g20topdogg
-
Posts
1,904 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
18
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Media Demo
Gallery
Posts posted by g20topdogg
-
-
23 hours ago, Fisix said:
You don’t have to be a brilliant GM to decide not to take a flyer on Eichel.
I like this year being more about development and fighting for a starting spot on the team each game. Certainly more than watching our prospects play on someone else’s team, while we wait and hope for the best with Eichel’s neck recovery.
Was that the only move we could have made? I'm not upset we didn't get Eichel. Quite frankly it's head scratching when we're at the bottom and no one was moved out besides some ufa guys who weren't resigned. Sure now that we're doing good everyone is happy that we didn't do anything. But if we started the season how many people predicted we would everyone and their grandma would be asking why we didn't do anything the whole off season. I just don't see why some are giving Bob credit here for this current team play by supposedly staying pat because he believed this was some playoff team or something.
-
4 hours ago, gotchabari said:
No, he knew what we had last year and knew what we had moving forward. He kicked the tires on Eichel, but otherwise didn't want to blow up the team. Didn't see a need to otherwise make change for the sake of change.
I don't agree with this. We needed obvious changes. The team was bad there's no reason to think they were some playoff team the following season. Just because we're better than anyone predicted we would be isn't giving credit to someone who happened to by some miracle have a team so a complete 180. Meaning Bob wasn't some brilliant GM.
Despite finishing second to last we didn't need any changes? I don't follow. The assistants were the obvious change. Everyone had predicted we finish near the bottom of the Pacific division. I said we'd finish somewhere around the bottom third of the league. Right now, we're in the playoffs. There's no way someone realistically knew this was a playoff team.
-
20 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:
yeah, that absolutely blows my mind.....
...but also it's now been a month of hockey (so essentially "october" is now over) and we are 2nd in a not so great pacific division with the most games played...so it's been a good start and we ARE better...but i guess we can see what comes with november and if we keep it up or come back down to earth...maybe Bob truly thought a better PP, better D system, full training camp, players recovering from Covid or whatever, would be all it took....... maybe he was right? I guess we'll see how November goes. Personally...I HOPE he was right lol I'd love for this team to suddenly just be competitive again and continue to be so!
So his plan was basically to do nothing and hope we become a better team? Bold strategy Bob. I don't think anyone can expect a team who was second to last the year prior to become a playoff team by making no changes. Sure we've all said the assistants were terrible, it doesn't take a genius to realise that we should get new ones. Basically, it seems if we grabbed anyone off the street told them not to do anything and we'd be a much better team we'd be in the same position... idk that seems like some backwards way to manage.
Hopefully with a new gm we'll actually get someone who's able to continue our rebuild, not start the rebuild. I don't get why some people think we need to start the rebuild by tearing everything down. The way I see it is we're in some kind of rebuild just go a little deeper into it not trade everyone you can on expiring contracts/ all the older guys. And besides, if the team keeps playing like this I don't see how we're going to get even a top 10 draft pick this year.
-
2
-
-
15 minutes ago, gotchabari said:
On the other side of the coin, it's resulted in 6 wins in a row that have been on the back of offense. They are decent defensive forwards, but where's the line between their defense and there not being offense when they were in the mix? I'm not claiming a direct cause-and-effect either way, just saying we may have accidentally learned that we can possibly get along without them.
I wouldn't trade either one to the first guy offering a conditional 4th and a bag of pucks to be named later, but they appear to be dispensible if the return is decent.
That's true. But Zegras with Frenchy D? Id rather have someone else take that spot who brings more offense. But you're right, to a certain extent if we keep this play up we don't really need them.
-
I don't want to start a new thread and this kind of ties into our last game so....
I think if anyone watched the game last night you can clearly see how valuable Lindholm is to the team. He scored a goal sure but his defensive play probably prevented some goals or at least some very high quality chances. We don't have anyone on our team with his abilities or even a replacement in our system. Which is why I think we cannot trade him and try everything we can to resign him. Manson who also had a decent game I'm fine trading him. In fact I think we should trade him, he's having a decent year and he probably has good value right now. He's not getting younger so it makes sense to trade him out now. Ricky is interesting, I'd be ok with moving him but him and silfverberg out of the lineup has definitely hurt our depth. He could also bring back good assets but I'm fine regardless if he's resigned or traded. Manson can be replaced internally by having both Benoit and Mahura in the lineup. Maybe, with the year Shatty is having we might be able to get a good haul for him. But Lindholm is too valuable to this team to move.
