HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

Lowe's strength as a GM

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-07-2003, 07:22 AM
  #151
mowthecat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: high on the mountain of love
Posts: 189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Cloutier? Hey, he did better than Salo last season, who made more than four times as much as he did. He also isn't signed long-tern, unlike Salo, so he can be thrown away rather easily should he not show significant improvement this year.
Salo isnt signed long term. His contract is over when this season is. After that its the clubs option and we all know it wont be renewed unless its for significantly less than current.We're talking two players at vastly different stages in their careers anyways so your point is moot.

Quote:
Burke got lucky on the Naslund contract? It came after his first forty-goal season, and he has been able to use it to leverage a uniform salary structure down the payroll. Interesting how Burke's good moves are being credited to "luck" (and when did this become a Burke-bashing thread?)
It was luck. How much will the next one be? Oh wait he probably wont be here if theres a lockout and a season goes down the drain. Its also no secret that Naslund was extremely amicable during negotiations and took significantly less than he could have received elsewhere. Like I said. Luck.You wont get arguments from me about what a terriffic guy he is.

Quote:
Can we end this sham about Edmonton not being able to compete budget-wise? .
Have a look at the average price of a ticket in Vancouver versus Edmonton my friend. I think you may be shocked at the difference. We're also talking about an older building that holds max 17,000 versus GM place.Makes a difference.

Quote:
Yes, both Vancouver and Ottawa are screaming ahead of Edmonton - both teams have significantly improved over the past few seasons while (and here's the important bit) retained key players as they have done so, and even improved in key areas (by how much is debatable, certainly, but moves were made). True, Vancouver did not have much more playoff success than Edmonton, but Vancouver did not lose the likes of Anson Carter and Janne Niinimaa as the season ended, and Todd Marchant in the off-season and have always been, at the end of every season under Brian Burke, poised for more success. Whatever losses there were have been replaced by smart UFA signings (fun fact, Ethan Moreau makes just as much as Magnus Arvedson next season, and Jason Smith makes the same as Zdeno Chara), or smart trades with a level of consistency Kevin Lowe can't touch.
You've gone ahead in the past 2 years while we've been getting younger deliberately in prep for 2004.2 years ago you finished 2 points ahead in the standings.Wow. Tell me who you think will look better say after a one year lockout when you are missing a couple of those key players (eg Naslund).Its all about timing and the past couple of years the Nucks have had more regular season success albeit not much moreso than the Oilers excepting "last year".Big whup. We didnt just "lose" Carter and Niinimaa as you say we traded them. This year will deem whether the trades were successful or not so unless you have crystal balls please refrain from making judgments on how a players season will unfold.

Personally I dont think aquiring the services of 3 players,Radek Dvorak,Raffi Torres, and Brad Isbister, while chopping some salary can be seen as a bad move. Ye3ah Ethan MOreau makes as much as Magnus Arvedsson... so? He's a leader for the Oilers and plays with a lot of heart and emotion.Tell me Arvedsson does the same.Hey if both teams make the playoffs this year we can compare who the more valuable player is ok?Same can be said for Smith. He's our captain last i looked which must mean he has some intangibles wouldnt you say?
Now quite possibly the Oilers can afford to lose some "key"players through trades and stay competitive because they have better prospects due to better drafting. Sorry but you cant say Burke has drafted better than Lowe the past 3 years which FYI is how long he's been the GM. Mizral points out a few drafts that Sather made...not Lowe. How astute is that or could it be that there was very little research done before he spouted off?

Oilers had or have 6 prospects that were on the bubble to make the team.How many did the Nucks have?Thats called smart drafting skippy.


Quote:
...whereas you demonstrate an ability to not know anything about any team in the league. Well done.
Any time anywhere dude.Tell you what,you pick a team, any team besides your own, and lets make it an obscure one say from the Eastern Conference, and we'll do comparative posts on their home board and see who demonstrates better knowledge. I'll guarantee it wont be you based on your obviously limited perspective and homer point of view.Amazing how Nucks fans can put together 2 good years and become the second coming.Puts you right with the Leafers in my books.

mowthecat is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 07:23 AM
  #152
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thor dyck
this became a burke bashing thread when mizral compared lowe to him. lets compare the two's drafting record as that was brought up by mizral.
Burke has had at least a year to prepare for 5 drafts, lowe has had three. Burke has drafted zero impact players in spite of having 6 first round picks including a second and third overall, lowe has at least one (hemsky) and his highest pick was 13th overall (traded for it i the guerin deal).

At this point, it looks like 3 burke picks will be in the nhl this year, the sedins and Brandon Reid. SO far, 6 of lowes guys have either played or will play this year.
From the '98 draft (which Burke has claimed he did have a major hand in. Allen was his first major pick):

Bryan Allen (4th overall, 1998)
Artem Chubarov (31st overall, 1998)
Jarkko Ruutu (68th overall, 1998)

Daniel Sedin (2nd overall, 1999)
Henrik Sedin (3rd overall, 1999)

Brandon Reid (208th overall, 2000)

Jason King (212th overall, 2001)

Of those, the Sedin's, Allen, Chubarov, and Ruutu should all play at least 40 games barring injury. Reid and King will likely play callup rolls.

Mizral is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 07:24 AM
  #153
mowthecat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: high on the mountain of love
Posts: 189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironchef Chris Wok
Make that "at least" 4. Artem Chubarov is a Burke pick.
Brandon Reid? Make it 3 again.

mowthecat is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 07:26 AM
  #154
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
*shrug* The Sedin twins are easily the best of the top-10 in that draft, and frankly the fact that you think they have plateaued displays nothing but your sheer idiocy and lack of understanding.
Really? Why would you compare Burke's "success" in drafting to only the top 10? You gauge him based on the entire draft class, in which case I ask are the Sedin sisters better than Tim Connolly, David Tanabe, Barrett Jackman, Martin Havlat, Nick Boynton, Mike Comrie, Frantisek Kaberle?

Seems to me that Burke passed on some pretty decent talent and and traded to do so.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Hedberg's a poor choice for backup? Don't know where you got that idea. Any time you get a middle-of-the-pack starter as your backup, it's a positive.
Sure it's a positive. As long as you keep overlooking the fact that Vancouvers weakest link is your starting goaltending and nothing has been done to improve it.

