HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Florida Panthers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=28)
-   -   Martin says Bouwmeester will not be traded (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=522942)

Markstrom Rules 06-08-2008 08:15 PM

Martin says Bouwmeester will not be traded
 
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/h...,4807581.story

Well, if you believe Gorten, reportedly Martin says Bouw will not be traded. He also says," I think we're discussing right now the terms of the contract." If true, that's great news. He seems confident in the end that Bouw will re-sign. However, Jokinen's future is up in the air.

JM's also narrowed his list of coaching candidates to three or four and will interview them next week. It seems like Maurice and Pearn are two of those candidates.

JM also said he "talked at length" with Olesz's agent last week.

If all this is true, this has got to be the most informative article Gorten has ever written. Seems like he is now jumping at the opportunity to not be the worst Panthers beat writer anymore and to push Biggane farther into the toilet. :sarcasm:

PanthersRule96 06-08-2008 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterBouw (Post 14349487)
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/h...,4807581.story

Well, if you believe Gorten, reportedly Martin says Bouw will not be traded. He also says," I think we're discussing right now the terms of the contract." If true, that's great news. He seems confident in the end that Bouw will re-sign. However, Jokinen's future is up in the air.

JM's also narrowed his list of coaching candidates to three or four and will interview them next week. It seems like Maurice and Pearn are two of those candidates.

JM also said he "talked at length" with Olesz's agent last week.

If all this is true, this has got to be the most informative article Gorten has ever written. Seems like he is now jumping at the opportunity to not be the worst Panthers beat writer anymore and to push Biggane farther into the toilet. :sarcasm:

I'd be pretty upset if we signed Olesz to a contract with backloaded money or something like that, as I think he's one of those players that you keep the salary down with until he proves he has ability. You can't pay for potential like we did with Horton when dealing with Olesz, as he hasn't shown enough yet. I know Martin knows this, but I wouldn't give Olesz anything over 1.5 million per season yet, maybe slightly higher if it was long term but I doubt his agent would want to sign longterm until he puts up some bigger numbers and stays healthy.

Bouwmeester.....we'll see. Who knows? Bouwmeester's our best trading chip and if we were offered a deal that improved the team greatly if Bouwmeester wouldn't sign, I'd take it and run. Had we not royally botched the Luongo deal (which only Keenan could have done), we could have had some skilled players from either Ottawa (perhaps Havlat, Phillips, Vermette, 1st? etc...whatever that deal was) or LA (Brown/Frolov/some nice pieces). Just because we struck out with dealing Louie doesn't mean we should overpay Bouw since we'd lose in any trade. If a good deal came up, I trust Martin to make good judgement as well, but Bouw is such an asset to our team that we'd be incredibly stupid to deal him.

Markstrom Rules 06-08-2008 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PanthersRule96 (Post 14349562)
I'd be pretty upset if we signed Olesz to a contract with backloaded money or something like that, as I think he's one of those players that you keep the salary down with until he proves he has ability. You can't pay for potential like we did with Horton when dealing with Olesz, as he hasn't shown enough yet. I know Martin knows this, but I wouldn't give Olesz anything over 1.5 million per season yet, maybe slightly higher if it was long term but I doubt his agent would want to sign longterm until he puts up some bigger numbers and stays healthy.

Bouwmeester.....we'll see. Who knows? Bouwmeester's our best trading chip and if we were offered a deal that improved the team greatly if Bouwmeester wouldn't sign, I'd take it and run. Had we not royally botched the Luongo deal (which only Keenan could have done), we could have had some skilled players from either Ottawa (perhaps Havlat, Phillips, Vermette, 1st? etc...whatever that deal was) or LA (Brown/Frolov/some nice pieces). Just because we struck out with dealing Louie doesn't mean we should overpay Bouw since we'd lose in any trade. If a good deal came up, I trust Martin to make good judgement as well, but Bouw is such an asset to our team that we'd be incredibly stupid to deal him.

