You're 50 years old. 6 years older than me Gramps. 😂 Seriously, why do you lie about your age? Is this part of your "incel" lifestyle? I know you're a McDonald's manager in Etobicoke. I know that you're 50 years old. I know that you're roughy 5'7 300 pounds. A real lard a$$.

Are you that embarrassed of yourself? Why are you lying to everyone? I also know that you dropped out of high school in grade 11. Everyone can see how horrible you are at writing. Why are you lying about having a higher education? Your last year at Etobicoke Central High school was in 1986. Formerly Westway High School. Stop lying and tell the truth for once.
- gergeswillems

This is the all-time best post in hockeybuzz history. I seriously hope you're OK.

I realize now that I've been writing here for six years and never shared any personal information. Just for fun (because like you I've got some time on my hands) I'll open up a bit.

For the record, I am 38 years old.

The idea of being an incel is truly hilarious as I am married with three kids, but also I'm an avowed liberal and I've never written anything crazy enough to suggest I'm' some kind of Trump loving incel.

I am 5'11 recently quit smoking so I'm back up over 200 but not fat. I could definitely use some exercise. I have never worked at McDonalds, in fact until the virus shut us down I was running a successful construction company, which is a job I took after I got sick of being a part time college professor and never getting hours.

I did not drop out of high school, but I did graduate Cum Laude from Laurentian University and then I took a Masters from Ryerson before moving out of province.

I think that I am an excellent writer, possibly even verging on great, and while I will accept insults about my political views, or hockey knowledge, you gotta give credit where its due. If you'd like to buy one of my books, DM for a link.

I was four years old in 1986, and I though I have not been to Etobicoke since my grandma moved out of Rexdale in the early 90s.

If you have any more questions I would love to help you out. Also, please don't hurt that poor guy at the Etobicoke McDonalds, you don't want to add a case of mistaken identity to your already mounting troubles.

This is the all-time best post in hockeybuzz history. I seriously hope you're OK.

I realize now that I've been writing here for six years and never shared any personal information. Just for fun (because like you I've got some time on my hands) I'll open up a bit.

For the record, I am 38 years old.

The idea of being an incel is truly hilarious as I am married with three kids, but also I'm an avowed liberal and I've never written anything crazy enough to suggest I'm' some kind of Trump loving incel.

I am 5'11 recently quit smoking so I'm back up over 200 but not fat. I could definitely use some exercise. I have never worked at McDonalds, in fact until the virus shut us down I was running a successful construction company, which is a job I took after I got sick of being a part time college professor and never getting hours.

I did not drop out of high school, but I did graduate Cum Laude from Laurentian University and then I took a Masters from Ryerson before moving out of province.

I think that I am an excellent writer, possibly even verging on great, and while I will accept insults about my political views, or hockey knowledge, you gotta give credit where its due. If you'd like to by one of my books, DM for a link.

I was four years old in 1986, and I though I have not been to Etobicoke since my grandma moved out of Rexdale in the early 90s.

If you have any more questions I would love to help you out. Also, please don't hurt that poor guy at the Etobicoke McDonalds, you don't want to add a case of mistaken identity to your already mounting troubles.
- James_Tanner

Even though you're lying, I did go too far. Even a moron like you didn't deserve that. My apologies.

Even though you're lying, I did go too far. Even a moron like you didn't deserve that. My apologies.
- gergeswillems

I haven't seen a worse apology since the Access Hollywood video and I do not accept it, you psycho. However, why would I lie? Everything I said is 100% true.

I haven't seen a worse apology since the Access Hollywood video and I do not accept it, you psycho. However, why would I lie? Everything I said is 100% true.
- James_Tanner

I wouldn't expect you to. It's not my fault that you're a pathological liar. I guess it's like your blogs. Everything you say is 100% garbage. Also, why would you rent a mansion? Why not buy a house and avoid flushing money down the toilet? You have a wife and 3 kids and rent a mansion? Makes total sense. 😂 Oh I forgot. It must be different rules for living in Fantasy Land. Say hi to Ford for me. He's your neighbour, right?

Let's get back to hockey. Tell us again which ELITE players Chayka could potentially add using draft picks? Someone also asked why Crouse is so terrible in your opinion? Maybe you can compare Crouse with the great Nik Pecan? Also, if Hjalmarsson and Stepan are exceptions for mid-tier players, which other bottom 6 guys and middle pair players around the NHL are acceptable to keep on a roster. Like Tyler Bozak sure helped the Blues win a Cup. Lars Eller helped the Caps the year before. Are they exceptions or should they also get replaced by AHL-level talent to free up money for more superstars?

