No offence, but, as somoene who has strong opinions on the moves this team should or shouldn't have made, don't you think that you should be more informed on some of the basic contractual situations of the team?
It's fine to take a firm stance on the Sens management performance, but, when you're not aware of some key facts, it leads one to believe that you weren't paying attention to the Sens contractual negotiations over the summer. When that's the case, it's hard for other to put too much weight into your opinions.
When I watch him, I just wonder what the hell..... what the hell was Muckler thinking. We needed more in that return.
Come playoff time, I hope the kid proves me wrong, but I see him getting walked over big time.
Plus , playoff Ottawa is not so easy....As well all know
I like Preissing's game. Sure there are moments when I wish he was more offensive and cleared the puck out quicker, but when I go watch the Sens play live compared to TV, I find I really like his game. The one thing about the Sens' defence over the years is that it started out really strong, then tailed off as the year went by, especially into the playoffs. I find this year, as a unit, it started off slowly, with all the changes and injuries, that it is doing the opposite. Starting off slow and starting to mesh now. We've always had a deep defence, but for the first time in a while, I really get the sense of a strong team defence unit. Its going to take time to hit its peak, but it will get there.
How many years was he signed for before his contract was over?
I'm not sure what you are asking here, because the key point was, that he was not signed. His contract expired in the summer. He was coming off a contract that paid him $2.6 in 05-06 on a one year deal. The hope was, that he would go out and have a big season for us, where, we'd be in a better position to give him bigger bucks the next year. The injury prevented that from happening, which threw a wrench into negotiations.
I'm not sure what you are asking here, because the key point was, that he was not signed. His contract expired in the summer. He was coming off a contract that paid him $2.6 in 05-06 on a one year deal. The hope was, that he would go out and have a big season for us, where, we'd be in a better position to give him bigger bucks the next year. The injury prevented that from happening, which threw a wrench into negotiations.
After his rookie contract expired in 2003, he signed a 1 year deal after a brief holdout for the 2003-04 season. I can't remember 100% if he signed before the lockout, but it would have been another 1 year deal, which I think he did sign. Then, the season after the lockout, as you mentioned was another 1 year deal. So, he only signed 1 year deals after his rookie contract.
[QUOTE=Cup 2007 Sens Rule!;7192496]Saying trading Gleason was questionable is silly. Smolinski was an important player for us for several seasons... including the year we got him when we came within a few minutes of a Stanley Cup finals berth. QUOTE]
Smolinski was periodically the goat on these boards the past few years. You consider him a good trade for what was at the time a top defensive prospect? Also, I would question Smolinski's impact on the team going so far that year. The only good playoff I have ever seen him have as a Sen was this year. Smoke is a player with a big frame but never uses it unless he is playing for team USA. Gleason may have been an impending loss but he was still a top rated d-man prospect at the time. Very similar to Havlat, he was a threat to leave and Mucks settle for a sub-par return. In both cases, if he had used some patience, the return would have been better.
I'm not sure what you are asking here, because the key point was, that he was not signed. His contract expired in the summer. He was coming off a contract that paid him $2.6 in 05-06 on a one year deal. The hope was, that he would go out and have a big season for us, where, we'd be in a better position to give him bigger bucks the next year. The injury prevented that from happening, which threw a wrench into negotiations.
Thanks, you answered me. Excuse me for not knowing everyones contract. For some reason I thought he was signed to a 2 yr deal.
On the other matter, Thats why they are called opinions. you have them, and I have them and we express them as we want. If you don't agree with mine, you won't be hurting my feelings.....
I like John Muckler's record with this team. He likes gutsy teams/players, and so do I. It's too easy to tap keys on a message board and ***** about the old ******* who is "out of touch", and has "been handed great teams in the past."
My only complaints would be.
-Signing Redden over Chara [signing Redden at all for that money].
-Hiring Bryan Murray.
And those aren't really complaints. There is some who like Redden at his salary and probably some who like Murray as a head coach. That's the nature of the beast, you can't keep everyone happy.
I wish he would have got a true #1 goaltender. I have to give him credit for throwing everything but the kitchen sink at Florida for Luongo. Also to be fair, there was a bidding war for Martin Gerber, who was a hot commodity. It wasn't a move out of left field.
