Éditer l'avatar
  • png, jpeg
  • La grandeur minimale recommandée se veut de 800px par 800px
  • Grandeur maximale: 1MB
Glisser l'image pour repositionner


Membre depuis
6 jun 2019
Équipe préférée
Blackhawks de Chicago
12 jui 1990
Messages dans les forums
Messages par jour
Sujets de discussion
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 4:56 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>Instead of just dishing out infractions and being robotic about keeping all users in check, I want to use this as a chance for all of us here to learn something from this and be better users for it. Sorry if being called out like this makes you feel weird, but I'm creeping up on a breaking point with how out of hand and ridiculous some of this has gotten. Please take my words into consideration.

Keeping each other blocked only works if the two of you mutually agree to not engage in third-party callouts. Using this thread as an example, <a href="/users/HatterTParty" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@HatterTParty</a> effectively serving as a moderator between you two so you guys can argue via proxy defeats that purpose.

<a href="/users/Ryminister_27" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@Ryminister_27</a>, more context in your original post in this thread probably prevents a lot of this current discord from happening: I see your post and its intention because I'm a neutral party but not everyone is going to approach that kind of post with my neutrality. Your post can be seen as inflammatory from a Hawks perspective, even if it's not immediately false. I don't think you handled most of this situation very well up until post #23 in this discussion either: some of your back and forth really only adds fuel to this fire, especially when you're questioning the maturity of other users. Not your place, all it does is get those users riled up.

<a href="/users/ChiHawk" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@ChiHawk</a> immediate callouts of other users as a troll will never diffuse the situation. Piggybacking on other users targeting (in this case) Ryminister because you can't directly flame him yourself is wholeheartedly unacceptable. How do posts such as "This guy is a massive Hawks troll" or "or last winning a cup in 66/67 (55 years ago) or reaching a conference finals since 01/02 (19 years ago) :laugh" improve the situation? Now that another user is requesting you stay off of their threads, I'd recommend you start focusing a lot more on how you're posting. Something you're doing is coming off as antagonistic, intentional or not. I don't need you to be all touchy-feely and overconsiderate of other users, but multiple instances of other users wanting you to frigg off is a telltale sign that something's not coming across right.

In all honesty, I'm tired of seeing your guys' names in our report forums. You guys have found every conceivable way this site has to piss the other off in spite of blocking each other. In spite of previous warnings and infractions, neither of you appears to be immediately willing to back out of this. Maybe it's pride, maybe you wholly believe it's all the other guys' fault. As far as the moderators are concerned, you've both been massive jackasses. The only way this gets better is if the two of you just learn to leave the other be. I won't speak for the other moderators, but I'm personally at the point where I'll ban one of you two (or both of you) the next time you guys cross the line. It's juvenile that the two of you have gone out of your way to manage to argue with each other despite having blocked each other.

This place is better off with tenured users like yourselves: despite the differences in opinions and that both of you think the other is a massive troll, both of you are valued users. The two of you combined have nearly 20,000 posts; you guys drive conversation and the development of good ideas when you set your minds to it. CapFriendly loses more than it gains if one or both of you end up banned because of this immature back-and-forth. Make it work before I or any of the other moderators need to make a hard decision.

<a href="/users/exo2769" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@exo2769</a> and <a href="/users/BigOaf69" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@BigOaf69</a>, neither of you two are without fault in this scenario either but I want to let you guys off with a very informal warning. Coming to the defense of your team's honour by way of "but what about the Leafs?!?!?" and similar snark is just about one of the most childish things you can do on these boards. All it does is piss people off and derail a conversation. I don't know how much of your opinions on the matter were swayed by ChiHawk calling Ryminister out as a troll, but you guys cannot be doing that. I know a lot of users do it, and I know bagging on the Leafs is a good time, but neither of those justifies it in the context of on-topic discussion. We're cracking down on it because of how much trolling and flaming comes out of it.

Can everyone just be better next time? None of this needed to happen.</div></div>

I appreciate the insights. I apologize sincerely for the parts I played in continuing the arguing and ranting. Seeing as I started this thread, I certainly shoulder a great deal of the blame and rightfully so. I respect your views on our disagreements and I will take your criticisms into account moving forward. Agains, I sincerely apologize the part I’ve played in this situation.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 4:04 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ryminister_27</b></div><div>I appreciate the post to try to clear things up a bit. My original comment wasn't meant to be harsh. It was an opinion and factual statement that rebuilds take a long time when you don't have a good roster, good prospects, or a good management team (take it from a Leaf fan, we know the pain lol). I can't control how someone interprets a comment, they're gonna read it and believe it was meant to be read a certain way when they have no idea on the tone. As I can see now, we both have the same issues with ChiHawk. That was the point I was getting at. That user interprets my comment because they've already judged me based on my interaction with them before, not how the comment was actually wrote. You can see why I've had them blocked for a long time now. I also find it funny how they say I've been blocked by them and admins have been involved in my behaviour (that part isn't true), but if they had me blocked I don't see why they constantly have to mention that they think I'm a troll. Should just grow up and leave it be. Mature a little.

