EHM The Blue Line

I NEVER got over that freaking Stewart/Shattenkirk trade. Back in the days I thought Stewart will be a good powerfoward for years to come but finally it's not that bad they traded him in the end. Where it hurts is why the hell they thought getting Johnson for Shattenkirk was a good idea. Yes, Erik had "potential" back then but his injuries were way too frequent IMO. Shattenkirk on the other side had a very good 1st season and it seems they didn't bother to try him for a longer time.

CJ wrote:This is not the time the Avalanche should be at the bottom of the sea. Duchene, Landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen.

Yes they should. After these four names, Rantanen is in his first season on top of that, who can carry this team further? The defense? They have none. They brought Beauchemin, which is not a bad idea if they had any good prospects in defense so he could be their "coach" but they do not. Now he's slowing down and since the team has no defense he plays too many minutes for what's left in his tank. Except Barrie, who lacks a ton in defense, they have nothing to back them up and and their goalies.

At the trade deadline, they only names they should keep are MacKinnon, Duchene, Landeskog, Rantanen, Pickard and maybe Mitchell. As for their prospects in the AHL only A.J. Greer seems decent enough. Even there, they should be open for offers for Duchene if they can land a good defensemen in the trade. I wouldn't mind if he's the one that needs to be sacrificed. I wouldn't protect Barrie at this point either.

The only thing that's going to "suck" if (they probably will) they finish last is that there is not a defenseman that seems to be in the top 3 of the draft ranking. Because that's what they really need. But don't take my words too seriously on this one, they can't pass on Patrick or Hischier haha

philou21 wrote:The only thing that's going to "suck" if (they probably will) they finish last is that there is not a defenseman that seems to be in the top 3 of the draft ranking. Because that's what they really need.

This is a truly serious problem league-wide IMHO. I know people that wish Detroit would tank for a high pick and I ask "Why? There's nobody there to draft defensively". There aren't the number of stud d-men to go around that there used to be, and to be honest that's now true at the lower levels as well now, which is only aggravating the problem/issue at the NHL level. I don't think coaches are properly developing their d-men anymore at lower levels.

I think a good part of the problem is related to some years ago when LA's GM absolutely and publicly *flayed* Michigan's coach Red Berenson over regarding Jack Johnson's development. Berenson played Johnson at Michigan as pretty much a rover position, and gave him very little actual defensive responsibility in return for more offensive production. And the net result was when Johnson moved on he was very ill-prepared to actually *have* to play defense, because the NHL wasn't college with its talent disparity. And he was a wreck at first in the NHL, and probably never hit his true NHL potential because of it.

And I've seen this with other guys at the collegiate level, and occasionally at junior level too (keeping in mind I don't see much junior). Collegiate and major junior hockey are a big enough business now that coaches feel the pressure to win however they can and so they'll do whatever it takes to win, never mind if it's what's best for the kid and his development in the long run.

And the NHL defensive prospects pool has suffered mightily because of it.

Timothy Liljegren is still an absolute stud, he's only dropping because he was out the entire fall with mono and wasn't picked for the WJC because of that. His upside is still pretty much limitless, amazing skater with very good offensive instincts, still has some work to do defensively but he's not a train wreck there either. Some ranking and mocks have him dropping far, i think that's ridiculous, imo he's got the highest ceiling in this draft by far and if he drops outside the top 5 i'll be very surprised, let alone if he drops outside the top 10.

This draft is also seen as 'weak' generally, which i also disagree with. It's true that it's a bit flat at the top in comparison to the last few drafts with McDavid, Eichel, Matthews and Laine but the depth in this draft looks really good, especially on D. There are so many good PMDs ranked/projected around the mid/late 1st round range, guys like Makar, Hague, Brännström, Heiskanen, Välimäki etc, they're all really good.