As for the Cloutier vs Salo, sure Salo had a poor year last year but Salo is here to get Edmonton through a specific period of time until the team is ready to contend (I expect our goaltending to look quite different in two years) where as Vancouver is supposed to be contending NOW and Cloutier is the main reason Vancouver can't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Yes, both Vancouver and Ottawa are screaming ahead of Edmonton - both teams have significantly improved over the past few seasons while (and here's the important bit) retained key players as they have done so, and even improved in key areas (by how much is debatable, certainly, but moves were made). True, Vancouver did not have much more playoff success than Edmonton, but Vancouver did not lose the likes of Anson Carter and Janne Niinimaa as the season ended, and Todd Marchant in the off-season and have always been, at the end of every season under Brian Burke, poised for more success. Whatever losses there were have been replaced by smart UFA signings (fun fact, Ethan Moreau makes just as much as Magnus Arvedson next season, and Jason Smith makes the same as Zdeno Chara), or smart trades with a level of consistency Kevin Lowe can't touch.
So to summarize, you are saying that Burke is a better GM because he has maintained a decent team that is built to succeed now - without actually addressing the key weakspot of the team - without actually improving the team enough to ensure a reasonable chance of success to beat the big 3 of the Western Conference - without actually providing enough depth to go beyond the second round of the playoffs and is faced with a win now or rebuild scenario despite not having a deep prospect system.

Where as Lowe is a poor GM because he has managed to recognize that the team he inherited was competetive enough to reach the playoffs but was not deep enough to contend so instead of letting his group of players run their course (such as Vancouver) he has completely rebuilt the team, restocked the farm, remained playoff competitive and and is set to see his team hit their stride?

I agree that today, the Vancouver Canucks are poised to do better than the Oilers but I also say that Vancouver doesn't have a cup team and because of that Edmonton is closer to truly contending. That is simply because Vancouver will come up short in the next couple years and be faced with a complete rebuild where as Edmonton is almost through the rebuild process and is set to show significant progress which in a couple years will see Edmonton regain their rightful position ahead of the Canucks.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 07:39 AM
  #155
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by momentai
Sorry to interrupt but just want to point out a few inaccuracies if I may. Salo is not signed long term at this point. He's in the last year of a 3 year deal with two CLUB options for the upcoming 2 years.
Ah...I wasn't aware they were club options.


Quote:
While the contract of Nazzy is a good one and I certainly do credit Brian Burke for that signing.. You can't compare it with the Weight situation. Naslund was WILLING to take less to stay with club and cooperated in that fashion. Weight did not and wanted 8 million dollars that the team could not afford. It has NOTHING to do with bargaining strategies. Fact is, Naslund wanted to stay in Vancouver and took a paycut to do that. Weight did not. You're going to have a tough time convincing me Brian Burke could have convinced him differently
I wasn't comparing it to the Weight contract! Dumping Weight was a good idea - I was responding to the original poster who said Burke got lucky with the Naslund contract.

Quote:
Well, there's really no sham here. The Canucks and the Sens are able to increase their payroll and the Oilers simply cannot. We have not multi-million dollar owners willing to eat a fair bit of a loss for winning. Our owners (all 37 of them) are just businessmen. Making an extra round in the playoffs really won't change much for us. We break even with one playoff appearance as it is.
Regardless of the reason - and you're right, stable ownership has a lot to do with it - if you just look at last season and look at what each team did with their budget, Lowe is clearly the loser.

Quote:
You've gone ahead in the past 2 years while we've been getting younger deliberately in prep for 2004.2 years ago you finished 2 points ahead in the standings.Wow. Tell me who you think will look better say after a one year lockout when you are missing a couple of those key players (eg Naslund).Its all about timing and the past couple of years the Nucks have had more regular season success albeit not much moreso than the Oilers excepting "last year".Big whup. We didnt just "lose" Carter and Niinimaa as you say we traded them. This year will deem whether the trades were successful or not so unless you have crystal balls please refrain from making judgments on how a players season will unfold.
Hey, if you traded Niinimaa and Carter for decent return, you probably wouldn't see me complaining. You also pessimistically assume that there's no way Naslund is coming back after a lockout because he "wants to play in Sweden" (gee, never heard a Swede say that before). Naslund is under contract for two more years - regardless of any lockout, he will be back for a season after it, and we can take it from there.

Quote:
Same can be said for Smith. He's our captain last i looked which must mean he has some intangibles wouldnt you say?
Intangibles don't cost $2.3 million. Lowe can do better.

Quote:
Oilers had or have 6 prospects that were on the bubble to make the team.How many did the Nucks have?Thats called smart drafting skippy.
Comparing the last three drafts (because that's all Lowe has been in charge of), the Oilers have, in terms "could play in the NHL this season"

Jussi Markkanen, Ales Hemsky, Jarret Stoll, and Ales Pisa.

Vancouver? Ryan Kesler, Jason King, Kirill Koltsov, and RJ Umberger.

Hemsky is the best prospect there, which makes sense because he's the highest pick there...If I had to rank them, It'd go something like this

Hemsky
Koltsov
Umberger
Kesler
Stoll
Markkanen
Pisa

...this is with one less first round pick than Edmonton had. Criticizing Burke's drafting record over Lowe's is pretty weak.

Quote:
Any time anywhere dude.Tell you what,you pick a team, any team besides your own, and lets make it an obscure one say from the Eastern Conference, and we'll do comparative posts on their home board and see who demonstrates better knowledge. I'll guarantee it wont be you based on your obviously limited perspective and homer point of view.Amazing how Nucks fans can put together 2 good years and become the second coming.Puts you right with the Leafers in my books.
Find one point where I said they were the second coming? I happen to be able to notice that in the off-season, the team doesn't regress. Yeah, I'm such a homer. News flash: When the CBA comes around, Edmonton isn't magically going to become a good team - they will have a whole building process to go through. The Canucks have been able to afford that under the current CBA, which gives them a clear financial advantage, but to say that Edmonton is poised for post-CBA success, and Vancouver isn't, is idiotic.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 07:47 AM
  #156
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 7,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
From the '98 draft (which Burke has claimed he did have a major hand in. Allen was his first major pick):

Bryan Allen (4th overall, 1998)
Artem Chubarov (31st overall, 1998)
Jarkko Ruutu (68th overall, 1998)

Daniel Sedin (2nd overall, 1999)
Henrik Sedin (3rd overall, 1999)

Brandon Reid (208th overall, 2000)

Jason King (212th overall, 2001)

Of those, the Sedin's, Allen, Chubarov, and Ruutu should all play at least 40 games barring injury. Reid and King will likely play callup rolls.
your kidding, right. Are you telling us that any of the propsect info he gathered during his tenure as Director of Hockey Operations for NHL was considered of value over a full time experienced scouting and coaching staff? 5 days after leaving NHL HQ in New York, he has successfully scouted and developed a game plan to take to the daft table???? That strains all credulity. I don't buy that at all. I purposely left that draft and Lowe's first one off the list for that reason.

