HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Anaheim Ducks (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=41)
-   -   Bob Murray Discussion (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1357415)

TheJoeMan 02-22-2013 10:23 AM

Bob Murray Discussion
 
I didn't want to drag the Fasth signing thread into a GM debate so I figured I bring it here. Plus there's been a lot of discussion about the moves Murph has made and it deserves it's own thread in my opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duckstudd269 (Post 60229119)
The trade [the Beauchemin trade] isn't acceptable IMO because it never had to be made. I cut Murray a slack when he moved Lupul because Lupul was always injured here, and Carlyle didn't do a very good job of using him. Still I don't cut Murray ANY slack on this move because it's a move that should have never had to happen. That's 100% on him.

I'm so sick of hearing this rationale. People swear to god Murph let Beauch walk and then traded for him like a week later. In the year and a half that passed circumstances changed. When he signed with Toronto a lot people felt it was for too much money and we couldn't afford it. When we got him back half of that contract expired and we were in a position to finally pay him that money. Plus how do we know Murph didn't offer the exact same contract and Frankie just picked Toronto? He was a free agent, it was his decision. Signing a player has less to do with the abilities of the GM and more to do with the intentions of the player.

But that's beside the point. Just because a player signs somewhere else doesn't mean you shouldn't reacquire them if the opportunity presents itself. Look at how good Beauch has been since he's been back. My god he's leading the league in plus/minus right now. And everyone thought it was a great trade at the time. Lupul was doing little but get hurt and Gardiner was expendable because of that little d-bag. Honestly I'd take Frankie's game right now over Gardiner's potential anyway considering the young d-men we have right now.

I'm happy with the job Murph has done. I mean look at the team right now. He went out and got players that fit and it's working great. He had the balls to fire our greatest coach ever because he knew going with Boudreau was the right call. He threw a lot of money at Fasth and guaranteed him a roster spot because he knew he was the real deal. He made those bold trades in '09 with Moen and Pahlsson and we were just a goal away from the Conference Finals that year. The return he got for Pronger was fantastic. He swings and misses sometimes but he gets on base a hell of lot more times.

Professor John Frink 02-22-2013 10:55 AM

I'm not really sure why this is being brought up now. Because of Burke coming back?

Anyway, I'll bite.

You can be sick of that rationale all you want. It doesn't change the fact that we could have kept Lupul, Gardiner and Beauchemin. I think overall people's issue with Murray is his asset management.

But you aren't entirely wrong. Beauchemin only played 20 games the season before he became a UFA. To throw a bunch of money at him would have been tough. But if anyone should have seen his overall value, it should have been Murray. On top of this, if he was in fact worth Lupul and Gardiner Murray should have signed him in the first place. I'd argue not very many thought it was a great trade. I know I certainly didn't like it. Mainly because it was just terrible asset management. Trading away two first round picks for a guy who you could have just signed is a big problem. A problem that the Ducks had because our defense was young inexperienced and weak.

Murray had to fire Carlyle or risk getting fired himself. I don't think it took huge balls to do so. And he gave Fasth a one year one million dollar deal to be our backup based on what scouts recommended. He gets credit for getting it done. But I doubt he was the one consistently scouting Fasth in Europe.

I don't like Murray, never will. So I am biased, but it's impossible for me to complain about this offseason. Clearly the moves he has made have worked.

TheJoeMan 02-22-2013 11:04 AM

You could look at the whole Beauchemin thing as poor asset management but it doesn't matter when you need to make your team better right now. It's simply crying over spilled milk. I mean should he have just sulked about it and not reacquired Beauch? Where would our team be right now? As far as I'm concerned every move he's made has worked out because the team is playing great and we have a lot of good pieces in the mix going forward. What if we signed Beauch back in 09 and then we don't have any money for Bobby? Koivu would have never been signed. At the time too we were also more concerned about the status of Wizniewski. It's just too bad he turned into an injury/suspension machine who thinks he's worth twice as much as he is.

Hockey Duckie 02-22-2013 11:26 AM

No one's perfect. But I'm glad Murray acknowledges his mistakes in order to improve. In retrospect, yeah I'm mad about the whole trade for Beauch back. Would it be different if we had traded for a different defenseman? We had Burke. We overspent and kept overspending. At the same time, we ignored our prospect pool. The meme was Win Now, who cares about everything else under Burke. I'm grateful for the Cup, but I'm over that now. Now it's about being able to survive as a small market team. Nowadays we complain about "if this player does not perform to that contract, then I'll be pissed." Instead of "did we really give that much to Big Bert? And how much for Schneider?!"

