Post-Game Talk: Ryan Poehling scores a hat trick and the shootout winner in his debut! Habs win 6-5 vs TML.

[Habsawce]

If we get the first overall (aka Kakko).
Karlsson could sign here

They'd take Hughes every time. You win in this league by dominating down the middle.

 

[HockeyDBspecialist]

They'd take Hughes every time. You win in this league by dominating down the middle.

our biggest need, If suzuki is not playing RW, is RW at the moment. We need a real sharpshooter that doesn't score only from net presence

 

[NotProkofievian]

I agree in theory. In practice, shopping Price and Weber may cost us more than it helps us. Price is still in his prime and could remain excellent to solid for another five years. Whatever we could get back for him wouldn't compensate for the loss of a top goalie, especially since we have no one close to taking his place.

I'd have no issue trading Weber, but I doubt it happens for a number of reasons, some of them pretty good reasons. First of all, there's value in mentoring young defensemen, which is something he's apparently good at. He's held in high esteem, he makes other dmen better -- that's what I hear and can only trust it's true.

This again? No. There is 0 value to this until proven otherwise. Presumably, Weber might have taught Mete to shoot a puck by now.

Second, Weber's cap hit and reduced speed makes him a tougher sell. Yeah, a few teams would jump at the chance to add his experience, but I doubt they'd jump high enough to give us a top draft pick or prospect. Whatever we'd get back wouldn't be worth what we traded away.

His cap hit is in excess of his salary, which is itself a source of value to some teams. Also, it's hard to square this point with your third (especially) and first (less so) points. Weber either is or is not good. You can't have ''not good'' when arguing that people wouldn't pay anything for him, and then turn around and argue that he's good and turns your young defenders into studs when arguing why we should keep him.

Luckily, aside from Price and Weber, the rest of our roster is prime or younger. I have no issue dangling any of our older assets for top picks in the next two drafts. That would mean our window opens around 2022, which is fine, provided Bergevin builds according to that timeline.

Nah. Is Petry's value going up or down from here? How about Byron? This is the story of our roster. Our ''win now'' guys are not nearly good enough to win. We saw this in 2017. We saw it in 2018. We saw it this year. Our ''win later'' guys might be, though.

Making no decision on this matter is making a decision of a kind.

 

[Lshap]

This again? No. There is 0 value to this until proven otherwise. Presumably, Weber might have taught Mete to shoot a puck by now.

0 value according to who? The fans? Weber's leadership has value as long as players claim they're benefitting from it. The fact that you and I don't see it is, frankly, irrelevant.

His cap hit is in excess of his salary, which is itself a source of value to some teams. Also, it's hard to square this point with your third (especially) and first (less so) points. Weber either is or is not good. You can't have ''not good'' when arguing that people wouldn't pay anything for him, and then turn around and argue that he's good and turns your young defenders into studs when arguing why we should keep him.

It's simple: Either Weber was slower because he was playing hurt, or he's just slower. It's hard to determine his on-ice value until we know either way. At least he's still able to put up points.

Nah. Is Petry's value going up or down from here? How about Byron? This is the story of our roster. Our ''win now'' guys are not nearly good enough to win. We saw this in 2017. We saw it in 2018. We saw it this year. Our ''win later'' guys might be, though.

Making no decision on this matter is making a decision of a kind.

That's exactly what I'm saying -- late-prime Price and Weber are probably un-tradeable, but this is the perfect time to shop mid-prime Petry and Byron. Sell high now, get better picks or prospects who may become tomorrow's stars.

 

[NotProkofievian]

0 value according to who? The fans? Weber's leadership has value as long as players claim they're benefitting from it. The fact that you and I don't see it is, frankly, irrelevant.

No. You either get something for it, or you do not. If you can't say exactly what it is that you're getting from Weber's man mountainly leadership in tangible terms, you don't get to make that argument. Well, you can make it, but I'm free to ignore it without conceding anything.

It's simple: Either Weber was slower because he was playing hurt, or he's just slower. It's hard to determine his on-ice value until we know either way. At least he's still able to put up points.

It's not hard to determine that his on ice value is going one way. How shall we react to this?

That's exactly what I'm saying -- late-prime Price and Weber are probably un-tradeable, but this is the perfect time to shop mid-prime Petry and Byron. Sell high now, get better picks or prospects who may become tomorrow's stars.

Weber is not unmovable. Price is without retention. But we don't need to move every single vet, just a couple.