Between Brandon Reid and Jason King, they have 15 games and 9 career nhl points. Those are the nhlers burke has drafted during the same years as Lowe has been GM. If you can convince anyone that Burke isn't the worst drafting gm in hockey, then you are much more articulate and persuasive than me. It would be difficult to find another team with so little to show from the last 4 drafts.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 07:58 AM
  #157
Oilers Hockey
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Heartland of Hockey
Posts: 1,531
vCash: 500
Wow Oiler and Canuck fans like to bicker alot! *grabs bag if popcorn* I'm learning alot from this thread too.

Oilers Hockey is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 08:09 AM
  #158
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thor dyck
your kidding, right. Are you telling us that any of the propsect info he gathered during his tenure as Director of Hockey Operations for NHL was considered of value over a full time experienced scouting and coaching staff? 5 days after leaving NHL HQ in New York, he has successfully scouted and developed a game plan to take to the daft table???? That strains all credulity. I don't buy that at all. I purposely left that draft and Lowe's first one off the list for that reason.

Between Brandon Reid and Jason King, they have 15 games and 9 career nhl points. Those are the nhlers burke has drafted during the same years as Lowe has been GM. If you can convince anyone that Burke isn't the worst drafting gm in hockey, then you are much more articulate and persuasive than me. It would be difficult to find another team with so little to show from the last 4 drafts.
Thor,

Brian Burke has said that the 1998 was not a 'Mike Keenan-draft' many a-time.

Also, it should be noted that the prospects in the Oilers organization have a bit of an easier time cracking the lineup in Edmonton than the Canuck prospects do in a deeper Vancouver squad.

Mizral is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 08:12 AM
  #159
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
I agree that today, the Vancouver Canucks are poised to do better than the Oilers but I also say that Vancouver doesn't have a cup team and because of that Edmonton is closer to truly contending. That is simply because Vancouver will come up short in the next couple years and be faced with a complete rebuild where as Edmonton is almost through the rebuild process and is set to show significant progress which in a couple years will see Edmonton regain their rightful position ahead of the Canucks.
That's pretty dramatic, don't you think? Why would the Canucks need to completely rebuild after the next couple of years?

Mizral is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 08:31 AM
  #160
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
That's pretty dramatic, don't you think? Why would the Canucks need to completely rebuild after the next couple of years?
Simple, three years ago when the Canucks started showing promise, they did so as a one line team.

Two years ago when the Canucks continued showing promise, they did so as a one line team.

Last year when Vancouver still continued to show promise they did so as a one line team.

At some point Burke will realize he can't win the cup with 1 line. (Actually 2/3's of a top line because I think with lesser line mates Morrison is a second line center at best)

Now in the next couple years the Canucks will most likely have to a) choose between keeping Bertuzzi and Naslund at the expense of getting quality help on the other three lines or b)trading one or both of the players for a deeper overall team.

Whether Burke prolongs (b) for a few years or looks at doing it within the next couple is irrelevant because at the end of the day he won't win the cup with scenario A and scenario B equates to a complete rebuild. There simply isn't any forward depth after your first line.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 08:53 AM
  #161
Yanner39
Registered User
 
Yanner39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ottawa ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
Simple, three years ago when the Canucks started showing promise, they did so as a one line team.

Two years ago when the Canucks continued showing promise, they did so as a one line team.

Last year when Vancouver still continued to show promise they did so as a one line team.

At some point Burke will realize he can't win the cup with 1 line. (Actually 2/3's of a top line because I think with lesser line mates Morrison is a second line center at best)

Now in the next couple years the Canucks will most likely have to a) choose between keeping Bertuzzi and Naslund at the expense of getting quality help on the other three lines or b)trading one or both of the players for a deeper overall team.

Whether Burke prolongs (b) for a few years or looks at doing it within the next couple is irrelevant because at the end of the day he won't win the cup with scenario A and scenario B equates to a complete rebuild. There simply isn't any forward depth after your first line.
That decision may be easier for Burke is Naslund decides to take off for Sweden to finish is career there.

Yanner39 is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 09:03 AM
  #162
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 7,893
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Mizral]Thor,

Brian Burke has said that the 1998 was not a 'Mike Keenan-draft' many a-time.


So Burke is saying he felt that his 5 years experience in the nhl hq could replace the knowledge and experience of his scouting department? This leaves two possible conclusions

1 the scouting department was completely incompetent
2 burke is a very bad gm because the first rule of management is to let the workers work. He considered his 5 day opinion superior to the professionals who spent years watching these guys.


Also, it should be noted that the prospects in the Oilers organization have a bit of an easier time cracking the lineup in Edmonton than the Canuck prospects do in a deeper Vancouver squad

deeper vancouver squad - you got me there. Vancouver is generally regarded as having the deepest squad of any playoff caliber team.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 09:06 AM
  #163
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Ah...I wasn't aware they were club options.
Umm yeah, you have demonstrated your lack of knowledge quite a few times recently. but don't let minor things like facts and that cloud your opinion.

Quote:
I wasn't comparing it to the Weight contract! Dumping Weight was a good idea - I was responding to the original poster who said Burke got lucky with the Naslund contract.
If you don't think getting a very good player to sign long term for less than he would have made signing yearly deals lucky, then you aren't very bright. Anytime you get a player who wants to be with your team for the long haul, and is willing to take less for it, and also happens to be a very good player, you are lucky.


Quote:
Regardless of the reason - and you're right, stable ownership has a lot to do with it - if you just look at last season and look at what each team did with their budget, Lowe is clearly the loser.
And how is that? Did Vancouver win the cup or something? Last time I checked, Vancouver made it to the 2nd round for the first time in 8 years. I wouldn't be bragging about that. Let's also not forget that Vancouver might (I said might, so chill out) not have made it there anyways if most of the St. Louis team hadn't gotten sick after they got up in the series.