Draft rant over

I do not follow the draft rankings much but I did heard someone on TV saying it was a "weak" draft. Rankings are rankings though so there's still possibilities to find good players outside the top 10 but overall, they were saying that outside the top 15 there wasn't much compared to the last years.

philou21 wrote:I do not follow the draft rankings much but I did heard someone on TV saying it was a "weak" draft. Rankings are rankings though so there's still possibilities to find good players outside the top 10 but overall, they were saying that outside the top 15 there wasn't much compared to the last years.

I don't agree with this at all, i'd say this is a pretty deep draft. The issue is in the top 5-10 where it might be sketchy, mostly because the top 2 prospects before the year in Patrick and Liljegren have both been injured for most of the season.

Weber wins the hardest shot competition with 165 km/h.
Laine second with 163 km/h! Darn boy...

I don't get why they pulled out Subban for MacKinnon. It would've been more interesting.

McDavid beat Mike Gartners speed skating record with like 0.05 seconds, he's pretty fast that guy...

And no, Larkin doesn't have the record since he got a flying start from the blueline, doesn't count

They were talking like he had the record yesterday. I wasn't understanding that since Larkin had a boost. IMO it doesn't count either. Those kinds of records should be beat the same way it was established.

I don't understand why Larkin would start that way/why it was allowed

Sebastian Aho's first career hat-trick!

Nice !!


Also, in other news, the Rocket de Laval (new Canadiens AHL affiliate) unveiled some info and their kits :

Home kit

Alternate kit

It's going to be nice for Montreal to have their affiliate team 30 min away from them.

Hitchcock got fired in St. Louis. Yeo takes the wheel.

Mikael Granlund has now points in 11 consecutive games and is now the Minnesota Wild franchise leader. Erik Haula and Andrew Brunette had 10.

Seems Marchand doesn't give a darn about fines :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFm1NcibUeI

St. Louis fired Ken Hitchcock http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/st-l ... -mike-yeo/

Ukko wrote:Seems Marchand doesn't give a darn about fines :<br abp="814"><br abp="815">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFm1NcibUeI

Given Marchand makes 5 million a season I don't suspect a 10 thousand dollar fine has much impact (it's 0.002% of his salary)

I don't see the play as "totally OK" but I don't see the big deal either; I saw comments saying that "of course Marchand did it on purpose though he wasn't looking because of peripheral vision" which makes sense...but the how did Stralman not know he was there? And the way Stralman goes down (I saw it described as a "big Rockette style kick" with his right leg) it looked like he was trying to draw a penalty - if Stralman truly didn't realize Marchand was there then players today are even more oblivious of their surroundings than I thought (which is hard to believe!)

I just don't see such a play happening "in the old days" not because players didn't make contact like Marchand did (they definitely did), but players (in this case Stralman) weren't apparently unaware of opponents on the ice and potential contact like they are now

9 defeats in a row for the Avalanche.

philou21 wrote:9 defeats in a row for the Avalanche.

I'm going to say something weird to most, I guess.

I kinda' envy Colorado's position in a way. Not in a tanking sense, or in a "Looking forward to a top pick" sense. But in a certainty sense.

I know Detroit is in a situation where the playoffs are not impossible, or even quite improbable. And while there's been a lot of outcry for Detroit to just tank it already, most fans (many of those same ones) still are actually rooting for Detroit to go on a run and push into the playoffs, or at least come close. Most don't know whether Detroit should sell off at least a goalie, Vanek, and a d-man and "play the kids" and hope maybe *they* can do something... or stick with what they have because the thought of losing Vanek's scoring punch is frightening.

The East is one big cluster of teams in limbo. Clubs that have started to look out of it all seem to go on runs to get back into the thick of it. One injury to someone, or one tea, like a Columbus suddenly going into a real funk, could change everything for 4 or 5 teams in the East. It's so tight. The Loser Point has seen to that.

In the West, Colorado and Arizona are clearly out of it. It's already over for them. And while that stinks, at least there's certainty of their fate and what they should/need to do I guess.

Get rid of Howard and Vanek, and wait for Zetterberg, Kronwall to retire or trade them. Then hit a full scale rebuilding.