Murray had to tinker at first. He thought we can be a small, fast team. But the NHL refs didn't care and swallowed their whistle. This time around he went big and it's paying dividends. Our prospects are starting to pilfer into the NHL. Our scouting helped up nab Fasth and Andersen. Winnik turns out to be a freakin' steal... and he came over because Cogs talked to our org about him. Heck, Lovejoy was a find too!

It's difficult to remain mad at Murray for that long when you look at what he's been doing. It's like me being mad at BB for all the crazy line combo's, but what he's trying to do is find a better combination if possible. Like putting Ryan at center now looks as though that's an amazing thought. Since that has transpired, i'm not as infuriated... still upset, but not as infuriated as now I see what BB's trying to do.

Lord Flashheart 02-22-2013 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Professor John Frink (Post 60245229)
On top of this, if he was in fact worth Lupul and Gardiner Murray should have signed him in the first place.

He was worth a solid prospect + struggling forward on a hefty paycheck who couldn't beat Jason Blake for position, with no place on a team (part of it was Carlyle's fault (by his own admission) for not making Lupul work on LW with Ducks).

That's considerably different to just saying "if he was worth Gardiner + Lupul".

Duck Off 02-22-2013 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJoeMan (Post 60243315)
I didn't want to drag the Fasth signing thread into a GM debate so I figured I bring it here. Plus there's been a lot of discussion about the moves Murph has made and it deserves it's own thread in my opinion.



I'm so sick of hearing this rationale. People swear to god Murph let Beauch walk and then traded for him like a week later. In the year and a half that passed circumstances changed. When he signed with Toronto a lot people felt it was for too much money and we couldn't afford it. When we got him back half of that contract expired and we were in a position to finally pay him that money. Plus how do we know Murph didn't offer the exact same contract and Frankie just picked Toronto? He was a free agent, it was his decision. Signing a player has less to do with the abilities of the GM and more to do with the intentions of the player.

But that's beside the point. Just because a player signs somewhere else doesn't mean you shouldn't reacquire them if the opportunity presents itself. Look at how good Beauch has been since he's been back. My god he's leading the league in plus/minus right now. And everyone thought it was a great trade at the time. Lupul was doing little but get hurt and Gardiner was expendable because of that little d-bag. Honestly I'd take Frankie's game right now over Gardiner's potential anyway considering the young d-men we have right now.

I'm happy with the job Murph has done. I mean look at the team right now. He went out and got players that fit and it's working great. He had the balls to fire our greatest coach ever because he knew going with Boudreau was the right call. He threw a lot of money at Fasth and guaranteed him a roster spot because he knew he was the real deal. He made those bold trades in '09 with Moen and Pahlsson and we were just a goal away from the Conference Finals that year. The return he got for Pronger was fantastic. He swings and misses sometimes but he gets on base a hell of lot more times.

Prof summed my thoughts up pretty much but I will add a little:

The circumstances never changed after Murray let Beauch walk. There was a huge hole in the defense from day 1 of that first season with out him. That's bad asset management and bad vision IMO. I'm not necessarily mad that we had to trade back for Beauchemin specifically. My gripe is that we should never have to trade back for one period because Beauch should have never been allowed to walk. That hole in the roster was made because Murray had faith in unproven players. Even if he traded for a different top 4 defenseman I'd still be pissed because just re-signing Beauch would never have allowed that hole to open.

People were worried that we'd have to throw crazy money at Beauchemin because of the deals that were going on. The common thought here was that he'd get at least 4.5 million. He ended up signing for 3.8, and id argue that he woulda stayed here for 3.5 since this has always been his first choice.

Anyway my original argeement a few days ago was that before this season, Murray's job here had been mediocre at best. Still stand by that. Hope the team continues to do well though. Would love for him to prove me wrong and change my views on him entirely.

goosemooseduck 02-22-2013 12:16 PM

Won't repeat myself about him being bad or good on how he currently manages the team under constraints imposed on him by owners (budget), I'll just say that under BM, Ducks will never be contenders. If it happens, It'll be because of some luck and/or team overachieving.

He doesn't have guts nor skill, like some other GMs (Burke for example), to take necessary risks to assemble something close to cup contending team and convince owners, it's time to open the wallet to get remaining pieces and have a run for a cup.