Let's get back to hockey. Tell us again which ELITE players Chayka could potentially add using draft picks? Someone also asked why Crouse is so terrible in your opinion? Maybe you can compare Crouse with the great Nik Pecan? Also, if Hjalmarsson and Stepan are exceptions for mid-tier players, which other bottom 6 guys and middle pair players around the NHL are acceptable to keep on a roster. Like Tyler Bozak sure helped the Blues win a Cup. Lars Eller helped the Caps the year before. Are they exceptions or should they also get replaced by AHL-level talent to free up money for more superstars?
- Kooleus

Star-Star-Star
Star-Star-Star
Plug-Plug-Plug
Plug-Plug-Plug

Star-Star
Star-Star
Plug-Plug

Star-Plug

It's all random which team wins the Cup.

Star-Star-Star
Star-Star-Star
Plug-Plug-Plug
Plug-Plug-Plug

Star-Star
Star-Star
Plug-Plug

Star-Plug

It's all random which team wins the Cup.
- gergeswillems

Better dial that team down a notch. A "Star" must average at least 9 million a year, and that's on the cheap side. There are 11 "Stars" in your line-up. That's 99 million right there. Now, "Plugs" are indeed cheap....but still any DECENT plug gotta cost 1 to 3 million a year. So, let's say average 2 million per spot. You have 9 more of them. Now we are up to an additional 18 million. Grand total of 117 million!!!

No way Salary Cap come even CLOSE to that. 80-85 million....maybe.So you have to replace 3-4 of those stars with 3-4 plugs just to be Cap compliant. Not sure you are going to have much of a team....definitely will be much weaker than this model. Bring in GM Jimmy. I know there has to be a better way.

By the way....at 9 million....you can forget Top 10-20 NHL players...McDavid, Matthews, McKinnon etc....none of those stars will sign for that cheap when available. If you want even 2 top tier guys, you better come up with 11-12 million each for those two.

Then your Cap hit around 125 million. See now, the kind of crap Dumbass has to deal with when the Leafs have to ice a contender in October or December or whenever we re-start. Too many 10+ million guys, means icing a team incapable...or extremely unlikely ....of going the distance. Balance is needed.

Better dial that team down a notch. A "Star" must average at least 9 million a year, and that's on the cheap side. There are 11 "Stars" in your line-up. That's 99 million right there. Now, "Plugs" are indeed cheap....but still any DECENT plug gotta cost 1 to 3 million a year. So, let's say average 2 million per spot. You have 9 more of them. Now we are up to an additional 18 million. Grand total of 117 million!!!

No way Salary Cap come even CLOSE to that. 80-85 million....maybe.So you have to replace 3-4 of those stars with 3-4 plugs just to be Cap compliant. Not sure you are going to have much of a team....definitely will be much weaker than this model. Bring in GM Jimmy. I know there has to be a better way.

By the way....at 9 million....you can forget Top 10-20 NHL players...McDavid, Matthews, McKinnon etc....none of those stars will sign for that cheap when available. If you want even 2 top tier guys, you better come up with 11-12 million each for those two.

Then your Cap hit around 125 million. See now, the kind of crap Dumbass has to deal with when the Leafs have to ice a contender in October or December or whenever we re-start. Too many 10+ million guys, means icing a team incapable...or extremely unlikely ....of going the distance. Balance is needed.
- hawk35

It's Tanner's blueprint. Not mine. I watched my team win 4 Cups with valuable role players like McCarty, Draper, Maltby, Lapointe, Drake, Holmstrom, etc. You need more than your stars to win big playoff games and series. Stars often cancel each other out and it's the Draper's and McCarty's who come through for a team.

That being said, you still need your stars to be your best players. Wings win nothing without Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanahan, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Konstantinov, Chelios, Rafalski, Kronwall, etc. But I don't believe all role players are created equal. Tanner does and he's dead wrong. A successful GM can't build a contender using video game logic.

You can't just pluck any plug from the AHL or Europe and hope he becomes Chris Kontos or Fernando Pisani in the playoffs. Perhaps Tanner's blueprint should read...

Star-Star-Star
Plug-Star-Plug
Plug-Plug-Plug
Plug-Plug-Plug

Star-Star
Star-Plug
Plug-Plug

Star-Plug

This get's his fantasy land team under the Cap, yes? It's still a recipe for playoff failure.

