Commandant

Its a little early to include Arvidsson in that group... he was still a seventh round pick.... but no issue with the rest being ahead of Lernout.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showthread.php?t=130487

He doesn't get it... he was the 15th defenceman used by the team and the team literally had to use a clause in the NHL rules of "emergency call-up" just to be able to use him. It says absolutely zilch about his status or potential as a prospect. Any rational person would understand this. Its pretty clear we aren't dealing with a rational person. The idea that he's a top 5 prospect in the organization because of this emergency call-up is so very, very laughable.

They adjusted scoring by era... so they adjusted those numbers down. Its a little more complicated than what i'm going to describe, but essentially this is what they did. 1) Figure out the Average goals per game in NHL history. 2) Figure out the average goals per game for each season. 3) figure out average nhl goals that season divided by average goals per game all-time 4) Multiply points scored that season by 1 over the factor in 3 5) Equalize all seasons to 80 games. compare players Gretzky's points are so mindnumbing that even when adjusting his stats down cause of the high scoring nature of the era, he's still miles ahead of anyone.

Those percentages don't add up... are you sure those aren't points?

The guys at Total Hockey also adjusted points for eras and how many goals was league average that year vs how many points each player got, etc.... Gretzky was still miles ahead of everyone else.

1000 points is a borderline hall of fame career. Gretzky finished about 980 points ahead of the next closest guy (Messier). He finished more than 1000 points ahead of Gordie Howe. The difference between him and the next guy is almost a hall of fame career just on its own.

Thanks brian... good to go.

I don't think the fact they let go Ellis and Dietz has anything to do with Lernout and has everything to do with Ellis and Dietz... I'm pretty sure the organization is aware that they are allowed to keep more than one prospect defenceman if they like the guy. So the idea that they let go of Ellis and Dietz is a reflection that they don't like them... not a reflection that one single prospect is now the second coming. Oh and while we are on the Dietz/Ellis thing... the organization also signed Tom Parisi, Philip Samuelsson, and Zach Redmond over the last couple months, along with drafting 4 defencemen in the draft. Using your Dietz/ellis logic, surely this influx of D means that they hate Lernout right? Oh wait actually it doesn't because teams normally have more than one prospect on the blue line. so whether they sign other prospects or release others, it really doesn't say a lot about Lernout either way. On top of that, the fact he was used in big situations at the end of the year (when the organization ran out of defencemen due to injury) or that he was called up (as the 15th defenceman the organization used at the NHL level, and under the emergency call up rules)... tells us nothing about what the organization thinks of him. Unless you think the organization also once had high hopes for Oliver Michaud a goalie they signed on an emergency basis and put in the NHL for 1 period as an 20 year old... he was never heard from again.

Define "let him walk" Cause some might say 3 different teams (Edmonton, LA, St. Louis) let the greatest player ever "walk"

Bronze in Rugby (women)

a year after moving cammalleri, they moved Eric Cole (4.5 million)... for Michael Ryder. Ryder then left as a free agent. They clearly were able to fit Cammalleri and Cole both under the cap, and that cap was much smaller than today. So why wouldnt' another top 6 winger have been able to fit? Cam gets his own money, new guy gets Cole money plus part of the cap increase Oh well... whatever... its fun to speculate, but its all ifs and butts and alot of moving pieces, so it still brings us to the main point. The Habs were a worse team when that infamous Bruins game ended than they were before the game started. The present and future of the franchise were both dealt some damage with that trade.

He wasn't even the top pairing in St. Johns... never mind being a top defensive zone player in the entire AHL. I'm actually convinced that Ethan has never actually watched these guys play. The judgments are just so off. As Brian says, he wasn't bad... but the hyperbole, its over the top.

You can backtrack all you want but here is your exact quote. "Lernout's career to this point is not that dissimilar to Weber" That statement is 100% false. You can backtrack and play semantics all you want. It doesn't change the fact that you made an asinine statement of fact, not opinion... that was 100% demonstrably false.

He's talented, no argument there. I took called out the comment that he's a tough player, cause thats not his game at all.... skilled? yes. He's got skill. But don't expect him throwing hits all over the ice, or plowing into goalies, or dropping gloves, or whatever. Thats not his game.

Both reviews are pretty positive.... In fact all of the players he reviewed he was positive about. The players who say stuff publically, its interesting, but its also grain of salt, cause no one wants to publically rip a strip off of a fellow player. Not in that forum. Maybe immediately after the game when tempers are hot, some might do so. But I don't see guys with a calm demeanor going in the players tribune and ripping each other. I haven't seen it in any sport.

I'd like to see him in Hamilton, Mississauga or Niagara for the ease of seeing him play more often. but thats just a selfish thought.

Who says I'm not laughing when i finish posting. I laughed really hard at the Zarley Zalapski reference the other day.

They may not have paid someone else along the way.... like Shaw.... or maybe DD never gets 3.5 million, or maybe another piece is moved. Hard to say....

The guy scored 38 points in 42 games last year.

"fat lips" also said that he was on team canada at the olympics cause they needed a "token" for P.R. reasons and diversity. there was more....

Opinions based in fact are great. Opinions based on fairytales that Reway is tougher than Lehkonen, or that Lernout's accomplishments are similar to Weber have value? Really? I have always respected the majority of people's opinions here, but this guy is just flat out wrong. His comments make no sense and make me question if he's ever watched any of these players actually play the game. You have to be the most extreme fanboy to think that Lernout has the same type of potential today as Shea Weber. Seriously, the lunacy of those statements is just off the charts. And this idea that opinions can never be challenged and can never be misinformed or flat out wrong... its just a bunch of P.C. bullcrap. Sometimes an opinion is just based on false facts and can be idiotic. It happens. Again, I'm sorry, but I'm not sorry for calling out bullshit.

I think that Josi is a good defenceman, a very good defenceman. But he isn't at an elite level like a Subban, Doughty, Keith, Karlsson, etc.... and oh one more name.. Ryan Suter who if we look at the numbers, it becomes clear that he was a driving force in Nashville and still is in Minnesota. Again, saying that a guy isn't as good as that group doesn't mean he's awful.

you seem to be having a hard time with this.... you can have an opinion on players,,, but back it up with facts. When you say things for your proofs like Lernout has similar accomplishments to Weber at the same age, or that Reway is tougher than Lehkonen, or Lehkonen will stay in the SHL cause he can earn basically the same money as being a mid-tier NHLer, and other such proofs, you are attempting to use facts to prove your opinions. Unfortunately those facts are horribly and laughably inaccurate.

The point is this.... Canada supposedly hires the best management teams they can, right? Those teams have made attrocious mistakes, right? Oh and the 2010 team (no stamkos) and the 2014 team (kunitz over St.Louis and Giroux) have madd mistakes.too, even if they had enough talent to win in spite of those mistakes.