Oh and for the record, Vermette has put up more goals and just as good year-end point totals as Gagner.

Ok, James. Everyone thought that Gagner had the potential to be a star in the NHL. He never really panned out due to injuries, soft play, inconsistency, and other factors. He's not going to break 50 points this year if he goes on a hot streak even. Gagner CAN be a 70 point player beside a super star winger like Kessel, Hall, Zetterberg, etc.. if he played 82 games. But the Yotes don't have the talent to make this young, flawed talent any better than he already is.
- YzermanIsTheMan[/quote

You could be right. Easily. But he could also end up playing with Boedker and clicking and both of them could break out. Lets not forget were a mere six games into the season.

Sorry if it wasn't clear. Best defensive, not the best offensive.

Admittedly, it was worded horribly. It's the comment section. Grammar and Spelling don't count. This goes kind of fast, there isn't a lot of editing going on.
- James_Tanner

Fair enough

Oh and for the record, Vermette has put up more goals and just as good year-end point totals as Gagner.
- LeftCoaster

Well if this is for the record, you clearly need some more info:

Gagner is 25. Vermette is 32.

Vermette has twice put up a season that is better than Gagner's career high of 49 (which Gagner did at 18) one was when he was a year older than Gagner is now, and he got 53 and one came when he was 29 and got 63 points.

But I am sure Gagner - at 25 - has peaked.

Well if this is for the record, you clearly need some more info:

Gagner is 25. Vermette is 32.

Vermette has twice put up a season that is better than Gagner's career high of 49 (which Gagner did at 18) one was when he was a year older than Gagner is now, and he got 53 and one came when he was 29 and got 63 points.

But I am sure Gagner - at 25 - has peaked.
- James_Tanner

Gagner might hit 70 points in his career one season.....but I'm not prepared to bet the farm on him. Too injury prone and not enough talent surrounding him.

Well if this is for the record, you clearly need some more info:

Gagner is 25. Vermette is 32.

Vermette has twice put up a season that is better than Gagner's career high of 49 (which Gagner did at 18) one was when he was a year older than Gagner is now, and he got 53 and one came when he was 29 and got 63 points.

But I am sure Gagner - at 25 - has peaked.
- James_Tanner

My point stands...Gagner isn't as good as you think (my unabided opinion), but you can continue to hope all you want.

You could be right. Easily. But he could also end up playing with Boedker and clicking and both of them could break out. Lets not forget were a mere six games into the season.
- James_Tanner

And that could happen to. The thing is, we've seen his play and his actualy contributions for over five seasons now. We know his potential, his actual inability to live up to his potential, and his downfalls. I wish him all the best and the Yotes, too. I just don't see it happening. Cause right now, history and current times say that Gagner is going to fail your expectations, the only thing you have is your expectations that he'll be a force. Nothing to really back that up. Nothing against you, I just think that you need to agree that Gagner is and will be a 40-50 point guy forever and always unless something completely changes. Cause the change of scenery didn't change that.

Gagner might hit 70 points in his career one season.....but I'm not prepared to bet the farm on him. Too injury prone and not enough talent surrounding him.
- Jeropotato

Are you OK? Why are you being so reasonable today? haha

Seriously though, I was so enthusiastic about getting the guy, his o points so far are disappointing, but we have to remember it's only six games in and he's played with duds.

I can take the abuse too, I mean, to be so emphatic about him, I'm prepared to be harassed all season, even if he has a good one.

BUT I do continue to find it funny how many people are ready to say I told you so 4% into a season when - like you said - it's not even close to unreasonable to expect 70 points from the kid in a careeer year. Hell, maybe even for a few if he was on a good line.

Are you OK? Why are you being so reasonable today? haha

Seriously though, I was so enthusiastic about getting the guy, his o points so far are disappointing, but we have to remember it's only six games in and he's played with duds.

I can take the abuse too, I mean, to be so emphatic about him, I'm prepared to be harassed all season, even if he has a good one.

BUT I do continue to find it funny how many people are ready to say I told you so 4% into a season when - like you said - it's not even close to unreasonable to expect 70 points from the kid in a careeer year. Hell, maybe even for a few if he was on a good line.
- James_Tanner

I like Gags that why. I guess a start for him would be an 82 game season.

And that could happen to. The thing is, we've seen his play and his actualy contributions for over five seasons now. We know his potential, his actual inability to live up to his potential, and his downfalls. I wish him all the best and the Yotes, too. I just don't see it happening. Cause right now, history and current times say that Gagner is going to fail your expectations, the only thing you have is your expectations that he'll be a force. Nothing to really back that up. Nothing against you, I just think that you need to agree that Gagner is and will be a 40-50 point guy forever and always unless something completely changes. Cause the change of scenery didn't change that.
- YzermanIsTheMan

You have a point. But there's one thing I think you have to concede: He has averages 50 points per 82 games over 7 years. That's remarkably consistent, but like you said, he's done that while leaving everyone wanting more. I think there is enough precedent of guys finding their game at the age he's at that it's not unreasonable to think he will too.

