Toggle sidebar

Your overall rating of Chia on a scale of 1-10

1-10

  • 10

    Votes: 12 4.1%

  • 9

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 8

    Votes: 8 2.7%

  • 7

    Votes: 31 10.5%

  • 6

    Votes: 37 12.6%

  • 5

    Votes: 41 13.9%

  • 4

    Votes: 39 13.3%

  • 3

    Votes: 48 16.3%

  • 2

    Votes: 35 11.9%

  • 1

    Votes: 43 14.6%
  • Total voters
    294
Status
Not open for further replies.
Aceboogie

Aceboogie

Registered User
Aug 25, 2012
32,649
3,896
shoop said:
We weren't, cuz if we had stayed at 16 then Barzal would have been the pick no questions asked. :D
Click to expand...

So many good players available at 16 in 2015. The team could have had another top 6 forward or top 4 D in Chabot or even top goalie prospect in Samsonov if we had just stood pat and throw a dart a dart board with all of the consensus 15-20th ranked players and picked whoever it landed on.
 
McGoMcD

McGoMcD

Registered User
Aug 14, 2005
15,688
668
Edmonton, AB
Little Fury said:
No if they miss McDavid for 20 games, they're in the mix for Jack Hughes. That's a problem, no?
Click to expand...

The thing I find the strangest about the Chia supporters is they strangely dismiss McDavid. If Chia was so brilliant to get us to the playoffs last year, then it must be that the team wasn't trending up with out him. Which implies that McD didn't add much. It was Chia getting a goaltender, suring up defence, and getting better culture (which I don't even buy into). However, the whole story is just at odds with Data. McD wins this team so many games. THe oilers should have been in the playoffs last year just based on having that good of a player on the roster. And, sadly, they should have been there this year too. It is hard to comprehend how bad this team is built if it can't get to the playoffs with a guy that probably wins you 10 games on his own. This team with out McD is a hopeless mess. That is what Chia has built.
 
shoop

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
Aceboogie said:
So many good players available at 16 in 2015.
Click to expand...

Do you have a time limit on when you will let the trade go? A finish to a season?

Or is this one trade going to tarnish Chiarelli in your eyes for ever and going to be something that you will bring up as long as you live?
 
McGoMcD

McGoMcD

Registered User
Aug 14, 2005
15,688
668
Edmonton, AB
shoop said:
Do you have a time limit on when you will let the trade go? A finish to a season?

Or is this one trade going to tarnish Chiarelli in your eyes for ever and going to be something that you will bring up as long as you live?
Click to expand...

Well that trade will tarnish Chia forever in the eyes of hockey fans. I get letting it go at some point, but reality is, it will be on Chia's resume for the rest of his life.
 
BoldNewLettuce

BoldNewLettuce

Esquire
Dec 21, 2008
28,125
6,967
Canada
McGoMcD said:
The thing I find the strangest about the Chia supporters is they strangely dismiss McDavid. If Chia was so brilliant to get us to the playoffs last year, then it must be that the team wasn't trending up with out him. Which implies that McD didn't add much. It was Chia getting a goaltender, suring up defence, and getting better culture (which I don't even buy into). However, the whole story is just at odds with Data. McD wins this team so many games. THe oilers should have been in the playoffs last year just based on having that good of a player on the roster. And, sadly, they should have been there this year too. It is hard to comprehend how bad this team is built if it can't get to the playoffs with a guy that probably wins you 10 games on his own. This team with out McD is a hopeless mess. That is what Chia has built.
Click to expand...

I just don't believe that any GM is brilliant.

No human has perfect foresight and GM's are a rung below.
 

Little Fury

Registered User
Jun 21, 2006
17,831
6,800
shoop said:
Do you have a time limit on when you will let the trade go? A finish to a season?

Or is this one trade going to tarnish Chiarelli in your eyes for ever and going to be something that you will bring up as long as you live?
Click to expand...

It's not just the one trade.
 

MaxR11

Registered User
Mar 28, 2017
4,991
1,709
McGoMcD said:
The thing I find the strangest about the Chia supporters is they strangely dismiss McDavid. If Chia was so brilliant to get us to the playoffs last year, then it must be that the team wasn't trending up with out him. Which implies that McD didn't add much. It was Chia getting a goaltender, suring up defence, and getting better culture (which I don't even buy into). However, the whole story is just at odds with Data. McD wins this team so many games. THe oilers should have been in the playoffs last year just based on having that good of a player on the roster. And, sadly, they should have been there this year too. It is hard to comprehend how bad this team is built if it can't get to the playoffs with a guy that probably wins you 10 games on his own. This team with out McD is a hopeless mess. That is what Chia has built.
Click to expand...


