2021 Roster Thread XVII - Targeting "Someone Else"

[deadhead]

For the sake of not wasting my time by refuting you point by point, I’ll just point out that you went through that whole spiel and didn’t address the point to my reply: You’re argument that Eichel wouldn’t make a difference because he’s not Crosby.

And in case I need to say make this clear, I’m not discouraging Couts in any way for only have 1 more playoff series win than Eichel over your time period (Yay regular season wins!!!) because he can’t carry mediocre teams.

Couts' teams averaged 17 points more per season than Eichel's teams, so I'd say Couts did a pretty good job carrying mediocre teams.
Couts didn't have real talent until 2019-20.

I'd be happy to make the trades people are proposing for Eichel for Barkov and pay him $10M a year, he's >> Eichel.
That's an example of an elite center entering the prime of his career.

 

[Prongo]

This is a pathetic argument and even you know it is.

 

[mja]

Honestly, this all just comes down to a bias on his part against big name skill guys he perceives as not wanting it enough or not being winners or whatever. He did the same shit to Tavares, even said Patrick would be better than Tavares as soon as 3 seasons ago and look how well that prediction has turned out.

 

[Bigkarl]

Couts' teams averaged 17 points more per season than Eichel's teams, so I'd say Couts did a pretty good job carrying mediocre teams.
Couts didn't have real talent until 2019-20.

I'd be happy to make the trades people are proposing for Eichel for Barkov and pay him $10M a year, he's >> Eichel.
That's an example of an elite center entering the prime of his career.

Yeah, he totally carried all those teams with no help from Giroux being just under a ppg over that time period with a Hart finalist season, or Voracek at .85 ppg, or Mason being good enough to get all-star votes in 2 of those seasons... ROR (funny enough was also widely considered to be part of the problem in Buffalo until he got away and promptly won a cup), Okposo, Evander Kane (for 1 season and was considered to be a locker room cancer before going to a conference finalist), and Foligno are definitely equal to those Flyers teams, and it's Eichel's inferiority to Couts that has made Buffalo so bad.

I'm about the only person on this board that almost actually agrees with Deady, and I'm still arguing with him.

 

[Starat327]

This is embarrassing.

 

[Prongo]

Truthfully, would we hate the idea of Matthew Tkachuk here? Have no idea what the cost would be but have to assume that Patrick would be going back.

Ottawa makes a lot of sense for obvious reasons.

 

[deadhead]

Honestly, this all just comes down to a bias on his part against big name skill guys he perceives as not wanting it enough or not being winners or whatever. He did the same shit to Tavares, even said Patrick would be better than Tavares as soon as 3 seasons ago and look how well that prediction has turned out.

So how did adding JT to Toronto work out. Multiple playoff victories?
Before JT, 251, 271 goals scored, after 286, 279 (pro-rated), 274 (PR)
Meanwhile losing him crippled the Islanders. Not.

Yes, I'm biased against big named skill guys b/c they tend to be overpaid relative to their contribution to WINNING.
Guys like Couts, Bergeron, Barkov, Marchand, tend to be underpaid but are more valuable.

Now you have to be careful with advanced metrics with top scorers, b/c they tend to be more valuable than their xGF% would suggest b/c they're usually top finishers, especially top scorers who score goals. But xGF can be a check on raw scoring stats.

Same way PP numbers should be checked against their PP pp/60 and xGF/60, Eichel plays 3+ minutes a night on the PP so he racked up points, but he's 27th among forwards during his two peak seasons in pp/60 on the PP. Eichel was 100th in xGF/60 on the PP.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Truthfully, would we hate the idea of Matthew Tkachuk here? Have no idea what the cost would be but have to assume that Patrick would be going back.

Ottawa makes a lot of sense for obvious reasons.

 

[mja]

So how did adding JT to Toronto work out. Multiple playoff victories?
Before JT, 251, 271 goals scored, after 286, 279 (pro-rated), 274 (PR)
Meanwhile losing him crippled the Islanders. Not.

Yes, I'm biased against big named skill guys b/c they tend to be overpaid relative to their contribution to WINNING.
Guys like Couts, Bergeron, Barkov, Marchand, tend to be underpaid but are more valuable.

Now you have to be careful with advanced metrics with top scorers, b/c they tend to be more valuable than their xGF% would suggest b/c they're usually top finishers, especially top scorers who score goals. But xGF can be a check on raw scoring stats.

Same way PP numbers should be checked against their PP pp/60 and xGF/60, Eichel plays 3+ minutes a night on the PP so he racked up points, but he's 27th among forwards during his two peak seasons in pp/60 on the PP. Eichel was 100th in xGF/60 on the PP.

Yes, it's Tavares' fault that TO hasn't won a playoff series (I mean, he was nearly a complete no-show against Montreal this year, right?) and it's thanks to his departure that the Isles have, because absolutely nothing else could possibly have led to those results. It's all on Tavares.

 

[Starat327]

Yes, it's Tavares' fault that TO hasn't won a playoff series (I mean, he was nearly a complete no-show against Montreal this year, right?) and it's thanks to his departure that the Isles have, because absolutely nothing else could possibly have led to those results. It's all on Tavares.

Save yourself.

 

[deadhead]

Yes, it's Tavares' fault that TO hasn't won a playoff series (I mean, he was nearly a complete no-show against Montreal this year, right?) and it's thanks to his departure that the Isles have, because absolutely nothing else could possibly have led to those results. It's all on Tavares.