-
4
-
1
-
-
So when are we starting the "seems we are stuck with Solomon " thread?🤣
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, yeaitsme said:
Was just listening to the new spittin chiclets podcast today. Ryan Whitney was talking about Bob Murray and how mean and vindictive he was to certain people. The hockey gods fired him for us. Hoping this doesn’t effect the good hockey we’ve been playing this year.
I immediately thought of former head coach BB. I mean sure he was on the hot seat but I think towards the end of his tenure he couldn't even pick his own assistants if I remember correctly? Perhaps his weird micromanagement with Eakins?
Perhaps one of the new assistants spoke up or Solomon. I'll reserve too much judgment until it's clear what has happened but this definitely doesn't look good for Bob.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Spencer_12 said:
I didn’t say that at all. My personal opinion is I think McTavish eventually will be as good if not better than Tuch, and I have been against including him/#3 pick in a deal for Eichel since day 1 of this discussion. If McTavish continues to put up NHL/AHL numbers obviously I’ll be even more emboldened, but even if he struggles in the NHL and goes back to the OHL I’ll be encouraged if he has a good WJC. The thing is, my opinion on McTavish is meaningless in this discussion. Speculating that McTavish + a possible top 10 + whatever beats out Vegas’ completed deal is pointless. We have no idea how Buffalo evaluates McTavish. All we know is Buffalo reportedly really likes Krebs, and Tuch is a good player on a good contract. I can say that Buffalo values our 1st round pick more than Vegas’ 1st. That’s obvious. But McTavish + Lundestrom + Comtois over Tuch and Krebs? Who knows. Maybe Buffalo does. Maybe they don’t. It’s pointless to speculate over.
Fair enough. I would think that McT would be valued higher but you're right Buffalo might see something else. It's probably a moot point anyway as we may never have been in serious discussions in the first place. I'd like to hear what we were even offering but it's probably never going to come out.
In regards to our pending free agents, Bob has almost literally done any additions/ subtractions from a team that finished second to last. I can see that the team is overall better than last year (thanks to the assistants, probably...) but it's kind of strange to not do anything when we were that bad as far as the players go. I'm all for trading Manson. Rakell I'd like to keep but I'm not sure we will. I'd definitely try to keep Lindholm.
Bob? Hello?
I think he's on vacation.... well it's been a rough summer being in trade talks and all...
-
14 hours ago, Jasoaks said:
yeah...wait, what? lol guy announces retirement after not being on a team for 3 years..."yeah guys, i mean...I appreciate all the offers but I think i gotta call it quits" sounds like something Bernier would do...
Was he in the KHL or something?
I think he couldn't officially retire because of cap ramifications. I'm pretty sure he was on ir or something.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Spencer_12 said:
Krebs has a bigger track record than McTavish does. He was better in the CHL than McTavish was even at the same age, already has shown himself in the U20 WJC by putting up 8 points in 7 games, and has 10 points in 7 AHL games (5 in 2 this season). His AHL/NHL stats are barely more than a sample size than McTavish’s so probably not worth mentioning, but there we go. At any rate, it’s all speculation for how the Sabres rate McTavish vs Krebs. I’m just going off what Friedman had to say about how they felt about Krebs and how Krebs has more of a track record. Those are two facts I’d rather base an opinion off of than prospect rankings that likely rate guys in the 20s overall similarly.
As for picks/Tuch, I’m guessing there’s a lot of value in trading for a guy like Tuch plus a likely pick in the late 20s vs. playing the what if game hoping Anaheim really does end up with a top 5-10 pick. There’s too much what if based speculation on what other teams would/could do to move up from late in the 1st round to a top 10. You almost never see it happen, and it’s probably because you’ve got teams saying, “hell no we aren’t trading a guy like Tuch plus our 1st just for #8” and other teams saying, “hell no we should get more than Tuch plus your 1st for #8.”
So you basically agree that McT plus a possible top ten pick is worth more than Tuch and a possible 20+ pick? Yeah exactly. That's why it's a better deal than Vegas. Possibly, and I mean possibly depending on what that pick ends up could also be worth adding Krebs. Add in Comtois and Lundestrom (for example) and I'd say that our deal would be better. But of course that's also speculation because we really don't know what our offer was or even if we even made an actual offer.
