Your DRW ‘hot takes’

Bench

3 is a good start
Aug 14, 2011
21,201
14,889
crease
The 10-11 results are more of an indication that he took over a very good team to begin with... and then took 4 years to win a playoff game

That would be like saying taking over the 2013 Wings were "a good team to begin with" after beating the Ducks and almost knockin' out the Hawks. There was the start of a slide happening. The Wings may have made the playoffs the following 3 years, but only won 5 games, and haven't been relevant since.

You can rearrange historical perspective all you want, but the Lightning are one of the best teams in the league now. Yzerman's DNA is all over that. Tampa fans will give him that credit, why won't you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: OgeeOgelthorpe

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,462
That would be like saying taking over the 2013 Wings were "a good team to begin with" after beating the Ducks and almost knockin' out the Hawks. There was the start of a slide happening. The Wings may have made the playoffs the following 3 years, but only won 5 games, and haven't been relevant since.

You can rearrange historical perspective all you want, but the Lightning are one of the best teams in the league now. Yzerman's DNA is all over that. Tampa fans will give him that credit, why won't you?
They've won 0 playoff games in 2 out of the last 3 years. That seems like a pretty low bar to be considered "one of the best teams in the league"

...and he still had nothing to do with bringing in their Norris winning defenseman or 2X Richard winning captain.
 

Lil Sebastian Cossa

Opinions are share are my own personal opinions.
Jul 6, 2012
11,436
7,446
They've won 0 playoff games in 2 out of the last 3 years. That seems like a pretty low bar to be considered "one of the best teams in the league"

...and he still had nothing to do with bringing in their Norris winning defenseman or 2X Richard winning captain.

What is it with people denying facts?

They literally played in the Cup final in 2015.

LAST YEAR. LAST YEAR. They finished within 3 points of the Red Wings 1995-1996 season. Tied their number of wins.

But he did have everything to do with bringing in Hart winner Nikita Kucherov, other 90 point C Brayden Point, third highest scoring forward Yanni Gourde, D who looks to continue their chain of pretty bad ass backenders in Mikhail Sergachev after taking Drouin.

Seriously, there are so many times I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on here. People find one damn thing to latch onto which is technically true and use it as a cudgel for a point when literally everything else points to the opposite result being the answer.
 

Bench

3 is a good start
Aug 14, 2011
21,201
14,889
crease
What is it with people denying facts?

They literally played in the Cup final in 2015.

LAST YEAR. LAST YEAR. They finished within 3 points of the Red Wings 1995-1996 season. Tied their number of wins.

But he did have everything to do with bringing in Hart winner Nikita Kucherov, other 90 point C Brayden Point, third highest scoring forward Yanni Gourde, D who looks to continue their chain of pretty bad ass backenders in Mikhail Sergachev after taking Drouin.

Seriously, there are so many times I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on here. People find one damn thing to latch onto which is technically true and use it as a cudgel for a point when literally everything else points to the opposite result being the answer.

Hell if I know. Even stuff like this baffles me.

And I'm an insane person that wants to draft a goalie at #4.
 

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,462
What is it with people denying facts?

They literally played in the Cup final in 2015.

LAST YEAR. LAST YEAR. They finished within 3 points of the Red Wings 1995-1996 season. Tied their number of wins.

But he did have everything to do with bringing in Hart winner Nikita Kucherov, other 90 point C Brayden Point, third highest scoring forward Yanni Gourde, D who looks to continue their chain of pretty bad ass backenders in Mikhail Sergachev after taking Drouin.

Seriously, there are so many times I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on here. People find one damn thing to latch onto which is technically true and use it as a cudgel for a point when literally everything else points to the opposite result being the answer.
First off, you realize you're in a thread specifically for hot takes?

LAST YEAR. LAST YEAR. They got swept out of the first round. Where they were outscored 19-8. They won as many playoff games as the Red Wings 2018-2019 season. 14 teams finished with more playoff wins.

Those are some nice/good players (Drouin kind of a disappointment for a 3rd overall pick, thanks for helping my point).
Are any of them better than Hedman/Stamkos? Kucherov is certainly there with them.

How has having those nice/good complimentary players worked out for them?
2 division championships in 9 years
0 playoff wins in 5/9 years
That's pretty underwhelming for a "Great GM" that was spotted 2 of the best players in the league and a 3rd overall pick early in his career.
 

Lil Sebastian Cossa

Opinions are share are my own personal opinions.
Jul 6, 2012
11,436
7,446
First off, you realize you're in a thread specifically for hot takes?

