NHL General Thread

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Yet you hate on Mitch Marner for doing exactly what you would do in his position. Harold Ballard Disease is a helluva aliment.

Oh I don't hate Mitch Marner, nothing so dramatic as that, I only hate the commies, otherwise I live and let live, if Marner wants out, there's the door, more power to him, get dat papuh.

You said it yourself, Yzermandias, there are no Made Guys anymore, so I don't owe Mitch Lindros any respect.

[J4L]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

He only had three years left as the Great One anyways, he was never the same after he got cross checked in the back by Gary Suter at the Canada Cup, so the Oilers had already got the best of him, and they sold high.

You must have missed the 1993 playoffs then.

[Yzermandius19]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

Oh I don't hate Mitch Marner, nothing so dramatic as that, I only hate the commies, otherwise I live and let live, if Marner wants out, there's the door, more power to him, get dat papuh.

You said it yourself, Yzermandias, there are no Made Guys anymore, so I don't owe Mitch Lindros any respect.

Good Luck finding someone willing to give you a Foppa for Mitchy Lindros, that's a tough find.

[J4L]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

Bankruptcy is bankruptcy, Gretzky didn't win shit for them, he didn't make any money for them neither.

Who are you trying to fool?  After Gretzky became a King, attendance went from 11,000 to sellouts every game.  It also became the "in" thing to do for Hollywood Celebrities. Not to mention that Kings merchandise was selling like hotcakes. I think only the Raiders and Bulls sold more merchandise when Gretzky was in LA.  It was Bruce McNall, and his horrible business investments that brought down the Kings. Ironic, since that is precisely what happened in Edmonton with Peter Pocklington five years earlier.

[Dougie93]

9 minutes ago, J4L said:

You must have missed the 1993 playoffs then.

IIRC the Montreal Canadiens won the cup, Patrick Roy won the Conn Smythe, and in the Finals Gretz did not much, had an empty netter in game one, I think he scored again in game four, but that was about it, certainly a mere shadow of his former self, prior to Suter wrecking his back.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Dougie93

[Yzermandius19]

Goodbye Lindros, Hello Foppa.

 

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, J4L said:

Who are you trying to fool?  After Gretzky became a King, attendance went from 11,000 to sellouts every game.  It also became the "in" thing to do for Hollywood Celebrities. Not to mention that Kings merchandise was selling like hotcakes. I think only the Raiders and Bulls sold more merchandise when Gretzky was in LA.  It was Bruce McNall, and his horrible business investments that brought down the Kings. Ironic, since that is precisely what happened in Edmonton with Peter Pocklington five years earlier.

Well, profit is when you make money, bankruptcy is when you make so little profit that the bank comes to foreclose on you, so by definition, as the Kings went bankrupt in the time Gretz was playing for them, he didn't make a dime for them.  

[Yzermandius19]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

Well, profit is when you make money, bankruptcy is when you make so little profit that the bank comes to foreclose on you, so by definition, as the Kings went bankrupt in the time Gretz was playing for them, he didn't make a dime for them.  

More like, he didn't make enough dimes for them to save them from other idiotic investments. Gretzky made them plenty of dimes.

[Yzermandius19]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

certainly a mere shadow of his former self, prior to Suter wrecking his back.

 

[Dougie93]

9 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Good Luck finding someone willing to give you a Foppa for Mitchy Lindros, that's a tough find.

Meh, wingers are a dime a dozen, easy come easy go.

[Yzermandius19]

2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Meh, wingers are a dime a dozen, easy come easy go.

I'm sure the Leafs will get another 90 point winger any day now, them being a dime a dozen and all.
Lulz

Edited July 20, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

I'm sure the Leafs will get another 90 point winger any day now, them being a dime a dozen and all.
Lulz

Two wingers who score 45 points are easy to find, problem solved.

[Yzermandius19]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Two wingers who score 45 points are easy to find, problem solved.

That doesn't solve the problem, taking up two roster spots in the top six instead of one is an inefficiency. Marner plus another top six winger is more than 90 points, two 45 point top six wingers to replace Marner is a major drop off.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Dougie93]

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

That doesn't solve the problem, taking up two roster spots in the top six instead of one is an inefficiency.

Not when Marner's cap hit is 11.6, 11.6 is three players worth of cap, 11.6 for a winger is the ultimate inefficiency.

[Yzermandius19]

8 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Not when Marner's cap hit is 11.6, 11.6 is three players worth of cap, 11.6 for a winger is the ultimate inefficiency.

Depends on the winger. Point per game wingers are not a dime a dozen, and moneyballing their replacements is harder than you think. Three players is three roster spots, and the Leafs already have cheap wingers in the top six who can put up 45 points, so losing Marner can't actually be replaced all that easily. There are only four winger spots in the top six, and you have other wingers already taking up those spots who 45 point wingers won't be an upgrade on. Adding two 45 point wingers to the top six does not replace Marner, and you don't have enough top six roster spots for three extra 45 point wingers to fill.

