Freshmen Forwards (Overrated)

[Jim Hyla]

But not worthy of comment!!

[quote sah67]Let's all just ignore...[/quote]

Totally agree.

[BCrespi]

[quote Will][quote sah67]he probably would have gone back down to mommy's basement to play NHL '94 and put his superb strategies to work.[/quote]

Would he have taken the Kings to the Cup playing against the computer with the offsides off?[/quote]

It's not so much me as it is Roenick.  He's good.

[Chris 02]

Facetimer, is that you?

[ugarte]

Good god, people. Cut it out with the (exclusively) ad hominem attacks on IMM. Yes, IMM is all-caps CRAZY and seriously negative. But no, he is not simply trolling and spraying stupidity around like a lawn sprinkler.

He¹, like bandrews37, has written lengthy, provocative posts that attack some sacred cows.  This is not a crime. While a lot of people address the criticisms on the merits, others seem to feel that if someone says something negative it is bad; if they say it twice, they are trolls. It kills discussion.  I agree with some of what the new agony aunts have to say, disagree with some and lack knowledge to evaluate the rest. But whatever the merits of IMM's and bandrews' views, those posts have prompted some of the most interesting conversation that the board has seen in a long time. And while they are stating things in a declarative, self-important manner, so do most of us most of the time. They are not being disrespectful (definitely not, by internet standards), they are stating unpopular opinions.

There are fans who talk hockey and there is the old Clarkson Roundtable. Don't be the Clarkson Roundtable.² As my mother always told me, Don't be Goldie Knight. (This was cryptic advice at the time.)

¹ Given the number of regular female posters here, sorry if I am taking liberties.

² Apologies to Neil O'Donnell (do I remember that right?) who ran a great, enjoyable precursor to CHDF/eLF and to all the sane Roundtable members who had to put up with my not-so-youthful trolling over there. It was just so much fun.

[RichH]

[quote ugarte]He¹, like bandrews37, has written lengthy, provocative posts that attack some sacred cows.  This is not a crime. While a lot of people address the criticisms on the merits, others seem to feel that if someone says something negative it is bad; if they say it twice, they are trolls. It kills discussion.  I agree with some of what the new agony aunts have to say, disagree with some and lack knowledge to evaluate the rest. But whatever the merits of IMM's and bandrews' views, those posts have prompted some of the most interesting conversation that the board has seen in a long time. And while they are stating things in a declarative, self-important manner, so do most of us most of the time. They are not being disrespectful (definitely not, by internet standards), they are stating unpopular opinions.[/quote]

Well said, and well footnoted.

And thanks for bringing up fond memories of the Clarkson Roundtable.

[Will]

The only thing that really bothers me is PUTTING THE TITLE OF THE POST ALL IN CAPS LIKE THIS, as if one's specific intention is to grab attention.  (Luckily, Age has taken care of that, at least for now.  Thanks, Age!)  Otherwise, if you've got your negative opinions, yeah, let's discuss them.

[KeithK]

I'm pretty sure bandrews37 isn't trolling.  He just has an unpopular negative opinion right now.  IMM's first post looked like the same.  This one is so over the top negative that I can't help but think he's trolling.  Even if e he's not there's no point in arguing with someone who thinks " Schafer gambled with the freshman forwards this season and lost".

[mtmack25]

_____________________________Goals_____ST Goals_____5x5

Bitz-Sawada-Greening ________8-10-11_____3-5-5_____5-5-6

Carefoot-Mugford-Kennedy_____ 9-1-5______4-0-0_____5-1-5

McCutcheon-Barlow-Gallagher___10-6-3_____8-2-1_____2-4-2

Milo-Scott-Romano____________3-4-9_______0-2-4_____3-2-5

I think it is important to see who puts the puck in the net.  We only scored 3 shorties this year, they are included in ST goals but dont make much of a difference.  The #1 PP unit for most of the year was Bitz, Sawada, McCutcheon, Scott and someone was plugged in here for a while I think.

