I was actually encouraged at some of the personnel moves that Green started with, but he hasn't continued on with them. Eriksson should be treated in the same fashion as Gagner, at this point I would rather Gagner over Eriksson, but realistically I don't want either playing.

Eriksson played over 18 mins while the only guys really showing any emotion, (Virtanen, Schaller, Guadette, Grandlund, Archibald) only 8-14.
- Makita

One of the main reasons why I have been opposed to player signings like Erickson and Gagner is because they ride on the coattails of linemates and don't drive play on their own.
It is fine if they are signed as defensive 3rd or 4th liners, not when you are expecting them too be point producers.

I was actually encouraged at some of the personnel moves that Green started with, but he hasn't continued on with them. Eriksson should be treated in the same fashion as Gagner, at this point I would rather Gagner over Eriksson, but realistically I don't want either playing.

Eriksson played over 18 mins while the only guys really showing any emotion, (Virtanen, Schaller, Guadette, Grandlund, Archibald) only 8-14.
- Makita

Disagree and its not even close. As much as an epic failure Eriksson has been, at least he is strong on the defensive side. I give him that much. Hes faster than Schaller, Granlund and Archibald. Smarter than Virtanen and more experienced that Gaudette.

The one critique I have is that he doesnt goto the net or the dirty areas, things that I thought he was renowned for.

I think that he is a good complement to Pettersson and that might save his game....

Gagner is a waste of air on all accounts. We have one Leipsic already....and cheaper.

Disagree and its not even close. As much as an epic failure Eriksson has been, at least he is strong on the defensive side. I give him that much. Hes faster than Schaller, Granlund and Archibald. Smarter than Virtanen and more experienced that Gaudette.

The one critique I have is that he doesnt goto the net or the dirty areas, things that I thought he was renowned for.

I think that he is a good complement to Pettersson and that might save his game....

Gagner is a waste of air on all accounts. We have one Leipsic already....and cheaper.
- chompsey

100%. I never want to see Gagner again. 1.5 more seasons of Loui and then we can stach him in the A for his final two seasons

Good effort all things considered, couple of mistakes in the third cost them. Gaud looks to be improving, I liked the push after the pouliot blunder, couple of posts, so called ahl dmen led the team in shots.

Disagree and its not even close. As much as an epic failure Eriksson has been, at least he is strong on the defensive side. I give him that much. Hes faster than Schaller, Granlund and Archibald. Smarter than Virtanen and more experienced that Gaudette.

The one critique I have is that he doesnt goto the net or the dirty areas, things that I thought he was renowned for.

I think that he is a good complement to Pettersson and that might save his game....

Gagner is a waste of air on all accounts. We have one Leipsic already....and cheaper.
- chompsey

Not this year he ain't. Looks like he's labouring out there kind of like Boeser. They both look slower this year.

Either Loui has just lost interest post-Sedins or the aging process is rapidly taking over.

Gagner was never going to repeat that 50 point season here with this roster.

Good effort all things considered, couple of mistakes in the third cost them. Gaud looks to be improving, I liked the push after the pouliot blunder, couple of posts, so called ahl dmen led the team in shots.
- Bettmanhatesus

So called? Pouliot, MDZ, Biega half of last nights D are AHL D . Hutton is sitting a top of the fence now. He could fall either way.

So called? Pouliot, MDZ, Biega half of last nights D are AHL D . Hutton is sitting a top of the fence now. He could fall either way.
- manvanfan

Talk about a massive opportunity for Hutton. Hope he takes it and runs with it pump and dump baby.

So called? Pouliot, MDZ, Biega half of last nights D are AHL D . Hutton is sitting a top of the fence now. He could fall either way.
- manvanfan

I would say half the league is AHL quality and that is being generous.

I would say half the league is AHL quality and that is being generous.
- Reubenkincade

Totally agree with that actually. Gone are the days of most clubs having 4 decent lines soon we'll have 32 teams that can barely field a top 6. Talent sure is getting watered down with over expansion and having Hockey in markets it has no business being in.

Totally agree with that actually. Gone are the days of most clubs having 4 decent lines soon we'll have 32 teams that can barely field a top 6. Talent sure is getting watered down with over expansion and having Hockey in markets it has no business being in.
- LordHumungous

No offense my good man, but, thats a pretty uninformed point of view.

Hockey membership globally has never been higher with countries like the USA and Switzerland becoming real forces and producing more elite players than ever before, nutrition is better, fitness is better, skill development is better.

There has never been a period with better depth than what we are currently seeing. Perhaps the original 6 might rival what we have today.

But part of the reason why scoring was so high in the 70's and 80's was the disparity between the top 6 and bottom 6 with good coaches exploiting matchups.

This isn't even really a debate. It's a fact. Nostalgia is great and all but the truth is that hockey talent has never been more deep.

I'm a little late to the party today. Was putting the finishing touches on my interview with Carolina Hurricanes President and GM Don Waddell this morning. They're an interesting team this year: give it a read when you have a moment.

https://www.forbes.com/si...-hurricanes/#59dcf3305ea6

As for the Canucks...well, here's the new blog:

https://www.hockeybuzz.co...sert-to-Coyotes/194/95549

No offense my good man, but, thats a pretty uninformed point of view.

Hockey membership globally has never been higher with countries like the USA and Switzerland becoming real forces and producing more elite players than ever before, nutrition is better, fitness is better, skill development is better.

There has never been a period with better depth than what we are currently seeing. Perhaps the original 6 might rival what we have today.

But part of the reason why scoring was so high in the 70's and 80's was the disparity between the top 6 and bottom 6 with good coaches exploiting matchups.

This isn't even really a debate. It's a fact. Nostalgia is great and all but the truth is that hockey talent has never been more deep.
- chompsey

No harm done my friend just how I look at it. I'm not talking about scoring in general I was more referring to total depth through lineups across the league. On a personal I think it has been suffering throughout the league regardless of how much 'better' the players are nowadays. But it's a large debateable issue to be sure.