Quote:
Originally Posted by A Pointed Stick
Is that really you Mitch? The Mitch I know spent 20 paragraphs telling me that either PA or Nielsen had to go, with me agreeing, because our forward corps is a bunch of cream puffs, basically.
The word on the street is that Garth couldn't get anyone to pay a prospect and 1st rounder, but yes just a 1st rounder should have sprung PA. You have to do that deal. Knowing we can't come back with the entire caste from Under the Rainbow next season kinda requires you to trade one or more between now and August, with now being the best time, and July 1st the worst when we lose this guy.
What changed Mitch? I realize we could sign PA and trade Nielsen at the draft or whatever, but I really don't see that happening. Do you?
Garth held out and got left with nothing to show for it. Now with the playoffs firmly out of reach, we keep assets that will make us go in the opposite direction of the pick we want (1st via lottery, hopefully). That's a lose lose. And before you reach for the "But winning at the end will pay better dividends down the line" excuse, I pre-emptively argue back that if that was one of the goals of this team: Rolston would never have played up after his first month to begin with because he was that obviously a POS from day one, Mottau would have been sent packing months ago for anything, Nino would have been in Europe or back in Juniors, etc., etc., etc.
Man, this trade deadline still has me PO'd.  |
...and I'm already going against my self-imposed hiatus.
The players staying and playing is not nothing. The message it sends to the team of guys who are still signed past this season is not nothing. The chance to negotiate with our free agents is not nothing. Look, I'm not thrilled with the makeup of the team. We've already beaten that horse to death. I wouldn't have cried if PAP was traded, but not for a 2nd rounder at the last moment where it looks to the rest of the team who will be here into the future like you're throwing in the towel.
Here's what I am saying:
I'm saying that a 1st was most likely never on the table for either player; others here are saying that it most definitely was while often ignoring the context of any of the trades that did occur and how said trades might differ with what they wished would have occurred.
I'm saying that Garth pulls the trigger if a 1st is on the table for either of these assets because that should have been enough considering our position in the standings and our recent "win one, lose one" play. It should have been close enough in value. I'll ask it again, can anyone here honestly see Garth turning down a 1st rounder for either player?
Look, I'm not running the team. That should be pretty ****ing obvious. Everyone is taking what they think the team should look like and how it should be managed and lumping it into our supposed "failures" during the trade deadline. I'm only arguing that at this exact moment I am fine with what transpired.
I'm saying that trading your starting goaltender and PAP who was performing well
and seems to be well-liked by his teammates while the team was close enough to a playoff spot to compete would have sent the wrong message to the players on this team. It would not have helped the development of the players on this team for the rest of this season. The value coming in would've had to have been enough to
sell it to the rest of the players remaining.
On the other hand, the team wasn't in a position due to its play up to this point to start throwing our 1sts for rentals. A core player had to be available. I didn't see a 1st+ go for a signed core player type of deal happen that didn't involve another core player going the other way; did anyone else see something like this happen?
Too many people look at all of this like it's black and white. Sink or swim. Dump for assets or not. The situation is really not that simple. In order to properly value these two players who we kept you have to take everything into consideration. You have to consider the effect of losing on the players of this team. The effect of throwing in the towel. Yes, you have to consider the potential changes in draft position (plus or minus.) You
also have to consider the slight chance of making the playoffs. You have to consider future negotiations with other GMs. There's a ton of things to consider.
The fact of the matter is that many teams this deadline were really hovering around a middle ground. Close enough to compete, not far away enough to completely throw in the towel. There's a reason why it was such an uneventful trade deadline. I keep saying it, but I'll say it again, there were
less buyers and less sellers.
Teams recognize that a 1st in this coming draft is quite useful. Teams weren't about to sell off a 1st for anything that wasn't a perfect fit for them.
Exactly one 1st round pick was exchanged for a rental which was a very specific need.
Having said all of that, in case anyone gives a ****, I'm not applauding our moves leading up to the deadline or at the deadline. I'm pretty sure you won't find a post of mine where I say I'm "happy" about the moves or lack of moves at this deadline. I'm just not "pissed" about it.
I think what we did was reasonable. That's all. This doesn't change how I feel about our failures before now. This doesn't change what I might feel about future failures.
What would "I" have done?
I would have made it known that one of Nielsen and PAP could be had leading up to the deadline before I signed either of them; I'm talking a month ago. I would have traded the one with more value coming back. Why? Because I DO want to change the makeup of the team. Whichever one I could have kept I would have re-signed. So yes, I would have moved PAP or Nielsen with enough time to sniff out core players for trades when we had more games to play (and quite frankly, more interesting players were being discussed as potentially available.)
Having said that, Nielsen is still movable with his current contract and PAP might still be gone after this season. There's a reason why I'm not crying and complaining at this exact moment. If PAP leaves for "nothing", he still leaves. It still opens up a slot for a bigger forward, or a better skater. We still have the opportunity to gun for a 1A center. We could play Bailey, Nielsen or PAP on that player's wing. I still don't think PAP should be brought back for much more than $3 million/year for 2 years. He really hasn't produced much away from John Tavares at 5-on-5.
We've already brought up Cizikas. We're already trying Bailey on wing. As far as I'm concerned, we ****ed up by not trying a lot of **** much sooner. I'm not happy about our lines throughout the season. I'm not happy about our management overall.
I just don't think we were mismanaged at the deadline itself. That's it. I also think that we'll end up retaining Nabby. I've felt like this would happen well before the deadline. We've known for quite some time that PAP will test free agency. That's fine, he'll be an option. I think it's worth a 2nd round pick to retain his services for the rest of this season. It's as simple as that. There are a lot of goalies potentially going to market in the off-season. I think that gives us a better chance to retain Nabby while he's still part of the team.
Some people might wish we jettisoned everything and failed for Nail. I'm saying that failing tends to beget more failing. I'm saying that it eventually wears down on the psyche of your players. I'm saying that playing meaningful games, even if you lose them, is good practice. I'm saying that it's better to ice a competitive squad, even if that squad is mismatched for the remainder of this season.
Heck, I'm saying a lot of ****. Try to listen to
all of it. My stance hasn't changed from before. I'm only arguing on why the moves
at the deadline itself were reasonable. I think Nielsen is movable. Whether he'll be moved or not? I'm going to save ******** on the franchise for the off-season, where improving the core has more opportunities and is not as time stressed. When it becomes obvious at that point that we're definitely in the "slow-slow" rebuild, then I'll gladly join the slinging **** parade. Of course, I'll accept it and understand the obvious reasons for it. I won't be happy about it. I will think it'll be a mistake even for cost saving purposes (which would require a larger explanation in how I view the economics of our situation.) I'm simply saving that argument for a later date where it makes more sense.
The deadline really isn't the time to move for core pieces. Before this season. A month ago. In the future, this upcoming off-season. These time periods would all be better times to improve the club via trade. I'm not exonerating our management for that failure. I'm simply stating that our moves
at the trade deadline itself were "reasonable". That's all. There's no reason to preemptively argue with me. I'm not arguing outside of this very specific instance. Which was part of the point I've been making that is continuously getting overlooked. I completely understand the frustrations being expressed here. I'm only arguing that the day of the deadline wasn't the failure. There was failure before. There will probably be more failure after.
OK, now I've definitely beaten
this horse to death. Animal lovers cannot be happy with me.
,
Mitch