LAST YEAR. LAST YEAR. They got swept out of the first round. Where they were outscored 19-8. They won as many playoff games as the Red Wings 2018-2019 season. 14 teams finished with more playoff wins.

Those are some nice/good players (Drouin kind of a disappointment for a 3rd overall pick, thanks for helping my point).
Are any of them better than Hedman/Stamkos? Kucherov is certainly there with them.

How has having those nice/good complimentary players worked out for them?
2 division championships in 9 years
0 playoff wins in 5/9 years
That's pretty underwhelming for a "Great GM" that was spotted 2 of the best players in the league and a 3rd overall pick early in his career.

Hey, guess what, the Wings got swept out of the first round multiple times, actually, back in the late 90s, early 2000s, when they were clearly the class of the league. It's almost like the playoffs actually are a crapshoot and people aren't just blowing smoke up your ass when they say any team has a shot. It was a gigantic shock that Tampa lost to Columbus like they did. But Columbus is actually a pretty decent team as well. I mean, sure, the regular season isn't the only thing, but they had 62 damn wins. They were the better team 62 times out of 82. But because they had one bad week of hockey against another ostensibly pretty good team, they're dogshit apparently.

Kucherov is better than Stamkos. Point has a pretty easy argument to be placed on the same level and is six years younger.

Yes, I realize I'm in a thread of hot takes. But hot take doesn't mean that you ignore reality. Tampa Bay is one of the best teams in the NHL. That is an inarguable fact. Steve Yzerman was the guy who built that roster. Sure, say he got the gift of having Stamkos and Hedman on the roster before he got there. He added a Hart winner with a 2nd round pick, he added not one, not two, but three pretty damn good goalies and cut bait at good times (Roloson, Bishop, Vasilevskiy) having traded Cory Conacher and Steve Downie for them.

I guess 2005 USC isn't one of the greatest college football teams of all time because they got beat by Texas then. Or the 2007 Patriots that lost 17-14 in the Super Bowl to finish 18-1 aren't among the greatest NFL teams ever. You can be one of the best teams in the league and not win. That's why they f***ing play the games. On paper, Tampa should have blown Columbus out. In reality, they lost a close game 1 and showed their ass in game 2 to give up home ice to Columbus and Columbus sealed the deal at home.

To add a couple more pertinent Red Wings things...

The "greatest hockey team ever" the 2001-2002 Red Wings with their 9 Hall of Famers were one fluky ass goal that Cloutier gave up and Steve Yzerman on one damn leg refusing to let them lose from dying in the first round. They were one triple OT game away from being in a real damn dog fight against the younger Hurricanes.

The Cup winning team in 2007-2008... if they didn't sign Chris Osgood for like ten bucks and have him as the backup to come in and save the Nashville series would have lost in round one because Hasek sprung a leak.

The Penguins won in 2009 in game 7 because Maxime Talbot played out of his mind in a deciding game. Sidney Crosby sat his ass on the bench injured for the second half of that game 7.

That 2015 Lightning team that made the finals? They almost lost a game 7 to Detroit which they really might have done if the league didn't suspend Kronwall for the hit on Kucherov.

The playoffs are a funky set of circumstances where it usually isn't the best team that wins. It's the team that perseveres and gets luck. So it's not the best idea to say "HAHAHA YOU LOST IN THE PLAYOFFS YOU SUCK!"
 
Last edited:

OgeeOgelthorpe

Baldina
Feb 29, 2020
17,004
17,982
What is it with people denying facts?

They literally played in the Cup final in 2015.

LAST YEAR. LAST YEAR. They finished within 3 points of the Red Wings 1995-1996 season. Tied their number of wins.

But he did have everything to do with bringing in Hart winner Nikita Kucherov, other 90 point C Brayden Point, third highest scoring forward Yanni Gourde, D who looks to continue their chain of pretty bad ass backenders in Mikhail Sergachev after taking Drouin.

Seriously, there are so many times I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on here. People find one damn thing to latch onto which is technically true and use it as a cudgel for a point when literally everything else points to the opposite result being the answer.

Dude, you're talking sense. The problem is this is HFBoards. Some people on here are just head-shitting birds looking for someone's head to shit on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ArmChairGM89

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,462
Hey, guess what, the Wings got swept out of the first round multiple times, actually, back in the late 90s, early 2000s, when they were clearly the class of the league. It's almost like the playoffs actually are a crapshoot and people aren't just blowing smoke up your ass when they say any team has a shot. It was a gigantic shock that Tampa lost to Columbus like they did. But Columbus is actually a pretty decent team as well. I mean, sure, the regular season isn't the only thing, but they had 62 damn wins. They were the better team 62 times out of 82. But because they had one bad week of hockey against another ostensibly pretty good team, they're dogshit apparently.

