• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Wait&Sneed said:

1. Teams will again go "all in" before the playoffs, as they always do, and be forced to lose good players in the expansion later down the line

2. If Seattle learned anything from Vegas they will target exactly the same types of players who will flourish in larger roles

3. Vegas has gone to the post season each year with deep runs 2/3 years. They're a good team, not at all a fluke.

Bold prediction when you don't even know their roster yet and Vegas proved it can be done.

Not bold at all. Teams will protect their best players. Seattle is still getting 2nd tier players at best. They're not getting top line forwards or top pair D, but still lots of middle 6 F and 2nd/3rd pair D. That's not playoff caliber, but still better than being bottom feeders. I don't think that's a particularly "bold" prediction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Not bold at all. Teams will protect their best players. Seattle is still getting 2nd tier players at best. They're not getting top line forwards or top pair D, but still lots of middle 6 F and 2nd/3rd pair D. That's not playoff caliber, but still better than being bottom feeders. I don't think that's a particularly "bold" prediction.

Teams protected their best players against Vegas. Vegas got what at the time was considered 2nd tier players at best. They didn't get top line forwards or top pair D, but still got lots of middle 6 F and 2nd/3rd pair D. That not only was playoff caliber, it was stanley cup finals caliber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Teams protected their best players against Vegas. Vegas got what at the time was considered 2nd tier players at best. They didn't get top line forwards or top pair D, but still got lots of middle 6 F and 2nd/3rd pair D. That not only was playoff caliber, it was stanley cup finals caliber.

Anaheim traded Theodore to keep Vatanen. Let that sink in. Everyone knew Theodore's potential at the time of that trade. Not only that, they traded Vatanen that same damn season. 

Florida mismanaged their roster so badly that they gave up Smith AND Marchessault. 

Gotta imagine teams will be more aware of this type of s*** when it comes to Seattle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, marcaractac said:

Anaheim traded Theodore to keep Vatanen. Let that sink in. Everyone knew Theodore's potential at the time of that trade. Not only that, they traded Vatanen that same damn season. 

Florida mismanaged their roster so badly that they gave up Smith AND Marchessault. 

Gotta imagine teams will be more aware of this type of s*** when it comes to Seattle.

Classic hindsight is 20/20.

Vatanen at the time was a steady 2-way, 40 pt Dman for the Ducks who was logging big minutes for them every night. They sacrificed future for the now. Had they known Theodore was 100% gonna be a superstar Dman and Vatanen would quickly decline after this... I'm sure they would have acted differently, but they didn't.

Florida had in Marchessault a 5'9" forward with one decent season, and a Reilly Smith coming off a really bad 37 pt season for them. Had they known Marchy was due to become a consistent 65 pt top6 forward, and Smith would return to 50 pts, and even up his game to a 60 pt forward... I'm sure they would have acted differently, bu they didn't know that.

It's all a gamble, and Seattle is certainly going to win some of these gambles that teams make just like Vegas did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Classic hindsight is 20/20.

Vatanen at the time was a steady 2-way, 40 pt Dman for the Ducks who was logging big minutes for them every night. They sacrificed future for the now. Had they known Theodore was 100% gonna be a superstar Dman and Vatanen would quickly decline after this... I'm sure they would have acted differently, but they didn't.

Florida had in Marchessault a 5'9" forward with one decent season, and a Reilly Smith coming off a really bad 37 pt season for them. Had they known Marchy was due to become a consistent 65 pt top6 forward, and Smith would return to 50 pts, and even up his game to a 60 pt forward... I'm sure they would have acted differently, bu they didn't know that.

It's all a gamble, and Seattle is certainly going to win some of these gambles that teams make just like Vegas did.

Vatenen has never hit 40 points in his entire NHL career. I mean, he was a 40 point dman in the AHL, so i'll give you that. It was a known bad trade at the time, and it looks even worse now. Especially considering the Ducks were well into their decline at this point and should have been hanging on to their top prospects.  

Marchessault scored 30 in his first full NHL season. He was only flirting with making the NHL full time before that. You make it sound as if he was some useless guy who came out with one banger of a year. Smith had a down year on a bad team. It happens.

It's not the fact that they lost Smith to Vegas. It's not the fact that they lost Marchessault to Vegas. It's that they lost Smith AND Marchessault to Vegas. Florida could have done nothing and just lost one of these guys. They traded Smith to ensure they drafted Marchessault because they were afraid to lose ******* Jason Demers. Who they pretty well immediately traded for Jamie McGinn....

So please, continue to bless us all with your knowledge of how giving up Smith and Marchessault for Jamie McGinn is hindsight. 

Hindsight is William Karlsson coming out scoring the way he did in Vegas. Theodore, Marchessault, and Smith? Not so much. 

Edited by marcaractac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, marcaractac said:

Vatenen has never hit 40 points in his entire NHL career. I mean, he was a 40 point dman in the AHL, so i'll give you that. It was a known bad trade at the time, and it looks even worse now. Especially considering the Ducks were well into their decline at this point and should have been hanging on to their top prospects.  

Marchessault scored 30 in his first full NHL season. He was only flirting with making the NHL full time before that. You make it sound as if he was some useless guy who came out with one banger of a year. Smith had a down year on a bad team. It happens.

It's not the fact that they lost Smith to Vegas. It's not the fact that they lost Marchessault to Vegas. It's that they lost Smith AND Marchessault to Vegas. Florida could have done nothing and just lost one of these guys. They traded Smith to ensure they drafted Marchessault because they were afraid to lose ******* Jason Demers. Who they pretty well immediately traded for Jamie McGinn....

So please, continue to bless us all with your knowledge of how giving up Smith and Marchessault for Jamie McGinn is hindsight. 

Hindsight is William Karlsson coming out scoring the way he did in Vegas. Theodore, Marchessault, and Smith? Not so much. 

So let me understand... the fantasy world you live in is that the professionals in Anaheim and Florida are complete idiots and had no good reason to do what they did? Noted.

In the two prior seasons to 2017 Vatanen came off the following seasons at 22 and 23 years old:

  • 37 pts, 67 games: 45 pt pace
  • 38 pts, 71 games: 44 pt pace

You can split hairs all you want, but that's a 40+ pt Dman playing 21+ minutes a night. An extremely valuable asset. Not only that, but he's extremely young at the time, indicating he will grow even more.  And Anahiem was going to the playoffs consistently...going as far as round 3 in 2016.

They also had on their roster: Vatanen, Fowler, Montour, and Manson. They were not in need of Dmen at the time.

You can pretend all you want that the "Ducks F'ed up major" but all that is is silly hindsight 20/20. They made a calculated move in sacrificing Theodore and they lost the gamble.

Vegas benefited from a gamble like that, and Seattle will benefit from similar ones.

Marchy scored 7 goals and 18 pts in 45 games for Tampa his first season, and road pine. You're blatantly wrong here. Smith was a declining player for them. It makes sense to sacrifice your declining players.

But yes, I'm sure you were well ahead of the game and knew all without your hindsight. Why you work in IT and not for an executive of the Panthers is beyond us. 

Edited by Wait&Sneed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Teams protected their best players against Vegas. Vegas got what at the time was considered 2nd tier players at best. They didn't get top line forwards or top pair D, but still got lots of middle 6 F and 2nd/3rd pair D. That not only was playoff caliber, it was stanley cup finals caliber.

Yes, but you have to admit that a roster made up of 2nd tier players SHOULD NOT be a playoff team, let alone a Cup finalist. I seriously question why you would think that another franchise built presumably the same way should expect the same result as their predecessor when logic says otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Yes, but you have to admit that a roster made up of 2nd tier players SHOULD NOT be a playoff team, let alone a Cup finalist.

Why not?

Vegas has proved a deep well-coached team lacking superstars can consistently go deep in the playoffs.

19 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

I seriously question why you would think that another franchise built presumably the same way should expect the same result as their predecessor when logic says otherwise.

What's the logic? It's been shown Vegas wasn't a fluke. They've consistently made the postseason and gone deep 2/3 years. Why wouldn't a similarly built team be able to achieve the same results?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are all correct. Teams will be hesitant to make the same kind of deals they made the last time. Don't forget Vegas also picked up 5 extra - including two 1st - draft picks in the process. But the kind gamble teams made that Sneed talks about will also happen again and Seattle will in some of those cases come out the winner. There is also the fresh start aspect of it. Some players will benefit from a change of enviroment and getting a clean slate/second chance. Can't get a fresher start than a new franchise.

Edited by Akakabuto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Why not?

Vegas has proved a deep well-coached team lacking superstars can consistently go deep in the playoffs.

What's the logic? It's been shown Vegas wasn't a fluke. They've consistently made the postseason and gone deep 2/3 years. Why wouldn't a similarly built team be able to achieve the same results?

Because a team void of high end talent is typically not very good. We literally have decades of professional sports that prove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Because a team void of high end talent is typically not very good. We literally have decades of professional sports that prove it.

Okay, so how did Vegas manages to become such a successful team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2020 at 7:08 PM, Wait&Sneed said:

Okay, so how did Vegas manages to become such a successful team?

If you've ever been to Vegas, you would know that sometimes you hit the jackpot when the odds say you shouldn't.

Vegas had a lot of things fall just right from the beginning. They literally "got lucky". I mentioned several of them already. 

Expecting a 2nd expansion team to be able to repeat what Vegas did is like expecting a team that just won the Cup to repeat that feat the next year. Even the best team needs a little "luck" on their side to win. No one expects things to fall the same way again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

If you've ever been to Vegas, you would know that sometimes you hit the jackpot when the odds say you shouldn't.

Vegas had a lot of things fall just right from the beginning. They literally "got lucky". I mentioned several of them already. 

Expecting a 2nd expansion team to be able to repeat what Vegas did is like expecting a team that just won the Cup to repeat that feat the next year. Even the best team needs a little "luck" on their side to win. No one expects things to fall the same way again. 

Now your argument is Vegas just got lucky?

Why even bother hiring pro scouts to make selections amirite?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Wait&Sneed said:

Now your argument is Vegas just got lucky?

To some degree....yes. Like it or not, luck plays a part in winning and losing, success and failure. Good drafting, ownership, scouting, development, coaching, and managing increases your odds of success. But you're still only playing the odds. The things you can't control can make or break a season just as much as the things you can. That's "luck". Vegas had things fall overwhelmingly in their favor from the start. You can't credit their success based solely on their coaching, drafting, managing, etc. All of which they did very well. They also benefitted from uncontrollable/unpredictable factors working out for them as well. That is "luck".

Edited by Neomaxizoomdweebie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now