Better dial that team down a notch. A "Star" must average at least 9 million a year, and that's on the cheap side. There are 11 "Stars" in your line-up. That's 99 million right there. Now, "Plugs" are indeed cheap....but still any DECENT plug gotta cost 1 to 3 million a year. So, let's say average 2 million per spot. You have 9 more of them. Now we are up to an additional 18 million. Grand total of 117 million!!!

No way Salary Cap come even CLOSE to that. 80-85 million....maybe.So you have to replace 3-4 of those stars with 3-4 plugs just to be Cap compliant. Not sure you are going to have much of a team....definitely will be much weaker than this model. Bring in GM Jimmy. I know there has to be a better way.

By the way....at 9 million....you can forget Top 10-20 NHL players...McDavid, Matthews, McKinnon etc....none of those stars will sign for that cheap when available. If you want even 2 top tier guys, you better come up with 11-12 million each for those two.

Then your Cap hit around 125 million. See now, the kind of crap Dumbass has to deal with when the Leafs have to ice a contender in October or December or whenever we re-start. Too many 10+ million guys, means icing a team incapable...or extremely unlikely ....of going the distance. Balance is needed.
- hawk35

So having a few mid-tier guys like Bozak, Eller, Wilson, and dare I say it but maybe guys like Soderberg or Demers making $2-5M might be useful after all? This is getting interesting now. Although maybe not every star player needs to make $9M+. Chayka should go out and acquire guys like MacKinnon, Pastrnak, and Josi who all make way less than that. I hear Chayka is offering draft picks, also maybe include Dvorak and Stepan? Is that enough?

So having a few mid-tier guys like Bozak, Eller, Wilson, and dare I say it but maybe guys like Soderberg or Demers making $2-5M might be useful after all? This is getting interesting now. Although maybe not every star player needs to make $9M+. Chayka should go out and acquire guys like MacKinnon, Pastrnak, and Josi who all make way less than that. I hear Chayka is offering draft picks, also maybe include Dvorak and Stepan? Is that enough?
- Kooleus

GM's often overrate their stars too. For example, Phil Kessel is no longer an impact player. He was for Pittsburgh. But he had the luxury of Crosby and Malkin drawing the tougher matchups. Phil feasted on the other guys. He's not an elite player anymore. Just because he's being paid alot of money doesn't mean he's still worth it.

When Derek Stepan is your #1 or even your #2 center then you're not a serious contender. OEL is very good but he isn't great. Chychrun is good when he plays. But he spends too much time on IR. He's injury prone. Taylor Hall is a very good player. But can he carry a team? No he can't. He's not staying anyway. I believe this team wins more games than they should because Rick Tocchet is an excellent head coach. The goalies bail them out most of the time when they're not on injured reserve. There's too many holes with this Coyotes team.

It's Tanner's blueprint. Not mine. I watched my team win 4 Cups with valuable role players like McCarty, Draper, Maltby, Lapointe, Drake, Holmstrom, etc. You need more than your stars to win big playoff games and series. Stars often cancel each other out and it's the Draper's and McCarty's who come through for a team.

That being said, you still need your stars to be your best players. Wings win nothing without Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanahan, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Konstantinov, Chelios, Rafalski, Kronwall, etc. But I don't believe all role players are created equal. Tanner does and he's dead wrong. A successful GM can't build a contender using video game logic.

You can't just pluck any plug from the AHL and hope he becomes Chris Kontos or Fernando Pisani in the playoffs.
- gergeswillems

100% agree. In the 3 Cups the Hawks won, they were indeed lead by stars Toews, Kane and Keith. But, they won with mediocre Niemi and a Hot/Cold Crawford. Goaltending didn't WIN them the Cup. The stars were stars....but it was the contributions of Buffers, Boland, Bickel, Ladd and many other of the "mid-range" guys. And, no....these players were NOT simply interchangeable with any AHL plug....as these players were wedged out yearly by the Cap, it became harder and harder to afford the mid-range guys needed. You need all 3. You need a couple of Stars... a handful of impactful mid range guys,....and a few minimum guys that can eat 6-8 minutes and not kill ya.