Kucherov is better than Stamkos. Point has a pretty easy argument to be placed on the same level and is six years younger.

Yes, I realize I'm in a thread of hot takes. But hot take doesn't mean that you ignore reality. Tampa Bay is one of the best teams in the NHL. That is an inarguable fact. Steve Yzerman was the guy who built that roster. Sure, say he got the gift of having Stamkos and Hedman on the roster before he got there. He added a Hart winner with a 2nd round pick, he added not one, not two, but three pretty damn good goalies and cut bait at good times (Roloson, Bishop, Vasilevskiy) having traded Cory Conacher and Steve Downie for them.

I guess 2005 USC isn't one of the greatest college football teams of all time because they got beat by Texas then. Or the 2007 Patriots that lost 17-14 in the Super Bowl to finish 18-1 aren't among the greatest NFL teams ever. You can be one of the best teams in the league and not win. That's why they f***ing play the games. On paper, Tampa should have blown Columbus out. In reality, they lost a close game 1 and showed their ass in game 2 to give up home ice to Columbus and Columbus sealed the deal at home.

To add a couple more pertinent Red Wings things...

The "greatest hockey team ever" the 2001-2002 Red Wings with their 9 Hall of Famers were one fluky ass goal that Cloutier gave up and Steve Yzerman on one damn leg refusing to let them lose from dying in the first round. They were one triple OT game away from being in a real damn dog fight against the younger Hurricanes.

The Cup winning team in 2007-2008... if they didn't sign Chris Osgood for like ten bucks and have him as the backup to come in and save the Nashville series would have lost in round one because Hasek sprung a leak.

The Penguins won in 2009 in game 7 because Maxime Talbot played out of his mind in a deciding game. Sidney Crosby sat his ass on the bench injured for the second half of that game 7.

That 2015 Lightning team that made the finals? They almost lost a game 7 to Detroit which they really might have done if the league didn't suspend Kronwall for the hit on Kucherov.

The playoffs are a funky set of circumstances where it usually isn't the best team that wins. It's the team that perseveres and gets luck. So it's not the best idea to say "HAHAHA YOU LOST IN THE PLAYOFFS YOU SUCK!"
You keep talking about championship games and fluky game 7's where one play in one game could change everything. That is totally different than being swept in the first round where you are 0/16 games on the way to a championship. (which happened to the red wings once, not multiple times. I'll also point out that in that series, all games were 1 goal games and 2 went to overtime. That is not the same as being outscored 19-8)

You bring up a series against Nashville that the wings won 4-2 and never trailed in the series and compare it to being swept?
 

ArmChairGM89

Registered User
Dec 10, 2019
1,552
1,034
You keep talking about championship games and fluky game 7's where one play in one game could change everything. That is totally different than being swept in the first round where you are 0/16 games on the way to a championship. (which happened to the red wings once, not multiple times. I'll also point out that in that series, all games were 1 goal games and 2 went to overtime. That is not the same as being outscored 19-8)

You bring up a series against Nashville that the wings won 4-2 and never trailed in the series and compare it to being swept?
If a team wins the Stanley cup two out of three years, the middle year getting swept, with the exact same roster, by your Logic that year they were a bad team. But they weren’t. They were the exact same great team with a bad performance.
 

Lil Sebastian Cossa

Opinions are share are my own personal opinions.
Jul 6, 2012
11,436
7,446
You keep talking about championship games and fluky game 7's where one play in one game could change everything. That is totally different than being swept in the first round where you are 0/16 games on the way to a championship. (which happened to the red wings once, not multiple times. I'll also point out that in that series, all games were 1 goal games and 2 went to overtime. That is not the same as being outscored 19-8)

You bring up a series against Nashville that the wings won 4-2 and never trailed in the series and compare it to being swept?

Shit, I had it in my mind that they got swept by the Kings in 2000-2001. The gut punch sure felt like it.

And yes, I brought up the Nashville series. The Wings were a FAR FAR FAR better team than the Preds in 2007-2008 and they were tied 2-2 and went to an OT in game 5.

But yes, I did. One play can change everything, even in a sweep. Read in this article about it, Tampa blitzed Columbus and were up 3-0 early in game one. They made a regular season type play that would have buried the Jackets, but it was a risky play that blew up in their face and led to a whole lot more bad decisions.

