HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Notices

Larry Pleau re-signed through 2006

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-28-2003, 05:29 PM
  #1
execwrite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peekskill, NY
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Larry Pleau re-signed through 2006

Just announced on the radio broadcast. He's here for another three years.

Overall, he's done a good job and the continuity will help. But I guess they won't address Quenneville's contract until the season is over.

Let the screaming begin...

execwrite is offline  
Old
10-28-2003, 06:01 PM
  #2
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
I really only have a couple things to say. First of all, this move makes it very clear that ownership feels that Pleau has done his job and that Chris Osgood is a Cup quality goaltender.... which in turn puts tremendous pressure on Joel Quenneville. Secondly, It's obvious that ownership feels that Larry Pleau is a valuable member of their organzation because they got him signed before he would have become a 'UFA' this summer. One final thing... my personal opinion is that the ideal situation would have been a one year contract that ownership could easily buy out of if they change their mind in June.

degroat* is offline  
Old
10-28-2003, 07:43 PM
  #3
Laperriere22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CO
Country: Denmark
Posts: 3,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by degroat
my personal opinion is that the ideal situation would have been a one year contract that ownership could easily buy out of if they change their mind in June.
I agree most with that one. Considering that Pleau and Q are both on the hot seat to varying degrees this year, seems that locking up Pleau longterm just makes it that much more expensive to fire him if it comes to that. Not starting the "fire Pleau" stuff, but firing him is a realistic avenue that could be explored if this season ends the same as it has been the past couple of seasons. Now, Pleau will suck up more of the organization's resources if terminated. Personally, this move seems to be ignoring the reality of the situation. A one year deal would make much more sense as it allows some flexibility and in this particular situation, flexibility is very important IMO.

Laperriere22* is offline  
Old
10-28-2003, 07:52 PM
  #4
think-blue-
Registered User
 
think-blue-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,159
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to think-blue-
Interesting. BTW, sort of off topic, has Pleau replaced Ferguson yet (asst. gm, GM of the minor team?)

think-blue- is offline  
Old
10-28-2003, 09:46 PM
  #5
dirt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Trealor, Mo
Country: United States
Posts: 798
vCash: 500
No. For now I think he is the GM for both St. Louis and Worcester.

dirt is offline  
Old
10-29-2003, 12:38 AM
  #6
c-carp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
I think its a good move.

c-carp is offline  
Old
10-29-2003, 03:42 AM
  #7
TimothyR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 125
vCash: 500
I agree with Lappy and degroat. The organization has admitted that, with this level of salary and talent, this team has underachieved. Letís take your points a step further, degroat. Who is really running the team (as far as player choices)? Is Q telling Pleau what he needs/wants and Pleau is getting it? How much is Pleau guiding this organization? I wonder given that fact that the GM of an admitted underachieving team is rewarded with a long term contract. Again, that tells me that the President/Owners donít feel that Pleau is responsible for it. This really makes me go Hmmmmm!

TimothyR is offline  
Old
10-29-2003, 05:03 AM
  #8
execwrite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peekskill, NY
Posts: 3,478
vCash: 500
Why would Larry Pleau accept a one-year extension? And why would the Lauries want him to?

They don't need one more year to evaluate him. If he's their guy, they were right to give him some security. It's only a two-year extension they gave him.

It will be interesting to see if Quenneville gets a similar extension come January.

execwrite is offline  
Old
10-29-2003, 04:11 PM
  #9
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laperriere22
I agree most with that one. Considering that Pleau and Q are both on the hot seat to varying degrees this year, seems that locking up Pleau longterm just makes it that much more expensive to fire him if it comes to that. Not starting the "fire Pleau" stuff, but firing him is a realistic avenue that could be explored if this season ends the same as it has been the past couple of seasons. Now, Pleau will suck up more of the organization's resources if terminated. Personally, this move seems to be ignoring the reality of the situation. A one year deal would make much more sense as it allows some flexibility and in this particular situation, flexibility is very important IMO.
I see your point, Lappy, but why do we assume that if this year ends without a Cup, then Pleau has "failed again," and should be fired?

In other words, why is it "the reality of the situation," as you imply, that anything less than a Cup win is abject failure on Pleau's part, and on the part of the Blues as a team?

Now, I agree that the Cup is the goal, and the organization is saying so publicly now (where they weren't doing so in previous years). But in light of all the other outstanding contributions Pleau has made to this organization, quite frankly, I think it's kind of silly to put the condition on him that he either achieves the hardest goal in all pro sports (winning the Stanley Cup), or he's gone.

I find myself more in agreement with execwrite's take...

Quote:
Originally Posted by execwrite
Why would Larry Pleau accept a one-year extension? And why would the Lauries want him to?

They don't need one more year to evaluate him. If he's their guy, they were right to give him some security.
Continue to discuss.

PB

Prussian_Blue is offline  
Old
10-29-2003, 04:20 PM
  #10
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Never once did I say that LP would accept a one year extension. As I said before, a one year deal would have been ideal in case they wanted to "change their mind in June." This is what I said above. Why would I give you a different answer now?

degroat* is offline  
Old
10-29-2003, 05:44 PM
  #11
Laperriere22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CO
Country: Denmark
Posts: 3,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrussianBlue
I see your point, Lappy, but why do we assume that if this year ends without a Cup, then Pleau has "failed again," and should be fired?

