First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson

>>I live in the town where he played all of his collegiate and pro
>>careers, and this was a big topic prior to his first training camp.
>
>Hey, if I'm wrong I'm wrong and I willingly accept that.

Happens to everyone now and again. We've all got at least one comment
that will live in infamy... :-)

>Given that three of their top six forward spots would consist of a
>rookie, a longshot who came out of nowhere the year before, and a guy
>who'd netted 20 goals only once in his career, it seems terribly silly
>to write the kid off before camp.

Well, they didn't 'write him off', as they invited him to camp. They
just didn't expect him to make it at the outset.

And two of those three spots looked good: Svatos had a great rookie
year, Wolski looked like he belonged in the playoffs after tearing up
the OHL the year before, then then Arnason. As for the latter, please
remember that the Avs signed him to 'replace' Forsberg a year after
signing 'Turgeon' to do the same thing.

So, it's not terribly out of line when you look at it that way. :-)
Neither signing made too much sense to me either, but there you have
it. Given that, thank heaven Stastny did what he did.

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

Chris wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 10:11:20 -0400, Thomas <noneman.TakeThisOut@none.man> wrote:
>
>> Chris wrote:
>>>>>> Stastny wasn't supposed to make that team?
>>>>> No. He wasn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> He won the job. Quenneville said as much. He was slated to spend the
>>>>> entirety of 06-07 in the AHL, but he played so well in the preseason
>>>>> that Quenneville had to keep him.
>>>> I'd love to see the quote where Q stated that Stastny was absolutely
>>>> going to spend the season in the A; especially since he'd recently
>>>> gotten rid of Tanguay.
>>> Thomas is correct, Walk. Here in town, there was a lot of talk about
>>> how Stastny probably should have stayed at DU, signed a pro contract
>>> too early, etc. I don't have the quote handy, but I do recall reading
>>> Q saying that they were all pleasantly surprised by Stastny's play in
>>> camp/preseason last year, and how they initially expected him to get
>>> some time in the AHL, much like our other young players are this year
>>> - Hensick, Stewart, Burki, etc.
>> Thank you.
>>
>> The thing Walk seems to have forgotten (or never known) was that we were
>> all hoping that Stastny would one day develop into the player he is
>> currently. If he were expected to be as good as he is currently right
>> off the bat, he wouldn't have been there in the second round.
>
> Correct. And while Stastny was a very good player at DU, he didn't
> lead his team in goals or assists, and was something like 12th in
> goals in that conference that year. He was a good scorer, not a
> prolific one. I distinctly remember a number of raised eyebrows when
> he went pro, and there was considerable question about his speed in
> particular. And that last point was the one that had him slated for
> AHL time, IMO.

His speed is no longer a concern, and neither is his skating. Both have
improved quite a bit since he broke in.

And for all the talk about Smyth's lack of speed, he sure hasn't shown
that in Colorado.

-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

Chris wrote:
>>> I'd take the former, though in the context of our current discussion,
>>> which player scores every game, and which one 'gives you nothing'
>>> three games at a time? Your question doesn't cite anything realistic,
>>> as there are no NHL players who garner a point every game.
>> I guess the wings homers were asleep last year when Stastny set a
>> consecutive
>> games POINTS SCORING STREAK RECORD for a rookie. What was it? 22
>> games?
>>
>> Anyone on Detroit have a 22 game points streak?
>
> More sweeping conclusions after 10 games.
>
> Doug does come up with some doozies though. Though this one certainly
> doesn't come close to last year's "The Wings' rookies are better than
> Stastny because they have a better +/-".
>
> Stastny is very regular in his scoring, and has been since he turned
> pro. Let's ignore the 82 games last year and pay 100% attention to
> the 9 this year though, Elz. Plus, who scores in *every* game?
> Absolutely nobody.

You'll have to forgive Doug. He wants badly to be one of the big boys
here, but he's just not. He's a casual fan by his own admission, which
leads him to these ridiculous assertions.

