Bannedforlife

Guys, why arent we talking about Hippet and Tague?!?

Youre right. It would be much more constructive if I stated my desire to draft Tippet and Hague about 50 times a day.

Relatable af

you guys, do you think Tippet and Hague have best friends yet? cause i was thinking that we could be best friends, if they draft them i mean, which i think they will because i told kenny what would happen to all my jerseys if he didnt draft Tippet and Hague, so i definitely think that we are already best friends and once they get here we can do best friend stuff together like ride bikes together and go to the arcade together and make fun of girls together and throw rocks off the bridge together and practise hockey together and when they have a game we could ride our bikes down to the arena together and they could show me around the dressing room and i could help them put on their jerseys and maybe they could get me my own jersey that says "Leftwinger #01" and when the game starts i could sit up in the owners box next to kenny and tell him all my ideas and if he doesnt listen to my ideas ill tell him hes a big stupidhead and then after the game we could have a sleepover at my house and my mom could make grilled cheese sandwiches for us and we could watch a scary movie together and then we could prank call Franzen together and then we could draw fake tattoos on each other that say "Tippet and Hague and Leftwinger RULEZ!" and then we could go to bed in my giant triple best friend bunk bed and we can stay up late and tell secrets to each other and then fall asleep and have best friend dreams together the end!!!

I really think were gonna draft Tippet and Hague. Unless we dont. But we probably will. But I would be okay with it if they choose someone else. Unless Tippet and Hague are still on the board. Do you think they have ever heard of Tippet and Hague? Ive never actually seen Hague play hockey, but I really believe he'll turn out to be a Hall of Famer.
 
Here's my draft order that no one asked to see
1. Tippet
2. Hague
3. Patrick
4. Hischier
5. Tippet
6. Tippet
7. Hague
8. That one kid that ive also never seen play but he's like 6'6"
9. Tippet and Hague
10. Gretzky
 

I think we should draft Tippet and Hague. Has any one ever heard of them?

Ill be very upset if we dont draft Tippet and Hague. I believe Kenny will make it happen, but then again I wont be surprised if he doesnt because HOLLAND

This is a real shame, as I was hoping that we could shed about 4m in the expansion draft and then trading 10-15m by trading away bad contracts. Howard wouldve been a big chunk of that if we could have convinced Calgary to take him off our hands. Oh well, as long as we draft Tippet and Hague, ill be happy.

Its too bad we werent able to trade for Drouin because I think he wouldve really enjoyed playing with Tippet and Hague

Elfstrom would be better if his name was Tippet and Hague

Relatable af

I bet you were the kind of kid that would scream and cry if you didnt get to open all of your presents on christmas eve.
And then you would complain that the presents you received werent the ones you wanted.

Maybe if you threaten to burn your jerseys Holland will release it to you early

If the sheet fits... And bigotry doesn't have to be absolute. Liking Lidstrom doesn't mean you're not a bigot for your prejudice against Swedes in general. Bigots aren't noted for their rationality.
Unbelievably, your attempt to prove that you aren't biased is so full of implied bigotry that it might as well be one of those hidden-3D-image pictures, where if you squint at it just right you see a bunch of swastikas with thumbs-up emojis.
First, "same type of player/team". which we know means "European-style", which we know means soft/weak/gutless/etc. but that you like to hide behind your new code-word, "finesse". Either way it is factually inaccurate. The diversity of nationalities, size, and play style may not be all that everyone wants, but it inarguably exists. It is a hallmark of bigotry to exaggerate the  influence of the object of that bigotry.
That same point is also evident in your blaming our decline on "finesse". While there isn't sufficient data to make factual assertions, that alone is an indictment of your opinion. That you include that statement in the very same sentence as "first top 10 in forever" shows such ridiculous and willful disregard of the both the success of our strategy, and the well-known cyclical nature of sports, that I defy anyone to read that sentence without imagining a rimshot at the end.
And in regards to the whole "finesse" thing, it seems to be widely accepted that the game has been trending toward speed and skill (finesse, one might say), and anecdotal evidence from discussions on hitting, fighting, the disappearance of enforcers, growing sentiment against stay-at-home-defensemen and defensive-specialist-forwards, and a strong movement toward analytics seems to support that conclusion. I'm not even sure you believe your finesse argument. Misusing our players has often been discussed here, and even you have done so; arguing that our grittier and less-skilled players are playing too much, at the expense of our finesse players. Your advocacy for Tippett (whose grittiness is hardly more than a footnote in his scouting report compared to his finesse attributes of skating and shooting) also suggest you are just using the term as a  facade.
Finally we have the sheer vehemence of your anti-"finesse" rhetoric suggesting an irrational bias. Here saying such a pick would be a waste, previously calling such a pick "non-impact", and the ultimate example of:
...in regards to Pettersson, who you later admitted you had never even heard of. And even though you have since been made aware that every scouting service believes Pettersson has elite potential, you still refuse to believe it. It might have done your argument some good if you had acknowledged his potential, and just said you felt there were better options. Too late for that now though.
You can't get better if you don't recognize your faults. I'm doing this for your own good, pal.
 