what's the goal of a team? to win the stanley cup. how much does it matter if we build a team that looks great in the reg season but never even gets close to get it done in the playoffs consistently. having guys like barzal, eberle etc may just be like that shiny toy that looks great for individual player point totals and may or may not translate to reg season team success but a gm's job is to assemble a team that will get it done in the playoffs and not just get into the playoffs but not have a high chance of winning it all.

sometimes when you have that big big picture in mind there will be poor seasons. chia can succumb to fan and media pressure and build a shiny team that looks good with talent that can put up points in the reg season but have little substance in the playoffs or is not a piece you want for the playoffs. what good will that be to us in the big picture, when it's all said and done. being a sharks fan probably sucks. i sure as heck don't want chia to build a team that looks good in reg season but is of low threat to get anything done in the playoffs. i'd rather wait for him to collect the proper pieces to make this team a legit cup contender every year.
 

Little Fury

Registered User
Jun 21, 2006
17,831
6,800
HK97 said:
what's the goal of a team? to win the stanley cup. how much does it matter if we build a team that looks great in the reg season but never even gets close to get it done in the playoffs consistently. having guys like barzal, eberle etc may just be like that shiny toy that looks great for individual player point totals and may or may not translate to reg season team success but a gm's job is to assemble a team that will get it done in the playoffs and not just get into the playoffs but have a high chance of winning it all.

sometimes when you have that big big picture in mind there will be poor seasons. chia can succumb to fan and media pressure and build a shiny team that looks good with talent that can put up points in the reg season but have little substance in the playoffs or is not a piece you want for the playoffs. what good will that be to us in the big picture, when it's all said and done. being a sharks fan probably sucks. i sure as heck don't want chia to build a team that looks good in reg season but is of low threat to get anything done in the playoffs. i'd rather wait for him to collect the proper pieces to make this team a legit cup contender every year.
Click to expand...

Funny because recent history shows the best regular season teams have the best chance of winning the Cup.

Playoffs are a crap shoot; all a GM can do is build the best team possible and hope that the bounces go their way.
 

MaxR11

Registered User
Mar 28, 2017
4,991
1,709
Little Fury said:
Funny because recent history shows the best regular season teams have the best chance of winning the Cup.

Playoffs are a crap shoot; all a GM can do is build the best team possible and hope that the bounces go their way.
Click to expand...

i think it just seems that way because MOST gms who build teams know what they're doing as far as building to win a cup. a few gms that don't fully get it might have teams that generally make the playoffs frequently but are essentially fodder for teams that have built to win it all. i think this is what makes building hard now. and maybe why gms pass on overtly flashy players that might be great in reg season but the gms don't feel like he's a piece of the puzzle that'll get it done in the playoffs. you see a lot of the unsexy players that really shine and become vital pieces when it comes to a successful playoff run.
 

Little Fury

Registered User
Jun 21, 2006
17,831
6,800
BoldNewLettuce said:
i dont know....how many time has s team with a better record won the cup agaisnt eh opponent? ....how mant times has s the president trophy winner won the cup?
dunno......
Click to expand...

Since 1994, the President's Trophy Winner has won the cup 6 times and lost in the Final 3 times. 16 Cup winners were Division leaders, 7 were Conference champions. 17 of 24 winners had more regular season points than the runners-up. only three teams have won the Cup in that span that had fewer than 100 points (DET in 1997, LA in 2012 and Pittsburgh in 2009 when they had 99 points).
 
Aceboogie

Aceboogie

Registered User
Aug 25, 2012
32,649
3,896
BoldNewLettuce said:
i dont know....how many time has s team with a better record won the cup agaisnt eh opponent? ....how mant times has s the president trophy winner won the cup?
dunno......
Click to expand...

The correlation of regular season win success to playoff success is not much: Can the Regular Season Predict the Playoffs?

"After a lengthy analysis, we get another result saying the regular season has minimal bearing on which teams go far in the postseason. The good news in all this? It means the Stanley Cup playoffs remain as unpredictable as ever."

That being said, the comment about wanting Chiarelli to build a playoff contender is a major stretch. Its bordering on a strawman argument. Chiarelli is building a team that cant even make the playoffs, so making some argument we want a playoff contender is big stretch. And the whole notion of certain types of players being built for the playoffs is such as pointless debate and chalked full of so many incorrect statements/assumptions. Remember when Ovy and Thorton were playoff chokers

And lastly, what players is Chiarelli bringing in that would make up this "built for playoffs" team. I will give him Kassian, Letestu (although these 2 likely had one randomly good playoff run) and Larsson based on last playoffs. Other than that, I dont see much
 

Little Fury

Registered User
Jun 21, 2006
17,831
6,800
HK97 said:
i think it just seems that way because MOST gms who build teams know what they're doing as far as building to win a cup. a few gms that don't fully get it might have teams that generally make the playoffs frequently but are essentially fodder for teams that have built to win it all. i think this is what makes building hard now. and maybe why gms pass on overtly flashy players that might be great in reg season but the gms don't feel like he's a piece of the puzzle that'll get it done in the playoffs. you see a lot of the unsexy players that really shine and become vital pieces when it comes to a successful playoff run.
Click to expand...

