James I know this something you have debated in the past , but if you have seen many games or highlites I think you would have to change your mind on the importance of face offs. There has been several ggoals as a result of face off wins. With most games being so close it has shown just how important this part of the game is , especially during the playoffs were every goals importance is magnified
- HamiltonHawk

I do not change my mind based on a few well timed plays. The faceoff has been studied and facts are facts. If all things are equal, it's good if a player is decent at draws. However, people massively overrate their impact and say things like "corsi is stupid, but damn is that boy good at faceoffs" meanwhile, if you're under 50% cf and the best in the NHL at faceoffs, that is not as good as being an even player and the worst in the league at faceoffs.

How can you argue, not a knock on McDavid but the Oilers finished 29th, n there record was not much better with him in the lineup, again not knocking McDavid as one day he will have all the awards.
- HamiltonHawk

the argument in this context is that one can't say the Hawks don't still make the playoffs without panarin.
I absolutely believe they do.
And it's not like they achieved some crazy regular season feat that they'd never reached before either. (I'm not tryin to imply huge importance on this one way or another- just responding to the oilers record sans mcdavid)
The Hawks finished same place in the standings as last year, 1 more point, 1 less win


And same goes, I'm not knocking panarin. Slick Effin player. And I'm not even neccesRily against him winning the Calder for certain Criterias.

since record wise with/without seems to be abit of stalemate, an argument that Keith/Kane/hossa/toews/seabrook/Ladd/hjslmarsson etc are far better off without artem than the oilers are with hall/leon/eberle/sekera etc are without Connor

First off, there is nothing but low risk, high reward with the Kadri signing. While a good player, he's not a star. He could be one, someday, but not today. I personally blame that on the way he was developed. Carlyle was the first to actually try and work with him. Now, Babcock is too. Each time he works on an element of his game, he improves, only it takes time to get there. It seems like that last thing he has left to improve is his shooting, which he is working on now. I think this is why a player's "prime" is between 27-32, because it takes that long to put it all together for most players.

Second, the team Canada defense corp would be made better by Brodie, Subban and Muzzin for sure, but not Letang. He's far more one dimensional than he gets credit for. He's an offensive force, but little more.

Third, I don't think Maloney has let the game pass him by, he just made several bad decisions, and wouldn't commit to any specific path to improving his club for fear of being wrong. He's a safe manager, with his primary concern being his job.

Finally, as for Reimer, he just doesn't have the stamina to be a starting goaltender. The more he plays, the worse he gets. After watching him for 8 years, this is fairly evident. However, he's done very well against the West and Calgary needs a goalie. Burke drafted him and will push to get him there. My guess is a 3 year deal worth 4.5 per. Burke likes his former players a lot, and Anaheim won't trade them Andersen.

I actually agree with something you wrote!
Reimer should be heavily pursued in the offseason. Never thought of the Coyotes as a team that would go after him though. The teams you keep hearing are Calgary and back to TO (which makes little sense for him to go a split duties with the horrible Bernier).
How do you think he'd fare down in Arizona?

I guess you make a couple fair points, but if the award is to go to the best player, then it's McDavid. Panarin is six years older and skates with Kane, and only wins on the technicality of McDavid missing half the year. Best is best, don't know why you need to play a full year, but it's cool to disagree, thanks for the post.
- James_Tanner

Now that's mighty disingenuous of you.

If you're going to negate Panarin because he's playing with Kane, then you also have to negate McD. Aren't you always saying the Oil have one of the most talanted Offensive rosters in the league.

By that logic, the award should go to either Ghost or Eichel, because they did the most with the talent at hand, which was limited at best.

Now that's mighty disingenuous of you.

If you're going to negate Panarin because he's playing with Kane, then you also have to negate McD. Aren't you always saying the Oil have one of the most talanted Offensive rosters in the league.