Quote:
Hey, if you traded Niinimaa and Carter for decent return, you probably wouldn't see me complaining. You also pessimistically assume that there's no way Naslund is coming back after a lockout because he "wants to play in Sweden" (gee, never heard a Swede say that before). Naslund is under contract for two more years - regardless of any lockout, he will be back for a season after it, and we can take it from there.
Hey maybe you should see how these guys perform before you start saying the Oilers didn't get a decent return. I mean weren't Canuckle fans up in arms when their leader Trevor Linden was traded for a massively uninterested and underacheiving Todd Bertuzzi and a 6th defenceman in Bryan McCabe? Or how about the Bure-Jovo deal. At the time, neither of those deals seemed to be very good for the Canucks did they? How about you give the trades a little time to sort themselves out before harping on the fact that the Oilers didn't get decent return.

Let me put it this way... a healthy Radek Dvorak brings a heck of a lot more to the table than a healthy Anson Carter. There is no dispute there.... there can't be. And if Isbister can break out in a similar fashion to Bertuzzi... who knows. And before you harp on me that Izzy is not Bert, I seriously think that maybe you should check their previous stats, and realize that the same things said about Bertuzzi 3-4 years ago are being said about Isbister. Of course there is no guarantees, but nothing in the the NHL is a guarantee.

Quote:
Intangibles don't cost $2.3 million. Lowe can do better.
He is a very good stay at home defenseman, who has been at the top of the league in both hits and blocked shots before. Not only that but it's not like Lowe gave him a cheque, it was awarded by an arbitrator. The oilers can't get much of a return on Smith because they would need that big bruising defenceman back in return.

Quote:
Comparing the last three drafts (because that's all Lowe has been in charge of), the Oilers have, in terms "could play in the NHL this season"

Jussi Markkanen, Ales Hemsky, Jarret Stoll, and Ales Pisa.

Vancouver? Ryan Kesler, Jason King, Kirill Koltsov, and RJ Umberger.

Hemsky is the best prospect there, which makes sense because he's the highest pick there...If I had to rank them, It'd go something like this

Hemsky
Koltsov
Umberger
Kesler
Stoll
Markkanen
Pisa

...this is with one less first round pick than Edmonton had. Criticizing Burke's drafting record over Lowe's is pretty weak.
Kesler is still 2 years away (at least) before he even plays in the AHL, so him being in this list is meaningless... as for putting him ahead of Stoll, I dunno... I mean your own HF page only has him as a 5.5, and it isn't like the Oilers page has a history of over-ranking players. As for the rest, Pisa, Markannen, Stoll and Hemsky have all seen NHL duty already.

Quote:
Find one point where I said they were the second coming? I happen to be able to notice that in the off-season, the team doesn't regress. Yeah, I'm such a homer. News flash: When the CBA comes around, Edmonton isn't magically going to become a good team - they will have a whole building process to go through. The Canucks have been able to afford that under the current CBA, which gives them a clear financial advantage, but to say that Edmonton is poised for post-CBA success, and Vancouver isn't, is idiotic.
No the Oilers won't be a good team the second a new CBA is signed... but no one said that. The term "post-CBA" does not mean 5 seconds after the deal is met. By the time the Oilers play their first game after the 2004 season, they will have a young, solid core of players, most of whom will be under 27 years old. The success will come from being able to develop and keep those players for several years, a luxury the Oilers have not had. That has been Lowe's goal since he took over in 1999. Keep a competetive team in the short term, but continually making moves in getting a little younger each time. In that respect, there is very little he could have done to do a better job. Younger, bigger, faster, cheaper, better. When you go from 93 to 92 to 92 points over 3 years, despite continually getting younger, you are a better team.

The whole point isn't who built a better team for 2003, because the Canucks have... but the race wasn't to 2003, at least not for the Oilers.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 09:13 AM
  #164
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
2. How can you compare the 2 teams?

I mean the core players (top 6 forwards, 4 Defencemen and Goaltender) are this:

Edmonton: Comrie (23), Smyth (27), York (25), Hemsky (20), Dvorak (26), Isbister (26), Brewer (24), Smith (29), Staios (30), Semenov (22) and Salo (32)

Avg Age:25

Vancouver: Morrison (28), Sedin (23), Sedin (23), Bertuzzi (28), Naslund (30), Linden (33), Jovo (27), Ohlund (27), Salo (29), Sopel (26) and Cloutier (27)

Avg Age: 27

The oilers are about 2 years in behind in terms of development of their core players, yet finsihed only 14 points back. 14 points is a lot, but I would also like to point out that the Oilers blew a tonne of games this year because of their inability to keep a lead, and a lot of that can be attributed to inexperience.

K-Lo didn't build a team to win the cup in 2003. If that were the case, then yeah, he wouldn't have been doing a very good job. But he isn't building for now, nor would it make sense for him to have. This is his 4th season on the job, and before that he inherited a team that had a great 1st line, a solid defence, a great goalie, 2 3rd lines and a 4th line. This team also had virtually nothing in the cupboard in terms of prospects, and the average age for these guys was around 27-28, and who if you look at their salaries now, demand a payroll of approx $60 mil a season.
Excellent post. I would pare down the core even more though. I keep harping on the fact that Lowe's experience with winning teams is what sets him apart in many ways. How good a job he is doing may be up for debate but I don't think there is any question that the winning teams he has seen had a core of 5 or 6 with a very strong group of role players. A lot of people who don't like the Oilers still like to think that Gretzky won those cups by himself but that is clearly not the case. He was just a large part of it. The core in Edmonton during the dynasty years was Gretzky, Kurri, Messier, Anderson, Coffey and Fuhr. There were lots of others who were made better by playing with these guys but that was it. Four forwards (didn't Sather invent the two player forward line?) a rushing D man and a big game goalie. That core along with character, drive, and reasonable skills produced one of the all-time great teams.

On Vancouver you have Naslund (30) (I am trusting your ages for the Nucks) Bertuzzi (28) Jovo (27) and Ohlund (27) Cloutier shows signs but has not been a 'big game' goalie to date.

In Edmonton the core is being built for 2 to 3 years from now. Will they make it? Who knows. But it is Comrie (23) (yes, it doesn't look good) Hemsky (20) Brewer (24) and Semenov (22). IMO those are the 4 players that (all things being equal) Lowe will fight to keep. Average age 22. For Vancouver it is 28. That is why I say that the time for the Canucks is now or soon. (And yes, players are sticking around in their prime longer than they used to.) But having a core with an average age of 22 is not something to be sneezed at. And Dawgbone, I agree with your assessment of everyone of the Oiler players you listed except Cleary. I actually think his problem is/was that he was wound too tight. Just my opinion.

theoil is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 09:42 AM
  #165
mowthecat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: high on the mountain of love
Posts: 189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Ah...I wasn't aware they were club options.
If you arent aware then dont beak off about it. Point is Lowe has $3.9 million to play with next year and he definitely isnt done wheeling and dealing for this year. Assuming there is a lockout in 2004 that meabns Salos buh bye and JD DesLauriers steps in in 2005. Good planning on Lowes part wouldnt you say?Yes he signed Salo for too much for this year but at the time Salo was playing well and that was near the going rate.


