kipwinger

Must be hard for you to admit that Edvinsson and Cossa are “better” than Eklund and Wallstedt.

So weird that the best player available for both our picks address serious organizational needs. What are the odds?

I don't understand this reference?

If I'm Chicago I'm going all-in on Eichel and Seth Jones. To the point that I'd move Dach, Boqvist, and my 1sts in 2021 and maybe 2022 to do it. They need the publicity and that would all but guarantee they'd start getting marquee free agents again.

Discussion for another day I suppose. I'm going to turn things back to hockey before everyone here blows their brains out.

All your facts are straight, but again, you're being dishonest. Do you really care? I doubt it. You've made a point over and over and over on this board about how much you don't give a sh*t about how other people feel. It's like your thing. I find it hard to believe that the "COVID is a hoax" and "fat people are disgusting" guy gives a s*** about other people's health in general, and mental health in particular. Which is fine, you're entitled to your own value system. But it's going to be pretty hard to convince me that in this one instance you have some sort of sympathy for other people that you don't extend in any other situation.

I'm a big Jordan Petterson fan. Just read his book not too long ago. And I'd agree that's he's not conservative by any modern definition. But that's kinda the point with guys like that. They're entirely defined by the extremes. I listen to a lot of Joe Rogan and he's a prime example too. He came out and endorsed Bernie Sanders for President during the primaries and the lefty dipsh*ts threw a fit because he was "too conservative" and therefore they didn't want his endorsement. Meanwhile Neocon dipsh*ts were outraged because he endorsed a "socialist". As far as the bolded, who cares? Lots of people use drugs, alcohol, and other self destructive means to cope with mental health issues and conservatives don't seem to give a s***. But suddenly they're super concerned about these people's health the minute it comes to this one issue. I don't buy it. Which is sad because if they just championed mental health in general it would easily encompass their positions on things like gun violence (it's the crazies not the guns) and become a winning issue for themn. But then they'd have to embrace more widespread access to healthcare (heaven forbid) and god knows they don't want that. And around and around we go.

I don't think there's anything wrong with informed conservative ideas. Certainly there are cases to be made for a number of conservative positions. The problem with guys like Ben is that they're super reactionary and eventually get to the point where they're just being opposite the Libs for the sake of being opposite the Libs. Conservative Dudes: You ain't a man unless you play sports, drink beer, chase tail, and kick ass! G a y Bois: Agreed, we definitely aren't men then. Conservative Dudes: Ummm...YES YOU ARE A MAN BY GOD!

I think my favorite thing about Ben Shapiro is how he castigates trans people for being non-scientific while wearing a yarmulke. Apparently calling yourself a woman because you wear wigs and skirts and s*** is patently absurd to a man who thinks that a bearded dude in the sky says you're one of his special people so long as you don't eat pork.

Lol, I just saw someone online saying she looks like a "hot" character from The Sims.

Never seen her. Pic?

Agreed. I always get a good laugh when Ben Shapiro gets on his soapbox and rants about who is or is not a man. Laughable coming from that guy.

Aren't you the one who said "Manlets aren't people" just the other day?

I bet he's a joy to be married to. Yeesh.

I love that in an effort to wrap his mind around why women might not like being thought of as "distractions" he likens them to dogs and children lol. This guy is SUCH a dumbf*ck.

Apparently low-end top of the lineup players are commanding a pretty hefty price tag these days. That's essentially a Mantha-level return for Risto. Neither of them are difference makers and that's a TON of assets to give up for non needle movers. Also probably explains why Eichel/Reinhart/Kuznetsov/Jones haven't moved yet. Imagine what those guys will cost.

Apparently Yzerman isn't the only GM that can make lopsided trades. Holy hell did Buffalo get a haul for Ristolainen.

I agree with most of this. I think a better maxim than "don't draft on position" would be "don't reach based on position". I'm not saying you should draft a 2nd round talent in the top ten just because you need a defenseman. That would be an absurd premise. But we're all very aware of talent tiers. So in this draft, for instance, a guy like Brandt Clark and a guy like Mason McTavish are generally as talented as one another. As such, it's not unreasonable to take the defenseman if that's what you need.

You're kinda right, but there's a bigger point here. I agree that BPA vs. "drafting for position" is generally the dichotomy that most dumbass fans subscribe to. What I'm saying is that since "best" isn't real each team comes up with their own ways of evaluating talent based on a number of different factors. The position a kid plays should definitely be a big part of that evaluation. Why wouldn't it? Nobody would say "don't draft for speed/size/shooting/passing. Draft the best player available" right? Because that would be dumb. Secondly, drafting for position actually makes tons of sense when you consider that all positions don't hold equal value. For instance, there are some GMs in baseball who almost exclusively draft pitchers at the top of the draft. Why? Pitchers are more valuable than right fielders (for example). So a top ranked pitching prospect has WAY more value than a fielder in the long term.

There's no such thing as "best to them". "Best" implies some objective standard for comparison which, as I've said, doesn't exist when it comes to hockey prospects. I agree though that they take the player they "like" the most. But that's a different thing. For example, if I said the Rolling Stones were the best rock band of all time because I "like" them the most you should probably roll your eyes and disregard pretty much everything I'm saying from that point on.

This is my yearly reminder that there's no such thing as "best player available". There are several reasons why. First, what makes a player "better"? Is being fast "better" than being strong? Is being a good shooter "better" than being a good passer? Is a really good track record "better" than a really high upside? There is no correct answer to any of these questions, because good hockey players come in all shapes and sizes. For example, was Steve Yzerman "better" than Nick Lidstrom? If they were both 17 year old draft eligibles and you had a crystal ball and knew the trajectory of both their careers it would still be IMPOSSIBLE to rank order and determine who's best. Secondly, there's no objective way of analyzing players to determine what "best" would be, even if it were possible to define it. That's what scouting combines try to do and they're universally panned for how inefficient they are. For example, there's not a single measurable way to evaluate a hockey player that someone like Alex Semin wouldn't max out on. He'd be in the 99th percentile of every single evaluation tool. Unfortunately he doesn't give a f*ck and never did, so he's jerking off in some Russian hellhole right now. Finally, teams aren't really interested in the "best player available". They're interested in the player who's going to be the "best NHLer" in a few years. In most instances the "best" players in any given draft are all undrafted overagers, and those guys rarely get selected. Teams don't want to draft the "best" player, they want to draft players with the greatest capacity to have "better" NHL careers than their draft class peers. So the next time you find yourself saying "BPA! BPA!" just take a second and consider what that actually means, because it's nonsense.

Leddy-Hronek Merrill-Seider Bean-Stetcher DK Do it Steve.

I think these types of trades are always available but GMs overvalue their assets because they fall in love with their young players/prospects/pics. Yzerman has no love for any of these bums.

Link to Yzerman's presser https://i.pinimg.com/originals/20/ca/0a/20ca0a89e7636c92d5c04a4bfea142e3.jpg

Yzerman addressing the media at 3:55. Youtube is streaming it live.