If a similar player on a team you dont cheer for got this contract, you would blast the GM as a fool. But because you cheer for the yotes, its a good contract.

He is terrible - like really terrible - defensively, and doesn't grade out well by advanced stats (which you love to use). This deal seems unnecessary and they should've waited to see how he would perform with a little more talent (Kessel) before signing him to a giant contract
- bulet13

Let's not do the same thing as Tanner with hyperbole. Keller is a kid so let's not start with terrible defensive labels. If as a GM you believe that the player is the real deal and is going to continue to get better and better than it's a smart deal to make. Not a deal without risk but they could save a lot of cap dollars on the back end.

Let's not do the same thing as Tanner with hyperbole. Keller is a kid so let's not start with terrible defensive labels. If as a GM you believe that the player is the real deal and is going to continue to get better and better than it's a smart deal to make. Not a deal without risk but they could save a lot of cap dollars on the back end.
- MJL

It's not a hyperbole. He really is terrible defensively. I didn't say he can't get better- I didn't even say if I think its a bad deal or not. But if a player who scored 50 pts with advanced metrics like Keller signed that deal for, lets say Vancouver or Edmonton, Tanner would be laughing at those GMs nonstop for the next few years. Just pointing out his hypocrisy is all.

For the record, I think its a fine deal but definitely not "without risk" as Tanner claims. And I don't see why Chayka was in such a rush to get it done now.

It's not a hyperbole. He really is terrible defensively. I didn't say he can't get better- I didn't even say if I think its a bad deal or not. But if a player who scored 50 pts with advanced metrics like Keller signed that deal for, lets say Vancouver or Edmonton, Tanner would be laughing at those GMs nonstop for the next few years. Just pointing out his hypocrisy is all.

For the record, I think its a fine deal but definitely not "without risk" as Tanner claims. And I don't see why Chayka was in such a rush to get it done now.
- bulet13

It is hyperbole. It's just throwing poop at a wall to counter point. There's a difference between calling out Tanner's hypocrisy and labeling a really good promising player. I explained why there is a "rush" and why Chayka wanted to make that deal.

lol

supply and demand doesn't work in a free market, but only in a mandatory one.

i think i've heard it all now.
- Tumbleweed

Supply and demand doesn't enter into it.

You're not thinking of this in the right sense.

Each team has 82 dollars. Whichever team gets the most value per dollar will have the best team

Supply and demand doesn't enter into it.

You're not thinking of this in the right sense.

Each team has 82 dollars. Whichever team gets the most value per dollar will have the best team
- James_Tanner

you're making the mistake of thinking about purely from a theoretical perspective.

there is a maximum demand, but it's not relevant since it has never been reached.

rfa's cost is not only some number that reduces your 82 dollars. the higher cost reduces the demand for rfa's (really one cost for 1 team, and a different cost for the other 30 teams).

unless you bring the real world into it, you will never get it.

Supply and demand doesn't enter into it.

You're not thinking of this in the right sense.

Each team has 82 dollars. Whichever team gets the most value per dollar will have the best team
- James_Tanner

Flies in the face of your claim that there are the elite players and everyone else is basically the same.

Saying that supply and demand does not enter into how each teams spends it's 82 dollars is just ignorant.

It is hyperbole. It's just throwing poop at a wall to counter point. There's a difference between calling out Tanner's hypocrisy and labeling a really good promising player. I explained why there is a "rush" and why Chayka wanted to make that deal.
- MJL

No, I think its pretty well known that Keller is poor defensively.

No, I think its pretty well known that Keller is poor defensively.
- bulet13

So he's like the majority of other 20 year old forwards in the league? You're grasping at straws here to try and justify criticizing the deal.

It's pretty well know except to the team's GM.

https://www.usatoday.com/...-winless-start/809667001/

“I think (Keller is) a really good defensive player,” Chayka said. “He’s smart. He’s committed. He has a great stick. He reads plays faster than everyone.”

Good for player getting over paid a bit now, but if he continues to improve as projected, the Yotes will be getting a good value for Keller last few years of deal. If they waited til next year to do a deal and he played great than contract would be higher for Yotes. If he didn't play well then his contract would be lower.

Is this a gamble? Yes, but why not be proactive for a change?

Only way this deal blowsup in their faces is if he gets injured badly, or falls off a cliff, play wise. Don't see either happening

Supply and demand doesn't enter into it.

You're not thinking of this in the right sense.

Each team has 82 dollars. Whichever team gets the most value per dollar will have the best team
- James_Tanner

>Supply and demand doesn't enter into a market where there are literally several positions, play styles and other factors that contribute to a winning formula, and are in limited numbers.

Wow... that's something...

>Supply and demand doesn't enter into a market where there are literally several positions, play styles and other factors that contribute to a winning formula, and are in limited numbers.