Furthermore, I also think that your arguement is flawed in that it would work for virtually everyone. "You can't make a prediction accurately based on potential because the only info you have is in the past" which, yes, you're right, except that we know things are rarely repeated from the past and that stats are only part of what you would use to predict the future.

Sorry could probably explain better but kids are climbing on me now!!

You have a point. But there's one thing I think you have to concede: He has averages 50 points per 82 games over 7 years. That's remarkably consistent, but like you said, he's done that while leaving everyone wanting more. I think there is enough precedent of guys finding their game at the age he's at that it's not unreasonable to think he will too.

Furthermore, I also think that your arguement is flawed in that it would work for virtually everyone. "You can't make a prediction accurately based on potential because the only info you have is in the past" which, yes, you're right, except that we know things are rarely repeated from the past and that stats are only part of what you would use to predict the future.

Sorry could probably explain better but kids are climbing on me now!!
- James_Tanner

I want to insert some disturbing funny comment about your last sentence, but I won't.

Anyway, I see what you're getting at, and you're right kind of. I think you and I will stalemate at the agreement that we'll have to wait and see how he pans out over the next couple years.

I want to insert some disturbing funny comment about your last sentence, but I won't.

Anyway, I see what you're getting at, and you're right kind of. I think you and I will stalemate at the agreement that we'll have to wait and see how he pans out over the next couple years.
- YzermanIsTheMan

Yes, best not to. My son, he`s 2, and he was climbing all over me and the key board and I had to leave the thought unformulated. We kind of have a consensus here anyways, it`s good too, cause i think we both made some strong points.

Still, I gotta say zero points in six games isn`t helping my cause any!

Yes, best not to. My son, he`s 2, and he was climbing all over me and the key board and I had to leave the thought unformulated. We kind of have a consensus here anyways, it`s good too, cause i think we both made some strong points.

Still, I gotta say zero points in six games isn`t helping my cause any!
- James_Tanner

No, its not. But then again, one step closer to possible lottery. And thats cool that you have a 2 year old son. They're always fun.

is Gormley expendable?

Didn't read the blog. A little dissapointed with the title. Not gonna be much traffic in this thread I dont think.
- Jeropotato

60+ comments is great for Yotes discussion.

For those who didn't read it because it's too long, go hang out on twitter, 140 characters shouldn't hurt your brain.

This was one of JT's best blogs yet.

I get the reasoning behind playing a veteran lineup, but to not even give 1 of your kids a chance to show his stuff is inexusable. Especially with the lack of skill up front, and the high end skill playing in the AHL and OHL.

Icing a boring, middle of the pack team is the worst case scenario for a team that is still on the bubble as far as their future in the desert goes.
It almost feels like they are trying to expedite the move to Seattle.

No, its not. But then again, one step closer to possible lottery. And thats cool that you have a 2 year old son. They're always fun.
- YzermanIsTheMan

Yeah, his name is Holden and he is hilarious. I have two daughters as well. They're just as cool, but by not being 2 they aren't as funny.

is Gormley expendable?
- TheCalSen

Definitely not expendable, but I would bet that they'd consider trading him.
Or, trading someone else and bringing him up. He's pretty much NHL ready and it's kind of mysterious why he's not in the league.

Some theories: a) he didn't have a good training camp b) Coyotes don't want half their defense made up of 1st/2nd year players c) They are wanting to win and compete as much as possible this year and so don't want to play any of their young players (factoring into this would be the added value of having so many developed rookies-who-are-older-and-as-such-better-than-normal-rookies on ELC contacts to squeeze extra value out of them in comparison to salary cap).

Probably a mixture of all three, based on nothing buy my own opinion.

Also, I heard the Flyers need a D, why not Connor Murphy for Braydon Schenn? I feel like he could be a great player on the Coyotes.

60+ comments is great for Yotes discussion.

For those who didn't read it because it's too long, go hang out on twitter, 140 characters shouldn't hurt your brain.

This was one of JT's best blogs yet.

I get the reasoning behind playing a veteran lineup, but to not even give 1 of your kids a chance to show his stuff is inexusable. Especially with the lack of skill up front, and the high end skill playing in the AHL and OHL.