The lack of impactful mid-range guys is what the Leafs need to address to make the next step. Dubas thinks he can do it by adding a multitude of minimum guys and hoping they "pop". I think he needs to bite the bullet, trade one of his 4 costly forwards and target a couple of impactful mid range guys. Maybe a forward and a D-man. You got to give to get. Can't see how he acquires what he needs by saying all his top guys are "untouchable". Time will tell. But, when we get going again....I think my thinking will be proven right, and the Leafs will again fall short.

100% agree. In the 3 Cups the Hawks won, they were indeed lead by stars Toews, Kane and Keith. But, they won with mediocre Niemi and a Hot/Cold Crawford. Goaltending didn't WIN them the Cup. The stars were stars....but it was the contributions of Buffers, Boland, Bickel, Ladd and many other of the "mid-range" guys. And, no....these players were NOT simply interchangeable with any AHL plug....as these players were wedged out yearly by the Cap, it became harder and harder to afford the mid-range guys needed. You need all 3. You need a cuple of Stars... a handful of impactful mid range guys,....and a few minimum guys that can eat 6-8 minutes and not kill ya.

The lack of impactful mid-range guys is what the Leafs need to address to make the next step. Dubas thinks he can do it by adding a multitude of minimum guys and hoping they "pop". I think he needs to bite the bullet, trade one of his 4 costly forwards and target a couple of impactful mid range guys. Maybe a forward and a D-man. You got to give to get. Can't see how he acquires what he needs by saying all his top guys are "untouchable". Time will tell. But, when we get going again....I think my thinking will be proven right, and the Leafs will again fall short.
- hawk35

Yes. You saw it firsthand with Chicago. Solid depth insulating your stars wins in the playoffs. The Leafs won't improve because Dubas doesn't want to give anything of significance up. He's still hoping guys like Mikhayev can turn into Marian Hossa. He won't trade Nylander. Or Kapanen. Or even Johnsson. So are they banking on young Robertson cracking the lineup next season as a rookie? Is Dubas banking on Jeremy Bracco to be the ammunition to acquire a top 4 defenseman? Exactly. You have to give to get.

They need a top 4 defenseman to compliment Rielly, Muzzin and Dermott. Is Dermott even a top 4 guy on a contender? Both Sandin and Liljegren look to have bright futures. But is either one ready to play a solid 15-20 minutes a night in the playoffs? Not right now they aren't. Sandin is very good though. I like him alot.

But I agree. You have to give to get and Dubas seems unwilling to do this. Did he really need Tyson Barrie? Kadri was playing third line center. But shouldn't that tell you that you have an embarrassment of riches at forward which you can parlay into a legitimate top 4 defenseman? Why trade for a pending UFA? Sakic sure didn't try too hard to keep Barrie. Of course, having Makar and Byram in the system made it much easier to trade him.

I think Freddy Andersen is a good goalie but he doesn't exactly have a good record in Game 7's. He'll command a hefty raise eventually. Do they keep him? Fans are guilty of cheering for the laundry. When Kadri was a Leaf, he was appreciated. He gets traded and all of a sudden becomes worthless amongst alot of the Leafs fanbase. Now Kerfoot comes to town and he's better than Kadri somehow. He is? How long before the wheels fall off Jake Muzzin? Lots of hard miles on that guy.

I believe the Leafs aren't that far away from being a Cup favourite. But only IF they make that BIG blockbuster trade they so desperately need. But until Dubas gets off the porch and plays with the big dogs, the Leafs will continue being a video game hockey team. Lots of goals for. And lots of goals against.

It's Tanner's blueprint. Not mine. I watched my team win 4 Cups with valuable role players like McCarty, Draper, Maltby, Lapointe, Drake, Holmstrom, etc. You need more than your stars to win big playoff games and series. Stars often cancel each other out and it's the Draper's and McCarty's who come through for a team.

That being said, you still need your stars to be your best players. Wings win nothing without Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanahan, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Konstantinov, Chelios, Rafalski, Kronwall, etc. But I don't believe all role players are created equal. Tanner does and he's dead wrong. A successful GM can't build a contender using video game logic.

You can't just pluck any plug from the AHL or Europe and hope he becomes Chris Kontos or Fernando Pisani in the playoffs. Perhaps Tanner's blueprint should read...

Star-Star-Star
Plug-Star-Plug
Plug-Plug-Plug
Plug-Plug-Plug

Star-Star
Star-Plug
Plug-Plug

Star-Plug

This get's his fantasy land team under the Cap, yes? It's still a recipe for playoff failure.
- gergeswillems

The team I root for the Flyers was having a strong season before the league suspension. Obviously adding Niskanen, Hayes and Braun were significant factors. However what was also a big factor was adding player like Pitlick and having Aube-Kubel take a jump in development. That drastically improved their depth and was a solid contributor to the teams play. Can't win in the NHL today without being 4 lines deep. Tanner's "philosophy" comes from his ignorance on how to properly use and evaluate analytics.

