HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Flyers Mismanagement of Assets

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-07-2010, 02:00 PM
  #101
mm6492
Registered User
 
mm6492's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,518
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
They traded a 1st rounder for the rights to two pending UFAs, and then went ahead and overpaid for them.

That's the problem. If they gave up the 1st rounder to avoid a bidding war, fine-but they paid Timonen pretty much what the market would have born had he been a UFA and they overpaid Hartnell, especially when you factor in giving him a NTC.
Thats my issue, but it is hard to argue, as we have know idea what other teams wereplanning to fo, while Homer may have had some idea of this.


And the giving out of NTC's and NMC's could start a whole new thread......

mm6492 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:00 PM
  #102
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm6492 View Post
What about the mismanagement of assets which is teh reason I create dthis threa? I understand it has been talked about, in the original post I even mentioned that. But I wanted to get peoples opinions on how this will begin to effect us. Plus, we have threads ranging from Fire Holmgrem, Richards is Cannon, and one that normally just talks about Vodka and Scotch I do not see an issue with creating this thread.
Fair enough about the thread

However, I don't think the mismanagement of assets is really that bad here. If you compare league wide, every team has some trades that come back to look bad in a few years. That said, we don't have any of the doozies that really really sting on a level of a Luongo for Todd Bertuzzi trade. I don't see any trades that really hit us hard and set us back, and that's fine by me.

BringBackStevens is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:02 PM
  #103
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm6492 View Post
And he was forced to do it because he did not have enough room under teh cap to call Giroux up. So due to mismanagement of the salary cap, he was forced to mismanage our assets. Brilliant move!!!
That's the worst part. He could have juggled a couple of other salaries and kept Upshall and got Giroux back in the line-up.

It was obvious that Biron was going to be the starter at the TDL. So why not trade Niittymaki for a bag of pucks, future considerations or simply waive him and turn around and claim one of the several back-ups floating around on waivers that had a smaller hit?

Or, how about waiving Cote? Dumping Cote would have given them enough room to dress Upshall and Giroux, without even touching goal.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:03 PM
  #104
i am dave
Registered User
 
i am dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Corner of 1st & 1st
Country: United States
Posts: 2,182
vCash: 500
Oh dear lord, I had forgotten Jaroslav Modry played for this team before reading this thread... Thanks a lot!!

i am dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:03 PM
  #105
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm6492 View Post
Thats my issue, but it is hard to argue, as we have know idea what other teams wereplanning to fo, while Homer may have had some idea of this.


And the giving out of NTC's and NMC's could start a whole new thread......
The NTC's and NMC's could start a whole new website!

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:04 PM
  #106
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
They traded a 1st rounder for the rights to two pending UFAs, and then went ahead and overpaid for them.

That's the problem. If they gave up the 1st rounder to avoid a bidding war, fine-but they paid Timonen pretty much what the market would have born had he been a UFA and they overpaid Hartnell, especially when you factor in giving him a NTC.
A little context is needed when looking at this trade. Timonen was the best UFA defensemen available that season, and as you said was probably paid right on what he was going to get in the open market. What really helped was the ability to be sure they would have him before UFA began. After the season that we had, it was NOT AN OPTION to put up a record like that again from ownership and management's perspective, and the team absolutely needed a top flight defensemen. It was the cost of doing business. A first round pick for two good players under contract was not much to pay at the time for the benefits it gave the team

As for Hartnell being overpaid, I disagree. He was the youngest UFA ever and his skillset was rare. I think he easily would have grabbed 4.5 on the market

BringBackStevens is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:05 PM
  #107
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
Fair enough about the thread

However, I don't think the mismanagement of assets is really that bad here. If you compare league wide, every team has some trades that come back to look bad in a few years. That said, we don't have any of the doozies that really really sting on a level of a Luongo for Todd Bertuzzi trade. I don't see any trades that really hit us hard and set us back, and that's fine by me.
Well, Luongo for Bertuzzi is an epically horrid trade.

