Michael McCarron for Tree.
- manvanfan

Don't know much about him.

4th line grinder sort?

i'd rather add Tree to a package to land a gem.

Agreed.
package his rights to a pro-ruskie team like Mtl, Wsh or NYR.
- dbot

hold onto him. trade his rights when his KHL contract is about to expire. You may get a 3rd rounder. oh well. that's the gamble when you draft Russians.

- dbot

I would like to wish him well but it is not in my character. I hope he turns out to be the biggest bust in the KHL

Michael McCarron for Tree.
- manvanfan

why?

Pretty sure the Vancouver organization ruined it for him from the team sucking so bad.
- manvanfan

Nah.

He's just a big baby that would rather play in Russia than the NHL.

Let the hate flow through you.

I would like to wish him well but it is not in my character. I hope he turns out to be the biggest bust in the KHL
- VANTEL

I would like to wish him well but it is not in my character. I hope he turns out to be the biggest bust in the KHL
- VANTEL

Same buddy.

Nah.

He's just a big baby that would rather play in Russia than the NHL.

Let the hate flow through you.
- dbot

It's true, After a year and a half his english was nile. He didn't do anything to help himself.

Don't know much about him.

4th line grinder sort?

i'd rather add Tree to a package to land a gem.
- dbot

Probably a middle 6 scorer. Just a real large player. Pretty decent numbers in the AHL and showing promise during nhl stints.

Have read along for a while now and want to underscore the merits between tanking and draftist model. How they differ in planning and outcome for a season.

As it's another year that Nucks don't win a top draft spot. Yet despite that there are calls to tank the season for the next draft. Like we'll get Dahlin or Svechnikov if we tank. Hasn't the draft lottery proven, even more now with a 3 draw, how unlikely that will be?

Then excuses of its good to tank because you get a 4/5th pick. Often a pick interchangeable with picks further down the round. How making efforts to bottom out your team for that boggles the mind. The prize to tank has always been the top pick or consolation 2nd. The top elite franchise changing player. That reality with the draft lottery is just not possible in a tank. Heck the Wings came closer then the Avs to win the lottery on the lotto draws. That's why tanking is just a ridiculous model to plan a whole season on.

Bottoming out may happen through a failed season. There are no guarantees of success. But to continue to call for and expect the Nucks plan to tank their season is just inexplicable.

The plan should be to improve and get better. Not wait to see what draft pick you get at end of season. That's a piece that you add to the mix. Along with the depth and hope of other rounds. The "Draftist" model. Acquire and keep picks in all rounds is a viable plan to add talent.

Thus, in the above the difference here is that tanking as a model is the act to bottom out your season by planing and making moves to lose. (E.g. suppress Cap. Sign and play plugs) The draftist model is to make plans to improve the team and draft in all rounds to accumulate talent. Possibly make moves to acquire more picks when development allows youth/prospect integration to move a veteran.
- Nuck4U

No, no they are not. Do your homework before you make claims like this, 4 and 5 are more often significantly better than picks 6-10. This is a statistically true statement, if you are going to make a claim it needs to be reliable. Ie/ in the last ten drafts, the 4-5 picks have played more games and accumulated more points on average. For sure there are outlier examples at 6-10 picks that are very good, but those picks are not as good if we average out the years and the best pick after 4 and 5 statistically is (I know you're going to be shocked here) pick #6!
Enough with your "Draftist" horsepoop already, no one is buying what you're selling. We are still going to get a very good player at 5. We pick 2nd in the round 2 so if your goal is to "draft in all rounds to accumulate talent" there is no better way to do that than to pick in either volume and quality. pick 5, 33, 64 and 95 are much higher quality overall than 2, 44, 75 and 106 (Philly's) for example. That, again, is an inference based on facts. Acquiring picks is literally rule number one of any tank, seems you want to pick and choose which parts of tank and try to take some kind of moral high-ground without any logical or ethical merit. The only merit to your argument is to accumulate picks, which other than picking top 5 is exactly what people who want a full tank want more than any other thing.

Probably a middle 6 scorer. Just a real large player. Pretty decent numbers in the AHL and showing promise during nhl stints.
- manvanfan

I would expose Tryamkin to Vegas

He's not coming back.
- Marwood

nope he's not. If was coaching, maybe. If was icetime, maybe. But the fact he is home sick. Not coming back.

So if we draft Liljgren this year and Dahlin next year, plus with OJ...
i like that direction.