Yeah, I can't see Olesz getting anything over 1.5 unless it's a long term deal, but even then I can't fathom it being much more than 2 mil. 2.5 at the absolute max. But like you said, I don't think he and his agent want a long term deal, even though Martin does. Martin probably just doesn't want to lose him to an offer sheet potentially in a couple years from some poaching team with a ton of cap space. They might compromise on like a 3 year, 2.25 mil/year deal.

As for the bolded part of your post, the 'if Bouw doesn't sign' doesn't seem to exist to Martin. He seems confident it'll get done. I don't think he would have said the things he did and used the words he used in this article if he wasn't REALLY confident Bouw is going to re-sign. One thing about Martin, he's very rational, patient, and he seems to really think things out. He's not going to put the possibility out there of leaving his cheese hanging out in the wind, boldly declaring Bouw will not be traded and then ending up having to trade him later on.

I still think trading Luongo was a mistake. You never trade a franchise goaltender, unless in the unlikely case you get a top 10 goalie in return along with other assets like a top six forward, a top 4 d-man, picks, prospects, etc. The rumored Ottawa offer was Havlat, Phillips, Emery, and a 1st, just FYI. It would have to be an incredible trade for us to part with Bouw IF he is willing to re-sign. I don't really see any team making an offer that would be worth our while. Especially with Martin at the helm, he would want a treasure chest in return for his valued Bouw. If Bouw is asking for anything over 7 mil/year, I'd say that's definitely overpayment, but I really can't see him demanding that much. I mean, Lidstrom makes 7.5, and I think he'd then be the 2nd highest paid d-man in the league. Ain't happening.

Cats Gambler 06-08-2008 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterBouw (Post 14349937)
I still think trading Luongo was a mistake. You never trade a franchise goaltender, unless in the unlikely case you get a top 10 goalie in return along with other assets like a top six forward, a top 4 d-man, picks, prospects, etc. The rumored Ottawa offer was Havlat, Phillips, Emery, and a 1st, just FYI. It would have to be an incredible trade for us to part with Bouw IF he is willing to re-sign. I don't really see any team making an offer that would be worth our while. Especially with Martin at the helm, he would want a treasure chest in return for his valued Bouw. If Bouw is asking for anything over 7 mil/year, I'd say that's definitely overpayment, but I really can't see him demanding that much. I mean, Lidstrom makes 7.5, and I think he'd then be the 2nd highest paid d-man in the league. Ain't happening.

Tell me one person who doesn't think that.

And I don't think losing Bouwmeester helps us at all, no matter what we get....In my opinion at least...I think it'd be a big mistake.

Mogo 06-09-2008 06:02 AM

What kinda coach is Maurice really?

Rattrick 06-09-2008 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cats Gambler (Post 14350932)
Tell me one person who doesn't think that.

And I don't think losing Bouwmeester helps us at all, no matter what we get....In my opinion at least...I think it'd be a big mistake.

*Cough* GP *Cough* :help:

Georgia Panther 06-09-2008 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rattrick (Post 14352537)
*Cough* GP *Cough* :help:

I haven't advocated trading Bouw so stop coughing:naughty:. The only negative thing I have said about Bouw is I don't like his personality, too soft spoken to become a leader on a team IMO, and I would have prefered drafting Nash over Bouw. I have called him a future franchise blueliner and would only advocate trading him if he becomes impossible to sign long-term.

RoadDoggFL 06-09-2008 11:31 AM

He was talking about the Luongo trade...

Georgia Panther 06-09-2008 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RoadDoggFL (Post 14353946)
He was talking about the Luongo trade...

OK then. I did think Luongo should have been traded, still do. I do think Keenan could have and should have made a better deal in retrospect.

OneOfTheHockeyGods* 06-09-2008 01:10 PM

Philly needs a d-man and I think they would be a good partner if we have to ship off Bouw. If he doesn't sign long term to Dion's numbers or less we should trade him.

Maybe Bouw for

Umberger, Lupul and a 1st or 2nd. I could see our top two lines looking pretty damn solid. We could probably get Gagne instead of Lupul but I wouldn't take him b/c of his concussion problems.

Booth Weiss Horton
Umberger Jokinen Lupul

Those are two solid lines.