The thing is, the Flyers do mismanage their "minor" assets as badly as any team in the league. They are very cavalier about trading draft choices.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:06 PM
  #108
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
The title of the thread is The Flyers Mismanagement of Assets. People talk about the Denis Gauthier deal, well, wasn't that a Clarke deal as well? As for Nedved, yes, dealing Seidenberg for Nedved was a complete case of asset mismanagement. Nedved was to be brought in to provide offense, which he didn't. In 25 games with Phoenix, he had 11 points. And yet, he was expected to be the 2nd line center and back up to Forsberg if Forsberg went down with injury? Come on, the only problem with the forwards was that Primeau suffered another concussion and Clarke didn't find an adequate veteran winger to play with Carter and Umberger (and don't get me started on Niko Dimitrakos - he wasn't the player that line needed). Clarke badly mismanaged the team after the lockout.
Clarke had his problems...and lost his job. But his problems are somewhat moot at this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
They traded a 1st rounder for the rights to two pending UFAs, and then went ahead and overpaid for them.

That's the problem. If they gave up the 1st rounder to avoid a bidding war, fine-but they paid Timonen pretty much what the market would have born had he been a UFA and they overpaid Hartnell, especially when you factor in giving him a NTC.
You can quibble about Hartnell being overpaid, but Timonen absolutely is not overpaid for what he brings to the table. Particularly given when he signed his contract. You want to see overpaid, check out the guy patrolling the blue line for Chicago that doesn't really play defense.

There are only a few players in the league like Hartnell at this point, so claims of him being overpaid seem to ignore the supply-and-demand for that type of guy. Giving him a NTC is another matter, but I'm not all that interested in trading him anyway...for all his faults, he brings a lot of elements to this team that no one else can provide.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireHolmgrenDotCom View Post
Pitkanen is playing in the perfect hockey market for him. He has to deal with zero pressure from the fans, the media ect.
He doesnt have to worry about crying because he is getting booed in Philadelphia or Edmonton.
No doubt he's more comfortable down there...

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:07 PM
  #109
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
A little context is needed when looking at this trade. Timonen was the best UFA defensemen available that season, and as you said was probably paid right on what he was going to get in the open market. What really helped was the ability to be sure they would have him before UFA began. After the season that we had, it was NOT AN OPTION to put up a record like that again from ownership and management's perspective, and the team absolutely needed a top flight defensemen. It was the cost of doing business. A first round pick for two good players under contract was not much to pay at the time for the benefits it gave the team

As for Hartnell being overpaid, I disagree. He was the youngest UFA ever and his skillset was rare. I think he easily would have grabbed 4.5 on the market
The problem is, even if those players had not agreed to terms before they hit UFA, the Flyers still would have lost the first rounder.

What, exactly, was Hartnell's skill set? He's a 20 goal banger/agitator who takes a lot of stupid penalties. Ryan Malone is a better, albeit slightly older player, who has a similar cap hit.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:09 PM
  #110
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
The problem is, even if those players had not agreed to terms before they hit UFA, the Flyers still would have lost the first rounder.

What, exactly, was Hartnell's skill set? He's a 20 goal banger/agitator who takes a lot of stupid penalties. Ryan Malone is a better, albeit slightly older player, who has a similar cap hit.
Hartnell is more of a 25+ guy (consistently so when accounting for injuries and pro-rating), and was also young and improving when signed. Last year he potted 30...those guys don't come for cheap.

And actually, no, they wouldn't have lost the 1st rounder as I recalled. They would have given something up for the negotiations, but the 1st was contingent upon them signing.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:11 PM
  #111
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Clarke had his problems...and lost his job. But his problems are somewhat moot at this point.



You can quibble about Hartnell being overpaid, but Timonen absolutely is not overpaid for what he brings to the table. Particularly given when he signed his contract. You want to see overpaid, check out the guy patrolling the blue line for Chicago that doesn't really play defense.

There are only a few players in the league like Hartnell at this point, so claims of him being overpaid seem to ignore the supply-and-demand for that type of guy. Giving him a NTC is another matter, but I'm not all that interested in trading him anyway...for all his faults, he brings a lot of elements to this team that no one else can provide.



No doubt he's more comfortable down there...
I agree that Timonen is a fair contract, especially when compared to Campbell. But Campbell is a drastic overpayment, so it's not a real good comparison.

I base Hartnell being overpaid on his inclusion, almost annually, on several "worst contract" lists.