Icing a boring, middle of the pack team is the worst case scenario for a team that is still on the bubble as far as their future in the desert goes.
It almost feels like they are trying to expedite the move to Seattle.
- Vanoxy

Thanks for the props my good man. My main problem with the whole playing vets over kids thing is that the team needs to know what kind of players they have and you only learn that from playing them in the show. I also think it's a very outdated and regressive stance to over rate the value of experience.

I mean, one of the reasons most rookies have such bad stats is because they don't get to play very good minutes or with very good players, so this reinforces the typical 'experience is so important' mindset.

I have no idea how to study this or find stats for it, but my guess is that people who are physically prepared for the NHL but are mentally overwhelmed because they lack experience (or character or leadership or heart for that matter) is probably exponentially smaller than the conversation that usually surrounds the topic of experience would lead you to believe.

Thanks for the props my good man. My main problem with the whole playing vets over kids thing is that the team needs to know what kind of players they have and you only learn that from playing them in the show. I also think it's a very outdated and regressive stance to over rate the value of experience.

I mean, one of the reasons most rookies have such bad stats is because they don't get to play very good minutes or with very good players, so this reinforces the typical 'experience is so important' mindset.

I have no idea how to study this or find stats for it, but my guess is that people who are physically prepared for the NHL but are mentally overwhelmed because they lack experience (or character or leadership or heart for that matter) is probably exponentially smaller than the conversation that usually surrounds the topic of experience would lead you to believe.
- James_Tanner

That is why it's so ridiculous to not have a kid or two in the lineup.
The roster is loaded with character and experience, making it the perfect learning environment for a guy like Samuelson or Domi.
Plus the defensively responsible guys up and down the lineup would allow the kids to run around a bit, without their mistakes hurting you too badly.

I'm afraid the lack of youth infusion is going to lead to a full on youth movement in a couple of years, turning the Yotes into the Oilers of the south.

Much better to see a couple of young guys per year working into the lineup and learning from the Doans and Vermettes of the world than letting the core get stale and slow, then blowing it up.

Greening, Prince, 2nd
for
Gormley
?

Much better to see a couple of young guys per year working into the lineup and learning from the Doans and Vermettes of the world than letting the core get stale and slow, then blowing it up.
- Vanoxy

THIS!!!!!

Which is why Tipp needs to go, because we'll never have the type of development at the "pro" level that the kids need. Boedker was good defensively and he only got 10-12 mins a game after 3years in the league.

Tipp trusts veterans and only veterans. I think Tipp is a 'great' coach, he's just not the 'right' coach for the team at this phase of our existence.

Domi should be playing 16 mins a night on the 2nd line w/Hanzal and Samuelsson. No question about it. Erat and Korpi should be on the 3rd line with Vermette. Doan/Gagner/Bods is the 1st line until Gagner proves he can't handle it. 4th line of Klink/Vitale/McMillan is an ok 4th line.

Immediately jettison Moss/Crombeen/Chipchura

THIS!!!!!

Which is why Tipp needs to go, because we'll never have the type of development at the "pro" level that the kids need. Boedker was good defensively and he only got 10-12 mins a game after 3years in the league.

Tipp trusts veterans and only veterans. I think Tipp is a 'great' coach, he's just not the 'right' coach for the team at this phase of our existence.

Domi should be playing 16 mins a night on the 2nd line w/Hanzal and Samuelsson. No question about it. Erat and Korpi should be on the 3rd line with Vermette. Doan/Gagner/Bods is the 1st line until Gagner proves he can't handle it. 4th line of Klink/Vitale/McMillan is an ok 4th line.

Immediately jettison Moss/Crombeen/Chipchura
- Sindiggy

I couldn't agree more. I really do think it's time - new ownership, new management.

You know all those arguments about experience? It was so that I could then spring this on you: the new GM should be me.

I couldn't agree more. I really do think it's time - new ownership, new management.

You know all those arguments about experience? It was so that I could then spring this on you: the new GM should be me.
- James_Tanner

I wish you were....one less team In The West for the Oilers to worry about.

Greening, Prince, 2nd
for
Gormley
?
- TheCalSen

Doesn't meet the Yotes needs. Gormley in a one for one trade for a talented nhl ready young forward would make more sense as a return for the yotes.

Good blog, comprehensive.

For Domi, do you know if he was eligible for a 10-game tryout? Perplexing why he wasn't afforded at least that, if for nothing else but his own development.

At this point, I can only guess Maloney is waiting for the trade deadline to decide if he should sell off veterans like Michalek and Vermette. Not wrong to think they will both be very marketable then.

But I do agree with your ending. Might as well start the sell off sooner rather than later. Put yourself in the best position to grab a top pick and get some youth on the nhl roster. I'm not typically a fan of this strategy; but if there is ever a year to do it, this is the one.