Mclean Kreps Olesz
Belak Campbell Dvorak/Peltonen/Stumpel (hopefully we buy-out or trade these three)


That is nice lineup of forwards. Zednik may have to go too, but that wouldn't be much of a loss. In my opinion if we have to trade Bouw he should go to Philly. Unless, Chicago wants to part with one of their young stars or we can somehow make a miracle package for Malkin. To me this seems like a safe trade that would complete our forwards. I don't see us ever signing a top winger since that will cost a lot and JM would rather spend the bucks on a d-man. I don't think we will be able to sign Bouw and he could just file for arbitration and be on his way to UFA.

Markstrom Rules 06-09-2008 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mogo (Post 14352077)
What kinda coach is Maurice really?

It always seemed to me like he was a passionate coach and a players' coach. Someone that got along really well with his players and communicated really well with them, and had their respect. He has the rep for never having a former player ever say anything bad about him. He gets nothing but praise. He also seems to me like a good tactician. He did coach a mediocre Canes team to the SC Finals in 2002.

Miami Panther 06-09-2008 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterBouw (Post 14359823)
It always seemed to me like he was a passionate coach and a players' coach. Someone that got along really well with his players and communicated really well with them, and had their respect. He has the rep for never having a former player ever say anything bad about him. He gets nothing but praise. He also seems to me like a good tactician. He did coach a mediocre Canes team to the SC Finals in 2002.

I was reading on the Leafs board earlier today and one poster labeled Maurice as a player's buddy. Take it for what it's worth.

PanthersRule96 06-09-2008 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miami Panther (Post 14360034)
I was reading on the Leafs board earlier today and one poster labeled Maurice as a player's buddy. Take it for what it's worth.

That might be good as it's a MAJOR change from the way Martin was. Communication is key with this young team and Maurice will bring that. I'm not sure about his style of coaching, but if he's a good communicator, the players may like him, especially in the wake of Jacques.

zeroG 06-09-2008 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PanthersRule96 (Post 14360497)
That might be good as it's a MAJOR change from the way Martin was. Communication is key with this young team and Maurice will bring that. I'm not sure about his style of coaching, but if he's a good communicator, the players may like him, especially in the wake of Jacques.

what on earth would lead you to claim that JM was a poor communicator? not demonstrative enough for some people around here while behind the bench, maybe. if you've seen interviews with him, you'd know that he's articulate and has very good perspective. oh, and you don't accomplish what he's accomplished at this level without knowing how to communicate.

Beezer 06-10-2008 08:13 AM

I only think this is a good thing if JM manages to sign him long term. Otherwise we risk losing him for nothing in return.

Pukboy5kroner 06-10-2008 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeroG (Post 14360790)
what on earth would lead you to claim that JM was a poor communicator? not demonstrative enough for some people around here while behind the bench, maybe. if you've seen interviews with him, you'd know that he's articulate and has very good perspective. oh, and you don't accomplish what he's accomplished at this level without knowing how to communicate.

Martin is articulate?

Maybe in the most base sense of the word, meaning he is able to speak. From the interviews I've seen of him, I wouldn't call him a great or even mediocre speaker.

zeroG 06-10-2008 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pukboy8 (Post 14363344)
Martin is articulate?

Maybe in the most base sense of the word, meaning he is able to speak. From the interviews I've seen of him, I wouldn't call him a great or even mediocre speaker.

sure his english still has some frenchness to it. that's not the point tho - when you listen to him talk (and not the 5 second soundbites, listen to some of the longer conversations, for example, on growl tv), he can articulate complex ideas and has a very reassuring perspective on the game, the players and the team. i commented on this during the playoff stretch last year as i found it sort of interesting and surprising myself. it's true, though.

he is a smart guy, knows a lot about the game and can communicate that. is he alone in that regard? of course not. characterizing him as inarticulate or unable to communicate as was suggested above, i think is totally off base, though. this is different from being able to "connect" with players, mind you. maybe that's what whoever it was up above was referring to (tho even in a dispute about that, i'd tend to lean toward JM's side based on what i know of him).