Quote:
I wasn't comparing it to the Weight contract! Dumping Weight was a good idea - I was responding to the original poster who said Burke got lucky with the Naslund contract.
You did get lucky. Same for Lowe if Weight has just agreed to a $500 k raise over and above the $4.3 he was making and Guerin hadnt gone on to earn a ridiculous $9 mill per.

Quote:
Regardless of the reason - and you're right, stable ownership has a lot to do with it - if you just look at last season and look at what each team did with their budget, Lowe is clearly the loser.
You dont get it do you? So the Nucks will win the cup THIS year? Lets hope so cause they'll be in a lot tougher come 2005.Lowe said this team would get younger and still remain competitive.So far so good seeing as how 2 years ago the Nucks finished 4 points ahead and were bounced in the first round and last year made it to the second.Boy thats way more successful. Ottawa made it to the very end of the third and had a real good chance to be there.Thats successful.What the Nucks accomplished was minor over what the Oilers accomplished.

Quote:
Hey, if you traded Niinimaa and Carter for decent return, you probably wouldn't see me complaining. You also pessimistically assume that there's no way Naslund is coming back after a lockout because he "wants to play in Sweden" (gee, never heard a Swede say that before). Naslund is under contract for two more years - regardless of any lockout, he will be back for a season after it, and we can take it from there.
Please let me know who the Nucks have outside of the first line that comes close to Dvorak.Also please dont tell me Burke wouldnt have loved to get his hands on Isbister if he'd had the chance.Its in his history. As far as Naslund goes you ASSUME he'll be back 2 years from now but who will his linemates be?Are you guaranteeing Bertuzzi will be?

Quote:
Intangibles don't cost $2.3 million. Lowe can do better.
Yeah we would have been better off losing him for nothing.Ask the Leafs how much they would pay to get him back.

Quote:
Comparing the last three drafts (because that's all Lowe has been in charge of), the Oilers have, in terms "could play in the NHL this season"

Jussi Markkanen, Ales Hemsky, Jarret Stoll, and Ales Pisa.

Vancouver? Ryan Kesler, Jason King, Kirill Koltsov, and RJ Umberger.
Kesler has a chance to play in the bigs this year?I dont think so. Better bone up on the facts again too cause if I'm not mistaken Pisa signed to play in Europe about a month ago.

Quote:
Hemsky is the best prospect there, which makes sense because he's the highest pick there...
Yep he's the best prospect there for sure and as a matter of fact he's better than anyone Burke has ever drafted. In particular the Sedin sisters who were taken in the 2 and 3 spots versus Hemsky at 13.

mowthecat is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 09:45 AM
  #166
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
If you don't think getting a very good player to sign long term for less than he would have made signing yearly deals lucky, then you aren't very bright. Anytime you get a player who wants to be with your team for the long haul, and is willing to take less for it, and also happens to be a very good player, you are lucky.
Yeah, and I suppose Lamoriello is "lucky" Brodeur is willing to take $6.8 million per, and "lucky" that Stevens takes similar cash. Niedermayer's $4.1 million is pretty low too, wow, I bet Lou has a pact with Satan. I'm pretty sure John Muckler is "lucky" that an All-Star like Daniel Alfredsson is willing to take $5.5 million per. Feaster is pretty lucky that Nikolai Khabibulin makes $3.5 million per - he could easily ask for twice that. No, this has nothing to do with luck - it has to do with spending wisely. I bet Burke is pretty lucky Linden took a 60% pay cut on a three-year deal, too. Too bad Lowe isn't lucky, then maybe he could spend wisely.

Quote:
And how is that? Did Vancouver win the cup or something? Last time I checked, Vancouver made it to the 2nd round for the first time in 8 years. I wouldn't be bragging about that. Let's also not forget that Vancouver might (I said might, so chill out) not have made it there anyways if most of the St. Louis team hadn't gotten sick after they got up in the series.
Whose bragging? The important thing to note is that Vancouver didn't lose a top-2 defender, a top-line winger and a premier checking center and get nothing but gambles (and Raffi Torres) in return.

Quote:
Hey maybe you should see how these guys perform before you start saying the Oilers didn't get a decent return. I mean weren't Canuckle fans up in arms when their leader Trevor Linden was traded for a massively uninterested and underacheiving Todd Bertuzzi and a 6th defenceman in Bryan McCabe?
6th defenceman? He was the #1 defenceman on Long Island, and the captain of the Isles when the deal was made. As I recall, the mentality in Canuckland was one of "hey, it's a deal that had to be made, we got pretty good return"

Quote:
Or how about the Bure-Jovo deal. At the time, neither of those deals seemed to be very good for the Canucks did they? How about you give the trades a little time to sort themselves out before harping on the fact that the Oilers didn't get decent return.
Yeah, Bure was a player who refused to dress for Vancouver...if we'd gotten Shane Hnidy back in that deal it would've helped us - it's not like we sacrificed anything tangible off the roster.

Quote:
Let me put it this way... a healthy Radek Dvorak brings a heck of a lot more to the table than a healthy Anson Carter. There is no dispute there.... there can't be.
A healthy Radek Dvorak brought the Rangers 17 goals the season before his knee injury. True, if Dvorak returns to his Czechmates form, he is certainly a better player than Anson Carter, but I wouldn't get my hopes up. Dvorak has always been inconsistent, even before his injuries (knee, concussions, etc).

Quote:
And if Isbister can break out in a similar fashion to Bertuzzi... who knows. And before you harp on me that Izzy is not Bert, I seriously think that maybe you should check their previous stats, and realize that the same things said about Bertuzzi 3-4 years ago are being said about Isbister. Of course there is no guarantees, but nothing in the the NHL is a guarantee.
Yeah, you're right - but who did Lowe give up for Isbister? Janne Niinimaa. Who did Keenan give up for Bertuzzi? A washed-up Trevor Linden...and he also got Ruutu and McCabe in that deal.