Anatomy of a playoff collapse: What happened to the Lightning?

Tampa was Rocky and Columbus Clubber Lang. They hammered them in the face early expecting a roll over opponent. That didn't happen and Columbus just brutalized the shit out of them. As soon as it started going bad for Tampa, it snowballed, because that's what it does in the playoffs if you blink.
 

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
10,842
8,564
You keep talking about championship games and fluky game 7's where one play in one game could change everything. That is totally different than being swept in the first round where you are 0/16 games on the way to a championship. (which happened to the red wings once, not multiple times. I'll also point out that in that series, all games were 1 goal games and 2 went to overtime. That is not the same as being outscored 19-8)
Fair. And I even acknowledged in my original reply that Tampa is more inconsistent than Boston or Pittsburgh or Washington (even if they have similar win totals in the playoffs).

But that's comparing them to the BEST TEAMS IN THE LEAGUE OVER A DECADE.

So let's say that the Lightning have been in the second best tier of NHL franchises for 10 years. Is that such a knock on the guy Detroit hired as GM? Nobody is saying he's guaranteed to act perfectly, and multiple Stanley Cups are a formality already in progress. But he IS a good hire, and despite the mess this roster is in, I'm confident he will improve them to the point of not only making the playoffs in a few years, but being a significant factor in them, year over year.
 

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,462
If a team wins the Stanley cup two out of three years, the middle year getting swept, with the exact same roster, by your Logic that year they were a bad team. But they weren’t. They were the exact same great team with a bad performance.
ORRRRR...
You can look at what literally happened and what I'm literally arguing.

If a team misses the playoffs one year, gets swept out of the first round in another year, and loses in the conference finals the middle year: you are not one of the best teams in the league.
 

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,462
Fair. And I even acknowledged in my original reply that Tampa is more inconsistent than Boston or Pittsburgh or Washington (even if they have similar win totals in the playoffs).

But that's comparing them to the BEST TEAMS IN THE LEAGUE OVER A DECADE.

So let's say that the Lightning have been in the second best tier of NHL franchises for 10 years. Is that such a knock on the guy Detroit hired as GM? Nobody is saying he's guaranteed to act perfectly, and multiple Stanley Cups are a formality already in progress. But he IS a good hire, and despite the mess this roster is in, I'm confident he will improve them to the point of not only making the playoffs in a few years, but being a significant factor in them, year over year.
So, it sounds like you might even agree that:
Yzerman is a mediocre GM

and he did NOT:
spend the better part of a decade being very successful in Tampa.
 

ArmChairGM89

Registered User
Dec 10, 2019
1,552
1,034
ORRRRR...
You can look at what literally happened and what I'm literally arguing.

If a team misses the playoffs one year, gets swept out of the first round in another year, and loses in the conference finals the middle year: you are not one of the best teams in the league.
You argued if a team gets swept in the playoffs they are a bad team.

which is not true. Hockey is unpredictable more so than most sports. You take an 82 game sample size and throw that away in favor of 4 games? Silliness

we beat Montreal 4/4 games last year lol
 

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
10,842
8,564
So, it sounds like you might even agree that:


and he did NOT:
Just the opposite. A team being the 4th or 5th best in the league for 8 years is most definitely successful.

A mediocre GM is a guy that just hangs around but never does anything special. Like never winning your division, never winning the President's Trophy, never winning more than one round in the playoffs. Think, 'Florida Panthers or Minnesota Wild'. But Tampa succeeded at all those things under Yzerman.

Whether you want to call it very good, or above average, or solid, or whatever term you prefer, there's a wide gap between the best and mediocre.
 

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,462
Just the opposite. A team being the 4th or 5th best in the league for 8 years is most definitely successful.
THIS NEVER HAPPENED.

2012: Division finish - 3rd Playoffs: DNQ
2013: Division finish - 4th Playoffs: 1st round sweep
2014: Division finish - 2nd Playoffs: DNQ
2016: Division finish - 5th Playoffs: DNQ
 

Lil Sebastian Cossa

Opinions are share are my own personal opinions.
Jul 6, 2012
11,436
7,446
So, it sounds like you might even agree that:


and he did NOT:

How did you get that out of his post?

He said "they're not the best team" but that they're really not that far back in total playoff wins when you compare them to the teams who ARE the very best.

I really really hate this mentality that has formed around sports. The Royce Bobby line of thinking that if you're not first, you're last. That if you didn't win the title, you may as well not have played at all.