Hats of to Red Wings. I just checked their draft history. Larkin was a "high" pick at #15. Last time they had something better than that was 1991 with #10 Martin Laopinte. Can't believe how good they've been with no high end draft picks. Well the sick draft steals like Zetterberg, Lidström, Datsyuk explains a lot though.

I understand Primis how you feel but like CJ said I think the Wings, with all the success they had, can take a "break" for the playoffs to be sure to draft a bit higher.

One thing is sure though, Colorado's fate is indeed sealed.

philou21 wrote:I understand Primis how you feel but like CJ said I think the Wings, with all the success they had, can take a "break" for the playoffs to be sure to draft a bit higher.

One thing is sure though, Colorado's fate is indeed sealed.

They're like almost worse than EDM/BUF these last few seasons.. they can't get up from that deep hole they've dug themselves in. The morale in the team must be VERY low.

What are your thoughts on "tanking?" Should it be prevented, and if so, how?
Admittedly, my contemporary knowledge of NHL is limited to what I read on this forum, but "tanking" as a concept to me seems unintuitive. Why should teams be rewarded for losing on purpose?

I don't think he meant tanking that way....just maybe a year or two drafting high to help a bit.

On the other side, I still think the NHL should've done something with Edmonton's mediocrity after 10 years in the basement of the league and having so much first overall picks. That was just ridiculous.

A9L3E wrote:What are your thoughts on "tanking?" Should it be prevented, and if so, how?
Admittedly, my contemporary knowledge of NHL is limited to what I read on this forum, but "tanking" as a concept to me seems unintuitive. Why should teams be rewarded for losing on purpose?

I don't like tanking, but to be perfectly honest the Draft Lottery is enough to prevent it IMHO. Even with how many Top 3 Overall picks in the last however-many years, how has Edmonton done? They've never really gotten anywhere, and even now with McDavid finally it might not be enough...

For every Pittsburgh or Chicago that just is TERRIBLE for years to build up high draft picks and eventually has it work out, there are other cases like Arizona or Edmonton or Buffalo or Toronto or whatever where it just does *not* work out. If a team wants to "strip itself down to the nails" and hope for draft saviors... let them have fun with that. It takes a lot more than one single pick, or two picks even, with no guarantee still it'll even work.

philou21 wrote:On the other side, I still think the NHL should've done something with Edmonton's mediocrity after 10 years in the basement of the league and having so much first overall picks. That was just ridiculous.

Since I started watching hockey I've watched many teams have as long/longer "dry spells" (including Detroit) and no one was ever saying the NHL should do something/something should be done about it...since I started watching hockey Edmonton's won 5 Stanley Cups.....a little over a decade ago the Oilers were in the Stanley Cup Final (which over half the League can't say); the Leafs haven't won it all in 50 years, and have been awful almost every one of those 50 years & the Rangers took 54 years to win a Stanley Cup (despite both the Leafs and especially the Rangers spending oodles of money trying to win) - I'm not an Oiler fan (though I don't hate them like I did in my youth), but I really don't get the negativity they often receive because they got multiple #1 draft picks - the storied history of the Montreal Canadiens was built on unfairly having rights to Quebec players for quite awhile and then rip-off trades, but no one talks about that (at least the Oilers weren't drafting #1 overall in the same year they won the Stanley Cup, like Montreal did with Guy Lafleur)

This isn't meant to be directed at "just you" Philou, or even "you" period - but at the idea that "something should've been done because Edmonton got multiple #1 picks"

I just don't see it as a big deal, or something that people should be upset/bothered about (except for the McDavid year none of the Drafts had a legitimate consensus #1 pick)...I don't see what the difference is, or what it matters that other teams didn't get to take players like RNH or Yakupov (or even Taylor Hall) ahead of the Oilers

Primis wrote:I don't like tanking, but to be perfectly honest the Draft Lottery is enough to prevent it IMHO.

I agree