Yes. You saw it firsthand with Chicago. Solid depth insulating your stars wins in the playoffs. The Leafs won't improve because Dubas doesn't want to give anything of significance up. He's still hoping guys like Mikhayev can turn into Marian Hossa. He won't trade Nylander. Or Kapanen. Or even Johnsson. So are they banking on young Robertson cracking the lineup next season as a rookie? Is Dubas banking on Jeremy Bracco to be the ammunition to acquire a top 4 defenseman? Exactly. You have to give to get.

They need a top 4 defenseman to compliment Rielly, Muzzin and Dermott. Is Dermott even a top 4 guy on a contender? Both Sandin and Liljegren look to have bright futures. But is either one ready to play a solid 15-20 minutes a night in the playoffs? Not right now they aren't. Sandin is very good though. I like him alot.

But I agree. You have to give to get and Dubas seems unwilling to do this. Did he really need Tyson Barrie? Kadri was playing third line center. But shouldn't that tell you that you have an embarrassment of riches at forward which you can parlay into a legitimate top 4 defenseman? Why trade for a pending UFA? Sakic sure didn't try too hard to keep Barrie. Of course, having Makar and Byram in the system made it much easier to trade him.

I think Freddy Andersen is a good goalie but he doesn't exactly have a good record in Game 7's. He'll command a hefty raise eventually. Do they keep him? Fans are guilty of cheering for the laundry. When Kadri was a Leaf, he was appreciated. He gets traded and all of a sudden becomes worthless amongst alot of the Leafs fanbase. Now Kerfoot comes to town and he's better than Kadri somehow. He is? How long before the wheels fall off Jake Muzzin? Lots of hard miles on that guy.

I believe the Leafs aren't that far away from being a Cup favourite. But only IF they make that BIG blockbuster trade they so desperately need. But until Dubas gets off the porch and plays with the big dogs, the Leafs will continue being a video game hockey team. Lots of goals for. And lots of goals against.
- gergeswillems

Now this is good stuff. Let Tanner deal with all that instead of the other stuff. Don't worry though, you're in no danger of that. Your post is too well thought out.

The team I root for the Flyers was having a strong season before the league suspension. Obviously adding Niskanen, Hayes and Braun were significant factors. However what was also a big factor was adding player like Pitlick and having Aube-Kubel take a jump in development. That drastically improved their depth and was a solid contributor to the teams play. Can't win in the NHL today without being 4 lines deep. Tanner's "philosophy" comes from his ignorance on how to properly use and evaluate analytics.
- MJL

Correct. It's a fine balance. Chemistry isn't something you can measure on a spreadsheet. Larry Murphy was scapegoated out of Toronto in 1997 and was traded to Detroit. Mike Smith literally paid the Red Wings for him to go away. The Leafs even paid half his salary for the remainder of that season as well as the next one. Detroit gave up "Future considerations." Murphy won back to back Cups. Playing with Lidstrom certainly helped.

Roster building is an inexact science. There were years I was convinced the Red Wings would win the Cup just by the makeup of the roster. Like 1995 and 1996. Then they'd be eliminated. Analytics can be a useful tool but it can't be your only tool when it comes to building your roster. You're a fool if you believe so.

Take Duncan Keith. The guy skates ugly. Like a road runner with short choppy steps. But when the Hawks were winning those 3 Cups, he was a beast. Would a scout believe he'd anchor the defense of a 3 time Cup champion someday? I doubt it. But he did. Because he was a great player. It doesn't matter how you do it. Just as long as you do it. Tanner's spreadsheet likely would've said he was AHL material.

Correct. It's a fine balance. Chemistry isn't something you can measure on a spreadsheet. Larry Murphy was scapegoated out of Toronto in 1997 and was traded to Detroit. Mike Smith literally paid the Red Wings for him to go away. The Leafs even paid half his salary for the remainder of that season as well as the next one. Detroit gave up "Future considerations." Murphy won back to back Cups. Playing with Lidstrom certainly helped.

Roster building is an inexact science. There were years I was convinced the Red Wings would win the Cup just by the makeup of the roster. Like 1995 and 1996. Then they'd be eliminated. Analytics can be a useful tool but it can't be your only tool when it comes to building your roster. You're a fool if you believe so.

