krsmith17

There's no one doing "mental gymnastics" here. This is just you, once again, making something out of nothing. I'll ask you one simple question though... Do you honestly believe Larkin would have made those comment regarding the All-Star game if he had an extra 15-20 points on the season? I don't. Larkin is harder on himself than anyone, and he knows he hasn't been near good enough offensively this season. He's down on himself, and doesn't want to win a popularity contest to go to an event that he feels he doesn't deserve, this season. I respect the hell out of that.

Mastrosimone was cut from team USA. Regula was cut as well...

So far Yzerman has traded a 4th round pick for a 24 year old bottom six winger, a 25 year old depth winger for a 31 year old depth defenseman, a 19 year old defensive prospect for a 23 year old middle (bottom) six winger, a 24 year old bottom six winger for a 23 year old middle six winger, a 22 year old depth defenseman for a 24 year old depth goaltender, a 24 year old depth defenseman for a 23 year old depth defenseman... Not a single one of those trades have displayed "the opposite" of an old boys club mentality... It's not like he's trading any of the 30+ year old vets for picks or prospects. The ONLY move Yzerman has made that displayed that he doesn't favor the old vets, is waiving Ericsson. 95% of Red Wings fans loved that move, and for good reason. I think the same would have been the case if he elected to waive Howard over Comrie, or if he were to waive Nielsen in favor of a Turgeon. It shows a commitment to a youth movement, and gives young guys an opportunity to show they might not suck, over an old guy we know sucks... Another thing I said was very obvious when Yzerman elected not to bring Comrie back was that he clearly doesn't see any value in him going forward. Does that mean that he's right? No, not necessarily. Could he be right? Absolutely. However, there's nothing you can say that will convince me that not bringing Comrie back as a free asset for Grand Rapids was the right decision, regardless how this situation plays out. We lack goaltending depth. At worst, Comrie is a solid depth goaltender. At best, Comrie could pull a Jordan Bennington and become a starter for a few seasons, and maybe even help us go on a run in the playoffs. He likely falls somewhere in between, but again, even that's worth acquiring for free... I would have kept Comrie over Howard. In the end, it likely won't matter much. But it might... Anyway, I've said all I will say on this now. I've made my point very clear. As did you. You're just asking the same dumb questions over and over again, and I'm just repeating myself over and over again... Regarding the common cold. I've never taken more than a day or two (max) off work due to a cold. Anyone that needs three plus days off for a cold are just milking it... It's entirely possible that Larkin felt a cold coming on in Winnipeg, got it really bad later that night, had it at it's worst the next day and a half, and started feeling a little better the following day. Still had cold symptoms which is why he was a game time decision, and decided to man up and play through it. He did, so good on him. Or you know, he could have been out all night after the game in Winnipeg drinking and doing coke, because he's a young, rich, white guy...

One of the first things I said regarding that whole situation is that Yzerman might prefer to keep Howard because of the old boys club mentality that so many NHL general managers have. Howard has been around for years, and it would be a disservice to just throw him away (waive him) with (likely) only a few months left of his career. That doesn't make it the right decision though. I always try to understand why coaches / management make decisions they do. That doesn't mean they always make sense from a fan perspective. Hronek for McIlrath is a bit of a different scenario. How about the Nielsen for Turgeon one I brought up... You might try to wrap your head around why Yzerman would waive an old vet in favor of a young kid, and you'd likely even come up with some plausible reasons he might have made that decision. But you wouldn't "know" why he did it. You've seriously never had a 24 hour cold? I find that hard to believe... Have you also never gone to work with a bit of a cold? Ah, Twitter rumor. Makes sense now...

How the f*** would I know or even care why Yzerman didn't keep Comrie? Any other dumb questions? Yeah, completely fair to assume Larkin was out on a bender, and that's why he was a game time decision the following night. Definitely wasn't a cold or anything... I've yet to see anything on Larkin doing coke, other than from you on here. Where did you even come up with that one?... And yeah, to say that Larkin is lazy because he'd rather not be voted in to a dumb All-Star game is completely fair...

Would I (as a GM of a rebuilding team) keep a young player with potential over an old player that is likely to retire after this season? Yes. Every. Single. Time... Is that saying that I think that player will ever become a significant piece? No. It's saying that he could. Maybe you can ask me that question again for the 10th time. That would be fun... "Came at you"... LOL Okay... "Coming in with a chip on my shoulder"... Maybe the "chip on my shoulder" was about all the nonsense you've been spewing about Larkin the past couple weeks, and has nothing to do with our dumb debate about Comrie...

Saarijarvi sucks and Regula may never play a game in the NHL. I'd make both trades even knowing how this past month has played out. No, I came into a discussion saying your trade proposal was dumb. You've been really down on Larkin for the past few weeks. Last year you wouldn't have suggested such a dumb trade. Next year you will agree in hindsight it would have been a dumb trade. If you don't care, why are you still bitching and moaning about it? I never said homophobia doesn't exist. I'm saying that being *** wouldn't effect a player the same way hard drugs would...

No it's not "how these things work". Every trade Yzerman has made have been low risk, potential high reward. They weren't "bad decisions", just because they didn't work out. Obvious attitude? Yeah, okay... I've contributed to the discussion. Larkin isn't being traded for a subpar return. Your trade proposal was subpar. Dabura's was not. That hurt your feelings = butthurt. I guess I'm very naive to think that Larkin or any player would be the same person and player if they were *** or straight...

Are you for real? How the f*** would being *** effect a players career in 2020?

So I guess that makes you really "butthurt"? Me: "Agree to disagree". You: "No, I want to continue this conversation that is going nowhere, because I can't accept that you don't agree with everything I say"... You think those trades were bad in hindsight. You said both trades were smart at the time. Now that they haven't worked out, you say they were bad decisions. Yes, because I disagreed with you. You don't like that...