I've said this numerous times in the thread, I'll say it once more - Isbister and Dvorak aren't sure things, and while these aren't bad gambles for a small-market team to make, he's given up far too much for them. Every small-market GM loses gambles, and ends up losing more than he wins, typically. (In Vancouver: Sharifjanov, Pederson, Weekes, Vasiljevs, and Steve Kariya, are the big ones)

The point is that given the talent Lowe has let leave Edmonton, he's gotten nothing but question marks in return (and Raffi Torres) - he should have, and could have got more tangibles.

Quote:
He is a very good stay at home defenseman, who has been at the top of the league in both hits and blocked shots before. Not only that but it's not like Lowe gave him a cheque, it was awarded by an arbitrator. The oilers can't get much of a return on Smith because they would need that big bruising defenceman back in return.
He was a very good stay-at-home defender. He is barely average, now...and is paid in the same league as Keith Carney and Zdeno Chara - both of whom are leagues better than he is and recently signed contracts.

Quote:
Kesler is still 2 years away (at least) before he even plays in the AHL, so him being in this list is meaningless... as for putting him ahead of Stoll, I dunno... I mean your own HF page only has him as a 5.5, and it isn't like the Oilers page has a history of over-ranking players. As for the rest, Pisa, Markannen, Stoll and Hemsky have all seen NHL duty already.
What the hell are you talking about? Kesler is playing in the AHL this season! He's already on Manitoba's roster. Our HF Page is rather poorly written, using that as evidence is a bad idea, and comments like these just indicates how little you know about the Canucks. He's going to be one of the first callups this season.

Quote:
No the Oilers won't be a good team the second a new CBA is signed... but no one said that. The term "post-CBA" does not mean 5 seconds after the deal is met. By the time the Oilers play their first game after the 2004 season, they will have a young, solid core of players, most of whom will be under 27 years old. The success will come from being able to develop and keep those players for several years, a luxury the Oilers have not had. That has been Lowe's goal since he took over in 1999. Keep a competetive team in the short term, but continually making moves in getting a little younger each time. In that respect, there is very little he could have done to do a better job. Younger, bigger, faster, cheaper, better. When you go from 93 to 92 to 92 points over 3 years, despite continually getting younger, you are a better team.
Fair enough - though I was responding to the allegation that the Canucks weren't poised for post-CBA success.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 10:01 AM
  #167
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
Really? Why would you compare Burke's "success" in drafting to only the top 10? You gauge him based on the entire draft class, in which case I ask are the Sedin sisters better than Tim Connolly, David Tanabe, Barrett Jackman, Martin Havlat, Nick Boynton, Mike Comrie, Frantisek Kaberle?
This is idiocy. I suppose GM at the 1989 draft aside from Detroit is an idiot because Fedorov went in the 4th round - you have to gauge talent taken around the same time. Every GM that year would've taken one of the Sedins, Stefan, and Brendl with a top-4 pick. This would be like me blaming Lowe for taking Rita and passing up Havlat the same year - no-one can predict dark horses like that. "The Sedin girls" as you so cleverly call them still have plenty of upside left. Look at where Naslund was when he was 23.


Quote:
Sure it's a positive. As long as you keep overlooking the fact that Vancouvers weakest link is your starting goaltending and nothing has been done to improve it.
Why? As a goaltender, Dan Cloutier has yet to enter his prime, and no-one can deny that while inconsistent, he has no doubt shown flashes of brilliance. Burke also sent a rather telling message to him by signing him to a 1-year deal...

Quote:
So to summarize, you are saying that Burke is a better GM because he has maintained a decent team that is built to succeed now - without actually addressing the key weakspot of the team - without actually improving the team enough to ensure a reasonable chance of success to beat the big 3 of the Western Conference - without actually providing enough depth to go beyond the second round of the playoffs and is faced with a win now or rebuild scenario despite not having a deep prospect system.
Contend now? Our #1 d-man is 26. Our #1 center is 27. Bertuzzi is 28, Naslund is 30. The Sedins are 23, Cooke is 24, Ohlund is 27, Cloutier is 27...as a core, this team can stick together for 4-5 more years.

Quote:
Where as Lowe is a poor GM because he has managed to recognize that the team he inherited was competetive enough to reach the playoffs but was not deep enough to contend so instead of letting his group of players run their course (such as Vancouver) he has completely rebuilt the team, restocked the farm, remained playoff competitive and and is set to see his team hit their stride?
I seriously question this. I think Lowe certainly could have built a Stanley Cup champion around Carter, Smyth, Niinimaa, Marchant, etc...Smyth-Comrie-Carter was one of the top first lines in the league, Niinimaa would be a solid #2 guy on a contender, and would push Brewer to grow into a #1 role, etc.

Quote:
I agree that today, the Vancouver Canucks are poised to do better than the Oilers but I also say that Vancouver doesn't have a cup team and because of that Edmonton is closer to truly contending. That is simply because Vancouver will come up short in the next couple years and be faced with a complete rebuild where as Edmonton is almost through the rebuild process and is set to show significant progress which in a couple years will see Edmonton regain their rightful position ahead of the Canucks.
Nice crystal ball you have there. Personally, forgive me if I think a guy who thinks Tim Connolly is a better prospect than Henrik Sedin knows precisely jack-all about who will contend for a Cup and who won't a few years down the line.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 10:34 AM
  #168
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
I bet Burke is pretty lucky Linden took a 60% pay cut on a three-year deal, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Who did Keenan give up for Bertuzzi? A washed-up Trevor Linden...
So if Linden was washed up 4 years ago when he was traded, then why is considered a core player on the Canucks today and does it make Burke a good negotiator because a washed up player decided to take less simply to stay in the game?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
A healthy Radek Dvorak brought the Rangers 17 goals the season before his knee injury.
No, he scored 17 goals the year he had his knee injury. He was on pace to score over 20 that year when the injury occured.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
The point is that given the talent Lowe has let leave Edmonton, he's gotten nothing but question marks in return (and Raffi Torres) - he should have, and could have got more tangibles.
This is what appears you refuse to understand. If Lowe was to trade players for guys of equal statistics, he would be trading for players of the same age. His approach is to get younger in the process of getting better which by default means he must trade for guys that haven't yet reached their full potential. If you can't assess the talent that he is bringing back in the terms of long term results then clearly every trade will be a loser in your eyes. So far Lowe has done a good job and I am fairly confident that in 3 years you will look at our roster and envy us for many of the guys that Lowe - got screwed on and took gambles with.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 10:40 AM
  #169
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hemskyfan
Wow Oiler and Canuck fans like to bicker alot! *grabs bag if popcorn* I'm learning alot from this thread too.
Only in the last two years. They never used to have anything to say. Oh, that wasn't very nice of me, was it?

