The Kingslayer
Registered User
Sigh. If we wouldve signed ROR to that deal Lambert would **** all over us. He just needs a reason to **** on us. Eff this moron.
Why does Ryan Lambert hate the Avalanche?
- Thread starter Lemonlimey
- Start date
Sigh. If we wouldve signed ROR to that deal Lambert would **** all over us. He just needs a reason to **** on us. Eff this moron.
DRL
Registered User
I don't see the hate. Article was pretty good, all the reasons we loved oreilly are presented here. And he also refers to matt as great. Not seeing the hate in this article.
The Kingslayer
Registered User
a mangy Meowth
Ross Colton Fan
a mangy Meowth
Ross Colton Fan
Oh the hyperbole
Everybody? This is one specific person. With a documented history of it.
You equating this to the vanity posts about wishing the main board people would agree with us about offseason moves is just wrong. Not in the same category
The stat whackers do because the Avs committed the blasphemy of winning with a low corsi.
If it's not him it's someone else. Hear it all the time. "Who said that? Oh no wonder. He hates the Avs"
Lambert, Ferraro, Yost etc. Even Marek and Wyshynski after their latest podcast.
shadow1
Registered User
- Nov 29, 2008
- 16,596
- 5,245
It's comments like this that show he has a lot of anguish for the Avs. I'm not sure who this quote is directed at, but it must be the Avalanche themselves or the Avalanche fans.
Duchene is in a tie with Joe Pavelski and Jordan Staal as the 20th highest paid center annually. O'Reilly is tied with Pavel Datsyuk, Steven Stamkos, and Jason Spezza as the 7th highest paid center annually.
InjuredChoker
Registered User
i agree with you here (i've argued here that ferraro doesn't hate the avs and mocked the analysis of why he'd hate the avs etc) except yost. that dude definitely has some bias. even before avs became corsi abyss. and goes way over board with his shots. lambert at least takes shots against most of the teams in the league so don't see him it as him hating the avs as that would mean he hates almost every team in the league... i guess that is also possibility, though.
Lemonlimey
Registered User
Bingo, i believe. It was an ongoing gag 2 years ago how he'd post every month about how inevitable the avalanche decline would be - and that this (soon to happen!) tailspin would be the definitive signal of advanced stats victory. First it was that we'd miss the playoffs despite a great start, then that we'd never, ever win the division and were insane to even imagine so. And he harped all that year about how Roy was the worst coach in the league (still does actually). Well that Jack Adams trophy and Central banner hanging in the rafters apparently still keep him up at night.
My worry is that this bozo, and others like him, do have some impact. You see the same lazy arguments Lambert introduces repeated endlessly by other fans - and media. I by no means want to overblow the significance of a yahoo blog hack, but have you not noticed the book on Colorado somehow become an open and shut case? Despite actually proving most stat-heads wrong that season we have ultimately become the case study for why all analytics are forever infallible. Never is it mentioned that our loss to Minnesota could have had anything to do with injuries, nor last seasons 'regression'.
(edit: in fairness, he took a similarly obtuse angle on Calgary all this season)
Last edited:
InjuredChoker
Registered User
he does that kind of trolling in pretty much every article he writes, against almost every team in the league.
Freudian
Clearly deranged
- Jul 3, 2003
- 50,480
- 17,352
I think the contract is market value. Had not Buffalo paid him, someone else would have.
I do think the attempts to paint it as good value because O'Reilly is good defensively are overdoing it. But two-way play is a bit overrated because the catch phrase of the day is possession hockey.
Landeskog is on a contract that gives good value. Pacioretty is on a contract that gives good value. Shattenkirk is on a contract that gives good value. Seguin is on a contract that gives good value.
The bang for your buck value of the O'Reilly contract, even if he plays at the height of his ability going forward will never get close to contracts like that.
I don't think Lamberts article was to bash Avs, even though he's clearly bothered by them not being as into corsi as he is. He just overrates two way play a bit and he's far from alone.
I do think the attempts to paint it as good value because O'Reilly is good defensively are overdoing it. But two-way play is a bit overrated because the catch phrase of the day is possession hockey.
Landeskog is on a contract that gives good value. Pacioretty is on a contract that gives good value. Shattenkirk is on a contract that gives good value. Seguin is on a contract that gives good value.
The bang for your buck value of the O'Reilly contract, even if he plays at the height of his ability going forward will never get close to contracts like that.