Take Duncan Keith. The guy skates ugly. Like a road runner with short choppy steps. But when the Hawks were winning those 3 Cups, he was a beast. Would a scout believe he'd anchor the defense of a 3 time Cup champion someday? I doubt it. But he did. Because he was a great player. It doesn't matter how you do it. Just as long as you do it. Tanner's spreadsheet likely would've said he was AHL material.
- gergeswillems

Here is a point that many overlook about that team. What allowed and helped Keith to be able to do what he did in the right situations and deployments was having Hjamarlsson. Hjamarlsson took on a lot of the heavy lifting playing against top lines in defensive situations and was really, really good at it. He's not that player now or he would still be with Chicago. That's one of the things that Tanner doesn't get about the sport. How role players and depth players allow the stars to play in more situations where they can take advantage of their skills. Another thing you mentioned was chemistry. Now I have no clue if Fletcher was aware of what he was adding would so greatly add to team chemistry but it did. In 18/19, you could tell by the Flyers players body language that they weren't having fun and weren't confident. This year they are and a player like Hayes has added a great deal of that to the team. He has made it fun for the team along with his solid play. Like you said, you aren't going to find a column for team chemistry on naturalstatstrik. If all you have to do was get a few stars and some schlubs to make a championship team, it would be easy to do. Tanner doesn't get or know hockey and he never will.

Here is a point that many overlook about that team. What allowed and helped Keith to be able to do what he did in the right situations and deployments was having Hjamarlsson. Hjamarlsson took on a lot of the heavy lifting playing against top lines in defensive situations and was really, really good at it. He's not that player now or he would still be with Chicago. That's one of the things that Tanner doesn't get about the sport. How role players and depth players allow the stars to play in more situations where they can take advantage of their skills. Another thing you mentioned was chemistry. Now I have no clue if Fletcher was aware of what he was adding would so greatly add to team chemistry but it did. In 18/19, you could tell by the Flyers players body language that they weren't having fun and weren't confident. This year they are and a player like Hayes has added a great deal of that to the team. He has made it fun for the team along with his solid play. Like you said, you aren't going to find a column for team chemistry on naturalstatstrik. If all you have to do was get a few stars and some schlubs to make a championship team, it would be easy to do. Tanner doesn't get or know hockey and he never will.
- MJL

Yes. There's so many nuances in hockey. When the Devils were winning Cups, Scott Stevens was admired for dishing out devastating hits to his opponents. But it was his defense partner Brian Rafalski who was setting him up. Like leading a lamb to slaughter. Stevens of course didn't NEED Rafalski. He was a great player. But pairing with Rafalski made it much easier to crush opponents.

Stats never have and never will tell the whole story. When the Pens beat Detroit to win the Cup in 2009, Bill Guerin calmed that young Pens team down after being embarrassed by the Red Wings in game 5.

The Pens came back to win that series in 7. If you look at the stat sheet, Bill Guerin had nothing to do with it. But his experience, leadership and knowing what to say to a young Crosby and Malkin made all the difference. If he's not on that team, I don't believe they win that Cup. You won't find this out at natural fish sticks dot com.

Hmm, seems like there are quite a number of us that understand the value of these mid-tier players, how to construct an actual contender, and why a roster like the Coyotes isn't even close.

Naturally Tanner has disappeared.

Hmm, seems like there are quite a number of us that understand the value of these mid-tier players, how to construct an actual contender, and why a roster like the Coyotes isn't even close.

Naturally Tanner has disappeared.
- Kooleus

I just thought of Lanny McDonald in 1989 when the Flames won the Cup. Lanny was near the end of his career but anyone watching those playoffs knew his teammates badly wanted to win him a Cup. Like Ray Bourque in 2001 for Colorado. But you can't go on your computer at natural fish sticks dot com and know this important information.

That's part of what makes watching hockey so addicting. Even when my team doesn't win or isn't playing for the Cup, I love seeing how certain players raise their level of play. How teams respond from adversity like the Blues did so many times last year. Or how a motivated Red Wings team won the Cup in 1998 without one of their best defensemen, the injured Vladimir Konstantinov. Or how Steve Yzerman playing on one leg in 2002 led a Red Wings team to a third Cup victory.