If we could transition better out of our own end and get some speedy forwards to give the puck to...

i'm joking about Dahlin, but that is my current dream.
it will have to sustain me for the year.

#freefallingforDahlin
- dbot

That could be a stacked blue line.....but how are we going to score goals?

Pretty sure the Vancouver organization ruined it for him from the team sucking so bad.
- manvanfan

Funny thing is that he isnt going to a great organization in Russia either. His team has made the playoffs 3 times (losing in the first round every time) and has finished last in the league twice since the KHL's inception

hold onto him. trade his rights when his KHL contract is about to expire. You may get a 3rd rounder. oh well. that's the gamble when you draft Russians.
- CanuckDon

At this moment, there is no report of an out clause for the NHL:

@CanuckSyko @tryamkin94 Dont know if there are out clauses. If no out clause, a player can buyout his contract when pays 2/3 of the rest of contract to his team.

— vorky (@vorkywh24) May 1, 2017

Let's see how this unfolds to find out options. Plus the buy out that's salary. Not bonuses I believe. So if salary is $1M left on 2/3 and you get offered a 4x4 deal for NHL sure singing bonus would cover $750K. Looks like a couple seasons to make a move. The time we all bet on he'll come back to NHL.

If he doesn't want Nucks and a Russian friendly environment home base NYC is it. That makes trades to the Devils, Isles and Rangers as viable. Teams that would covet him and he could be more inclined to go too.

I would expose Tryamkin to Vegas
- VANTEL

Not eligible.

hold onto him. trade his rights when his KHL contract is about to expire. You may get a 3rd rounder. oh well. that's the gamble when you draft Russians.
- CanuckDon

He has zero value until/if he wants to return

I would like to wish him well but it is not in my character. I hope he turns out to be the biggest bust in the KHL
- VANTEL

Put is this way, Larsen will be better than Tryamkin in the KHL.

Not eligible.
- neem55

Yes he is

nope he's not. If was coaching, maybe. If was icetime, maybe. But the fact he is home sick. Not coming back.
- Kaynine

It's the Sedins. They are poison in the locker room.

[quote=Marwood]It's the Sedins. They are poison in the locker room.







I knew it

It's the Sedins. They are poison in the locker room.


To be honest, I wonder whether they truly are good leaders or not. I get the feeling that some of the guys that have left didn't like them.















- Marwood

Golf?
- LordHumungous

Nope.

No, no they are not. Do your homework before you make claims like this, 4 and 5 are more often significantly better than picks 6-10. This is a statistically true statement, if you are going to make a claim it needs to be reliable. Ie/ in the last ten drafts, the 4-5 picks have played more games and accumulated more points on average. For sure there are outlier examples at 6-10 picks that are very good, but those picks are not as good if we average out the years and the best pick after 4 and 5 statistically is (I know you're going to be shocked here) pick #6!
Enough with your "Draftist" horsepoop already, no one is buying what you're selling. We are still going to get a very good player at 5. We pick 2nd in the round 2 so if your goal is to "draft in all rounds to accumulate talent" there is no better way to do that than to pick in either volume and quality. pick 5, 33, 64 and 95 are much higher quality overall than 2, 44, 75 and 106 (Philly's) for example. That, again, is an inference based on facts. Acquiring picks is literally rule number one of any tank, seems you want to pick and choose which parts of tank and try to take some kind of moral high-ground without any logical or ethical merit. The only merit to your argument is to accumulate picks, which other than picking top 5 is exactly what people who want a full tank want more than any other thing.
- neem55

You still don't get the distinction of the models. Draftist is building through the draft and hanging on to (accumulating) picks not trading them away. Tanking is to plan and make moves to bottom out the season to get the top pick. That is the only rule in tanking. You should rebrand yourself a "Draftist" otherwise it's a misnomer what you are selling. The reality of the lotto draft has proven what is the horsepoop.

You still don't get the distinction of the models. Draftist is building through the draft and hanging on to (accumulating) picks not trading them away. Tanking is to plan and make moves to bottom out the season to get the top pick. That is the only rule in tanking. You should rebrand yourself a "Draftist" otherwise it's a misnomer what you are selling. The reality of the lotto draft has proven what is the horsepoop.
- Nuck4U

your "distinction" is not accurate in anyone's mind but yours. Accumulating draft picks is what tanking teams do, did the leafs tank or take a "draftist" approach?