Granted, he haven't had that chance yet, but we'll see this and/or next season if he is good enough of a GM to not lose key assets (Getz/Perry) and take care of possible replacements for what is inevitable (Teemu retirement/production drop), fill other existing roster holes (either trough new acquisitions or current lineup of prospects), and work with owners on at least some budget flexibility to deal with the above and have a chance on going deep in POs.

Seasons 12/13 and 13/14 will let us know of how good (or bad) GM he really is.

davidy2d 02-22-2013 12:44 PM

The Beauchemin thing is fine because at the end of the day it shows he is willing to correct mistakes and won't hurt the team so that his reputation looks better.

Exit Dose 02-22-2013 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey Duckie (Post 60246911)
No one's perfect. But I'm glad Murray acknowledges his mistakes in order to improve. In retrospect, yeah I'm mad about the whole trade for Beauch back. Would it be different if we had traded for a different defenseman? We had Burke. We overspent and kept overspending. At the same time, we ignored our prospect pool. The meme was Win Now, who cares about everything else under Burke. I'm grateful for the Cup, but I'm over that now. Now it's about being able to survive as a small market team. Nowadays we complain about "if this player does not perform to that contract, then I'll be pissed." Instead of "did we really give that much to Big Bert? And how much for Schneider?!"

Murray had to tinker at first. He thought we can be a small, fast team. But the NHL refs didn't care and swallowed their whistle. This time around he went big and it's paying dividends. Our prospects are starting to pilfer into the NHL. Our scouting helped up nab Fasth and Andersen. Winnik turns out to be a freakin' steal... and he came over because Cogs talked to our org about him. Heck, Lovejoy was a find too!

It's difficult to remain mad at Murray for that long when you look at what he's been doing. It's like me being mad at BB for all the crazy line combo's, but what he's trying to do is find a better combination if possible. Like putting Ryan at center now looks as though that's an amazing thought. Since that has transpired, i'm not as infuriated... still upset, but not as infuriated as now I see what BB's trying to do.

I agree. The funny thing is that if we had landed someone else that delivered what Beauch currently is, no one would be complaining.

Really though, that isn't what's bugging me right now. What does bother me is how much some people are complaining at this very specific moment. You would think it was November 2011 again.

Exit Dose 02-22-2013 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duckstudd269 (Post 60247769)
Anyway my original argeement a few days ago was that before this season, Murray's job here had been mediocre at best. Still stand by that. Hope the team continues to do well though. Would love for him to prove me wrong and change my views on him entirely.

Is it really that hard for you to acknowledge that part of the fruits we're enjoying right now, were the result of building over the previous years? While I think it's too early to call the rebuild a success, it is extremely clear that was what was happening over the last few years.

TheJoeMan 02-22-2013 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duckstudd269 (Post 60247769)
Prof summed my thoughts up pretty much but I will add a little:

The circumstances never changed after Murray let Beauch walk. There was a huge hole in the defense from day 1 of that first season with out him. That's bad asset management and bad vision IMO. I'm not necessarily mad that we had to trade back for Beauchemin specifically. My gripe is that we should never have to trade back for one period because Beauch should have never been allowed to walk. That hole in the roster was made because Murray had faith in unproven players. Even if he traded for a different top 4 defenseman I'd still be pissed because just re-signing Beauch would never have allowed that hole to open.

People were worried that we'd have to throw crazy money at Beauchemin because of the deals that were going on. The common thought here was that he'd get at least 4.5 million. He ended up signing for 3.8, and id argue that he woulda stayed here for 3.5 since this has always been his first choice.

Anyway my original argeement a few days ago was that before this season, Murray's job here had been mediocre at best. Still stand by that. Hope the team continues to do well though. Would love for him to prove me wrong and change my views on him entirely.

So what would have preferred? Him to not acquire a d-man that can log big minutes against the opponents best players, put up decent numbers and provide veteran leadership? What was the alternative? Lupul was not working and Gardiner was expendable. You have no idea what Beauch would and would not have stayed here for. Maybe Murph offered him more money but Beauch just wanted to play in the East? Maybe Beauch didn't consult Murph at all. Maybe once he got the offer from Burke he took it. You nor I were there so you can't say Murph could have matched him but didn't. If anything reacquiring affirms that he did want to sign Beauch at those numbers but he said no. He was a free agent after all.