I'm not saying that he sucks, or doesn't bring a lot to the table, but for a team with the cap issues the Flyers have, that deal is a problematic one.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:11 PM
  #112
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
A little context is needed when looking at this trade. Timonen was the best UFA defensemen available that season, and as you said was probably paid right on what he was going to get in the open market. What really helped was the ability to be sure they would have him before UFA began. After the season that we had, it was NOT AN OPTION to put up a record like that again from ownership and management's perspective, and the team absolutely needed a top flight defensemen. It was the cost of doing business. A first round pick for two good players under contract was not much to pay at the time for the benefits it gave the team

As for Hartnell being overpaid, I disagree. He was the youngest UFA ever and his skillset was rare. I think he easily would have grabbed 4.5 on the market
It was also Nashville's own pick they got back; the Flyers already knew they were getting Kane or JVR, so it's not like they walked away from that draft without selecting a player in the first round. The trade made sense at the time and helped make the team competitive immediately without sacrificing the future.

CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:12 PM
  #113
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
Well, Luongo for Bertuzzi is an epically horrid trade.

The thing is, the Flyers do mismanage their "minor" assets as badly as any team in the league. They are very cavalier about trading draft choices.
Well it depends what you qualify as "mismanaged". As much as I like Carcillo, the Upshall trade was mismanagement. Not a major loss, but that qualifies in my view. The Eminger trade was poor as well, and not in a "looking back" type manner as most people were baffled at the time. The Gauthier thing was a waste of a 2nd round pick as well.

The other things I've seen listed I wouldn't count as egregious losses of assets including Pitkanen/Lupul, Carle trade, Pronger trade. You could easily argue these trades as being wins for the team if you chose to do so, so I think labeling these as mismanagement is splitting hairs at best

So essentially, you have 3 bad moves that could be labeled as mismanagement of assets. I don't think that's the issue here.

BringBackStevens is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:14 PM
  #114
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Hartnell is more of a 25+ guy (consistently so when accounting for injuries and pro-rating), and was also young and improving when signed. Last year he potted 30...those guys don't come for cheap.

And actually, no, they wouldn't have lost the 1st rounder as I recalled. They would have given something up for the negotiations, but the 1st was contingent upon them signing.
Actually, I have only see the trade as the 1st for exclusive negotiating rights, not conditional upon signing either or both players.

Hartnell is on pace for 18 goals this year, making the 30 he had last year an aberration, meaning he's a 20-25 goal guy. $4.25mm a year is a lot for what he brings.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:16 PM
  #115
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
It was also Nashville's own pick they got back; the Flyers already knew they were getting Kane or JVR, so it's not like they walked away from that draft without selecting a player in the first round. The trade made sense at the time and helped make the team competitive immediately without sacrificing the future.
Except they could have signed both players to similar contracts and kept the first rounder. That's sacrificing the future.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:16 PM
  #116
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
I agree that Timonen is a fair contract, especially when compared to Campbell. But Campbell is a drastic overpayment, so it's not a real good comparison.
...actually it's a perfect comparison as far as the contracts that defenders have been signing. Defensemen get supposedly "ridiculous" contracts each and every season. $6.5M for a first pairing D that has been running one of the best PPs in the league for 2.5 years is pretty good bang for your buck, IMO. Not to mention, prior to this season (now we have Pronger, after all) the team has looked like complete garbage whenever Timonen was out.

Quote:
I base Hartnell being overpaid on his inclusion, almost annually, on several "worst contract" lists.

I'm not saying that he sucks, or doesn't bring a lot to the table, but for a team with the cap issues the Flyers have, that deal is a problematic one.
Please send me a link to someone that included him on such a list after he scored 30 goals last year...

It got chalked up as a terrible contract after his awful start here, but since about January of that year he's been a solid contributor, and does a lot of things (similar to Malone) that 95% of NHL players don't bring to the table in one package. Limited supply equates to high demand...and raises the price.

If you look around the league at guys like Hartnell...they're all getting paid a bit more than their statistical output would suggest they get when compared to others. Of course, most guys potting 25 goals a year don't play with a bur under their saddle anymore.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:16 PM
  #117
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
Actually, I have only see the trade as the 1st for exclusive negotiating rights, not conditional upon signing either or both players.
I think your wrong here. Either way, its a win for the Flyers

BringBackStevens is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:20 PM
  #118
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
Well it depends what you qualify as "mismanaged". As much as I like Carcillo, the Upshall trade was mismanagement. Not a major loss, but that qualifies in my view. The Eminger trade was poor as well, and not in a "looking back" type manner as most people were baffled at the time. The Gauthier thing was a waste of a 2nd round pick as well.