Wow... that's something...
- OzBolts

Everyone keeps saying you can't compare RFAs to UFAs which is ridiculous. Yes, the market dictates each contract differently, but that is irrelevant when trying to figure out if you spent money wisely.

For example, just because Philly had to outbid other team's for Hayes services doesn't mean they were right to do so.

They didn't have to go for him, and he won't improve their team enough to warrant the money spent to get him.

The Flyers have the same 82 million to spend as the Coyotes do, and HOW you got the players is irrelevant when determining the value of each dollar spent.

I honestly can't understand if you guys are just trolling me or if you're just honestly not getting this - it's a pretty simple, non-controversial idea.

Everyone keeps saying you can't compare RFAs to UFAs which is ridiculous. Yes, the market dictates each contract differently, but that is irrelevant when trying to figure out if you spent money wisely.

For example, just because Philly had to outbid other team's for Hayes services doesn't mean they were right to do so.

They didn't have to go for him, and he won't improve their team enough to warrant the money spent to get him.

The Flyers have the same 82 million to spend as the Coyotes do, and HOW you got the players is irrelevant when determining the value of each dollar spent.

I honestly can't understand if you guys are just trolling me or if you're just honestly not getting this - it's a pretty simple, non-controversial idea.
- James_Tanner

First of all I will state as a Flyers fan, I completely agree with your read here on the Hayes signing. That's not where you went wrong. Where you went wrong is comparing the Keller and Hayes signing. That just doesn't fly. Certainly a team would prefer to lock up a young high quality drafted player rather than an older UFA player for the same money if you're a developing team. You're not comparing apples to apples here. Now compare the Yotes 35 point 6.5M center in Stepan to the Flyers Hayes signing and you might be on the right track. In terms of consistency, I wonder what your comments were when the Yotes acquired Stepan?


"Stepan, 27, is gives you a consistant 55 points and 20 goals. He's great at producing offense and is a B level #1 centre - which is nothing to sneeze, not everyone gets a McDavid. "

James Tanner


If you want to talk about if spending on a player was wise, then really one player has zero to do with the other.

Everyone keeps saying you can't compare RFAs to UFAs which is ridiculous. Yes, the market dictates each contract differently, but that is irrelevant when trying to figure out if you spent money wisely.

For example, just because Philly had to outbid other team's for Hayes services doesn't mean they were right to do so.

They didn't have to go for him, and he won't improve their team enough to warrant the money spent to get him.

The Flyers have the same 82 million to spend as the Coyotes do, and HOW you got the players is irrelevant when determining the value of each dollar spent.

I honestly can't understand if you guys are just trolling me or if you're just honestly not getting this - it's a pretty simple, non-controversial idea.
- James_Tanner

your basis for your cap allocation is the basis used here:

https://fantasy.hockeybuzz.com/hbsl

you are literally living in fantasy land.

the system in the nhl rewards teams for drafting and developing internally. it's not a fully open market and very easy to see.

you really need to consider a diet change. cut out the sugar 100%/mindless entertainment, eat healthier (including plenty of protein) and exercise regularly.

i actually think you are a reasonably smart guy. but it's also painfully obvious that your brain is working poorly. Unless your happy with your sugar-fueled superficial fantasy thoughts/blogs/life.

but i really think you'll thank me when your brain is working closer to optimally.

First of all I will state as a Flyers fan, I completely agree with your read here on the Hayes signing. That's not where you went wrong. Where you went wrong is comparing the Keller and Hayes signing. That just doesn't fly. Certainly a team would prefer to lock up a young high quality drafted player rather than an older UFA player for the same money if you're a developing team. You're not comparing apples to apples here. Now compare the Yotes 35 point 6.5M center in Stepan to the Flyers Hayes signing and you might be on the right track. In terms of consistency, I wonder what your comments were when the Yotes acquired Stepan?


"Stepan, 27, is gives you a consistant 55 points and 20 goals. He's great at producing offense and is a B level #1 centre - which is nothing to sneeze, not everyone gets a McDavid. "

James Tanner


If you want to talk about if spending on a player was wise, then really one player has zero to do with the other.
- MJL

it's seriously like talking to a child who changes his mind based on whatever new shiny object is in front of him at the moment.

no consistency/principles to any of tanner's thoughts/ideas.

Everyone keeps saying you can't compare RFAs to UFAs which is ridiculous. Yes, the market dictates each contract differently, but that is irrelevant when trying to figure out if you spent money wisely.

For example, just because Philly had to outbid other team's for Hayes services doesn't mean they were right to do so.

They didn't have to go for him, and he won't improve their team enough to warrant the money spent to get him.

The Flyers have the same 82 million to spend as the Coyotes do, and HOW you got the players is irrelevant when determining the value of each dollar spent.