-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

>> Well, color me out of the anti-Stastny crowd. I've only gotten to see
>> him a few times (when I get more free time, maybe I'll re-up Center
>> Ice), but he's terrific.
>
>Maybe that's why you think he was a lock to make the team.
>
>He wasn't. Walk, did you ever see him play in college? I make it a point
>to watch Avs prospects whenever I possibly can, and I watched DU games
>to see if he was a chip off the old block. He was good in college, but
>he wasn't that good.

Correct. Even during that time, DU guys like Gauthier, Carle, and
even Dingle got every bit as much press as did Stastny. He was good.
He wasn't heads above everyone else. Heck, Hensick looked better
coming out of school than Stastny did.

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:06:59 -0600, Chris <noone.DeleteThis@goaway.com> wrote:

>
>>> Well, color me out of the anti-Stastny crowd. I've only gotten to see
>>> him a few times (when I get more free time, maybe I'll re-up Center
>>> Ice), but he's terrific.
>>
>>Maybe that's why you think he was a lock to make the team.
>>
>>He wasn't. Walk, did you ever see him play in college? I make it a point
>>to watch Avs prospects whenever I possibly can, and I watched DU games
>>to see if he was a chip off the old block. He was good in college, but
>>he wasn't that good.
>
>Correct. Even during that time, DU guys like Gauthier, Carle, and
>even Dingle got every bit as much press as did Stastny. He was good.
>He wasn't heads above everyone else. Heck, Hensick looked better
>coming out of school than Stastny did.

Hit send too soon.

What I meant to say in that last sentence was:

Heck, Hensick looked better coming out of school than Stastny did, and
look where he is after his first training camp.

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:11:58 -0600, Chris <noone DeleteThis @goaway.com> wrote:

>
>>> I'd take the former, though in the context of our current discussion,
>>> which player scores every game, and which one 'gives you nothing'
>>> three games at a time? Your question doesn't cite anything realistic,
>>> as there are no NHL players who garner a point every game.
>>
>>I guess the wings homers were asleep last year when Stastny set a
>>consecutive
>>games POINTS SCORING STREAK RECORD for a rookie. What was it? 22
>>games?
>>
>>Anyone on Detroit have a 22 game points streak?
>
>More sweeping conclusions after 10 games.
>
>Doug does come up with some doozies though. Though this one certainly
>doesn't come close to last year's "The Wings' rookies are better than
>Stastny because they have a better +/-".

I said that? How about coming up with the quotes complete with google
ids please.
>
>Stastny is very regular in his scoring, and has been since he turned
>pro. Let's ignore the 82 games last year and pay 100% attention to
>the 9 this year though, Elz.

Why not? Other people are.
>
>Chris
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:33:12 -0400, Thomas <noneman.DeleteThis@none.man> wrote:

>> Stastny was a high pick
>
>...out of college...

I thought taking college kids was in vogue now.

>> with great family pedigree who had just come
>> off two pretty darn good years at D.U.,
>
>Good, but not "lock to make the team" years.
>
>> and was competing for space on
>> two top lines that had recently lost Alex Tanguay and Peter Forsberg.
>> His main competition consisted of a rookie, a second year kid who came
>> out of nowhere (and quickly returned),
>
>You might want to look at Svatos' game log and stop bagging on him
>sometime soon.

It's three goals. And one assist. The guy has been a one-hit wonder
so far. It's not bagging on him, it just is what it is.

If he's on a 30 goal pace after the season's a third over, I'll reign
it in a little.
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

WalkinDude wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:33:12 -0400, Thomas <noneman RemoveThis @none.man> wrote:
>
>>> Stastny was a high pick
>> ...out of college...
>
> I thought taking college kids was in vogue now.

It's the smartest play, yes. But that doesn't mean that when you pick a
guy in the second round one year that you consider him a lock to make
the team the next.

>
>>> with great family pedigree who had just come
>>> off two pretty darn good years at D.U.,
>> Good, but not "lock to make the team" years.
>>
>>> and was competing for space on
>>> two top lines that had recently lost Alex Tanguay and Peter Forsberg.
>>> His main competition consisted of a rookie, a second year kid who came
>>> out of nowhere (and quickly returned),
>> You might want to look at Svatos' game log and stop bagging on him
>> sometime soon.
>
> It's three goals. And one assist. The guy has been a one-hit wonder
> so far. It's not bagging on him, it just is what it is.