The other things I've seen listed I wouldn't count as egregious losses of assets including Pitkanen/Lupul, Carle trade, Pronger trade. You could easily argue these trades as being wins for the team if you chose to do so, so I think labeling these as mismanagement is splitting hairs at best

So essentially, you have 3 bad moves that could be labeled as mismanagement of assets. I don't think that's the issue here.
I think trading a 1st rounder for Timonen and Hartnell was a waste of a first. I think they probably could have signed both to similar deals as UFAs, and kept the first, to boot.

Trading a 1st rounder for Eminger was a horrible mismanagement of assets. If they had signed Eminger to an offer sheet for what they signed him for, the compensation wouldn't have been a 1st rounder. The fact that they traded him later doesn't mitigate the initial bad trade...and now that Downie seems to be maturing, even getting Carle might be a less defensible trade.

The deals for Carcillo, and sending Gauthier were moronic. Recalling Jones was idiotic. Losing Vaananen and Metropolit was dumb.

They are far too cavalier with their minor assets.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:21 PM
  #119
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
Except they could have signed both players to similar contracts and kept the first rounder. That's sacrificing the future.
Sure, they could have kept the pick... and probably watched Hartnell and/or Timonen sign with one of the 28 other teams that would have been vying for their services. Considering JVR is still working his way into the lineup, that pick would likely still be a season away. Instead, the Flyers had a run to the ECF and another playoff in which they lost to the evental champions... experience they almost certainly wouldn't have accumulated without a move like the trade for Hartnell and Timonen.

The trade was a major coup for the Flyers.

CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:21 PM
  #120
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSaq View Post
Actually, I have only see the trade as the 1st for exclusive negotiating rights, not conditional upon signing either or both players.

Hartnell is on pace for 18 goals this year, making the 30 he had last year an aberration, meaning he's a 20-25 goal guy. $4.25mm a year is a lot for what he brings.
I think there's a lot more aberrational down scoring going on with this club than any previous aberrational up scoring.

Hartnell's career post-lockout:

25 in 81
22 in 64 (28 in 82)
24 in 80 (first year here, and that 24 is remarkable if you recall his first half)
30 in 82

That's pretty consistent 25-30 production as opposed to 20-25, and $4.25M (given the fact that he actually hits people, and plays in front of the net) really ain't that much for that. He's also not a dick like someone like Avery.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:22 PM
  #121
mikedifr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Josh Gratton and 2 2nd Round Picks for Denis Gauthier
Joni Pitkanen (former 1st) and Geoff Sanferson for Jason Smith and Joffrey Lupul
2nd Round Pick for Martin Biron
1st Round Pick for Rights to negotiate with Hartnell and Timonen
1st round Pick for Steve Eminger
Steve Eminger and Steve Downie (former 1st) for Matt Carle
Denis Gauthier and 2nd Round Pick for Patrik Hersley and Ned Lukacevic
Scottie Upshall and 2nd Round Pick for Daniel Carcillo
Joffrey Lupul, Luca Sbisa (former 1st) and two first round draft picks for Chris Pronger

Of these trades, the two involving Gauthier were bad and that's about it. the first for Eminger also included a third rounder which turned out to be Jacob DeSerres, so you can't really judge that trade yet because he could wind up being a starter here. Not to mention it also turned into Matt Carle. The Upshall trade was a good one even though everyone on here wants to **** Scottie Upshall. The Hartnell and Timonen trade was also a good one. Would you rather have Jonathan Blum (the guy Nashville took w/ the pick) than Timonen and Hartnell? Biron for second round pick is a steal. He is a starting goalie who helped this team when it needed a goalie. How are you going to complain about that? The Pronger trade the jury is still out on, but I think it will be a good trade regardless of the outcome. Pronger is a Hall of Fame player and the Flyers want to win now. I'll take it.

As for the signings, hindsight is 20/20. Briere was one of (if not the most) sought after free agents on the market. If the Flyers didn't give it to him someone else would have. The Flyers were in disarray and needed a star on the team. If they didn't get him, there would have been outcry for Homer's head for not getting him. Timonen and Hartnell are really not that outlandish. Maybe one or two million too much, but again, hindsight. The bottom line is Homer has done the best job with what he has. When the Flyers win the Cup with all these "bad trades" we'll see what everyone is saying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Wait, lemme get this straight. You think:



was a "good" trade? That trade is friggin atrocious on value. Scottie Upshall as a player trumps Carcillo as a player (and this isn't a matter of liking their style, Upshall is simply a better "hockey player"). Then you throw in the 2nd rd. pick for good measure.