RCGP 06-10-2008 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneOfTheHockeyGods (Post 14354902)
Philly needs a d-man and I think they would be a good partner if we have to ship off Bouw. If he doesn't sign long term to Dion's numbers or less we should trade him.

Maybe Bouw for

Umberger, Lupul and a 1st or 2nd. I could see our top two lines looking pretty damn solid. We could probably get Gagne instead of Lupul but I wouldn't take him b/c of his concussion problems.

Booth Weiss Horton
Umberger Jokinen Lupul

Those are two solid lines.

Mclean Kreps Olesz
Belak Campbell Dvorak/Peltonen/Stumpel (hopefully we buy-out or trade these three)


That is nice lineup of forwards. Zednik may have to go too, but that wouldn't be much of a loss. In my opinion if we have to trade Bouw he should go to Philly. Unless, Chicago wants to part with one of their young stars or we can somehow make a miracle package for Malkin. To me this seems like a safe trade that would complete our forwards. I don't see us ever signing a top winger since that will cost a lot and JM would rather spend the bucks on a d-man. I don't think we will be able to sign Bouw and he could just file for arbitration and be on his way to UFA.

Philly can't afford it. They have limited cap space.

OneOfTheHockeyGods* 06-10-2008 04:56 PM

Philly could afford it if we eat some salary or they buyout some guys. The deal could probably get done.

Detroit could also make a good trading partner. Maybe something around Franzen/Kronvall/Fillpula. I never felt Bouw wanted to be here. And by be here I mean live in South Florida.

We really need to get a coach signed soon because that may help us resign Bouw.

If we trade Bouw I think we should trade Jokinen and go for a mini rebuild. Unfortunately, Jokinen may be on the downside of his career and his value is only diminishing. This would be more of a one season kind of deal. Between Jokinen and Bouw we should get some quality prospects/quality young guys/young scorers with a high upside/ good draft picks. Then we can spend money on a UFA in the summer of 2009. Basically, this team is relying on Booth-Weiss-Horton-Olesz to put up career numbers for us to make the playoffs. We have no top line forward for Jokinen and we will not get one as everyone knows. A mini-rebuild allows us to acquire more prospect depth, more young quality forwards, and a lot more money to actually sign a significant UFA. This team's biggest problem is a lack of legitimate offensive talent. With a one season rebuild we should be a legitimate threat come the start of the 2009 season.

I see no point in keeping Jokinen if we don't get a top line winger to play with him. In the long run we would be better off trading him.

RCGP 06-10-2008 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneOfTheHockeyGods (Post 14368024)
Philly could afford it if we eat some salary or they buyout some guys. The deal could probably get done.

Detroit could also make a good trading partner. Maybe something around Franzen/Kronvall/Fillpula. I never felt Bouw wanted to be here. And by be here I mean live in South Florida.

We really need to get a coach signed soon because that may help us resign Bouw.

If we trade Bouw I think we should trade Jokinen and go for a mini rebuild. Unfortunately, Jokinen may be on the downside of his career and his value is only diminishing. This would be more of a one season kind of deal. Between Jokinen and Bouw we should get some quality prospects/quality young guys/young scorers with a high upside/ good draft picks. Then we can spend money on a UFA in the summer of 2009. Basically, this team is relying on Booth-Weiss-Horton-Olesz to put up career numbers for us to make the playoffs. We have no top line forward for Jokinen and we will not get one as everyone knows. A mini-rebuild allows us to acquire more prospect depth, more young quality forwards, and a lot more money to actually sign a significant UFA. This team's biggest problem is a lack of legitimate offensive talent. With a one season rebuild we should be a legitimate threat come the start of the 2009 season.

I see no point in keeping Jokinen if we don't get a top line winger to play with him. In the long run we would be better off trading him.

Buying out still counts against the cap. The Flyers will have trouble getting Umberger and Carter under contract. Why should we help them out by taking bad contracts? There are plently of teams we could deal Bouwmeester to and not have to take bad any contracts.

