Neomaxizoomdweebie

Not really. Let's look at the final 8 teams and the 2 goaltenders who got the most playing time for each team. Montreal: Carey Price, 1st round, 6th overall, by Montreal Jake Allen, 2nd round, drafted by the Blues Tampa Bay: Andrei Vasilevsky, 1st rd, 19th, by Tampa Bay Curtis McElhinney, 6th rd, by Calgary NY Islanders: Semyon Varlamov, 1st rd, 23rd, by Washington Ilya Sorokin, 3rd round, by the Islanders Vegas: M-A Fleury, 1st overall, by Pittsburgh Robin Lehner, 2nd rd, by Ottawa Winnipeg: Hellebuyck, 5th round, by Winnipeg Brossoit, 6th round, by Calgary Colorado: Grubauer, 4th round, by Washington Johansson, 3rd round, by Buffalo Boston: Rask, 1st round, 21st, by Toronto Halak, 9th round, by Montreal Carolina: Nedelijokic, 2nd round, by Carolina Reimer, 4th round, by Toronto So out of these 8 starting goaltenders, 5 are 1st round picks. None of the backups are first rounders. Sounds like a pretty good argument for drafting a goalie in the 1st round, right? Not so fast. 3 of the first rounders were drafted in the late first, after all of the better skaters were gone, by playoff teams, who could afford the gamble, not by rebuilding teams. Only 2 first round picks were still playing for the team that drafted them (Price, Vasilevskiy). The other 3 (Varlamov, Rask, Fleury) were playing for a team that acquired them in some other way. So basically, Carey Price is the only goalie to make it to at least the 2nd round, who was a top 10 pick, and still playing for the team that drafted him. That's 1 out of 8. Summary: you are more likely to be a playoff team with a goaltender YOU drafted outside the first round (or at least late first round) or acquired from another team.

You do understand that a F or D taken at 6 are more likely to pan out than a G at 6, right? Wahlstedt may turn into an elite goalie, but its less likely than getting a first line forward or top pair defenseman with that pick. Goalies are much harder to predict at that age, and are more likely to bust than a skater. That's just the way it is. You can criticize the logic all you want, but the facts back it up. You seem to think that SY should gamble that pick with a boom or bust prospect. I disagree. I would rather he use it on a safer bet that's actually more likely to live up to a 6th overall draft pick. We cant afford to blow this pick.

Silicone

You're cherry picking stats again. I can do it too. Up until last season, Larkin's avg was 0.68 and Reinhart's was 0.64. You can keep pointing to last season's numbers if you want to, but that only proves Reinhart was the better player last season, nothing more. Once again, Larkin has been the better player over their respective careers. And Larkin has played far more center than Reinhart. Up until last season, where Reinhart filled in at center because Eichel was injured, he has played mostly RW on Eichel's line. With the exception of his first 2 seasons in the NHL, where he played wing about 75% of the time, Larkin has mostly played center. And despite playing a more defensively responsible position, Larkin has still managed to beat Reinhart at P/GP. My point has been from the beginning that you cant call Reinhart a 1C if Larkin is a 2C based on points per games played, which is the stat that you claimed made Larkin a 2C. If you wanted to acquire Reinhart for the purpose of RW on Larkin's line or as a 2C, that would be a more reasonable take.

Why are you deflecting? I am talking about Reinhart. Why you talking about Larkin?

Yes, because: 1. It was both his best season last year and a shortened season. No way to know if he could have sustained that scoring level (probably not) over a full season. 2. His stats over the previous 6 seasons say something completely different than last season. Over his career, he has scored less than Larkin. Last season was the exception, not the rule.

She is flawless.

They can eat a baguette

Dude. Come on. Don't make me read charts and graphs and stuff. What is this, college?

Bring back Gina Carano.

I wanna drive trains too.

And if we don't have the goaltender we need in the system, we can always find one easier than a 1/2 C or a top pair dman. If Yzerman had his top 2 centers set, had a few really good wingers, and at least his top pair D ready, I might take a flyer on a goalie in the first round. But he doesn't. You have got to use your high picks on guys who are more likely to pan out than goalies, and guys who play positions that are harder to fill than goalies.

Being a high percentage shooter is irrelevant if he's not scoring. His stats looked good last season, but over his career, his offense is worse than Larkin's, despite playing with Eichel. I can't think a guy who scores less while playing with an elite center, is offensively better than a guy who plays with subpar talent on his line, but still scores at a better collective rate. Over their respective careers, Larkin has a better scoring rate, is much better defensively, more responsible, and a better/faster skater than Reinhart. Trading for Reinhart would be redundant, unless you think you have the talent on the wings to succeed with Larkin and Reinhart as your 1 and 2 Centers.

No. He said Zadina was a bust. A top 6 winger is not a bust. If Zadina tops out as a Tatar type, I will be disappointed, but that is far from a bust when you consider how most 6 overall draft picks over the last 20 years have panned out.

No. People don't want Wallstedt at 6 because drafting goalies that high is a bigger risk, they can easily be acquired thru trades and free agency, and elite goalies are usually not 1st rounders anyway.

Which is why they will just wait until the first day of free agency to re-sign him.

You didn't answer the question.

I did.

What question? Is that the question? Because the answer is no. Why? Because you're cherry picking stats by only choosing 54 games comparatively. Over their careers, Larkin has been the better scorer. 1. Unsustainable shooting percentage. 2. Has lower scoring stats than Larkin despite playing with Eichel. 3. Not a true center.

Glendening is an UFA. He can't be protected unless he is re-signed before the expansion draft.

Sam Reinhart: 295 points in 454 games over 7 seasons = 0.65 points per game Dylan Larkin: 289 points in 433 games over 6 seasons = 0.67 points per game I don't have a math degree, but it would appear that Larkin has a better scoring rate than Reinhart. If Larkin is not a 1C based on P/GP, then Reinhart can't be either. Reinhart is also a year older and has a worse +/- than Larkin, is slower, and is worse defensively. But he should be center over Larkin?

Why would give up that much for a guy who scores at a lower pace than Larkin and then make him a 1C when Larkin is supposedly a 2C?

Who is Seattle's one contract?

Maybe where you come from.

October 22, 2020 https://thecanuckway.com/2020/10/22/the-canucks-and-jake-virtanen-agree-new-year-contract/ The Vancouver Canucks and forward Jake Virtanen have come to an agreement on a two-year contract with an average annual value of $2.5 million.