 

[Lshap]

No. You either get something for it, or you do not. If you can't say exactly what it is that you're getting from Weber's man mountainly leadership in tangible terms, you don't get to make that argument. Well, you can make it, but I'm free to ignore it without conceding anything.

The only thing that has zero value is a debate between you and I about something we have zero access to. Players of all teams claim leadership has value. Ignore them if you wish.

 

[NotProkofievian]

The only thing that has zero value is a debate between you and I about something we have zero access to. Players of all teams claim leadership has value. Ignore them if you wish.

Would they not say that of just about any veterans that were present? This isn't about veterans or leadership or team spirit per se, it's about the marginal value of Weber's leadership. You made the claim, now support it if you wish.

What do we get besides lovely interview soundbites?

 

[admiralcadillac]

Would they not say that of just about any veterans that were present? This isn't about veterans or leadership or team spirit per se, it's about the marginal value of Weber's leadership. You made the claim, now support it if you wish.

What do we get besides lovely interview soundbites?

You load every post with claims you can't support. Why do you call Weber's leadership of marginal value when LShap's post specifically claimed that you can't know that? The players seem to indicate the exact opposite.

 

[MC94]

No. You either get something for it, or you do not. If you can't say exactly what it is that you're getting from Weber's man mountainly leadership in tangible terms, you don't get to make that argument. Well, you can make it, but I'm free to ignore it without conceding anything.



It's not hard to determine that his on ice value is going one way. How shall we react to this?



Weber is not unmovable. Price is without retention. But we don't need to move every single vet, just a couple.

If leadership was so important than sign Messier to a contract in the offseason I get your point most important is your play obviously, but being a good leader is not to be underrated imo

 

[Lshap]

Would they not say that of just about any veterans that were present? This isn't about veterans or leadership or team spirit per se, it's about the marginal value of Weber's leadership. You made the claim, now support it if you wish.

What do we get besides lovely interview soundbites?

Actually, yes, lots of veterans are praised for their leadership value. The quality isn't specific to Shea Weber, just like goal-scoring isn't specific to Alex Ovechkin. Weber is just purportedly better at leadership than most veterans. And to be clear, it's not me making that claim because, as I said, it's not a quality that's evident to us fans. I'm simply citing evidence gathered from his peers -- his captaincy of two teams, his role on Team Canada, the quotes praising his leadership from coaches, other stars (Crosby comes to mind), multiple past and present teammates. We're not on the ice with them, so we can either accept that anecdotal evidence about the value of leadership, or dismiss it.

But we've gotten away from the original point, which is that I'd be fine trading him, but assuming we don't or can't, his leadership is among the qualities that mitigate keeping him around. We're not talking Gomez...

 

[NotProkofievian]

If leadership was so important than sign Messier to a contract in the offseason I get your point most important is your play obviously, but being a good leader is not to be underrated imo

There's little to no chance of this ever happening in a world where Jonny Intangibles was voted in the top 100 players of all time over Malkin.

 

[NotProkofievian]

You load every post with claims you can't support. Why do you call Weber's leadership of marginal value when LShap's post specifically claimed that you can't know that? The players seem to indicate the exact opposite.

Marginal value is a fancy term that means ''the difference between Weber's leadership and another veteran's leadership.'' Just because we don't have Weber, doesn't mean we don't have leadership.

 

[admiralcadillac]

Marginal value is a fancy term that means ''the difference between Weber's leadership and another veteran's leadership.'' Just because we don't have Weber, doesn't mean we don't have leadership.

That's not the point though really, that's an argument you can make for a lot of things. "Just because Tampa doesn't have Kucherov doesn't mean they can't score goals."

Weber had another 14 goals this year and was a generally great presence on the blue line. He wasn't just a figurehead for leadership but was necessary in many ways.

 

[NotProkofievian]

That's not the point though really, that's an argument you can make for a lot of things. "Just because Tampa doesn't have Kucherov doesn't mean they can't score goals."

It is the point. He said this was something we had to consider that we're losing in trading Weber. The best he can come up with is that players seem to think he is a good leader. I'm sure they do. However, he can't tell me that the leadership would definitely or even probably be worse in his absence. On the other hand, I can pretty easily make the argument that Kucherov is basically irreplaceable offensively. I can point to production that not even Sid the kid has equalled.

 

[admiralcadillac]

It is the point. He said this was something we had to consider that we're losing in trading Weber. The best he can come up with is that players seem to think he is a good leader. I'm sure they do. However, he can't tell me that the leadership would definitely or even probably be worse in his absence. On the other hand, I can pretty easily make the argument that Kucherov is basically irreplaceable offensively. I can point to production that not even Sid the kid has equalled.