No motivation at all, but sure, keep telling yourself this is a carryover from a previous conversation... It's not, and I'm not "butthurt" over said conversation. I think your constant digging is annoying as s***. You can't accept that we have differing opinions. You can't accept that an NHL manager / coach can make a bad decision. Continue digging... Sorry for "butting in" on yours and Dabura's private conversation. I was voicing my opinion that it would be dumb to trade a 1C for a much older 3C and 3D... My bad...

Yeah, the production still isn't quite where I'd like to see it, but he created scoring opportunities and was robbed point blank on several occasions. And like you mentioned, was a beast defensively, and played huge minutes in all situations. Overall, a really good tournament for Veleno. McIsaac played well too. I think he'll be a solid bottom four defenseman that can play physical, block shots and kill penalties. Seider was an absolute beast, and one of the best defensemen in the entire tournament in my opinion. I don't think there's much question he'll be a very good top pairing defenseman. The question is, will he be a legit number one (top 20 in the league)?

Do you think he's lazy? Do you think he does drugs? I'm really confused as to what your issue is... Another dumb conversation that I'm done with...

Why should this be considered a bad thing though? The All-Star game is a f***ing joke. You've even said so yourself. I'm not at all shocked that Larkin, or any other player would rather do literally anything, than go to that watered down, joke of an event. The only thing I'm a little surprised about is Larkin actually saying it to the media. I applaud him for speaking his mind though, and not being a robot, like 99% of the other NHL players. Larkin is having a down year (stats wise), so I don't really blame him for not wanting to attend the "all-star" game, knowing there are so many more deserving players this season.

The only one overreacting and bringing the drama is you. This was not a personal attack, and I did not "jump down your throat"... I simply disagreed with your trade proposal. Get over it. You always try to make things something they're not. I never said Larkin should not be criticized. Go ahead, criticize away, if that's what helps you get through this painful season, watching the worst iteration of the Red Wings most of us have ever seen...

No, they're not in their prime yet. The other two are past their prime. See the difference?... So you weren't serious about him being lazy after saying it multiple times, bashing him for not wanting to attend a dumb all-star game, and apparently doing drugs? Ok... Flying in pretty butthurt? Yeah, ok... The bold, I agree with. So why suggest trading him for something really not-great?

kip was s***ing on team Canada's leadership group, Hayton and Veleno in particular. They were both great on the ice, and in the dressing room (according to teammates). Canada won the gold medal on the backs of those bad leaders.

I didn't say he wouldn't want a roster player. I'm saying he would definitely want players in their prime, not soon-to-be 30 year old veterans... I never said or implied that you want to trade Larkin, but if we do, we're not going to sell low on him. Your package would be selling low on him. "Larkin is lazy and he sucks" = "slightest critique". Me disagreeing with you = "overreaction". Got it...

23 year old 1C for 28 year old 3C and 29 year old 3D + a couple picks... Yeah, no thanks... Dabura's package is much closer to what Yzerman would be looking for. That's if he were trading him. Larkin isn't getting traded though, no matter how "lazy" you think he is, or how many drugs you think he does... The lazy thing couldn't be further from the truth, and the drugs thing is an unsubstantiated rumor...

Terrible leadership...

This Turgeon over Nielsen thing was next season, and yes I think Turgeon, or literally any other player in Grand Rapids, should make the team over Nielsen next season. And also yes, if it were to happen sooner than next season, I would be happy as well. Nielsen f***ing blows. Get over it. Yes, I think Comrie should have been given an opportunity over Howard. I'm not sure if waiving Howard would have been the best thing to do, but maybe carry three goaltenders for a while. We should be / will be riding Bernier for the most part anyway. Giving a 24 year old a longer look over a soon to be retired 35 year old, would have been a smart move. I don't f***ing know why Yzerman disagrees with me... It's funny that you think just because management or coaches do something, it's automatically the right move. I'm not going to pretend to be smarter than Yzerman or Holland or Blashill or Babcock, but they have all made many mistakes, and they will all make many more. This may prove to be a mistake, or it may prove to be a nothing move. Now that I've repeated myself for the 10th time, want to drop it? We disagree. We're never going to agree on this. Who gives a f***? Also, Happy New Year!

I've responded countless times and you keep asking the same dumb questions. Nothing you're saying is making any sense. The conversation is dumb. You're dumb for wanting to continue it. Yzerman is not dumb for waiving Comrie.

Such a dumb conversation, and I can't believe I'm actually taking your bait... Again, I can disagree with moves a general manager or coach make, without thinking he's an idiot. Not sure why that's so difficult for you to comprehend... This team is tanking. Yzerman is allowing the tank to happen. Does that make him an idiot? Not at all. It's smart. He's said from day one, it's going to take time. He's made some very smart low-risk moves. I expect that to continue into the summer, but I also wouldn't be shocked to see a couple shake ups before next season. Nielsen buyout should be at the top of that list. Anyway, as fun as this has been, I'm done...

What the f*** are you talking about? I'm not back peddling at all. Yes, I'd prefer to play Turgeon over Nielsen. What's your point? Where did I once say Yzerman is an idiot for waiving Comrie? I said right from the beginning that it probably wouldn't matter much in the end, but it was a confusing move. So I have to think Yzerman is (or you are) an idiot if he (you) wouldn't manage a team exactly like I would? I've said countless times that Nielsen has been one of the worst forwards in the league *regardless of contract*. So no, I'm not "the new leftwinger. Can't see past a contract to the actual value of the player." Nielsen has zero value.