By that logic, the award should go to either Ghost or Eichel, because they did the most with the talent at hand, which was limited at best.
- nikel

Mr. Tanner, I appreciate your commentary but want to give a different perspective on Dylan Strome. I was rooting for him to make the team last year before I attended the final preseason game. I had ice level seats and was pumped to see the young kids, and i came away with two thoughts on Strome. First, he is sneaky good in the offensive zone. Unlike Domi who is like a Tasmanian devil, stromes playmaking is just as good, but seemingly with half the effort. At one point he was at the top of the circles looking to pass and in the blink of an eye he put a no-look snap shot on goal that just missed and sounded like it put a hole in the boards! That got me unbelievably excited and I fully believe he will be a top 5-10 center in the league. Second, I noticed how terrible his skating was and how much it effected his game. He looked like he was wearing roller blades out there and at any given moment he was a half second behind the play. He didn't get to display his playmaking often because getting the puck was a chore for him. After seeing that I knew for sure they were sending him down. I know he likely would have improved his skating in the NHL, but rumors are he dramatically improved it in the OHL and is now one of the strongest skaters. For that reason alone, I love that they sent him down!! The right call for sure, and excited to see what he does next year! And for grins...vermette is better than you give him credit l, and his analytics will jump once he is a full time 3rd liner...his rightful roster spot. Thanks!!

Mr. Tanner, I appreciate your commentary but want to give a different perspective on Dylan Strome. I was rooting for him to make the team last year before I attended the final preseason game. I had ice level seats and was pumped to see the young kids, and i came away with two thoughts on Strome. First, he is sneaky good in the offensive zone. Unlike Domi who is like a Tasmanian devil, stromes playmaking is just as good, but seemingly with half the effort. At one point he was at the top of the circles looking to pass and in the blink of an eye he put a no-look snap shot on goal that just missed and sounded like it put a hole in the boards! That got me unbelievably excited and I fully believe he will be a top 5-10 center in the league. Second, I noticed how terrible his skating was and how much it effected his game. He looked like he was wearing roller blades out there and at any given moment he was a half second behind the play. He didn't get to display his playmaking often because getting the puck was a chore for him. After seeing that I knew for sure they were sending him down. I know he likely would have improved his skating in the NHL, but rumors are he dramatically improved it in the OHL and is now one of the strongest skaters. For that reason alone, I love that they sent him down!! The right call for sure, and excited to see what he does next year! And for grins...vermette is better than you give him credit l, and his analytics will jump once he is a full time 3rd liner...his rightful roster spot. Thanks!!
- Dahlmanyotes

Interesting take, but I know for a fact that Tippett wanted to keep him in the NHL, so I highly doubt his skating was that much of an issue or that a 20 year old picked 4th overall could improve it so much in one year.

Either way, he'll be in the NHL next year.

- tomburton99

Not quite sure you understand much about the game of chess.

Interesting take, but I know for a fact that Tippett wanted to keep him in the NHL, so I highly doubt his skating was that much of an issue or that a 20 year old picked 4th overall could improve it so much in one year.

Either way, he'll be in the NHL next year.
- James_Tanner

The article on his drastic improvement in skating can be found on HockeysFuture. No idea how reliable that site is but it cites his coach and others. Hanzal, Strome, vermette, Richardson will be a formidable center group...the problem is zero depth when one goes down.

The Yotes have announced they are moving their AHL affiliate to Tucson!

The article on his drastic improvement in skating can be found on HockeysFuture. No idea how reliable that site is but it cites his coach and others. Hanzal, Strome, vermette, Richardson will be a formidable center group...the problem is zero depth when one goes down.
- Dahlmanyotes

I strongly disagree that that is a formidable group of centres. A rookie, the most injury prone athlete in the world, a decent fourth line guy, I guess, in Richardson and Vermette who should absolutely, under no circumstances, be allowed to be on the team next year.

I guess you make a couple fair points, but if the award is to go to the best player, then it's McDavid. Panarin is six years older and skates with Kane, and only wins on the technicality of McDavid missing half the year. Best is best, don't know why you need to play a full year, but it's cool to disagree, thanks for the post.
- James_Tanner

But it doesn't necessarily go to the "best player". It goes to the player who had the "best rookie season". The Calder is not an "expected lifetime achievement award".

McDavid missing half the season is not a technicality, it is a reality. His future still lies as one of the best (if not the best) young stars in the game today, but in this conversation when talking about a season's worth of accomplishments Panarin is my choice. You don't have to play a full year to win the Calder, nor should you have to. However anyone who plays less than a full year by any significant amount (and almost 50% is certainly significant) has to be accounted for the fact said player did not play a full year. Not playing matters as much as playing b/c after all how can you be helping your team (and thus be the "best" or most valuable) rookie if you weren't playing.

Speaking of Drouin, still think Yzerman's unwillingness to give him away was one of the worst personnel management decisions you have ever seen?