You can't hinder your team because a player got away from you. To hold this against him after all this time is silly. He can't concern himself with (perceived) mistakes he's made in the past. His job is to fill this team with the right players. Period.

Sojourn 02-22-2013 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJoeMan (Post 60255127)
So what would have preferred? Him to not acquire a d-man that can log big minutes against the opponents best players, put up decent numbers and provide veteran leadership? What was the alternative? Lupul was not working and Gardiner was expendable. You have no idea what Beauch would and would not have stayed here for. Maybe Murph offered him more money but Beauch just wanted to play in the East? Maybe Beauch didn't consult Murph at all. Maybe once he got the offer from Burke he took it. You nor I were there so you can't say Murph could have matched him but didn't. If anything reacquiring affirms that he did want to sign Beauch at those numbers but he said no. He was a free agent after all.

You can't hinder your team because a player got away from you. To hold this against him after all this time is silly. He can't concern himself with (perceived) mistakes he's made in the past. His job is to fill this team with the right players. Period.

Beauchemin said there was never any negotiation between him and Murray. That he wanted to stay here, and was disappointed when Murray didn't make an offer.

Ducks DVM 02-22-2013 02:23 PM

He screwed up by letting him go. He then traded an underachieving injury prone cap dump and a prospect who projects as a 2-3D for an actual 2-3D. He then re-signed that 2-3D to an under-going rate 3 year contract. Hard to argue he didn't fix the mistake. Hard to argue all GM's don't make mistakes.

Time to move on.

Duck Off 02-22-2013 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exit Dose (Post 60253297)
Is it really that hard for you to acknowledge that part of the fruits we're enjoying right now, were the result of building over the previous years? While I think it's too early to call the rebuild a success, it is extremely clear that was what was happening over the last few years.

I've praised Murray for the roster now and am enjoying some of the fruits but I don't think it's really that he rebuilt the team for years. Most of our success this season is from FA signings IMO. Most were made this past offseason which is not rebuilding. Winnik, Souray, Allen, etc... I don't see those as part of the plan a few years ago.

I got on this topic because i originally responded to someone in other thread who was saying Murray haters have blunders on. Which is complete BS, because up until this season, the team has been pretty average at best.

Duck Off 02-22-2013 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJoeMan (Post 60255127)
So what would have preferred? Him to not acquire a d-man that can log big minutes against the opponents best players, put up decent numbers and provide veteran leadership? What was the alternative? Lupul was not working and Gardiner was expendable. You have no idea what Beauch would and would not have stayed here for. Maybe Murph offered him more money but Beauch just wanted to play in the East? Maybe Beauch didn't consult Murph at all. Maybe once he got the offer from Burke he took it. You nor I were there so you can't say Murph could have matched him but didn't. If anything reacquiring affirms that he did want to sign Beauch at those numbers but he said no. He was a free agent after all.

You can't hinder your team because a player got away from you. To hold this against him after all this time is silly. He can't concern himself with (perceived) mistakes he's made in the past. His job is to fill this team with the right players. Period.

What would I have preferred? I would have preferred him to at least try to re-sign Beauchemin in the first place. I would have preferred him not to have to give up assets for a POSITION (top 4 defensemen), not specifically Beauch, that he could of had for free. He didn't even try re-signing him. Again, he had too much faith in an unproven player in Sbisa.

I'm not pissed about the value he gave up. It was a need and he traded an injury prone player and a solid prospect for a top 4 defenseman. I'm pissed that he had to make a move due to him not realizing the need sooner.

You're right, no one knows what Beauch would have signed for. But Murray didn't even try. We were his first choice. This isn't something Beauch just said when he came back. He said it at end of season when he become FA, he said it at his press conference when he was introduced in Toronto, and he said it when he was traded back. I fully believe him. I'm not going to back and do the research again cause that was ***** at the time, not to mention years later, but assuming he would have signed with us for same amount (which I have no doubt he would have), a few minor changes could have been made and he would have easily been re-signed. However Murray never even tried. He thought he could leave that hole in our top 4 to an unproven player and brought in several vets to try and help too. He thought maybe adding a little more money to offense would be better for team. However that failed because that hole in our top 4 was too big to overcome. That's bad asset management.

And whoever said I'm holding it against him or that he should still think about his mistakes? You quoted me originally and if you read my first post in that thread, you will see that I was responding to someone who said Murray's haters had blinders. That's wrong because he's made a lot of mistakes, and one 20 game stretch doesn't make up for all the bad moves he's pulled off. Not when you consider how mediocre our team has been during his tenure. I want to see how team does the rest of the year.