PanthersRule96 06-10-2008 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeroG (Post 14360790)
what on earth would lead you to claim that JM was a poor communicator? not demonstrative enough for some people around here while behind the bench, maybe. if you've seen interviews with him, you'd know that he's articulate and has very good perspective. oh, and you don't accomplish what he's accomplished at this level without knowing how to communicate.

I'd claim that because it's a fact. It's been mentioned NUMEROUS times how Martin doesn't really relate to the players. He's more of a hands-off coach and doesn't establish any sort of personal relationships with players really. I've had coaches like that and I've had coaches who relate and are friendly with the players, and a lot of people respond to the latter style better. More veteran players would be good for Martin to coach with that approach but with younger kids, you have to be able to relate to them and bring them along. Martin is not even good in interviews with the media, and while I agree with calling out Olli, you don't keep beating your star player. Olli was a star over the past 5 years and had one bad year. You think he's going to enjoy coming back and enjoy negotiating with Martin after seeing his name dragged through the mud when it's players like Peltonen, Dvorak, Stumpel, Murphy etc... who didn't pull any weight at all and are much more largely to blame? Everyone knows Martin is very impersonal in the locker room, as many players have even said, so why is that a surprise that he's not the most effective communicator with his players? He can still get his point across, but it's evident when it took them so long to play the system correctly and actually listen to what he was saying that he's no Mike Babcock.

zeroG 06-10-2008 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PanthersRule96 (Post 14370448)
I'd claim that because it's a fact. It's been mentioned NUMEROUS times how Martin doesn't really relate to the players. He's more of a hands-off coach and doesn't establish any sort of personal relationships with players really. I've had coaches like that and I've had coaches who relate and are friendly with the players, and a lot of people respond to the latter style better. More veteran players would be good for Martin to coach with that approach but with younger kids, you have to be able to relate to them and bring them along. Martin is not even good in interviews with the media, and while I agree with calling out Olli, you don't keep beating your star player. Olli was a star over the past 5 years and had one bad year. You think he's going to enjoy coming back and enjoy negotiating with Martin after seeing his name dragged through the mud when it's players like Peltonen, Dvorak, Stumpel, Murphy etc... who didn't pull any weight at all and are much more largely to blame? Everyone knows Martin is very impersonal in the locker room, as many players have even said, so why is that a surprise that he's not the most effective communicator with his players? He can still get his point across, but it's evident when it took them so long to play the system correctly and actually listen to what he was saying that he's no Mike Babcock.

lol. please. are you kidding??? hmm. how would JM look coaching lidstrom, zetterberg, datsyuk? haha. babcock did a fantastic job but your analogy, and i'm being generous, leaves a lot to be desired.

in any event, we are talking about 2 different things. i clarified above that i'm talking about the ability to communicate, not relate, and you are still hammering on the wrong end of this argument so there isn't much point in this.

ps and OT - you, and others around here are so off on the olli thing. JM did not beat up olli at the end of the season and, if anything, he's been deferential to olli since the season's ended. he simply agreed with olli's self-criticism and added some stats to underscore the point. since then, he's been complimentary and if you've bothered to pay attention to anything he's said publicly, you'd know that he's walking a very fine line, knowing that olli very well could be back next year.

Rattrick 06-11-2008 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeroG (Post 14371637)
lol. please. are you kidding??? hmm. how would JM look coaching lidstrom, zetterberg, datsyuk? haha. babcock did a fantastic job but your analogy, and i'm being generous, leaves a lot to be desired.

in any event, we are talking about 2 different things. i clarified above that i'm talking about the ability to communicate, not relate, and you are still hammering on the wrong end of this argument so there isn't much point in this.

ps and OT - you, and others around here are so off on the olli thing. JM did not beat up olli at the end of the season and, if anything, he's been deferential to olli since the season's ended. he simply agreed with olli's self-criticism and added some stats to underscore the point. since then, he's been complimentary and if you've bothered to pay attention to anything he's said publicly, you'd know that he's walking a very fine line, knowing that olli very well could be back next year.

I agree. Babcock is like the Phil Jackson of the NHL. He's never coached a bad team yet he's considered one of the best.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:14 AM.

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.