Neomaxizoomdweebie

18..51..it doesn't change anything. Your point still holds true. You're not wrong about Tkachuk, I just refuse to agree with you because of my blinding dislike for the guy.

It's that kind of thinking that got us into this mess!!!!!!!!!

Which I am fine with. That's not how I see Matt Tkachuk play tho. Take the Wit incident. He waited until Wit stepped off the ice to hit him with his stick knowing (or expecting) that Wit wouldn't/couldn't do anything about it (without getting suspended anyway). And where was he when Wit turned around and came back on the ice? Was he dropping his gloves and saying "Let's go"? No. He had an official and another player between them as he continued to bark at Witkowski. That's cowardice. Do you think he would do that on the ice to a player like Wit knowing that he would get the snot beat out of him for it? I don't. He's not a power forward at all like his father, because Keith would have dropped the gloves and at least held his own. Guys like Matt Tkachuk jab, poke, slash, and trash talk players who lack any fighting skills and then run away from the guys who can take them. I would rather have guys like Daniel Tkaczuk on this team (which we already do unfortunately) than Matthew any day. Would love to see Tkachuk on the wrong end of this:

I wouldn't mind moving the Canes to QC. They never should have been moved from Hartford in the first place IMO. That said, I only see one of either Carolina or Florida being relocated. After losing Atlanta for the second time, I don't think the league wants to lose anymore SE US teams. The Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill area has a population of over 2 million people so I don't see the league giving up on it so easily. The Panthers have that whole Miami/South Beach thing going on so I can see them becoming the Coyotes East. Believe it or not, I actually think its more likely for either the Devils or Islanders to be relocated. The Islanders are the NY Mets of the NHL and the Devils are located halfway between NY and Philly. Both of those teams are more expendable and redundant. I'm guessing Lashoff.

Sorry, that was a poor attempt at humor. I am actually a very funny guy. Unfortunately, my development as a comedian was mismanaged. Stevie's nickname is "The Captain" for a reason. I would dare to say he is the best example of a captain in NHL history. Even now, he is the prototype that any player in any sport should emulate their leadership after. No one will remember in 20 years that Toews was ever a captain.

Secretly, I know you're right. I just can't like someone like that. I personally don't think he's anything like Keith tho. I actually liked his dad, respected him as a player. Tons of skill, tough, aggressive, but not dirty. Wanted him wearing the Winged Wheel. I can't say that about Matt. He's a punk IMO. Besides, the Wings have a Turgeon and a Bertuzzi. We win.

And then NO goals in 2 games gets you bumped down to the 4th line, am I right? Blashill is SOOOOO predictable.

Not a fight, but Landeskog suspended 4 games for crosscheck to Matthew Tkachuk. https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/avs-gabriel-landeskog-suspended-four-games-for-cross-checking-matthew-tkachuk/ So that's 14 games worth of suspensions Tkachuk's punked guys into in less than as many days. The kid is really becoming a d-bag. It's a shame that he has to resort to those kinds of tactics to be an NHL player because his name and skills aren't enough.

That's ridiculous. Horses don't eat strawberries!

First Bold: I'm so used to picturing Roy in an Avs sweater that I forget he was in Montreal first. So my point was actually incorrect. The Lindros trade didn't single-handedly do it, It was more like the main course and Roy was the dessert. 2nd Bold: They should have felt that way. In their final season in Quebec, the Nordiques were the number one seed in the East (even with Fiset in goal) and got beat by the Rangers in the 1st round. The next season the team moves to Denver, acquires a HOF goalie, and wins the Cup. Not fair to that fanbase. Bold with underline: I agree with you. No way the Habs trade Roy to Quebec City. 2nd Bold with underline: While I agree with you that a team will be moved to Quebec City, I don't want it to be Arizona. If that happens, an eastern time zone team gets moved to the Western Conference. Guess who is the westernmost located Eastern conference team? I would rather have someone like the Canes, Devils, Panthers, or Islanders move there to avoid the realignment issues. If the Coyotes are going to be moved, it should be to Seattle or Houston.

Picture: That had to be such an empty feeling, skating around with the cup knowing your name won't be on it. Bold: Abby's name wasn't on the cup that year because it didn't deserve to be. He only played 2 games that year. The following year he would have "qualified" because he played in the finals. But he still only played 2 regular season games that season, so I don't know that he would have "deserved" it. Still better than Jiri Slegr tho. That was a travesty. https://www.thoughtco.com/players-names-on-the-stanley-cup-2779441 Still hoping that Abby gets his name on the cup someday tho. He's actually earned it more in the seasons since then.

No matter how much I disagree with someone, I at least respect people enough to give value to what they say. (Even if I think it's absurd) I am sorry that you can't give me the same courtesy. No more point in continuing a discussion. You can't reason with someone who thinks your entire ideology or belief system isn't just flawed, but irrelevant or without merit because they can't accept other viewpoints besides their own. It's not enough to disagree, its like that person isn't even worthy enough to have an opinion. I am sorry. I will make sure that I confer with you next time before I have an opinion so that I know its ok to have one.

LOL, your "Good" is still bad. The bold means they're mediocre (So they are like the Jimmy Howard of the Atlantic Division!)