You can't build a team to win for the playoffs if you don't have a team that can win in the regular season.

What happens in the playoffs is luck/randomness/bounces play a bigger role in influencing results than over an 82 game grind. That's why consistently great regular season teams like San Jose or Washington sometimes end up bowing out earlier than their quality would dictate otherwise and why a nothing regular season player can ride a hot streak for a few games in the playoffs and look like a star. You can't plan for that as a GM and you can't predict which way the bounces will go. All you can do is build the best team possible.
 
BoldNewLettuce

BoldNewLettuce

Esquire
Dec 21, 2008
28,125
6,967
Canada
Aceboogie said:
The correlation of regular season win success to playoff success is not much: Can the Regular Season Predict the Playoffs?

"After a lengthy analysis, we get another result saying the regular season has minimal bearing on which teams go far in the postseason. The good news in all this? It means the Stanley Cup playoffs remain as unpredictable as ever."

That being said, the comment about wanting Chiarelli to build a playoff contender is a major stretch. Its bordering on a strawman argument. Chiarelli is building a team that cant even make the playoffs, so making some argument we want a playoff contender is big stretch. And the whole notion of certain types of players being built for the playoffs is such as pointless debate and chalked full of so many incorrect statements/assumptions. Remember when Ovy and Thorton were playoff chokers

And lastly, what players is Chiarelli bringing in that would make up this "built for playoffs" team. I will give him Kassian, Letestu (although these 2 likely had one randomly good playoff run) and Larsson based on last playoffs. Other than that, I dont see much
Click to expand...

i dont know...


i wont change my mind.

the way i look at it ....

if you eliminate a teams goaltender.....and 3 of i s defenders ....then have a league bottom special teams......while having the best player in the league......(he should draw multiple peantiles....maybe back to back) then you need to rekanize that team is garbage no matter what.
 
McGoMcD

McGoMcD

Registered User
Aug 14, 2005
15,688
668
Edmonton, AB
HK97 said:
what's the goal of a team? to win the stanley cup. how much does it matter if we build a team that looks great in the reg season but never even gets close to get it done in the playoffs consistently. having guys like barzal, eberle etc may just be like that shiny toy that looks great for individual player point totals and may or may not translate to reg season team success but a gm's job is to assemble a team that will get it done in the playoffs and not just get into the playoffs but not have a high chance of winning it all.

sometimes when you have that big big picture in mind there will be poor seasons. chia can succumb to fan and media pressure and build a shiny team that looks good with talent that can put up points in the reg season but have little substance in the playoffs or is not a piece you want for the playoffs. what good will that be to us in the big picture, when it's all said and done. being a sharks fan probably sucks. i sure as heck don't want chia to build a team that looks good in reg season but is of low threat to get anything done in the playoffs. i'd rather wait for him to collect the proper pieces to make this team a legit cup contender every year.
Click to expand...

Well first off, and obviously, you can't win the cup if you don't make the playoffs. Also the way the NHL is going the big bruising teams are not the ones winning the cups. Look at Vegas, I mean clearly they fell short, but they were the team not built for the playoffs. I don't think Chia's formula for winning a cup is up to date at all.
 

MaxR11

Registered User
Mar 28, 2017
4,991
1,709
Little Fury said:
You can't build a team to win for the playoffs if you don't have a team that can win in the regular season.

What happens in the playoffs is luck/randomness/bounces play a bigger role in influencing results than over an 82 game grind. That's why consistently great regular season teams like San Jose or Washington sometimes end up bowing out earlier than their quality would dictate otherwise and why a nothing regular season player can ride a hot streak for a few games in the playoffs and look like a star. You can't plan for that as a GM and you can't predict which way the bounces will go. All you can do is build the best team possible.
Click to expand...


don't get me wrong, i do agree with some of those points but i'm just trying to say it's not as easy as keeping a player like ebs for example whom maybe the management has low confidence can get it done in the postseason. they'd rather then keep a guy like cagguila who, at this moment may not put up the points ebs can in the reg season, but they might feel like he's a much safer bet to have as a consistent contributor in a playoff run. heck i wouldn't be surprised if they think strome would be a better postseason contributor. i understand you first need to make the playoffs but i'd say maybe they feel the diffference between a guy like strome and ebs is somewhat negligible as far as overall reg season contributors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom