I'll simply say it comes down to how much the coaching staff trusts and believes certain players can handle certain roles and situations and how the team matches up and what tools the coach has at his disposal. There's going to be significant youth on this team. I don't think it's unreasonable that the coach might want a veteran option to rely on if he feels it's needed. - MJL
I feel one veteran between Lehtara and Wiese is making the team and the other is waived or traded if they found some deal.
Right now, i feel Lehtara is more useful, compared to Weise as Lehtara can play center and also play on the PK is needed.
The team will be young, especially in the bottom 6 so the coaching staff might like keeping at least one vet around incase of injury there or maybe he just doesn't like the match up somewhere.
After this year Lehtara will be gone. And hopefully one of the youngsters has solidifed a role there.
I feel one veteran between Lehtara and Wiese is making the team and the other is waived or traded if they found some deal.
Right now, i feel Lehtara is more useful, compared to Weise as Lehtara can play center and also play on the PK is needed.
The team will be young, especially in the bottom 6 so the coaching staff might like keeping at least one vet around incase of injury there or maybe he just doesn't like the match up somewhere.
After this year Lehtara will be gone. And hopefully one of the youngsters has solidifed a role there. - J35Bacher
Not only young in the forward ranks but also young on defense with MacDonald out early.
I'll simply say it comes down to how much the coaching staff trusts and believes certain players can handle certain roles and situations and how the team matches up and what tools the coach has at his disposal. There's going to be significant youth on this team. I don't think it's unreasonable that the coach might want a veteran option to rely on if he feels it's needed. - MJL
so you're saying he might get waived, he might not. got it.
wasn't in depth at all. more like a long winded he will possibly lose his spot in the lineup or he might not. you are the king of providing common sense analysis. thank you for all your hard work.
oh playing a rookie over lehtera would depend on how much hakstol and the other coaches trust that rookie to perform in that role? thank you for that in depth statement.
I'm not familiar with the prospects that they received. - MJL
The only prospect of note was center Joshua Norris (2017, 19th overall), who had a decent if unspectacular freshman season last year.
But that was for Erik Karlsson, arguably the best defenseman (or at least a top-5) in the game. Mark Stone is a very good player, but he's not on EK's level, so I wouldn't expect the return to be as good.
The only prospect of note was center Joshua Norris (2017, 19th overall), who had a decent if unspectacular freshman season last year.
But that was for Erik Karlsson, arguably the best defenseman (or at least a top-5) in the game. Mark Stone is a very good player, but he's not on EK's level, so I wouldn't expect the return to be as good. - jmatchett383
Stone's contract situation also does not give Ottawa a ton of leverage, either.
Totally unrelated, but I just discovered that, back in the 1960s, every single person was a southern hillbilly, a member of the Flinstones cast, or a long-legged large-breasted woman.
This coming from the same GM who kept saying Ghost wasn't ready. I don't take much of Hextall's word seriously - twpguy
You have it all backwards...he would never be as good as he is today if he didn't become NHL ready the day Mark Streit was injured and experience watching games from the press box.
Totally unrelated, but I just discovered that, back in the 1960s, every single person was a southern hillbilly, a member of the Flinstones cast, or a long-legged large-breasted woman.
wasn't in depth at all. more like a long winded he will possibly lose his spot in the lineup or he might not. you are the king of providing common sense analysis. thank you for all your hard work. - Ftown19125
Just as I thought. Over your head even though I kept it simple.
One poster discusses actual reasons for why decisions might be made concerning various players when asked, another responds with"your a joke". Pretty obvious who has credibility and who doesn't. Let me know when you're ready to talk hockey.
One poster discusses actual reasons for why decisions might be made concerning various players when asked, another responds with"your a joke". Pretty obvious who has credibility and who doesn't. Let me know when you're ready to talk hockey. - MJL
I definitely didn’t say “your” a joke. For someone that tries to pretend he’s smarter than everyone else you can’t spell for poop.
There you go! Now you're on a roll. Credibility is rising by the second. - MJL
If it’s you giving credibility ratings I’m good haha. I could easily say things like “player x will have to earn his spot on the roster, it will not be given to him.”
If it’s you giving credibility ratings I’m good haha. I could easily say things like “player x will have to earn his spot on the roster, it will not be given to him.” - Ftown19125