I would say he's top 10. I think 6th is high tho. OMG, I completely forgot that that was ever a thing. I always look at that Ottawa situation like the Cuban Missile Crisis. You are so thankful that things DID'NT work out differently. I agree with the bold. Y had all the tools I think to come close to Lemieux/Gretzky, but had to make sacrifices for the team. I wonder sometimes how history would view him if he continued to play like he did pre-Bowman. His numbers would be phenomenal, but with less cup success. He never really could have it both ways. I still think he's better than guys like Sakic tho (both as a player and GM ). Lemieux and Gretzky are unarguably in the top 5 all time. Stevie's not, but I think I would put him in the 20-25 range. Is that legit, or am I being a homer. Totally agree with the bold. He was a generational talent both in his physical skill on the ice and his intangibles off it. Toews never was, never will be that. Both Y and Toews know it. Guys like Yzerman in all sports say stuff like that all the time. It's what you do. No one believes them. BTW, does anyone remember when THN was calling Larkin the next Toews? Are we still thinking that's a good thing? Cuz I would still be happy with that.

Thanks. It seems then that statistically speaking, the numbers say the team is better, but that is not translating into wins? Is that correct? That sure seems like what I'm seeing this season.

First bold: No, because that would be ridiculous and unrealistic. Apples and oranges. The possibility that krsmith laid out is a very real possibility, yours is not. 2nd bold: Fair enough, but I am basing my concern on what I am already seeing. I see Frk, a still developing forward, being placed on the 4th line. I BELIEVE that that is not the best way to manage him. I know there a lot of others who would agree with that. I think he would be better off off playing with better caliber forwards farther up in the lineup. If I believe that Frk is being mishandled, would it not also be reasonable to think that other prospects could be as well? A very real possibility based on a combination of both fact and opinion. You can disagree if you want, but that doesn't mean that my opinion/concern is without merit. It's insulting to say otherwise. 3rd bold: I agree to some extent. However, this team has SOME defensemen on it that would make better partners for developing players. Not all of them are bad. So, why not pair the better ones with the kids? Seems logical, right? What's not logical is to argue that a student will always turn out the same regardless of who the teacher is. If you're a parent, would you rather have your kid taught in the classroom with the "Teacher of the Year" with a proven track record of success or a teacher whose history shows them to be mediocre at best? Would you expect the same outcome by that analogy? I wouldn't, but based on your analogy there has to be some bad teachers, right? So I guess we shouldn't care what teacher our kids get then because they're going to turn out however they turn out no matter what? And if they get bad grades, it can't be the teacher, right? They're just a dumb kid. And maybe that's not "mismanaging", but I know I would be p****d if my kid didn't get the best teacher they could and their "development" suffered for it. Why should I feel any differently about the "kids" on this team?

It would have been more timely to say this yesterday, but isn't there a parade somewhere that you can rain on?

Correct. My meme was in response to the idea that hopefully the team puts the kids in the best possible situation to succeed. How is that a false premise? I bolded the entire paragraph because I agree with the overall message, not necessarily the exact verbage. Maybe I should only bold specific words next time? I guess I can't like some of what you say without agreeing with everything you say? Do I have that right? Nowhere was I implying that Smith WAS mismanaged (don't care), or that the kids WILL BE. But it is possible to mismanage a player, is it not? Whether or not Smith was, has nothing to do with it. I, like you, am hoping that the team does what is in the best interests of their development. Shouldn't we all hope for that? I don't care who Smith's D partners were, cuz it has nothing to do with the kids. Different coach now. But, is it not reasonable to believe that a prospect will develop better when he is partnered with a better quality Dman? Again, whether or not Smith was is irrelevant to that premise. This team has some low quality defensemen on it, and I hope that none of the kids are partnered with them, but instead with guys like Green, Daley, Kronner, etc cuz they just might learn more! I know, crazy right? I have no dog in this fight. I have said before that I always thought that Smith had the tools to be a 4/5 guy. In reality, he's not. I don't know whether he was mismanaged or not, I simply don't know and it would be arrogant of me to say otherwise. What I can say is that I BELIEVE that in the end its irrelevant, because he was never going to be more than a 3rd pairing defenseman regardless of how he was developed. Can we please move on? Not angry with YOU at all BTW, and I appreciate your response. To be fair, krsmith is not second guessing in hindsight. He has questioned how Smith was being developed for years, from the very beginning of his pro career That's not hindsight. If it was, I would agree with you. One thing I will say tho is that you always have the stats/figures and such to back up what you say. Respect. Even if I don't always agree with you.

It seems like individually, most of the players are equal to or better than last year. Some players were upgraded (Daley for Smith). Shouldn't they then be better collectively than last year? I think that might be why it seems that way.

OOPS, wrong thread.

I agree. He's not underachieving this year. I posted in another thread that before his injury, he was like 5th? in points among forwards. He is putting up 2nd line numbers and is outperforming both Nyquist and Tatar who are underacheiving this year IMO. Only a 1/4 of the way thru the season, and Abby has scored only 5 points less than he did all of last year. Definitely not underachieving this season. He's on pace for 64 points, his best ever. If he does that, the haters will be silenced, for now. As I'm sure most of you already know, Abby's criticism comes from the fact that he dropped way down in points (21) last season from the season before (42). Based on his contract, I think some people's expectations were too high, that he was supposed to be a power forward with hands. He's not. I think he's better than last year's numbers, that it's an anomaly. And if he continues to score around 60 points a season, people's opinion of him will change (If they're being reasonable).

First bold: 100% agree. Not saying the players or organization believe that, but a lot of fans do. Exactly the reason he shouldn't be captain. Second bold with italics: 100% agree. Exactly the reason he has earned, deserves to be an alternate. Third bold underlined: 100% agree. It's the fact that BOTH can be said about him that he shouldn't be captain. Previous captains (Y, Z, Lids) all had impeccable records. No one could really argue that they didn't deserve it, hadn't earned it. None of them could be said to be "underachievers". Abby doesn't fit that mold, so no "C".

No, not resentment. Don't think any of the kids are like that. Just think its easier for an overachiever to motivate than an underachiever is what I'm saying. Just my opinion tho.

It doesn't hurt. What do you do when the cream sets up too long?