mackel

Yes. But if this were another sport maybe basketball then your nationality would be irrelevant. Because the conclusion would make sense. Since my original point seems to be lost I said all things being equal I'd take the Canadian over the ___________.... and by the way rink size was on my mind when I said hockey environment. It was nice to see you agreed with me in the end though. On the Michigan ties... Abby and Glenny are over paid... which seems to fly in the face of the home town discount narrative, DK signed here due to Michigan ties... his play has warranted criticism and maybe even a seat in the pressbox. But on here I've read posts from people saying well he signed here because of this and that treat him with kid gloves... which is foolish.

Actually you sorta make my point.... we don't have many or any high end Canadian (or any nationality) players on our team... I point at this as something to address. Of the players you've mentioned only Zetterberg is/was a star. Kronwall was close to that status soley because he is/was our best defenceman, which speaks to the state of our blue line. Tatar, Larkin, Abby are all average players... I was hopeful with Larkin but unless this is just a sophomore slump he's good but not great.

It's something this team has done with players that have Michigan connections.... rightly or wrongly. But none of those Michigan linked players are high end, though some are paid that way.

Sure you could say that, it wouldn't make much sense...it's a statement that is counter to hockey orthodoxy. That said it could be your opinion and it wouldn't be a problem. It certainly wouldn't be something I'd argue over for a page and a half.

I'm not afraid to admit I'm canadian, I just don't see what impact that has on what I've said. My statement on culture and environment would be correct regardless of my nationality. I'm guessing you must be American given your argumentative demeanour... don't be afraid to admit it bro

I'm not from Ontario. I don't owe you or anyone an answer, I stated my opinion, and frankly I don't care if you agree or disagree. All other things being relatively equal a mountain of anecdotal evidence says take the canadian.

This isn't a relevant question. If the talent level is equivalent, you take the canadian... that's my opinion. You take the canadian for the intangibles, growing up in an immersive hockey culture, being in an elite competitive environment from a young age, and though it's corney to say that old school canadian heart and will to win is a real factor. Again you seem to disagree, which is fine... that's you're opinion and I respect that...

Sure if you can't get a canadian. If I had a choice of comparable players I'd take the canadian every time... I gather you disagree, which is fine. But that's my opinion, which is fine.

it's a dynamic we don't have. I think we have our quota of marginal and/or overpaid players that are from Michigan.

It would be nice to have a high end Canadian talent on the team, it's been a long time. Tippett has dropped bigly to #20.

http://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-lots-of-talent-after-patrick-hischier-1.702428 Interesting stuff...

I'd be thrilled if long term Larkin turns out to be better than an average 3+/2- center along the lines of Bozak. But I think that's what he'll be... serviceable and that's about it.

I'm really hoping that we draft a very good player, I'd like to see a big, physical, skilled canadian.... a dimension this club does not have. I really hope we don't draft a kid because he is from or played in Michigan. We have a few average to below average players on this team making big coin largely because of a tie to Michigan.

I wish they could convince Kronwall to be "injured" for the rest of the season... put him on "LTIR". Then bring up another guy maybe McIlrath for an assessment.

Zoom in on mine it's not just the stupid look on his face... it's a pic from tonight after he got beaned in the noggin.

Had to post so I could get my new profile pic out there...

So we don't have more bad contracts than most teams, yet we have a max payroll and are one of the worst teams in the league... sorry Kenny that doesn't jive.

You sound like a "control enthusiast"...

That 3rd rounder from the Hawks will likely be at the back end of the 3rd round... it's lore like a 3.7th round pick. It'll be nice to see if Jurco can be the player he was projected to be.

I don't post a lot here, but I've been on the board for years and years... reading topics. The term hater is an over used tripe. I'm not saying by you, but by posters in general. Typically people who saw the decline of this team coming over the last number of years were labeled as irrational, not "real" fans, haters, etc. I think that's in part why so many people seem to have disappeared from this board, they were tired of being criticized for seeing a team in decline, instead of unicorns and lollypops.

The guy was right though... so he wasn't a hater, he was ahead of the curve. By the away being critical doesn't make someone a hater.

We need to start winning bigly on deals.

Absolutely, back before the season I advocated for this exact scenario. I'm not entirely sold on Larkin, I see Mantha being far more important to us over the coming years.

Thinking highly of Trouba is one thing.... but it should be said that by keeping the pick and developing that player, we won't have Trouba in the line up... we will likely get a high pickin in 18, which is defenceman heavy.

I went and looked up the 2018 draft rankings and it looks like the majority of the top 10 are D. With that in mind and the fact we're rebuilding... I'd use the pick on the best available player this year and pre-tank for next year, by not adding an upgrade over a current roster player.