Ducksgo* 02-22-2013 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goosemooseduck (Post 60249973)
Won't repeat myself about him being bad or good on how he currently manages the team under constraints imposed on him by owners (budget), I'll just say that under BM, Ducks will never be contenders. If it happens, It'll be because of some luck and/or team overachieving.

He doesn't have guts nor skill, like some other GMs (Burke for example), to take necessary risks to assemble something close to cup contending team and convince owners, it's time to open the wallet to get remaining pieces and have a run for a cup.

Granted, he haven't had that chance yet, but we'll see this and/or next season if he is good enough of a GM to not lose key assets (Getz/Perry) and take care of possible replacements for what is inevitable (Teemu retirement/production drop), fill other existing roster holes (either trough new acquisitions or current lineup of prospects), and work with owners on at least some budget flexibility to deal with the above and have a chance on going deep in POs.

Seasons 12/13 and 13/14 will let us know of how good (or bad) GM he really is.

Wow ducks won't be cup contenders under BM is a very strong statement. This season we were suppose to suck to almost every NHL analyst. Now we're second in the western conference.

TheJoeMan 02-22-2013 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duckstudd269 (Post 60259673)
What would I have preferred? I would have preferred him to at least try to re-sign Beauchemin in the first place. I would have preferred him not to have to give up assets for a POSITION (top 4 defensemen), not specifically Beauch, that he could of had for free. He didn't even try re-signing him. Again, he had too much faith in an unproven player in Sbisa.

I'm not pissed about the value he gave up. It was a need and he traded an injury prone player and a solid prospect for a top 4 defenseman. I'm pissed that he had to make a move due to him not realizing the need sooner.

You're right, no one knows what Beauch would have signed for. But Murray didn't even try. We were his first choice. This isn't something Beauch just said when he came back. He said it at end of season when he become FA, he said it at his press conference when he was introduced in Toronto, and he said it when he was traded back. I fully believe him. I'm not going to back and do the research again cause that was ***** at the time, not to mention years later, but assuming he would have signed with us for same amount (which I have no doubt he would have), a few minor changes could have been made and he would have easily been re-signed. However Murray never even tried. He thought he could leave that hole in our top 4 to an unproven player and brought in several vets to try and help too. He thought maybe adding a little more money to offense would be better for team. However that failed because that hole in our top 4 was too big to overcome. That's bad asset management.

And whoever said I'm holding it against him or that he should still think about his mistakes? You quoted me originally and if you read my first post in that thread, you will see that I was responding to someone who said Murray's haters had blinders. That's wrong because he's made a lot of mistakes, and one 20 game stretch doesn't make up for all the bad moves he's pulled off. Not when you consider how mediocre our team has been during his tenure. I want to see how team does the rest of the year.

The bolded bit is my whole point. We needed a player like Beauch at that very moment so why not get him? Because Murph let him walk 18 months before? Would it have made a difference if he traded Lupul and Gardiner for Andrei Markov or Alex Edler? We subtract the same assets and fill the same need. Why does it matter that he used those assets to get a player he already had if that player is needed? Say Getzy walks this summer but in a year and a half he becomes available in a trade and we haven't found a replacement for him, would you not want him back? I just don't get why this is such an issue and such an indication of his abilities as a GM.

I think Murph has made a lot of bold moves that have put this team in the position they are in right now. Signing Koivu (and keeping him here), hiring Martin Madden (and all of his draft choices), the trades in '09, the Pronger trade, both Lubo trades, getting Cogliano, signing Lydman, hiring Boudreau, signing Souray and Winnik, signing Fasth. This team is in great shape. Honestly, and this goes to all Murray detractors, what moves has he made that have crippled this team? Are we not a deep, talented team sitting currently second in the league? Do we not have great goaltending depth and some very promising prospects/trade assets waiting the in the wings? Do we not have one of the best coaches in the league?

Sean Garrity 02-22-2013 04:29 PM

Didn't Beauch publicly state that he wasn't formally offered a contract from the Ducks? If Beauch chose to go somewhere else that is fine because after all he was free to choose. If he was never offered a contract, that is a separate issue and undeniably horrid asset management.

goosemooseduck 02-22-2013 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducksgo (Post 60262835)
Wow ducks won't be cup contenders under BM is a very strong statement.