Or teams like the AVS in 2001 when they won a Cup final without an injured Peter Forsberg. I don't look at which teams or players have the best cherry picked stats. Stats are useful but can be dangerous. They can be used to prove your biased narrative. But they can also be used to prove you're dead wrong.

In 1988 the Flames went 8-0 vs Edmonton during the regular season. They met in the playoffs and Calgary was favoured to win that series. The Oilers swept them in 4 straight games. Why did this happen? Wouldn't a player by player breakdown tell me that Caigary was the superior team?

Or perhaps the Oilers winning playoff experience made all the difference against a young and inexperienced Flames team? The Flames learned this lesson and won both the President's trophy and Stanley Cup the next season. Maybe they just had better spreadsheets?

The beauty of hockey are the unknown factors. The intangibles. The not knowing what's going to happen. One of my former hockey coaches taught me a great lesson. "When you think you know everything, you know nothing. When you think you know nothing then anything is possible."

I just thought of Lanny McDonald in 1989 when the Flames won the Cup. Lanny was near the end of his career but anyone watching those playoffs knew his teammates badly wanted to win him a Cup. Like Ray Bourque in 2001 for Colorado.

That's part of what makes watching hockey so addicting. Even when my team doesn't win or isn't playing for the Cup, I love seeing how certain players raise their level of play. How teams respond from adversity like the Blues did so many times last year.

Or teams like the AVS in 2001 when they won a Cup final without an injured Peter Forsberg. I don't look at which teams or players have the best cherry picked stats. Stats are useful but can be dangerous. They can be used to prove your biased narrative. But they can also be used to prove you're dead wrong.
- gergeswillems

That's the thing about "analytics". We're told by people like Tanner how factual they are and how they're best tool to rate players and predict future results. Yet if you show the same stats on some players to 3 different analytic heads, they'll draw 3 different conclusions.

Here is the only fact. If player A has a CF% of 52.1, all that tells us is what his teams CF% is when he is on the ice. That's it! Nothing more, nothing less. He's on the ice with 4 other skaters playing against 5 other skaters. All contributing to that stat. It's not in reality player A's stat. It's a team stat. Any conclusions drawn from that stat takes analysis. How much does that player actually contribute to that in a positive or negative way? Takes analysis. Same for all analytics. Lots of false data involved.

That's the thing about "analytics". We're told by people like Tanner how factual they are and how they're best tool to rate players and predict future results. Yet if you show the same stats on some players to 3 different analytic heads, they'll draw 3 different conclusions.

Here is the only fact. If player A has a CF% of 52.1, all that tells us is what his teams CF% is when he is on the ice. That's it! Nothing more, nothing less. He's on the ice with 4 other skaters playing against 5 other skaters. All contributing to that stat. It's not in reality player A's stat. It's a team stat. Any conclusions drawn from that stat takes analysis. How much does that player actually contribute to that in a positive or negative way? Takes analysis. Same for all analytics. Lots of false data involved.
- MJL

That's very true. When I attend a game live, I see so many things which I don't see on TV. I look at how a good defenseman quarterbacks his team on the Ice. Yelling instructions to his teammates. Where to go. Where to be. Often the player who scores the goal is a beneficiary of the player who created it. Lidstrom was great at this.

Instead of just dumping the puck in, he'd keep it. Wait that Extra second and create a scoring chance out of nothing. The Red Wings would end up scoring and he wouldn't show up on the scoresheet. Do his analytics say he had a bad game?

Well Tanner would look at the number of Lidstrom's giveaways and likely claim he gives the puck away more than most defensemen. Well he's playing over 30 minutes a night so he's obviously going to have more giveaways than Brett Lebda does. He's playing 10 minutes a night. Do analytics say Lebda is better than Lidstrom? He gives away the puck more!

Or how many times did I see Tommy Holmstrom screen a goalie so a Lidstrom blast from the point would go in? Holmstrom is a key reason why the Red Wings win a playoff overtime game but the scoresheet says he did nothing to help his team win. Homer's Corsi was terrible. His metrics would say he was AHL quality. Scotty Bowman knew better.

How can analytics measure a players heart? Holmstrom used to take constant abuse in front of the net from guys like Pronger and Hatcher. Back in the days when a player had to fight for prime real estate in front of the net. Holmstrom had a very unique value. No one was better at doing what he did when he played. You'll never prove that value in a computer program. Holmstrom"s willingness to pay the price in front of the net afforded him the opportunity to play on great hockey teams even though he couldn't skate, shoot or pass very well.