It ain't as inefficient as you make out to be when you have a legit top 20 scorer in the NHL on the wing. Not all wingers are created equal, most of them are a dime a dozen, but not all of them.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[J4L]

16 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Well, profit is when you make money, bankruptcy is when you make so little profit that the bank comes to foreclose on you, so by definition, as the Kings went bankrupt in the time Gretz was playing for them, he didn't make a dime for them.  

McNall made a big profit off the Kings.  Unfortunately, most of his other business dealings failed. That is why he had to relinquish the Kings.  His creditors were going to seize the club.

Ditto for Pockington. His businesses were in the red, so to cover his losses, he took the $15 million, and dealt Gretzky to LA.

Saying the Kings lost money, while playing in LA from 1988-95, is completely false.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Depends on the winger. Point per game wingers are not a dime a dozen, and moneyballing their replacements is harder than you think. Three players is three roster spots, and the Leafs already have cheap wingers in the top six who can put up 45 points, so losing Marner can't actually be replaced all that easily. There are only four winger spots in the top six, and you have other wingers already taking up those spots who 45 point wingers won't be an upgrade on. Adding two 45 point wingers to the top six does not replace Marner, and you don't have enough top six roster spots for three extra 45 point wingers to fill.

None of that matters in the playoffs, it really just comes down to Andersen, either he goes Conn Smythe or he doesn't, Matthews is a Unicorn, it's hard to find a 1C, but wingers are not hard to find,and you don't need a 90 point winger at the end of the day.

[Yzermandius19]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

None of that matters in the playoffs, it really just comes down to Andersen, either he goes Conn Smythe or he doesn't, Matthews is a Unicorn, it's hard to find a 1C, but wingers are not hard to find,and you don't need a 90 point winger at the end of the day.

You don't need it, but acting like it isn't a nice luxury and all wingers are created equal is taking things too far.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, J4L said:

Saying the Kings lost money, while playing in LA from 1988-95, is completely false.

Provably true, since McNall only ran them buy borrowing money, then he defaulted on a 90 million loan and the Kings were bankrupt, then Jeffrey Sudikov had to step in and bail the team out.

[J4L]

22 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

IIRC the Montreal Canadiens won the cup, Patrick Roy won the Conn Smythe, and in the Finals Gretz did not much, had an empty netter in game one, I think he scored again in game four, but that was about it, certainly a mere shadow of his former self, prior to Suter wrecking his back.

You must have never seen the Kings-Leafs series then.  Gretzky single-handedly carried the Kings on his back, and defeated the Leafs in 7 games. It was arguably his greatest series, as he did not have the Oilers dynasty players of the 80s to play with.

[Dougie93]

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

You don't need it, but acting like it isn't a nice luxury is taking things too far.

It's a luxury we can move on without when Mitch Lindros sits the season out, it's not like we have a choice, but I have faith in Dubas to find cheaper talent to replace Marner.

 

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, J4L said:

You must have never seen the Kings-Leafs series then.  Gretzky single-handedly carried the Kings on his back, and defeated the Leafs in 7 games. It was arguably his greatest series, as he did not have the Oilers dynasty players of the 80s to play with.

Big whoop, the Leafs couldn't score except for Gilmour and Clark, beating that Leaf team was no great feat, plus it won the Kings exactly nothing, as I said.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Dougie93

[Yzermandius19]

8 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

It's a luxury we can move on without when Mitch Lindros sits the season out, it's not like we have a choice, but I have faith in Dubas to find cheaper talent to replace Marner.

 

I don't have that faith. Point per game forwards don't grow on trees, there is no room for anymore top six centers, moneyball wingers are already crowding your top six, and then you got play Nylander in your top six too.

Marner isn't replaceable, not realistically. You can use the cap room to make the defense better, but you can't replace that forward production without bringing in another ppg winger, simple as that. You said it yourself, there is no such thing as a third scoring line, bottom six wingers ain't going to make up for Marner, not happening.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

I don't have that faith. Point per game forwards don't grow on trees, there is no room for anymore top six centers, moneyball wingers are already crowding your top six, and then you got play Nylander in your top six too.

Marner isn't replaceable, not realistically. You can use the cap room to make the defense better, but you can't replace that forward production without bringing in another ppg winger, simple as that.

Doesn't matter,  it's all about Andersen, Marner doesn't put them over the top, if he holds out beyond camp,  go Harold Ballard on him, lock him out and leave him locked out.

[Yzermandius19]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Doesn't matter,  it's all about Andersen, Marner doesn't put them over the top, if he holds out beyond camp,  go Harold Ballard on him, lock him out and leave him locked out.

Marner increases their chances, writing that off because he's not a 1C or a 1G, is silly. Not maximizing your chances makes no sense, just because no winger will put them over the top by himself. If you don't have a superior alternative to spend the cap space on, then not spending it on Marner is foolish.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Yzermandius19