In other words, why is it "the reality of the situation," as you imply, that anything less than a Cup win is abject failure on Pleau's part, and on the part of the Blues as a team?

Now, I agree that the Cup is the goal, and the organization is saying so publicly now (where they weren't doing so in previous years). But in light of all the other outstanding contributions Pleau has made to this organization, quite frankly, I think it's kind of silly to put the condition on him that he either achieves the hardest goal in all pro sports (winning the Stanley Cup), or he's gone.

PB
I think you'll find that I didn't say a winning the Cup is the deciding factor or even a factor at all. When I said "if this season ends the same as it has been the past couple of seasons", I didn't mean not winning the Cup. I meant that burning feeling of underachieving when it mattered the most. All I personally want to see is a series like Ottawa had vs. NJ last season. Though they lost it, they could hold their heads high for their performance, even in a loss. It's been awhile since I could say that about the Blues. I don't think anyone wants to see Pleau and Q next season if there's another Vancouver debacle or if the Blues totally underachieve like they did against the Wings in 2002. That's the point I was making; not a Cup or bust ultimatum. I'm just tired of walking away from each series the Blues lose thinking they haven't improved any since the year before (in the playoffs of course).

Laperriere22* is offline  
Old
10-30-2003, 10:06 AM
  #12
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laperriere22
I think you'll find that I didn't say a winning the Cup is the deciding factor or even a factor at all. When I said "if this season ends the same as it has been the past couple of seasons", I didn't mean not winning the Cup. I meant that burning feeling of underachieving when it mattered the most. All I personally want to see is a series like Ottawa had vs. NJ last season. Though they lost it, they could hold their heads high for their performance, even in a loss. It's been awhile since I could say that about the Blues. I don't think anyone wants to see Pleau and Q next season if there's another Vancouver debacle or if the Blues totally underachieve like they did against the Wings in 2002. That's the point I was making; not a Cup or bust ultimatum. I'm just tired of walking away from each series the Blues lose thinking they haven't improved any since the year before (in the playoffs of course).
Now those are sentiments I can get behind.

I just hear so much of the "Cup or bust" stuff from other quarters that it seems like that's how everyone feels. My apologies for minsinterpreting your sentiments.

Now, see, this is how discussions are supposed to occur. One party says something, another says something back, and the two settle differences like men, without the name-calling and other BS.

P_B

Prussian_Blue is offline  
Old
10-30-2003, 01:05 PM
  #13
Laperriere22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: CO
Country: Denmark
Posts: 3,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrussianBlue
I just hear so much of the "Cup or bust" stuff from other quarters that it seems like that's how everyone feels.
I must admit that I've been slowly trying to adjust to the rest of you fellows. I know most of you frequent or used to frequent those other Blues boards and it's taken me awhile to get used to certain things that you guys are already used to, like the Osgood attacks, the Pleau attacks, and the other stuff. I've never bothered visiting any of the other Blues boards because I've been comfortable with HF for quite some time. So, when you guys misinterpret something of mine, I've tried to accept the fact that it probably sounds like something some of the other, more irrational, Blues "fans" have posted somewhere else. I imagine it's been the same kind of thing for some other posters coming here and dealing with me as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PrussianBlue
Now, see, this is how discussions are supposed to occur. One party says something, another says something back, and the two settle differences like men, without the name-calling and other BS.
I agree. The most you'll get from me is a few wisecracks every now and then because humor is a good thing in my book. It's how it's supposed to work as far as I'm concerned. It should improve as everyone gets more and more used to everyone else I'd imagine (hope).

On a sidenote, the only problem I see at the moment is the general lack of traffic around here since the season started. Instead of complaining about it though, I'll start posting some postgame thoughts. I'm not a gameday thread kind of guy because I don't care about graphics and I don't need play-by-play posts either. But, I do like breaking down the game afterwards; so, I'll make an effort to do that from now on.

Laperriere22* is offline  
Old
10-31-2003, 05:01 AM
  #14
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,794
vCash: 500
I think Pleau has done a good job w/ everything. I know we have a huge payroll, but I think that can be tied to the current going rates of NHL players at the time of signings. He has not really done much in the UFA market but a lot in trades... He has also been successful in bringing in undrafted players, since our farm system was, well, crap

Lets also keep in mind that hindsight is 20/20 and Pleau had no idea of how players would perform/injury etc...

The team needed toughness after the 1st San jose series, and made moves to get Mel and Tkachuck (did we overpay, I don't think so, I believe the trade was fair - both teams walked away happy). We weren't dealing w/ Pitts. so you cant expect to **** the GM. It was an even deal - which is good.

We tried to address the goalie situation and bring in Hasek, but lost and prior to traded Turek for a backup in Braithwaite (don't need two starters). WE lost Hasek and the situation in goal was a ???. I wouldn't have traded Turek if we weren't going to get Hasek, but we didn't. (Should he have traded Turek before the Hasek blow up, maybe, maybe not, but if we didn't we be in Detroit current situation w/ 2 starters).

He address the goalie situation last season after a slow start by the 7 net minders and wound up w/ a injured Osgood...

All of the trades and UFAs have been brought in to improve the team. I agree that he changed the team makeup and direction 3 years ago, but the moves did improve the team. He has address the goalie situation, as best he could.

This is a team that has had major injuries to key players each of the 3 years and has lost a key member of the team via free agency w/o going after elite UFAs... They have been competitive and though last year was a blow out, they played well the 1st four games...

Frenzy1 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 09:59 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.