But to my original post, the Hawks have severely damaged their future. Sure winning 3 cups after 50 years of not winning felt great, but Stan Bowman screwed this teams future. Those cups were all the work of Dale Tallon and Bowman ruined it. They mismanaged draft picks and didn't look at retooling before, the Red Wings were a perfect example of competing but still drafting great and not mis-using prospects. Some people may try to point out that they drafted late because aid workers winning, it what they don't see is look at the success of the guys they picked. Since 2010 I believe it is, they have 2 guys that they picked in the 1st round on their roster. And they've traded multiple guys that they drafted away that turned out good. Teravainen, Danault, Hartman, etc are examples of that. Plus Kevin Hayes walked away for nothing. All of this prolongs a rebuild. Which is what I meant by the original thought.

I apologize for the rest of the unnecessary comments after, it should have went like that but some kids just don't know how to grow up.


Thanks for words and insight brother. Personally, I have nothing bad to go off of with you and your opinions are always welcome here. As for ChiHawk, his opinion is absolutely valued and can always be voiced. However, given our exchanges, it’s simply best that him and I stay apart in discourse. There’s no need to slander others in the course discussing hockey. So again, I appreciate your words and I welcome future discussions.

It’s hard to disagree with what you said regarding the hawks either. I’m a huge fan of dale Tallon and couldn’t believe he was fired for a simple mistake while bowman continues to make mistake after mistake. They’ve a had rough time for ten years even growing the odd late round pick, save for Shaw, and that magic has obviously run out. It’s pretty brutal. I will take the 3 cups, but it once felt like the team could have made a decent transition between eras at one time. Not any more.

Be well.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 3:25 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CrazyK04</b></div><div>I know. I've been frustrated with people talking poorly about Boqvist, but after looking at how he's being forced to play and his ice time, the best thing for him is to be in the AHL. He can become an offensive beast down there and prove to the NHL coaches that he is an offensive defenseman and that he needs to be allowed to score. IMO, Colliton is Dach's dream coach. Dach is a power forward. Colliton was a defensive player and is a defensive coach. Kirby Dach's defensively sound, big body forechecking ability allow him to get those A+ opportunities. His offensive prowess comes where? From the front of the net. If Colliton is the guy, he just has to relax on the offensive players. Again I say, look at a team like Tampa Bay, Kucherov and Point and Stamkos are all getting paid to score points. I think eventually Colliton could be a good coach, but they need an offensive associate coach to help him out. For the PK and defensive bottom 6 guys, Colliton can be and is a fantastic coach. For our Patty Kanes and Dom Kubaliks and Alex DeBrincats and God Save him, our Adam Boqvists, JC needs a little help. We have to remember, he's only been a North American coach for 5 or 6 years and an NHL coach for 2. With patience and help from veteran management, Kirby Dach's Chicago Blackhawks are gonna be super duper hard to play against.</div></div>

Okay, so firstly, I totally with you’re assessment of Colliton. He is the coach that he is and he favors a certain style and certain players can get behind it. I do think it’s a detriment to the other players such as boqvist, cat, strome, Kane and kuba for sure though. In that sense, I almost feel that Colliton is here to baby and coddle one player and ONLY one player.

Secondly? And this is where I differ, I don’t think the hawks will ever truly become a difficult team to play against in the defensive sense. They’ll never be the islanders or blues styled team that that essentially imitates. The reason is two fold. 1) Colliton has shown his hand in terms of the coach he is and style he wants. To this point, the youngsters and even veterans in the team have not bought in in my opinion. That’s just me though. 2) and this goes back to what I said about drafting and luck favoring the prepared, Chicago hasn’t committed the entire organization to a unified philosophy of how they want to grow and move forward between playing style and players. Essentially, I don’t believe they have drafted tough enough players, specifically on defense, to play such a style. Regula is an offensive minded dman who isn’t great on defense and Vlasic has a looonnnggggg way to go in development. Reason I bring them up is because they are the only players in defensive development that are over 6’2’’. There is just no toughness in this Chicago team, plain and simple. We have a few grinders, but not not defense. Zadorov and Murphy are exempt cuz they are full timers and not prospects.