Upshall is on pace for 28 goals right now...that's a quality 2nd liner. Carcillo is playing effectively on the 4th line and can't really go above there because he doesn't have the hands to consistently play above there.

I don't think Upshall would be on this team this year no matter what...because of his contract. But we could have gotten a LOT more than Dan Carcillo for Upshall and a 2nd if Holmgren had cut that deal after the season.
Let me put it the way I just put in an email to a friend of mine:

For $1.5 million we could have a young guy who obviously had some chemistry with players on this team, can play ANYWHERE in your lineup, easily would have stepped into a 2nd line role with Knuble and Lupul moving on and would have eased Giroux and JVR into the league where so much pressure wouldnt have been on them for secondary scoring, especially when Gagne went down.

Instead, you have $900k to Carcillo who offers nothing over Upshall other than fighting, in every other aspect of hockey Upshall is MUCH better; $1 million and change for a Dman no longer on this roster (Jones) and $500k for a guy like Pyorala who might not needed to be signed had Upshall still been here.

Let me summarize

Approximately $2.5 million for a 4th line fighter, a player not on the team anymore, and a guy getting scratched on a regular basis instead of a young player on pace for 28 goals this year now that he has been given some ice time and could have provided something we have missed on many occasions this year, heart and secondary scoring.

I dont care how much people think some of us "worship" Upshall.....That is a HORRIBLE move from an asset management standpoint that was brought on because of poor asset management to begin with.

mikedifr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:23 PM
  #122
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
I think your wrong here. Either way, its a win for the Flyers
Actually, since Nashville would have exercised the pick prior to the start of free agency, I'm almost certain I am correct.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:24 PM
  #123
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
Well it depends what you qualify as "mismanaged". As much as I like Carcillo, the Upshall trade was mismanagement. Not a major loss, but that qualifies in my view. The Eminger trade was poor as well, and not in a "looking back" type manner as most people were baffled at the time. The Gauthier thing was a waste of a 2nd round pick as well.

The other things I've seen listed I wouldn't count as egregious losses of assets including Pitkanen/Lupul, Carle trade, Pronger trade. You could easily argue these trades as being wins for the team if you chose to do so, so I think labeling these as mismanagement is splitting hairs at best

So essentially, you have 3 bad moves that could be labeled as mismanagement of assets. I don't think that's the issue here.
The Carle trade was fine from a value standpoint, but it was a part of a chain of mismanagement. It was a reaction to his mismanagement of a first for Eminger, and then it led to his mismanagement of Upshall and a 2nd. Not to mention Vaananen and Metro were waived because of that deal. So the fact that he never worked out the cap implications beforehand taints that deal. It wasn't a smart move.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:27 PM
  #124
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireHolmgrenDotCom View Post
Pitkanen is playing in the perfect hockey market for him. He has to deal with zero pressure from the fans, the media ect.
He doesnt have to worry about crying because he is getting booed in Philadelphia or Edmonton.
Exactly, I think Homer recognized that he was never going to hit his potential here after what he went through in 06-07 and decided to deal him even if one of the pieces he got back in that deal was pretty iffy.

FlyHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:27 PM
  #125
Scoopyten
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I think there's a lot more aberrational down scoring going on with this club than any previous aberrational up scoring.

Hartnell's career post-lockout:

25 in 81
22 in 64 (28 in 82)
24 in 80 (first year here, and that 24 is remarkable if you recall his first half)
30 in 82

That's pretty consistent 25-30 production as opposed to 20-25, and $4.25M (given the fact that he actually hits people, and plays in front of the net) really ain't that much for that. He's also not a dick like someone like Avery.
I fail to see how one year at 25 and one year at 30, and two years below that mean 25-30, rather than 20-25.

In fact, it's an average of 25 per year. Toss in his pace for 18 this year, and it's an average of just under 24 per year.

I agree he brings a lot of good things to the table, and he's a popular guy in the room, but he also makes a ton of dumb mistakes and takes a lot of needless penalties. I'm not looking to trade him, either, but if it were a question of Knuble and Upshall or Hartnell, I'll take the former.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:41 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.