I do not change my mind based on a few well timed plays. The faceoff has been studied and facts are facts. If all things are equal, it's good if a player is decent at draws. However, people massively overrate their impact and say things like "corsi is stupid, but damn is that boy good at faceoffs" meanwhile, if you're under 50% cf and the best in the NHL at faceoffs, that is not as good as being an even player and the worst in the league at faceoffs.
- James_Tanner

Under 50% could possibly mean .25/shot per game....it's not a big deal either.

James, You don't think Richardson should be on the team next year? Have you watched him play? And Vermette was great on face offs and had 17 goals! plus a leader for the rookies. He should not be in the top six. But as a third line center he is very good. Your hate for those two are odd. You look at numbers instead of watching the games! You should watch a hockey game you might like it.

Under 50% could possibly mean .25/shot per game....it's not a big deal either.
- Garnie

Well yeah, it sort of is because even being just slightly under 50% over the long term means you're team is always losing when you're on the ice.

James, You don't think Richardson should be on the team next year? Have you watched him play? And Vermette was great on face offs and had 17 goals! plus a leader for the rookies. He should not be in the top six. But as a third line center he is very good. Your hate for those two are odd. You look at numbers instead of watching the games! You should watch a hockey game you might like it.
- Gomey

I don't hate anyone. I am a fan of Vermette from way back, but he should retire because he is terrible. Those 17 goals, most of them were on the PP, and no other team in the NHL would have let him play the PP. The faceoffs do not matter in the slightest because the rest of his game is terrible.

Even as a third line centre, he's far, far below what most teams have. As for Richardson, he's alright, but again, he isn't one of the better 4th line centres in hockey and on a good team he's max 10-12 mins per night, so I just don't really care about him either way.

Speaking of Drouin, still think Yzerman's unwillingness to give him away was one of the worst personnel management decisions you have ever seen?
- uf1910

Just because something works out, doesn't mean you did a good job - I still think it was horribly mismanaged, yes.

Just because something works out, doesn't mean you did a good job - I still think it was horribly mismanaged, yes.
- James_Tanner

Well one thing is for damn sure, giving away young talented players for pennies on the dollar is a quick way of making sure your franchise doesn't succeed. But by all means, stand behind your premise that Yzerman bungled this situation by NOT doing just that.

But, I'll play your game and again will ask. What should Yzerman have done differently that wouldn't classify as "horribly mismanaged"?

Well one thing is for damn sure, giving away young talented players for pennies on the dollar is a quick way of making sure your franchise doesn't succeed. But by all means, stand behind your premise that Yzerman bungled this situation by NOT doing just that.

But, I'll play your game and again will ask. What should Yzerman have done differently that wouldn't classify as "horribly mismanaged"?
- uf1910

You're not going to get an answer. But you did just put Tanner into.....

You're not going to get an answer. But you did just put Tanner into.....

- tomburton99

I don't understand how chess works

Well yeah, it sort of is because even being just slightly under 50% over the long term means you're team is always losing when you're on the ice.
- James_Tanner

Always losing due to 1/2 shot avg/game...I don't think so.

I strongly disagree that that is a formidable group of centres. A rookie, the most injury prone athlete in the world, a decent fourth line guy, I guess, in Richardson and Vermette who should absolutely, under no circumstances, be allowed to be on the team next year.
- James_Tanner

Hanzal taking on the top lines, Strome as a second line center (providing we get some depth on the wing other than Domi and Duclair) will work just fine. I am baffled by your hatred of Vermette...his numbers look bad because he was miscast. Undoubtedly his numbers drastically improve once he is in a 3rd or 4th line role. Overpaid? ABSOLUTELY! But not fit for the team? That is just simply not true and a poor analysis. Richardson isn't my first choice for bottom 6 center, but I'd say he's in the top half of the league (for that role). And yes, like I mentioned we have no depth, so as soon as Hanzal goes down, the whole team falls apart. I think this is one of Maloney's biggest flaws...his teams always looked good on day 1, but were never built to sustain the wear and tear of a season. We need 1 or 2 of those hybrid center/wingers that can shift into the pivot when someone goes down. Especially with Hanzal on the team, I think this should be a high priority this offseason. None of the young prospects are ready to take on Hanzals role, so they should not be considered the "depth" for when Hanzal (inevitably) misses time. Agree? Disagree?