I don't think Lamberts article was to bash Avs, even though he's clearly bothered by them not being as into corsi as he is. He just overrates two way play a bit and he's far from alone.
Lemonlimey
Registered User
Totally agree, Ryan is worth it. Just bothers me how every framing of the discussion, at least that I've seen, is as if it was a UFA signing. Is ROR worth 7.5, when 'factoring' (sorry, had to) in his age and the rising cap? Absolutely! But when considering the assets given up, and the cap ramifications for the future, the amount of risk both teams have taken in the trade is similar.
Avs_19
Registered User
- Jun 28, 2007
- 84,832
- 32,900
That's a bit harsh.
RockLobster
King in the North
Pretty big difference between some guy who (to my knowledge) hasn't written a lot about the Avs, and Ryan Lambert, who's seemingly on a mission to trash the Avs whenever he gets a chance.
Grandland= Stat Whacker central.
His arguments weren't really stats-based.
Not that I have anything against stats, quite the opposite.
Lemonlimey
Registered User
dahrougem2
Registered User
I don't take anyone's opinions seriously unless their name is Bob McKenzie or Elliotte Friedman. Everyone else either uses the fancy-stats without watching the Avs, or simply doesn't know enough about this team to make an educated opinion yet tries to come off as knowledgeable.
- Dec 4, 2002
- 10,671
- 1,606
I think his point of signing mid-30s guys to 3 year contracts is a darn good one.
Right now, the Avs have 4 players 35 or over who are signed to ~$17M of contracts. For a team not really contending for the Cup, doesn't that seem like a lot?
RockLobster
King in the North
I think it depends on the player.
We didn't even offer Iginla the most years (the Islanders did), and he's been relatively healthy for his entire NHL career. I don't see him as having as big of a likelihood of dropping off.
Beauchemin, while he may be 35 (just turned 35 on June 4th), will play out this year as a 35 year old, next year as a 36 year old, and his last year as a 37 year old (he'll be 37-turning-38 after his contract is up). And on top of that, he broke in late and doesn't have the same amount of "mileage" on his body that a typical 35 year old NHLer has.
Stuart, yes, didn't like the extension at all, but at least the Avs got their picks back for him (just to move down 8 spots and likely nab their guy anyway).
Who is the other one?
Lemonlimey
Registered User
He, like all others, brings up the risk and downside, both of which certainly exist in the Beauchemin contract.
The issue is he goes further, citing the signing as an example of Sakic's incompetence. There is precedent, the Stuart debacle was a certain mistake. Sakic himself has shown how well he understands this, trading for those 2 picks used to acquire Stuart back from San Jose almost as if it was personal. He does Joe a disservice as he whiffs completely on the concept behind the signing: he suggests Colorado is deluding itself into believing it was a contender. Were that true, would we not have resigned ROR instead of flipping him for futures?
The clear idea behind Beauchemin is to get 1 year top pairing, one year second pairing, and one year third pairing. There is plenty of risk that won't work out, but the concept is that all our D prospects are 1, 2, or 3 years away. Boom Boom hopefully buys each of them that extra year they need of seasoning, and allows a smoother transition up the depth chart for Bigras, Siemens, and Zadorov.
Or the Avs are just idiots. Isn't that an easier article?
The issue is he goes further, citing the signing as an example of Sakic's incompetence. There is precedent, the Stuart debacle was a certain mistake. Sakic himself has shown how well he understands this, trading for those 2 picks used to acquire Stuart back from San Jose almost as if it was personal. He does Joe a disservice as he whiffs completely on the concept behind the signing: he suggests Colorado is deluding itself into believing it was a contender. Were that true, would we not have resigned ROR instead of flipping him for futures?
The clear idea behind Beauchemin is to get 1 year top pairing, one year second pairing, and one year third pairing. There is plenty of risk that won't work out, but the concept is that all our D prospects are 1, 2, or 3 years away. Boom Boom hopefully buys each of them that extra year they need of seasoning, and allows a smoother transition up the depth chart for Bigras, Siemens, and Zadorov.
Or the Avs are just idiots. Isn't that an easier article?
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
GAME 7 - North Bay Battalion @ Oshawa Generals - Series tied 3-3Wagers: 4Staked: $875.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
Series Winner Florida Panthers vs Boston BruinsWagers: 12Staked: $110,425.00Event closes- Updated:
-