SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

dannibalcorpse

we miss leo k
Member Since
Feb. 24, 2018
Favourite Team
New York Islanders
Forum Posts
6028
Posts per Day
2.6
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 29 at 6:06 a.m.
Thread: Stuff
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dannibalcorpse</b></div><div>I don't think you can keep saying "this trade doesn't get it done" without saying -why- it doesn't get it done. There's only a handful of times a guy like this has been traded in NHL history, and we all know these trades pretty well and can easily use them as reference points when talking about idea for trading for current guys.

Do you know what package this is comparable to? The Erik Karlsson trade - when the Senators traded a guy with a pair of Norris Trophies and a year left on his deal to the Sharks and got back a 40-point middle-6 forward(Chris Tierney), a 25 year old third pair D,(Dylan DeMelo), a recent 1st round pick (Josh Norris), and a project player (Rudolfs Balcers) in addition to a 1st and a pair of 2nds. This deal has Pettersson's RFA rights (no contract even!) being moved for a 60 point middle-6 forward (Mittelstadt), a 24 year old top-4 D averaging 20+ minutes per night (Samuelsson), a recent 1st round pick (Kulich), a project (Kisakov), and a 1st and a 2nd (that could turn into a 1st. Each of the roster players here profiles as a stronger player than what Ottawa got back in the Karlsson deal, and the rest of the assets line up (save for the extra 2nd, and I think trading off an extra 2nd for the potential to upgrade the other to a 1st is worth it.)</div></div>

Looks like the fun will end with pettersson resigning soon, but thanks for the assist.

No one likes to put any effort in besides dumping on other people's efforts.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 26 at 8:55 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 21 at 6:09 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 21 at 8:51 a.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 20 at 8:24 p.m.
Thread: Nelson
Forum: NHLFeb. 16 at 10:38 a.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>We as hockey fans need to start demanding better media voices, because the lot we have are horrendous. Yeah, there's good local writers/pundits here and there, but for the most part the "journalistic" landscape is anything but journalistic. And many of the most popular voices are the biggest poser idiots. Only hockey fans would make Don brain-dead psycho Cherry a superstar for decades. Why do we do this to ourselves? I swear, if I read a well-informed article or hear a genuinely knowledgeable commentator on TV it feels like a miracle.

And just to clarify, I am not talking about play by play and TV color guys, stuff like that. So many of them are amazing and professional and have more than a single clue. I'm talking myopic writers, podcast clowns, YouTube doofuses, goofball wastes of time in between periods, so-called insiders, stats gurus who barely seem to understand their own stats, all that. It's just depressing that people/media outlets have such gruesome taste.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LeafsForLife</b></div><div>I would agree with you that there are many people in the hockey industry that don't know much. However, I strongly disagree that Don Cherry was a problem. The hockey industry needs more people like him who have lots of hockey experience, will stand behind their comments, and aren't afraid to give controversial opinions. Now everyone is afraid to to say anything controversial, are not resolute in their opinions, and do not have a wealth of experience. There's no point debating this though because you're not going to change my view, I doubt I will change yours, and any result would still not affect who is employed in hockey media.</div></div>

As a hockey-fan that did not grow up with the game but converted in adulthood; the two differences I see in hockey media:

1) It is very Canada-centric (which mirrors the historical domination of the sport as a legacy of the pre-WHA days: former Players become coaches/GMs, media anaylsts and many Europeans go home; while American media has never invested much in hockey to offer many jobs). This creates the "old boys" club where everyone mirrors each other and few say anything to get noticed.
2) There is a major lack of true "hockey tactics" to explain greater insights into the games. For example in football, John Madden brought a coaches mind to the masses using his telestrater and breaking down the "Xs and Os" of plays/assignments and roles. Nobody in major hockey media does that to any noticeable level. Hockey is on-the-fly so it can't be done on every possession, but it could be on goals or high danger chances. This basically means that all of the casual fans (the masses) are generally hockey-dumb and just think "if he scores he's good if he doesn't he sucks" and the conversation goes off the rails when advanced stats tries to explain what "good" is or "bad" is but none of it is relevant to the actually play on the ice.

Now that I have 20+ years of watching hockey, playing hockey, and trying to understand roles/responsibilities I see this as the biggest gap in from hockey media to the public.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 13 at 1:42 p.m.