A team might balk at giving up a big return to draft into the top ten but what are teams going to just give away prospects that are probably way better than someone drafted in the late first? That's why it's rare because teams know you're paying a premium but they could also end up paying a lot for say a Nick Ritchie, it's a risk.
-
7 hours ago, Fisix said:
i don't understand why you all are just as willing to believe post-trade rumors as you were pre-trade, when there's ample evidence that most if not all the rumors from these very same sources has been BS, pretty much all along.
not even BM is silly enough to think we'd still be in the mix post-op, not without giving up pretty much our entire future. if BM ever said anything close to what you guys posted above, it had to have been a go-away statement, probably a parting shot when Buff's last offer was no retained salary, we get Z and Drys, you keep Kesler, and we get your 1st in 2021.
more likely is that these asinine rumors are sourced from Adams when BM refused to deal Z and wouldn't back down, or some other GM that felt wronged in the trade and wants to divert from their own inability to get it done.
we all knew that the trade was going to be too expensive for us, and that we don't have tradeable assets like other teams do (Z isn't tradeable, our future isn't tradeable), and now after the trade, we can say with complete conviction that we are not and never will be as crazy as Vegas' exec team is.
what bothers me is how un-satisfiable you all are. if he'd have traded Z, you all would have said it was too expensive and risky, and now that he didn't, oh gosh, he must not have really tried. pick a lane that makes some kind of consistent sense, and try not to pick one with oncoming traffic.
Literally nobody said this. No one wanted to trade Z or Drysdale and I'm glad he didn't. What IS being said is what did Bob do this summer? So if it's true that he was basically kicking tires on Eichel and didn't make any other moves what in the world did he even do?
-
3
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, Sexlaf15 said:
I don’t think it’s a question of is Vegas good. They definitely are and addressed their biggest need in a bombastic fashion. I think the question is, are they good enough ravaged but injuries to make it though and get healthy, which the answer is, probably.
They basically upgraded Tuch to Eichel. Sure they're stacked and everyone assumes they're going to pull a Kucherov but that's not guaranteed. It's difficult for a player who hasn't played for almost a year to come back in top form. Kuch was kind of a special case I would say. They would sell need to trade someone out when everyone is healthy as they're over the cap.
-
37 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:
soooo....what now Bob?
Trade Grant for a first rounder. Have Eakins play Steel as our top line center and never back away from it. Have our 1D be Larsson and be adamant that he's going to be the guy.... we can go on....
-
3 minutes ago, Jasoaks said:
thats how i felt about SJ when they got Karlsson...this feels different to me as this was Vegas actually addressing their biggest issue. They have a true #1C a true #1D....honestly, 2 #1D. Although I agree about Lehner...they lost a great goalie tandem...thats basically where their biggest issue now lies. So we'll see.
I like Tuch....I don't know enough about Krebs...curious if he turns into Suzuki 2.0....
We don't yet know if Eichel will even return to form. Imagine if he's no longer himself, Vegas could regret trading their top prospects.
-
Buffalo in my opinion got a lower return than was expected. I also feel that Anaheim's offer pre draft was also better. We've also been discussing better deals on these boards. I think Buffalo kind of played this till the end and got a worse offer as I had mentioned earlier this year would happen. Sure we don't have a Tuch but I'd have to think Comtois and Lundestrom have to be better than Tuch combined. We were also talking about McT, Perrault and a 2022 first (TOP THREE protected). Plus we could have given them Kesler contract to reach the floor. We don't really know yet what Bob was offering of course but I think we could have put together the better offer. Unless of course as someone mentioned that they just valued Krebs that high.
-
6 minutes ago, dukitup said:
I'm still in the Eichel camp. I would offer up Comtois, Steel/Jones, Larsson/Mahura, and a conditional 2022 1st. Maybe sub Lundestrom for Steel/Jones. Throw in the Kesler contract.
Don't think that would be enough. I also think Terry is a no go at this point. Or maybe he's exactly who we could trade.... I mean he's got to be very valuable right about now.
-
11 hours ago, PetrSykora said:
"Community not found" made my heart sink faster than Clifford in a fight with Brookbank. I'm so glad we're still here.