theoil is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 10:41 AM
  #170
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Yeah, and I suppose Lamoriello is "lucky" Brodeur is willing to take $6.8 million per, and "lucky" that Stevens takes similar cash. Niedermayer's $4.1 million is pretty low too, wow, I bet Lou has a pact with Satan. I'm pretty sure John Muckler is "lucky" that an All-Star like Daniel Alfredsson is willing to take $5.5 million per. Feaster is pretty lucky that Nikolai Khabibulin makes $3.5 million per - he could easily ask for twice that. No, this has nothing to do with luck - it has to do with spending wisely. I bet Burke is pretty lucky Linden took a 60% pay cut on a three-year deal, too. Too bad Lowe isn't lucky, then maybe he could spend wisely.
Brodeur is the highest paid goaltender who hasn't been a UFA, and generally goaltenders get paid less than positional players. Scott Stevens is also 40 years old, and is making about as much money in New Jersey as he could anywhere else. Niedermayer gets paid $4million dollars, which is a lot for a defenceman who doesn't put up 50+ points. Daniel Alfredsson never signed a long term deal, and him making $5.5 million is more than what Naslund makes, so I am not sure what your point is there. Khabibulin actually makes $4.4 million, and that puts him in the upper category of price in terms of goalies who haven't reached UFA status yet. Linden didn't have much choice but to take a 60% paycut... no team would be dumb enough to pay him $4 million again.

Quote:
Whose bragging? The important thing to note is that Vancouver didn't lose a top-2 defender, a top-line winger and a premier checking center and get nothing but gambles (and Raffi Torres) in return.
You were the one who brought up the budget comparison and said low was Clearly the loser.

Quote:
6th defenceman? He was the #1 defenceman on Long Island, and the captain of the Isles when the deal was made. As I recall, the mentality in Canuckland was one of "hey, it's a deal that had to be made, we got pretty good return"
Brian McCabe has had one year where you could possibly classify him as a number one defenceman, and it sure as hell wasn't with the Islanders... unless his 12 points in 52 games counted as being a number 1.

Quote:
Yeah, Bure was a player who refused to dress for Vancouver...if we'd gotten Shane Hnidy back in that deal it would've helped us - it's not like we sacrificed anything tangible off the roster.
Oh okay... so how do you think Niinimaa and Carter were much different? Carter was going to continually sign one year deals until he became a UFA, and Niiimaa had one more year left on a deal before he priced himself out of Edmonton. Yes the Oilers could have waited until they absolutely had to trade them, but that would not be very good asset management on Lowe's part would it? If you wait until you have to trade a player, you aren't going to get anything near what you want for him.


Quote:
A healthy Radek Dvorak brought the Rangers 17 goals the season before his knee injury. True, if Dvorak returns to his Czechmates form, he is certainly a better player than Anson Carter, but I wouldn't get my hopes up. Dvorak has always been inconsistent, even before his injuries (knee, concussions, etc).
A healthy Dvorak can also be relied upon to kill Penalties, forcheck, and show up every night. It isn't like Dvorak has gotten first line minutes anywhere, and it isn't like Carter would be a 1st line player on a lot of other teams. Also, Carter was no model of consistancy before he was traded for either.

Quote:
Yeah, you're right - but who did Lowe give up for Isbister? Janne Niinimaa. Who did Keenan give up for Bertuzzi? A washed-up Trevor Linden...and he also got Ruutu and McCabe in that deal.
The same washed up Trevor Linden who was one season removed from 33 goals and 80 points... yeah I call that washed up. I mean, Niinimaa had chronic back problems and he was on pace for his worst season since becoming an Oiler, and Lowe managed a player who was the number 5 overall pick, and a player that the Oilers have desparately needed for a long time... a power forward with somewhat decent hands.

Quote:
I've said this numerous times in the thread, I'll say it once more - Isbister and Dvorak aren't sure things, and while these aren't bad gambles for a small-market team to make, he's given up far too much for them. Every small-market GM loses gambles, and ends up losing more than he wins, typically. (In Vancouver: Sharifjanov, Pederson, Weekes, Vasiljevs, and Steve Kariya, are the big ones)
Nothing is a sure thing... is it a sure thing that Naslund won't blow out his knee and end his season 3 games into it? No. Dvorak adds a two way game that is probably better than Marchant's, and Isbister (like I mentioned) is that power forward the Oilers haven't had in years.

Quote:
The point is that given the talent Lowe has let leave Edmonton, he's gotten nothing but question marks in return (and Raffi Torres) - he should have, and could have got more tangibles.
Have you not learned anything from the past 4 years? In every deal Lowe makes, it seems he didn't get enough for what he gave up, but in a short matter of time, it is quite apparant he has.

Hamrlik - Brewer, Winchester
Guerin - Carter, Hemsky, Lynch
Weight - Reasoner, Stoll, JDD

I think he has proven that he knows what he is doing.

Quote:
He was a very good stay-at-home defender. He is barely average, now...and is paid in the same league as Keith Carney and Zdeno Chara - both of whom are leagues better than he is and recently signed contracts.
Yes... barely average. Please explain to me where you came to this wonderfully thought out conclusion, and I will explain to you how I can say Jovo is barely average offensively.

Quote:
What the hell are you talking about? Kesler is playing in the AHL this season! He's already on Manitoba's roster. Our HF Page is rather poorly written, using that as evidence is a bad idea, and comments like these just indicates how little you know about the Canucks. He's going to be one of the first callups this season.
You never seem to let things like facts get in the way of your arguments, and forgive me if I was dumb enough to beleive that the Canucks HF site would bother to keep things up to date. And by using that, I guess it shows how little depth the Canucks organization has when a player who doesn't even average a point a game in College is their first callup.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 10:47 AM
  #171
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
I seriously question this. I think Lowe certainly could have built a Stanley Cup champion around Carter, Smyth, Niinimaa, Marchant, etc...Smyth-Comrie-Carter was one of the top first lines in the league, Niinimaa would be a solid #2 guy on a contender, and would push Brewer to grow into a #1 role, etc.
Of course, it was that easy. But let's just ignore the fact that Weight makes $9 mil, Smyth 3.5, Carter 2.8, Niinimaa 2.9, Marchant would be making 1.9 and Brewer 2.4 mil....