You obviously haven't been watching the games.

-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 01:39:17 -0400, Thomas <noneman DeleteThis @none.man> wrote:

>>>> with great family pedigree who had just come
>>>> off two pretty darn good years at D.U.,
>>> Good, but not "lock to make the team" years.
>>>
>>>> and was competing for space on
>>>> two top lines that had recently lost Alex Tanguay and Peter Forsberg.
>>>> His main competition consisted of a rookie, a second year kid who came
>>>> out of nowhere (and quickly returned),
>>> You might want to look at Svatos' game log and stop bagging on him
>>> sometime soon.
>>
>> It's three goals. And one assist. The guy has been a one-hit wonder
>> so far. It's not bagging on him, it just is what it is.
>
>You obviously haven't been watching the games.

Okay, other than the fact that he's managed to match the output of
Matt Ellis and Dan Cleary, what exactly am I missing?
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

>>21 year old rookies aren't included as young guys? Ok, Doug.
>
>Of course they are. OTOH you originally said I said something that I
>didn't. I said IMO that Detroit's young guys as a collective whole
>were performing , taking everything into consideration, better as a
>collectively than Colorado's. Now if you interpret what I said as
>Detroit's rookie or rookies as being better than Stastsy go right
>ahead but you are wrong.

Oh, so when you wrote that, you felt that Detroit's young guys (which
includes rookies) were outplaying the Avs' young guys (which includes
rookies, which in turn would include Stastny), *except* for Stastny,
who you held in high esteem?

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

Chris wrote:
>>> 21 year old rookies aren't included as young guys? Ok, Doug.
>> Of course they are. OTOH you originally said I said something that I
>> didn't. I said IMO that Detroit's young guys as a collective whole
>> were performing , taking everything into consideration, better as a
>> collectively than Colorado's. Now if you interpret what I said as
>> Detroit's rookie or rookies as being better than Stastsy go right
>> ahead but you are wrong.
>
> Oh, so when you wrote that, you felt that Detroit's young guys (which
> includes rookies) were outplaying the Avs' young guys (which includes
> rookies, which in turn would include Stastny), *except* for Stastny,
> who you held in high esteem?

He meant that however you can conceivably slice it to where Detroit's
young guys are better than Colorado's young guys is proof of Detroit's
superiority and that your mom is a whore.

-Thomas
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 09:11:13 -0600, Chris <noone RemoveThis @goaway.com> wrote:

>
>>>21 year old rookies aren't included as young guys? Ok, Doug.
>>
>>Of course they are. OTOH you originally said I said something that I
>>didn't. I said IMO that Detroit's young guys as a collective whole
>>were performing , taking everything into consideration, better as a
>>collectively than Colorado's. Now if you interpret what I said as
>>Detroit's rookie or rookies as being better than Stastsy go right
>>ahead but you are wrong.
>
>Oh, so when you wrote that, you felt that Detroit's young guys (which
>includes rookies) were outplaying the Avs' young guys (which includes
>rookies, which in turn would include Stastny), *except* for Stastny,
>who you held in high esteem?

Yes.
>
>Chris
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson 

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 08:23:35 -0400, xpenenyx.RemoveThis@earthlink.net wrote:

>On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 09:11:13 -0600, Chris <noone.RemoveThis@goaway.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>>21 year old rookies aren't included as young guys? Ok, Doug.
>>>
>>>Of course they are. OTOH you originally said I said something that I
>>>didn't. I said IMO that Detroit's young guys as a collective whole
>>>were performing , taking everything into consideration, better as a
>>>collectively than Colorado's. Now if you interpret what I said as
>>>Detroit's rookie or rookies as being better than Stastsy go right
>>>ahead but you are wrong.
>>
>>Oh, so when you wrote that, you felt that Detroit's young guys (which
>>includes rookies) were outplaying the Avs' young guys (which includes
>>rookies, which in turn would include Stastny), *except* for Stastny,
>>who you held in high esteem?
>
>Yes.

LMAO.

Ok, Doug. Whatever you say...

Chris
 >> Stay informed about: First Hanlon, now Ron Wilson