I thought it was my harsh comments towards Eakins. He saw that and said we need to kick this guy... lol
Nice it's back up and running!
-
16 hours ago, dtsdlaw said:
Cogs is on a 1-year, $1M deal with San Jose. Grant has two more seasons left (including this one) at $1.5M + $1.75M.
[sad face]Idk why we didn't sign him. He would be perfect to mentor the younger guys. He probably doesn't want to deal with the Bob drama though so I would understand that. Too bad. Probably one of the worst trades in team history. I think Kesler mentioned somewhere that when Cogs was traded it sucked the life out of the locker room or something to that effect.
-
2
-
1
-
-
I think Grant is fine... in a limited role. I'm not sure why Eakins is playing him like a first or second line player. We were all scratching our heads last year on the weird deployment of players and I thought it would change with the new assistants but it's pretty obvious who is in charge of the lines. Eakins is terrible in line matching. Like isn't the point to match your best players to the other teams worst? I'm sure teams don't even employ a strategy against us because Eakins is already doing all the work for them. Why is our fourth line shutting down McDavid? It makes no sense! In this case I think Grant is better suited to a limited role and he'd be fine. Eakins is the one who's setting the team up for failure. Grant's stats would probably go up if he wasn't out with the other teams top line every other shift.
I'm sorry but Eakins is not the answer. We'd be royally screwed in the playoffs, if we ever make it of course...
-
2
-
-
45 minutes ago, Fisix said:
I would, as long as he hasn’t relapsed.
But, if I was BR, would I come back here?
Good point. But he doesn't have a lot of options. You'd have to take what you could get.
-
Bobby Ryan has been released from his PTO with the wings. Would you consider signing him for league minimum to a one year contract?
I think he's still a decent enough forward that we could flip at the deadline for picks. And he could still put the puck in the net.
-
2
-
-
I can't find any articles or videos after doing a search. But I think I remember him saying something along the lines of he wanted to step back and give some of the coaching staff and other personnel more room. Maybe I misinterpreted that statement to mean he's going to leave the gm position. Again, I haven't found any info on him stepping away so I apologize for the incorrect info.
-
1
-
-
On 10/8/2021 at 3:09 PM, ChopSuey said:
Who on this MB keeps spreading the rumors about BM having said he is stepping down after this season? I have never seen anything backing this claim up??? One can only wish!
That would be me! 🙋♂️
I don't know where I saw that but I thought I either saw it in a video somewhere or read an article...or it could have been a dream....🤣🤣
-
3 hours ago, CharlieConway said:
I've never seen a team in hockey make giving up a 2-3 goal lead look so common.
It's incredible at just how bad of a coach Dallas Eakins is and he's still getting work.
He never won anything in the AHL and is a pathetic 83-126-12 in the NHL.
Hey I get it, I'm on board buuuut.... this is still the preseason. Let's not go too overboard here.
Obviously the defensive decline has been dramatic. The crazy thing is that around that 15-16 season we were considered to have one of the top defensive corps in the nhl. There was talks about how young they were and the crazy potential they could still grow into. What happened?! I mean we see the signs but other than a serious mismanagement of player personnel why would we drop this fast? Bob once had a deep defensive pool and now we're stuck with Shatty and Larsson. Maybe the reason why players like Fowler are a lot worse is because their D partners suck and they have to cover for their job too. Get some better players and I guarantee you that Fowler will be praised again. Look at Gudbranson, he at least was fine as a D partner for Fowler, where is he now? Gone. Gone gone gone everyone gone. But hey we can take solace in the fact that Larsson is still here! Yeay!🙄
-
3
-
Is Eichel a Duck Yet?
in Rumors, Wishes and Speculations
Posted
I thought based on their poor pp last season and having new assistant coaches we'd be better too. I didn't expect us to be bottom three in the league but this?! Who'd of thought we'd be a playoff team? And isn't our GF like top 10 in the league right now? I like the play and hustle from this team but you're right, our defense is one hit away from crumbling. If Lindholm goes down I think our playoff hopes go down ther drain. Also, I'm just not sure how sustainable of a run this really is. I'd like to be really excited we're finally good but I feel like we might end up like the kings did last year where they looked like they might end up in the playoffs but then missed. Who knows, I'm enjoying the team success for now but I can't get 100% behind the fact that their going to keep this up for the rest of the year.