Now, add that together and you have a nice total of 22.5 million dollars. Now, you still need 12 more skaters and 2 more goalies, and you only have $10 mil to pay them.

But once again, don't let intelligence and facts cloud up your arguments here, we wouldn't want a purposeful conversation or anything.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 10:51 AM
  #172
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
You never seem to let things like facts get in the way of your arguments, and forgive me if I was dumb enough to beleive that the Canucks HF site would bother to keep things up to date. And by using that, I guess it shows how little depth the Canucks organization has when a player who doesn't even average a point a game in College is their first callup.
Over on the Canucks board there is a thread posted called "Don't feed the Trolls" posted by our good buddy Mizral. Just thought I would mention it.

theoil is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 11:13 AM
  #173
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
This is idiocy. I suppose GM at the 1989 draft aside from Detroit is an idiot because Fedorov went in the 4th round - you have to gauge talent taken around the same time. Every GM that year would've taken one of the Sedins, Stefan, and Brendl with a top-4 pick. This would be like me blaming Lowe for taking Rita and passing up Havlat the same year - no-one can predict dark horses like that. "The Sedin girls" as you so cleverly call them still have plenty of upside left. Look at where Naslund was when he was 23.
So this makes Burke a good GM?

Burke traded Brian McCabe and Vancouvers 2000 first round pick and pair of third round picks for the 2nd pick. Seems like a pretty high price for one of the Sedin's. Not too mention that at one point he had the first overall pick that would have got him Stephan but traded it for the later pick.

You say Burke just made a pick that every other GM would have made and GM's can't predict a darkhorse. Is the sign of a good GM some one who goes to the draft with a Central scouting sheet in one hand and a TSN rating sheet in the other and simply conforms to what he reads? or is the sign of a good GM some one who trusts his own scouts and is willing to step out from what is expected and gamble on his own? Sort of like what Lowe did with Niinimaki?

Lowe's gamble may never pan out but clearly conforming to the masses is no gaurantee either. At least Lowe is willing to live and die by his own decisions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Why? As a goaltender, Dan Cloutier has yet to enter his prime, and no-one can deny that while inconsistent, he has no doubt shown flashes of brilliance. Burke also sent a rather telling message to him by signing him to a 1-year deal....
Can Vancouver afford to wait for Dan Cloutier to catch up to the rest of the team in terms of developing though? By the time Cloutier is ready, Naslund will be back in Sweden and Bertuzzi will be eating up 20% of Vancouvers payroll.
The window will be closed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Contend now? Our #1 d-man is 26. Our #1 center is 27. Bertuzzi is 28, Naslund is 30. The Sedins are 23, Cooke is 24, Ohlund is 27, Cloutier is 27...as a core, this team can stick together for 4-5 more years.
Ahh but your whole team goes as Naslund and Bertuzzi go (Naslund is the true catalyst). Which takes me back to an earlier post, does Burke give in and pay these guys and forget about supplementing the line up or does he trade these guys and rebuild with more depth? Either way Vancouver's chance is now, not 4 years from now.

By the way, your #1 center is a 50 pt player without his linemates and hardly the guy to build a contender around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Nice crystal ball you have there. Personally, forgive me if I think a guy who thinks Tim Connolly is a better prospect than Henrik Sedin knows precisely jack-all about who will contend for a Cup and who won't a few years down the line.
So just so I am clear, Tim Connolly who scored 145 pts since being drafted while playing on a bad Islander team and a bad Buffalo team is not better than Henrik Sedin who has scored 104 pts on what you guys describe as a true stanley cup contender? Shouldn't the Sedin's be feeding off of the superior depth and talent that Vancouver has?

copperandblue is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 11:27 AM
  #174
oilers_guy_eddie
Registered User
 
oilers_guy_eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Intolerable climate
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 10,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
I seriously question this. I think Lowe certainly could have built a Stanley Cup champion around Carter, Smyth, Niinimaa, Marchant, etc...Smyth-Comrie-Carter was one of the top first lines in the league, Niinimaa would be a solid #2 guy on a contender, and would push Brewer to grow into a #1 role, etc.
Doubtful.

Think back a couple of years to when the Oilers had Weight, Guerin, Smyth, Niinimaa, and Hamrlik. We weren't close to being a contender then, and swapping in Brewer, Comrie, and Carter in place of Hamrlik, Weight, and Guerin doesn't strengthen the team.

That core couldn't get it done, and had to be parted out for obvious financial reasons. So Lowe had the choice of either trying to keep recycling new players in, or doing a substantial overhaul.

I think Lowetide has written some essays about this topic over the past couple of years... historically, the theme is that winning teams are built by assembling a group of key talents within a few years, then supplementing as needed. I think that if you look at the Senators, you'll probably find that most of the key players were brought in within a few years of each other. Alfredsson a couple of years earlier, Chara and Havlat a couple of years later, but probably most came to the Senators between 1997 and 2000. I haven't got a score-card to keep track of who got there when, but I think that's about right. You could probably make a similar observation about the Avalanche and Red Wings teams that first won championships in the mid '90s.

The other end of the spectrum would be teams like the Rangers, Boston, Chicago, Montreal... not that they're necessarily bad, but the turnover is more or less constant. The GMs are reactive- they're not carrying out a plan, they're reacting to weaknesses. Watching the Leafs trying to shore up their defense is an example... how many years have they been working on that? They're doing their best to plug leaks and keep the ship afloat, with varying success... but never really make any progress.

I believe that Lowe's decision was to forego a couple of years of running around trying to fix weak spots, and try to assemble a group that'll stay together for a while.

oilers_guy_eddie is offline  
Old
10-07-2003, 11:32 AM
  #175
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 7,893
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Burke's Evil Spirit
Nice crystal ball you have there. Personally, forgive me if I think a guy who thinks Tim Connolly is a better prospect than Henrik Sedin knows precisely jack-all about who will contend for a Cup and who won't a few years down the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
reply by copperandblue


So just so I am clear, Tim Connolly who scored 145 pts since being drafted while playing on a bad Islander team and a bad Buffalo team is not better than Henrik Sedin who has scored 104 pts on what you guys describe as a true stanley cup contender? Shouldn't the Sedin's be feeding off of the superior depth and talent that Vancouver has?


congratulations copperandblue, you have just posted one of the best come-backs I have seen EVER


Mr Sakich is offline  
Closed Thread

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 07:30 PM.

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.