Oh, I'd love nothing more but being proven wrong, although, most likely I won't be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducksgo (Post 60262835)
This season we were suppose to suck to almost every NHL analyst. Now we're second in the western conference.

C'mon, you really want to proclaim current team to be contenders after only 15 games played? Even in this shortened season, it's very unlikely they'll hang up there unless they win division.

Next season will be much better indicator what this team is made of.

Sojourn 02-22-2013 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goosemooseduck (Post 60264853)
C'mon, you really want to proclaim current team to be contenders after only 15 games played? Even in this shortened season, it's very unlikely they'll hang up there unless they win division.

Next season will be much better indicator what this team is made of.

As opposed to proclaiming the Ducks will never be contenders under Murray? Hmm...

Exit Dose 02-22-2013 05:31 PM

While I'm skeptical about how much of this success can be maintained, it seems a bit silly to deny that there has been any improvement to on-ice product. We've looked like a team that should at least be in line for a playoff spot. Looking at the talent on the roster and in the pipeline, it seems fair to say that we're at least heading in the right direction. The fact that we were able to find some success in the midst of rebuild is amazing. While I understand being skeptical of the quizzical stuff that Ducksgo spouts, there is still a level of optimism here that is completely rational. Some of these criticisms just sound like people are stubbornly holding on to the past. Yeah, we're unlikely to contend for a cup this year, but there's plenty to enjoy while our team continues working towards that goal.

KEEROLE Vatanen 02-22-2013 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Professor John Frink (Post 60245229)
I'm not really sure why this is being brought up now. Because of Burke coming back?

Anyway, I'll bite.

You can be sick of that rationale all you want. It doesn't change the fact that we could have kept Lupul, Gardiner and Beauchemin. I think overall people's issue with Murray is his asset management.

But you aren't entirely wrong. Beauchemin only played 20 games the season before he became a UFA. To throw a bunch of money at him would have been tough. But if anyone should have seen his overall value, it should have been Murray. On top of this, if he was in fact worth Lupul and Gardiner Murray should have signed him in the first place. I'd argue not very many thought it was a great trade. I know I certainly didn't like it. Mainly because it was just terrible asset management. Trading away two first round picks for a guy who you could have just signed is a big problem. A problem that the Ducks had because our defense was young inexperienced and weak.

Murray had to fire Carlyle or risk getting fired himself. I don't think it took huge balls to do so. And he gave Fasth a one year one million dollar deal to be our backup based on what scouts recommended. He gets credit for getting it done. But I doubt he was the one consistently scouting Fasth in Europe.

I don't like Murray, never will. So I am biased, but it's impossible for me to complain about this offseason. Clearly the moves he has made have worked.

Lupul was an anchor on our payroll after the bizarre injury situation, Murray like any GM has done some good things and bad, I think that's the nature of the position. luckily we're starting to get some contributions from kids he drafted, i'm honestly pretty surprised no other team has scooped up Martin Madden to be their assistant GM or something.

I'm happy that we've found a role for Cogliano, I would still like to get a little tougher up front, find that Chris Neil kind of guy who is an effective bottom 6'er, can chip in some goals and play tough. Beleskey is trying to do it atleast

What will determine Murray's future is how he handles this Perry and Getzlaf situation, can he allow them to test free agency? we'll find out

goosemooseduck 02-22-2013 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sojourn (Post 60265887)
As opposed to proclaiming the Ducks will never be contenders under Murray? Hmm...

They won't, not under BM.

Sojourn 02-22-2013 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goosemooseduck (Post 60271015)
They won't, not under BM.

And you don't see the irony there?

goosemooseduck 02-22-2013 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sojourn (Post 60273841)
And you don't see the irony there?

Nope, that's my opinion, as opposed to what I wrote in second part (quoted bellow) which is more or less depended on future events.

I might be proven wrong but that doesn't mean I have to change my opinion now based on 15 games.

Really, nothing ironic about it.

Quote:

Granted, he haven't had that chance yet, but we'll see this and/or next season if he is good enough of a GM to not lose key assets (Getz/Perry) and take care of possible replacements for what is inevitable (Teemu retirement/production drop), fill other existing roster holes (either trough new acquisitions or current lineup of prospects), and work with owners on at least some budget flexibility to deal with the above and have a chance on going deep in POs.

Seasons 12/13 and 13/14 will let us know of how good (or bad) GM he really is.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:34 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.