From my memory, the freshmen were excluded from most PP time until the second half, so there best opportunity to score came in 5x5 hockey. Our "top" line was pretty good at putting the puck in the net, in fact, Greening was the best at it.  Would McCutcheon have been better in that spot? Maybe. But Greening did well there.  Romano and Milo both outscored McCutcheon, absent his PP stats.  Had they been on the PP all year, maybe they would have scored more, but they did well with the time they had.

I cannot agree that Greening, our top goal scorer, did not deserve to be on the "top" line, even if he did score half of his goals in 2 games.  If it was so easy, why didn't everyone else score half of their goals in those games.  The fact is that he found the back of the net.

With that said, I don't believe that the freshman were our best players this year.  I think that as freshman they show a lot of potential for the future.  That is what excites me the most.  Some of them played immature at times this year and that can get ugly, but players learn over time.  The strong talents that they show now do not make them complete players, but the weak aspects of their game will be addressed in time.

And if you don't think that poor decision-making improves with time, please see Cook, Charlie(stop passing in front of our net) or O'Byrne, Ryan(I can still see it going in)

I do think that IMM makes some interesting line suggestions.  I think that Kennedy has some good offensive talent waiting to be seen.  And while I am defending the freshman to an extent, I think that Milo could have been left out of the lineup for one of the other scratches.  At least to give them the chance to step up.

[Giffy]

Why is everyone being so tough on Milo?  He was our best 2-way freshman that saw regular playing time.  He was also the only on that was put on penalty kill.  He may not have produced offensively as much as everyone would have liked, but his contributions went beyond that.

[KeithK]

[quote mtmack25]With that said, I don't believe that the freshman were our best players this year.  I think that as freshman they show a lot of potential for the future.[/quote]
If a team's best players are freshmen it probably means either 1) you landed a once-in-a-generation elite class or 2) you had weak upper classes to begin with.  I'm won't say that our frosh were out best players this year, but that's how it's supposed to work.

Note: I'm talking about how they played this year, not about potential.

[sah67]

[quote ugarte]opinions.

As my mother always told me, Don't be Goldie Knight. (This was cryptic advice at the time.)

[/quote]

KNOW NO LIMITS, ELYNAH POSTERS!! DISINTEGRIZINATE THE TROLLINATORS!!

See, if you use Caps in the actual post, it's more effective.  But on a serious note, apologies if I offended anyone...I didn't mean to make troll accusations.  I was just cranky at the time and sick of the ALL CAPS POST SUBJECTS.  Everyone's opinion is obviously welcome on this board, as long as you present it in a manner that doesn't visually offend us

[Beeeej]

I agree to an extent with what ugarte said - it's mostly just unpopular opinion, and that by itself isn't trolling.  But what puts stuff like this over the line into trolliness for me is that it's all negative with no constructive suggestions.  Not that I'm expecting IMM to step in as head coach for a retroactively played season to prove he could have done better and gone farther - but if you're going to criticize the coach's choices of who's on what line, tell us who you would've used instead, and why, and what makes you think it would've worked better.  If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead.  Back up your statement about Connors with some evidence that he was unreasonably forced to quit despite enormous potential that could've been the missing link for the team's season.

Criticism isn't prohibited without an accompanying mind to help, but it sure comes across more credibly with one.

[Al DeFlorio]

[quote Beeeej]If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead.[/quote]
Uh-oh.  Beeeej blows one at last. [Schafer may rule--or reign--but in this case he reins.]

[fullofgas]

[quote Al DeFlorio][quote Beeeej]If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead.[/quote]
Uh-oh.  Beeeej blows one at last. [Schafer may rule--or reign--but in this case he reins.][/quote]

I think his head just exploded!::doh::

[Rita]

[quote fullofgas][quote Al DeFlorio][quote Beeeej]If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead.[/quote]
Uh-oh.  Beeeej blows one at last. [Schafer may rule--or reign--but in this case he reins.][/quote]

I think his head just exploded!::doh::[/quote]

LOL!
Nice catch Al.