You just called Weber's leadership marginal, as in marginally better, but you don't know that. My point about Kucherov is that it's obviously not just his goal totals you care about, but his general production and the total package he is as a player - that's what you're losing. Weber's leadership isn't confined to an abstract concept but the 23 minutes he plays a game, the 14 goals he's had in 60 games this year, and the presence he has on the ice, ON TOP of what the players say he is in the locker room.

 

[Habsawce]

our biggest need, If suzuki is not playing RW, is RW at the moment. We need a real sharpshooter that doesn't score only from net presence

Centres convert to wingers much easier. You are not going to pass on a top line centre for a winger, not in my opinion. Think about it this way, Toronto has Tavares and Kadri during the Matthews draft. You think they take Laine cause they are weaker on the wing? No chance.

 

[NotProkofievian]

You just called Weber's leadership marginal, as in marginally better, but you don't know that. My point about Kucherov is that it's obviously not just his goal totals you care about, but his general production and the total package he is as a player - that's what you're losing. Weber's leadership isn't confined to an abstract concept but the 23 minutes he plays a game, the 14 goals he's had in 60 games this year, and the presence he has on the ice, ON TOP of what the players say he is in the locker room.

This is the last time that I'm going explain this to you before I start getting snarky: marginal difference just means the difference, whatever it is. It's a term from economics, not a value judgement. What's at issue is the actual value of it, since @Lshap brought it up as something we'd be losing. I'm asking for it to be quantified. I'm not the one who made a claim one way or the other, but don't ask me to go along with this as being some great loss unless you can substantiate it. Saying that I don't know that it wouldn't be a great loss is a nothing argument. I don't know that there isn't a celestial tea pot between Mars and Jupiter, either.

His general production and value on the ice was brought up as a separate point.

 

[admiralcadillac]

This is the last time that I'm going explain this to you before I start getting snarky: marginal difference just means the difference, whatever it is. It's a term from economics, not a value judgement. What's at issue is the actual value of it, since @Lshap brought it up as something we'd be losing. I'm asking for it to be quantified. I'm not the one who made a claim one way or the other, but don't ask me to go along with this as being some great loss unless you can substantiate it. Saying that I don't know that it wouldn't be a great loss is a nothing argument. I don't know that there isn't a celestial tea pot between Mars and Jupiter, either.

His general production and value on the ice was brought up as a separate point.

The marginal value, as in the difference between Weber's leadership and another veteran's, is not just an abstract concept.

I didn't struggle to understand your basic use of a term... what your post implied was that the margin itself is small. I just wrote a post disagreeing.

 

[NotProkofievian]

The marginal value, as in the difference between Weber's leadership and another veteran's, is not just an abstract concept.

I didn't struggle to understand your basic use of a term... what your post implied was that the margin itself is small. I just wrote a post disagreeing.

I never did any such thing. I asked someone to prove that it was substantial. Those are not the same things.

 

[Toene]

To quantify leadership is conceptually impossible. It's subjective and varies in the eyes of the different actors. But it exists, without a doubt. Like love, friendship, respect.

You can do a survey about quantitative matters. You could ask a given population what color they prefer. Or you could ask a room of player who they consider like a leader they respect.

Now how do you convert respect and leadership into cap hit, that I dont know.

But we must add that the value of a player is also subjective. Offer, demand, rarity of skillset, showmanship, etc. vary wildly in the eyes of a person (in this case sports manager) to another and has an impact on what a player will go for. Why is Evander Kane worth 7 million per year? Specific context -> specific value.

 

[admiralcadillac]

I never did any such thing. I asked someone to prove that it was substantial. Those are not the same things.

How much better proof do you need than teammates of the player at every level that player has played, along with his obvious quality as a player?

 

[NotProkofievian]

How much better proof do you need than teammates of the player at every level that player has played, along with his obvious quality as a player?

How much more proof do I need than anecdotes and begging the question? How about we start with some?

 

[admiralcadillac]

How much more proof do I need than anecdotes and begging the question? How about we start with some?

Tough to argue with willful ignorance...

You’ve won

 

[ECWHSWI]

You load every post with claims you can't support. Why do you call Weber's leadership of marginal value when LShap's post specifically claimed that you can't know that? The players seem to indicate the exact opposite.

yeah, the same players (the ones who were here obviously) who voted and supported Pacioretty captaincy apparently...

 

[1909]

How much more proof do I need than anecdotes and begging the question? How about we start with some?

OMG. When a guy decides to not understand......