I do agree Colliton could be a good coach, but he’s got the wrong team to do it with. He’s only around in my eyes to cater to Dach. As being tough to play against, we need at least 2-3 more drafts worth of tough, big, and quick forwards and dmen to get to that point. That’s just my two cents.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 2:41 pm
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 1:37 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ChiHawk</b></div><div>Ryminister is a Hawks troll and admins have been involved with his behavior...he's been on a block list for a reason. I get your constant negativity but he's not adding value or knows much about the Hawks, he's simply trolling Hatter and a perfect partner is your kind of posts negativity to jump on; context matters. Also, this conversation should be in the forums if you want to be policing your post with political correctness.

The simple fact remains; the Hawks are the 3rd youngest team right now in the league and The Athletic didn't take into consideration players with NHL experience 23 and under which would have included Boqvist, Dach, Debrincat, Nylander and Strome. Yes, the Hawks are thin with top prospects that haven't played in the NHL yet, and that largely is due to the simple fact is we were drafting late for awhile due to team success and those early draft picks since the Hawks success have been rushed into the league. Sure the NYR are younger with a much better prospect pool but you know how long they sucked for to get there? Successful teams just don't have deep prospect pools or are still having some success and aren't rushing players Boston, Penguins and arguably Pens need to rebuild.

Hawks should have committed to the rebuild 2 years earlier or even a year earlier, but in a cap world and a flat cap world at that, for a team that was the most successful last decade, rushing prospects into the NHL and not have enough prospect depth is to be expected. Hawks will be a bottom 5 team this year, but will gain another top prospect. The hope is they signed players like Janmark, Wallmark and Soderberg to get assets at the TDL. Seattle expansion draft is another key factor, and most importantly the Hawks have cap space for the first time in many years and most importantly in a flat cap world. Fans will have to endure another season of this as well but two seasons from now the tide should start to shift. Best teams with players under 25 you could argue include teams like the Jets and Oilers and yet look at them in no man's land.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ryminister_27</b></div><div>Have fun with a LONG rebuild. Terrible roster and terrible drafting. That takes awhile to replenish</div></div>

I made sure I quoted the original point of contention just to make sure nothing was getting lost in translation. Rye, indeed you did come in a little harsh and it comes off as somewhat condescending. Save for that, it’s a post based on opinion, something that is welcome for debate, yet no one had the foresight to actually try to debate him on it. Beyond that, I’m not interested anyone’s bull**** about how bad someone’s last 50 years have been. It’s not the point of this goddamn conversation.

As for you ChiHawk, I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, stay off my threads and I’ll stay off yours. I’m interested in the **** you stir up in the name of defending the beloved hawks. Nobody ever questions success breeding a lack prospect depth, the only topic of point is whether or not they’re actually drafting and developing in any decent capacity in the last three years. I haven’t blocked you cuz I don’t like doing to anyone, but Jesus, shut the hell up with you’re god awful negativity to anyone who disagrees with you.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 11:02 am
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 11:00 am
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 12:47 am
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 12:03 am
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BigOaf69</b></div><div>im sure they will take 3 cups this past decade in exchange for a few years of pain</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ryminister_27</b></div><div>Cool. Still doesn't explain how another team making it past the 1st round or not affects their rebuild.

But users like this are the ones that whine about "Leafs fans being bias" or the "arrogant Leafs fans" when literally all I did was say that a rebuild takes longer when you have a terrible roster and terrible farm system. It's quite hilarious how they have to revert to another team to try to validate a useless point that they think they have 😂</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ChiHawk</b></div><div>or last winning a cup in 66/67 (55 years ago) or reaching a conference finals since 01/02 (19 years ago) :laugh</div></div>

Guys, what does this have to do with the list? Stay on topic. I get the urge to pile on a leafs fan for chiming on the hawks long term issues, but I’m not having any of that in this chat. Everyone knows the leafs last 50 years, it’s brutal. No need for that here though.

Suffice to say, he may be right, they may have a while to go till they even matter again in the playoff conversation. The hawks don’t have many top tier, high top 6 potential forwards in their prospect or even 1st pairing dmen potential. That can change with experience, but this team is seriously thin on prospects still, and that’s concerning. As for an under 25 ranking, that’s a bit tougher to judge. Reason being, while there are good names under 25 on the hawks, the last 3 years have shown that as a team, they are clearly not a playoff team. On an individual basis, sure, they each have great potential and experience so far. But at the end of the day, does that matter if they can’t pull together as a team? On paper, they’re prospect pool ranking is frankly well warranted. Their under 25s, on the other hand, really depends on how you judge them. Are you looking at them individually, or how their individual talents gel into a cohesive team? If it’s the former, either late top 10, and in my mind more early teens, but if it’s the latter, easily middle of the pack to bottom half.
Forum: Armchair-GMMon at 9:58 am
Forum: Armchair-GMSun at 10:49 pm