I honestly can't understand if you guys are just trolling me or if you're just honestly not getting this - it's a pretty simple, non-controversial idea.
- James_Tanner

agreed.

but it's a logical fallacy to compare keller's contract to hayes to justify it as good.

your basis for your cap allocation is the basis used here:

https://fantasy.hockeybuzz.com/hbsl

you are literally living in fantasy land.

the system in the nhl rewards teams for drafting and developing internally. it's not a fully open market and very easy to see.

you really need to consider a diet change. cut out the sugar 100%/mindless entertainment, eat healthier (including plenty of protein) and exercise regularly.

i actually think you are a reasonably smart guy. but it's also painfully obvious that your brain is working poorly. Unless your happy with your sugar-fueled superficial fantasy thoughts/blogs/life.

but i really think you'll thank me when your brain is working closer to optimally.
- Tumbleweed

I can't take advice about my mental health from a guy who uses the word "literally" wrong.

agreed.

but it's a logical fallacy to compare keller's contract to hayes to justify it as good.
- Tumbleweed

The logical fallacy comes from assuming RFA/UFA/Market Value have anything to with it.

A dollar spent is a dollar spent. Where, how, doesn't matter.

I can't take advice about my mental health from a guy who uses the word "literally" wrong.
- James_Tanner

cool straw-man argument to avoid your issues.

you live in a fantasy world made up in your head.

but you're too narcissistic too see it.

The logical fallacy comes from assuming RFA/UFA/Market Value have anything to with it.

A dollar spent is a dollar spent. Where, how, doesn't matter.
- James_Tanner

only in fantasy hockey leagues.

The logical fallacy comes from assuming RFA/UFA/Market Value have anything to with it.

A dollar spent is a dollar spent. Where, how, doesn't matter.
- James_Tanner

Actually we're dwelling in a common sense context when discussing and comparing signings of different players. It's troubling that you can't see how RFA/UFA has a lot to do with it.

cool straw-man argument to avoid your issues.

you live in a fantasy world made up in your head.

but you're too narcissistic too see it.
- Tumbleweed

Part of the Tanner playbook.

Label someone's response a fallacy if he cannot refute the statement.

Ultimate fall back, insult the poster personally. Hang a hard left!

Actually we're dwelling in a common sense context when discussing and comparing signings of different players. It's troubling that you can't see how RFA/UFA has a lot to do with it.
- MJL

What is troubling is that you ignore what I say, talk about something completely different and then act confused about why I don't get your simplistic ideas. I get them, they're just preposterous. Gee I wonder where you learned to argue like this? haha Oh well, I've come to expect nothing less from a professional troll.

What is troubling is that you ignore what I say, talk about something completely different and then act confused about why I don't get your simplistic ideas. I get them, they're just preposterous. Gee I wonder where you learned to argue like this? haha Oh well, I've come to expect nothing less from a professional troll.
- James_Tanner

Like I said, the ultimate fall back plan, insult the poster.

The very fact that I posted just today that I agreed with some of your opinions concerning the Flyers signing of Hayes proves as a matter of fact that I don't ignore what you say.

Most importantly, you never, ever show or prove how my ideas are simplistic or preposterous. You don't because you can't. You just label them as such for the obvious reason that you have nothing to come back with other than insults.

You also obviously chose to ignore my post on how ridiculously inconsistent your reasoning is when I posted your comments on the Yotes acquiring Stepan.

I'm not a professional troll, I'm just an average guy and a hockey fan who obviously knows a lot more about the sport than you do. Why hate someone for that? Maybe see that counselor you recommended to others.

Like I said, the ultimate fall back plan, insult the poster.

The very fact that I posted just today that I agreed with some of your opinions concerning the Flyers signing of Hayes proves as a matter of fact that I don't ignore what you say.

Most importantly, you never, ever show or prove how my ideas are simplistic or preposterous. You don't because you can't. You just label them as such for the obvious reason that you have nothing to come back with other than insults.

You also obviously chose to ignore my post on how ridiculously inconsistent your reasoning is when I posted your comments on the Yotes acquiring Stepan.

I'm not a professional troll, I'm just an average guy and a hockey fan who obviously knows a lot more about the sport than you do. Why hate someone for that? Maybe see that counselor you recommended to others.
- MJL

Remember that time James got owned by MJL in his own blog?

Like I said, the ultimate fall back plan, insult the poster.

The very fact that I posted just today that I agreed with some of your opinions concerning the Flyers signing of Hayes proves as a matter of fact that I don't ignore what you say.

Most importantly, you never, ever show or prove how my ideas are simplistic or preposterous. You don't because you can't. You just label them as such for the obvious reason that you have nothing to come back with other than insults.

You also obviously chose to ignore my post on how ridiculously inconsistent your reasoning is when I posted your comments on the Yotes acquiring Stepan.

I'm not a professional troll, I'm just an average guy and a hockey fan who obviously knows a lot more about the sport than you do. Why hate someone for that? Maybe see that counselor you recommended to others.
- MJL

I still maintain my amateur troll status so that I can troll NCAA football threads.