It's neither his fault nor his credit. It's that his addition turned out to have little impact (need to add a difference maker!!!).

That's because the NHL isn't the NBA, with the hard salary cap (NBA has more exceptions than swiss cheese has holes) and the fact that even top players only play 1/3 of the minutes (an elite D-man like Pronger in the playoffs might hit 29 minutes), you have to look at not just the talent of the player added, but the impact of the cap hit on team depth.

 

[CutOnDime97]

So how did adding JT to Toronto work out. Multiple playoff victories?
Before JT, 251, 271 goals scored, after 286, 279 (pro-rated), 274 (PR)
Meanwhile losing him crippled the Islanders. Not.

Yes, I'm biased against big named skill guys b/c they tend to be overpaid relative to their contribution to WINNING.
Guys like Couts, Bergeron, Barkov, Marchand, tend to be underpaid but are more valuable.

Now you have to be careful with advanced metrics with top scorers, b/c they tend to be more valuable than their xGF% would suggest b/c they're usually top finishers, especially top scorers who score goals. But xGF can be a check on raw scoring stats.

Same way PP numbers should be checked against their PP pp/60 and xGF/60, Eichel plays 3+ minutes a night on the PP so he racked up points, but he's 27th among forwards during his two peak seasons in pp/60 on the PP. Eichel was 100th in xGF/60 on the PP.

You're typing so much to argue against this and not really making any good points.

Eichel makes this team better. There's very little offensive skill and creativity here besides an aging Giroux and potentially young guys like Farabee and Frost. Eichel would be a breath of fresh air.

I don't know if you actually believe half the stuff you argue or you're just bored. You always seem to be on the opposite side.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

As always, “it doesn’t matter.”

 

[Rebels57]

You're typing so much to argue against this and not really making any good points.

Eichel makes this team better. There's very little offensive skill and creativity here besides an aging Giroux and potentially young guys like Farabee and Frost. Eichel would be a breath of fresh air.

I don't know if you actually believe half the stuff you argue or you're just bored. You always seem to be on the opposite side.

Just like he's been doing for EVERY TOPIC in EVERY THREAD for more than FIVE YEARS.

Yet people still fall for it. Incredible.

 

[TheKingPin]

Which spot in the lineup do you see laughton playing next season?

By the end of this off-season, 1C.

But seriously, I would expect regression from him. He did have a lot more effort to finish the season after signing his new contract which was nice and not something he lacked in the first place. It didn’t translate to anything though. I would think he is at best a 3C here. Most likely a 3W or a 4C.

 

[TheKingPin]

Eichel is probably the most agreeable target this board has ever had at least.

 

[mja]

It's neither his fault nor his credit. It's that his addition turned out to have little impact (need to add a difference maker!!!).

That's because the NHL isn't the NBA, with the hard salary cap (NBA has more exceptions than swiss cheese has holes) and the fact that even top players only play 1/3 of the minutes (an elite D-man like Pronger in the playoffs might hit 29 minutes), you have to look at not just the talent of the player added, but the impact of the cap hit on team depth.

None of this is in dispute, well, except if you can add a prime top player, you should almost always do it, especially when you have a gaping hole at that spot both near and long term--after all, we could potentially be rolling with KevDog at 1C (what a great use of cap space he is!) by the trade deadline if this thing goes way south--but that has no bearing on your prediction that Patrick would prove better than Tavares by now (that's shit's not close) or your general antipathy towards him as a player.

The issue rather is your irrational bias against a certain player profile and the lengths you'll go to try to pass it off as dispassionate data-driven well-reasoned logic, while twisting yourself into pretzels and contradictions, arguing out of both sides of your mouth from one post to the next.

You don't like Eichel for the same reason you don't like Tavares or Jake. They don't smell like winners to you. I'd almost rather you just argue that.

 

[deadhead]

You're typing so much to argue against this and not really making any good points.

Eichel makes this team better. There's very little offensive skill and creativity here besides an aging Giroux and potentially young guys like Farabee and Frost. Eichel would be a breath of fresh air.

I don't know if you actually believe half the stuff you argue or you're just bored. You always seem to be on the opposite side.

Eichel might make this team better, depends on what you have to give up, his neck, and the impact of his $10M cap hit.
He's not good enough to be a slam dunk like say Barkov would be.

 

[Starat327]

None of this is in dispute, well, except if you can add a prime top player, you should almost always do it, especially when you have a gaping hole at that spot both near and long term--after all, we could potentially be rolling with KevDog at 1C (what a great use of cap space he is!) by the trade deadline if this thing goes way south--but that has no bearing on your prediction that Patrick would prove better than Tavares by now (that's shit's not close) or your general antipathy towards him as a player.

The issue rather is your irrational bias against a certain player profile and the lengths you'll go to try to pass it off as dispassionate data-driven well-reasoned logic, while twisting yourself into pretzels and contradictions, arguing out of both sides of your mouth from one post to the next.

You don't like Eichel for the same reason you don't like Tavares or Jake. They don't smell like winners to you. I'd almost rather you just argue that.

I'd rather we sisnt argue the idea that Eichel doesn't make this team better.

For someone who doesn't believe that add players like Stewart, playing hagg 50 games a year, etc are 'inconsequential he seems to be wildly nitpicking the differences between elite players.