Would you come off it if I just said Tampa built one of the most talented teams in hockey then? Not best because that implies championship success, but acquiring a number of talented players?
 

Winger98

Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
22,756
4,569
Cleveland
07/09 - out of playoffs
08/09 - out of playoffs
09/10 - out of playoffs

Yzerman took over in May 2010

10/11 - 3rd round
11/12 - out of playoffs
12/13 - out of playoffs
13/14 - round 1
14/15 - Cup finals
15/16 - 3rd round
16/17 out of playoffs
17/18 - 3rd round

At the beginning of 18/19 is when Yzerman stepped down.

He inherited a team out of the playoffs for three straight years, had a fluke run, missed the playoffs for a couple more years as he put together his team, and then went on a run. That doesn't seem like a bad run, and like he put the majority of the pieces in place for a top team. Yeah, he had Hedman and Stamkos in place, but a the bulk of that team that made three deep runs in four years was drafted/signed by Yzerman.
 

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,462
How did you get that out of his post?

He said "they're not the best team" but that they're really not that far back in total playoff wins when you compare them to the teams who ARE the very best.

I really really hate this mentality that has formed around sports. The Royce Bobby line of thinking that if you're not first, you're last. That if you didn't win the title, you may as well not have played at all.
They didn't finish "not first". They finished in the bottom half of the league 3 times.
They finished somewhere in the 9-16 range 2 other times.

(Again, I'm going to continue to not use 2010-11 season as he had very little to do with it and count the 2018-19 that was much more his team)

Would you come off it if I just said Tampa built one of the most talented teams in hockey then? Not best because that implies championship success, but acquiring a number of talented players?
I will not. This opens up a whole other can of worms and reminds me of a certain team with a large fanbase that insists their team has a lot of "talent" despite actually being the laughing stock of the league.
 

Winger98

Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
22,756
4,569
Cleveland
They didn't finish "not first". They finished in the bottom half of the league 3 times.
They finished somewhere in the 9-16 range 2 other times.

(Again, I'm going to continue to not use 2010-11 season as he had very little to do with it and count the 2018-19 that was much more his team)


I will not. This opens up a whole other can of worms and reminds me of a certain team with a large fanbase that insists their team has a lot of "talent" despite actually being the laughing stock of the league.

He wasn't the GM.
 

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
10,842
8,564
They didn't finish "not first". They finished in the bottom half of the league 3 times.
They finished somewhere in the 9-16 range 2 other times.
And you're missing the point that the above results, combined with the other years of Yzerman's tenure, is still better than 85 percent of the NHL.

If having one or more bad years makes you a bad GM, then according to the statistics I posted before, Pittsburgh is the only team in the league with a good GM, because everybody else missed the playoffs at least once, if not several times.

What about the guys running Arizona or Buffalo or New Jersey? They've been in the basement for several years, even with some high draft picks. If Yzerman is a mediocre GM based on his record in Tampa, what are these guys?
 

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,462
And you're missing the point that the above results, combined with the other years of Yzerman's tenure, is still better than 85 percent of the NHL.
And if you take away Stamkos and Hedman (And Lecavalier and St. Louis), the results are probably closer to better than 50% of the NHL. AKA: Mediocre and/or not "very successful"

What about the guys running Arizona or Buffalo or New Jersey? They've been in the basement for several years, even with some high draft picks. If Yzerman is a mediocre GM based on his record in Tampa, what are these guys?
...Bad?
 
Last edited:

Winger98

Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
22,756
4,569
Cleveland
So he is responsible for the results of the Red Wings 2018-19 season?

He wasn't GM in 18/19 of the Wings, either. But, yeah, I do hold Yzerman responsible for the 19/20 season. It's his team. And if he turns it around in three years where the Wings are making deep playoff runs, I don't think anyone is going to complain or talk about how mediocre he is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: izlez

jkutswings

hot piss hockey
Jul 10, 2014
10,842
8,564
And if you take away Stamkos and Hedman (And Lecavalier and St. Louis), the results are probably closer to better than 50% of the NHL. AKA: Mediocre and/or not "very successful"
Ahh, gotcha. Following that logic:
*Don Sweeney of Boston is actually mediocre, because of all the good players that were there before he started.
* Jim Rutherford of Pittsburgh is actually mediocre, despite winning multiple Cups, because he already had Crosby and Malkin.
* Brian MacLellan of Washington is actually mediocre, despite winning a Cup, because he already had Ovechkin.

Keep grinding that axe...
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->