Ray Sheppard played for the Red Wings and could score goals. He was a natural scorer. His analytics were much better than Holmstrom"s were. But which player would I dress in a SCF game 7? Holmstrom all day every day.

That's the thing about "analytics". We're told by people like Tanner how factual they are and how they're best tool to rate players and predict future results. Yet if you show the same stats on some players to 3 different analytic heads, they'll draw 3 different conclusions.

Here is the only fact. If player A has a CF% of 52.1, all that tells us is what his teams CF% is when he is on the ice. That's it! Nothing more, nothing less. He's on the ice with 4 other skaters playing against 5 other skaters. All contributing to that stat. It's not in reality player A's stat. It's a team stat. Any conclusions drawn from that stat takes analysis. How much does that player actually contribute to that in a positive or negative way? Takes analysis. Same for all analytics. Lots of false data involved.
- MJL

If a guy has a 52% Corsi and a good WAR and a low PDO then that says everything.

Also you guys can have Lidstrom and Holmstrom for the PP. I'll send out Cody Franson and Nik Pecan on my PP. Save my superstars for 5-on-5. Surprised Scotty never thought of this. Dinosaur.

If a guy has a 52% Corsi and a good WAR and a low PDO then that says everything.

Also you guys can have Lidstrom and Holmstrom for the PP. I'll send out Cody Franson and Nik Pecan on my PP. Save my superstars for 5-on-5. Surprised Scotty never thought of this. Dinosaur.
- Kooleus

Nik Pecan. 😂 Don't forget CORSI legend David Rundblad. Maybe if Schmaltz scores 90 points the Coyotes will win the Cup.

Now this is good stuff. Let Tanner deal with all that instead of the other stuff. Don't worry though, you're in no danger of that. Your post is too well thought out.
- MJL

Yeah, Dubas' plan is for Mikheyev to become Hossa and the fact that he hasn't traded away any 22 (23?) year old stars means he won't trade anything of value.

I always have fun here with Gerges, but there were a lot of hot takes in that post.


...Oh, and if you get a chance watch the documentary "When They See Us" on Netflix. It's really well done!

Yes. You saw it firsthand with Chicago. Solid depth insulating your stars wins in the playoffs. The Leafs won't improve because Dubas doesn't want to give anything of significance up. He's still hoping guys like Mikhayev can turn into Marian Hossa. He won't trade Nylander. Or Kapanen. Or even Johnsson. So are they banking on young Robertson cracking the lineup next season as a rookie? Is Dubas banking on Jeremy Bracco to be the ammunition to acquire a top 4 defenseman? Exactly. You have to give to get.

They need a top 4 defenseman to compliment Rielly, Muzzin and Dermott. Is Dermott even a top 4 guy on a contender? Both Sandin and Liljegren look to have bright futures. But is either one ready to play a solid 15-20 minutes a night in the playoffs? Not right now they aren't. Sandin is very good though. I like him alot.

But I agree. You have to give to get and Dubas seems unwilling to do this. Did he really need Tyson Barrie? Kadri was playing third line center. But shouldn't that tell you that you have an embarrassment of riches at forward which you can parlay into a legitimate top 4 defenseman? Why trade for a pending UFA? Sakic sure didn't try too hard to keep Barrie. Of course, having Makar and Byram in the system made it much easier to trade him.

I think Freddy Andersen is a good goalie but he doesn't exactly have a good record in Game 7's. He'll command a hefty raise eventually. Do they keep him? Fans are guilty of cheering for the laundry. When Kadri was a Leaf, he was appreciated. He gets traded and all of a sudden becomes worthless amongst alot of the Leafs fanbase. Now Kerfoot comes to town and he's better than Kadri somehow. He is? How long before the wheels fall off Jake Muzzin? Lots of hard miles on that guy.

I believe the Leafs aren't that far away from being a Cup favourite. But only IF they make that BIG blockbuster trade they so desperately need. But until Dubas gets off the porch and plays with the big dogs, the Leafs will continue being a video game hockey team. Lots of goals for. And lots of goals against.
- gergeswillems

OR...
He is giving the young guys the chance to see what he has first and PROPERLY recognizing that the team isn't a finished product and neither are they.

I am not a huge Dubas fan. He does some things well, but I think he made some bad mistakes also. I find it amazing how quick people are to come up with the worst possible takes on anything Leafs-related.

... I am also pretty sure he doesn't believe Bracco is going to fetch him a saviour on defense.