Oh, ok. I must have you confused with a different poster. I think her name was LeftWingette... I always get you two mixed up. That chick was always acting a fool...
 
 
 
(See what I did there? Like how you used to refer to players you dont like by girls names. Pretty funny, huh?)

We werent even behind in the series! It was tied at 2 and we were headed back home for game 5! Like, how much more can a person be an irrational, knee-jerk cry baby?! All im saying is that if youre gonna threaten to quit the team and start burning s***, you better make sure your team doesnt win the freaking STANLEY CUP!

We werent even behind in the series! It was tied at 2 and we were headed back home for game 5! Like, how much more can a person be an irrational, knee-jerk cry baby?! All im saying is that if youre gonna threaten to quit the team and start burning s***, you better make sure your team doesnt win the freaking STANLEY CUP!

Stars selected after the seventh pick
Lundquist (205)
Keith (54)
Seabrook (14)
Parise (17)
Getzlaf (19)
Burns (20)
Perry (28)
Bergeron (45)
Weber (49)
Pavelski (205)
Byfuglien (245)
Green (29)
Rinne (258)
Kopitar (11)
Rask (21)
Letang (62)
Quick (72)
Bishop (85)
Yandle (105)
Giroux (22)
Marchand (71)
Couture (9)
Shattenkirk (14)
Subban (43)
Simmonds (61)
Benn (129)
Karlsson (15)
Holtby (83)
Tarasenko (16)
Faulk (37)
Gaudreau (104)
Forsberg (11)

Here's my argument AGAIN... There are stars picked every year at or after the 7th pick. We can find a star player wherever we end up picking. That's not to say we will, just that we "can"... Please explain what you disagree with there...
Now here's where we do disagree. I believe there is skill involved in making these selections. Of course no one knows for certain which players will boom or bust, but based on hours and hour of watching these kids play, meeting with them and their parents several times, the better scouts can use this information to better determine what type of player / person they will develop into. You think it's pure luck. Whatever...

Thats true. But the argument being presented is that we will be unable to select a "real star" with the 7th pick, which couldnt be further from the truth.

This entire argument obviously depends on your definition of a "star player", but there are currently more All Stars playing in the NHL that were selected 7th overall or later than in the top 6.
 
There are also more players in the Hall of Fame that were selected 7th or later.

Stars selected after the seventh pick
Lundquist (205)
Keith (54)
Seabrook (14)
Parise (17)
Getzlaf (19)
Burns (20)
Perry (28)
Bergeron (45)
Weber (49)
Pavelski (205)
Byfuglien (245)
Green (29)
Rinne (258)
Kopitar (11)
Rask (21)
Letang (62)
Quick (72)
Bishop (85)
Yandle (105)
Giroux (22)
Marchand (71)
Couture (9)
Shattenkirk (14)
Subban (43)
Simmonds (61)
Benn (129)
Karlsson (15)
Holtby (83)
Tarasenko (16)
Faulk (37)
Gaudreau (104)
Forsberg (11)

Stars selected after the seventh pick
Lundquist (205)
Keith (54)
Seabrook (14)
Parise (17)
Getzlaf (19)
Burns (20)
Perry (28)
Bergeron (45)
Weber (49)
Pavelski (205)
Byfuglien (245)
Green (29)
Rinne (258)
Kopitar (11)
Rask (21)
Letang (62)
Quick (72)
Bishop (85)
Yandle (105)
Giroux (22)
Marchand (71)
Couture (9)
Shattenkirk (14)
Subban (43)
Simmonds (61)
Benn (129)
Karlsson (15)
Holtby (83)
Tarasenko (16)
Faulk (37)
Gaudreau (104)
Forsberg (11)

Stars selected after the seventh pick
Lundquist (205)
Keith (54)
Seabrook (14)
Parise (17)
Getzlaf (19)
Burns (20)
Perry (28)
Bergeron (45)
Weber (49)
Pavelski (205)
Byfuglien (245)
Green (29)
Rinne (258)
Kopitar (11)
Rask (21)
Letang (62)
Quick (72)
Bishop (85)
Yandle (105)
Giroux (22)
Marchand (71)
Couture (9)
Shattenkirk (14)
Subban (43)
Simmonds (61)
Benn (129)
Karlsson (15)
Holtby (83)
Tarasenko (16)
Faulk (37)
Gaudreau (104)
Forsberg (11)

Ur not wrong, i listen to a lot of podcasts and theres is just so sub par i learned to hate all of them. Its like listening to leftwinger shout at you about much Holland sucks every week.