked at LHD.

I know, but I never get tired of being right about stuff.

CRAZY! Veleno scores off the wing. Who saw that coming?!?

He’s basically Dekeyser without the injuries at this point. I’m okay with that.

Here’s a crazy thought regarding our defense, both Oliver Kylington and Shane Gostisbehere were on waivers a year ago and could have been on our team for the costs of their contracts. Michael Del Zotto is now, would be a solid addition to the left side given what we have.

No Vrana?

For sure, you'd have no know he was interested before you pulled the trigger but considering he's from Ontario and Toronto can't afford him and Buffalo sucks you'd have to think we'd have a pretty good shot.

Or flip one of the 1st and prospect for Bo Horvat? Guarantee Vancouver shops him before the draft.

Definitely. I like the trade and would do it. It's good value. Holland would be banking on a deep run to make that 1st worth it, but I think Edmonton bows out early again.

In terms of value that trade seems about right. We dont really have any right shot defenders in the pipeline though, so losing Hronek (especially given how bad our defense is) would be a tough pill to swallow.

I have noticed some cooling of jets as far as Chychrun goes. Though I would note that getting torched playing in Arizona and getting torched playing in Washington probably have very different root causes. But a year or two ago Chychrun was an analytics darling and people were laughing Ken Holland out of the building for that trade. Now I think he and Hronek have leveled out a bit.

The calculus really isn't that complicated. NHL coaches HATE getting scored on. They talk about it all the time. How many times have you heard coaches say something like "you can't outscore your mistakes" or "If you're bad defensively you have to score a lot to balance it out" or the like? Even the best defensemen rarely score enough to warrant a spot on the lineup if they're getting torched all the time. Now imagine how much worse it is for a depth defenseman like Cholo? He played 4 games, was on the ice for 4 goals against, and at 13 mins a night and no special teams play he has almost no chance of making up for those points.

Clean hit. I think Seider's head hit the glass from the force. I'm sure he's fine. This hit, on the other hand...