Still on goaltending, I'm positive Muckler wanted to re-sign Hasek. You could tell this because it took forever for him to hold the press conference where he stated Hasek wasn't coming back. I would have went with a Gerber/Hasek combo...where Gerber would have gave you a more than capable back-up [or at least it looked like he should have]. That tandem would have been the same price as Ottawa current tandem, who in my honest opinion, is not good enough to backstop this team to a Cup. Even though I feel this is one of the best balanced teams they've had in forever. Especially when you add in the 2nd line center that Muckler will deliver in the Spring.
I'm not saying we got enough for Havlat, because we likely didn't, but let's remember that we got four players for him, not one. If either of Hennessy and Barinka work out to be strong NHL players, which at least the former is supposed to do, people will be feeling a lot better about this trade. Then there is the pick in the 30-50 range in 2008, who may eventually help us as well. Muckler needed a very cheap roster player back so that he wouldn't get crucified by the media worse than he was and that's where Preissing comes in. Admittedly, he is slow and his shot sucks and he he has made some questionable decisions, particularly early in the year, but I still think he will prove to be well worth $600,000 he's making. Nothing about him is impressive, but he is a decent passer and he looks to me like he's starting to make better decisions, pinches, etc, as he gets more comfortable in our system. He's a guy whose greatest asset is supposedly his poise and hockey sense, so hopefully he'll get better with time and prove to be a dependable, if unspectacular, player for us when it counts. Would I prefer Havlat, of course I would, but considering that it would have added 4 mil to the payroll at minimum, I'm not sure if that would have been feasible. I suppose you could have traded Alfie or Heatley instead or let Redden walk in order to lock him up long term, and that may very well have been the right decision, but something painful was going to happen any way you slice it.
I also second Discostu's comment about the cap. Hard as it is to accept, we as Ottawa fans were saved by the cap, not ruined by it. If it doesn't come in, Melnyk doesn't even buy the team in the first place, and we're likely the Oklahoma City Bombers by now. That said, it's still no fun to lose you're best players for less than they're worth. Saying we should be grateful is sort of like saying that homeless people should be grateful for abandoned warehouses. It's still no fun to be in those shoes.
Very similar to Havlat, he was a threat to leave and Mucks settle for a sub-par return. In both cases, if he had used some patience, the return would have been better.
That's a very simplistic way of looking at it. 3 years of service for a prospect that may not have signed is a decent investment. Sure, Smolinski wasn't lights out on the ice, but he wasn't useless out there and was a popular player in the locker-room. Plus, we don't know that Muckler would have gotten a greater return anywhere else. Maybe it was Muckler who was trying to get rid of Gleason as well. We just don't know.
Thanks, you answered me. Excuse me for not knowing everyones contract. For some reason I thought he was signed to a 2 yr deal.
On the other matter, Thats why they are called opinions. you have them, and I have them and we express them as we want. If you don't agree with mine, you won't be hurting my feelings.....
Havlat's contract status was a pretty central point to the future of this team over the summer, which dictated the move that had to be made.
And, you can have all the opinions that you want, but, when people disagree with you, I suggest you consider that it's not because your opinions are unpopular, like you often claim, but, it's because they aren't informed opinions.
Havlat's contract status was a pretty central point to the future of this team over the summer, which dictated the move that had to be made.
And, you can have all the opinions that you want, but, when people disagree with you, I suggest you consider that it's not because your opinions are unpopular, like you often claim, but, it's because they aren't informed opinions.
Not all opinions are equal.
Some peoples opinions are based on emotion. After many years of watching this team fail miserably in the playoffs thats what happens to some people. Emotion takes over.....
Some peoples opinions are based on emotion. After many years of watching this team fail miserably in the playoffs thats what happens to some people. Emotion takes over.....
So why would you be upset with seeing Havlat let go? He is a pure prototype of Ottawa's past playoff failures, outside of the net.
That's a very simplistic way of looking at it. 3 years of service for a prospect that may not have signed is a decent investment. Sure, Smolinski wasn't lights out on the ice, but he wasn't useless out there and was a popular player in the locker-room. Plus, we don't know that Muckler would have gotten a greater return anywhere else. Maybe it was Muckler who was trying to get rid of Gleason as well. We just don't know.
I don't see what is so simplistic but let me be even more simple - you hand over a top defencive prospect for a middling journeyman whose role could have been fill by many other alternatives. Three years for me is the negative considering that it was widely believed that he was overpaid. As far as not being signed, he was willing to sign with another team - just not the Sens. As an example, Berard didn't want to sign in Ottawa (different talent levels - similar situation) and what did we get for him? Redden. A current analogy would be to trade Brian Lee for Stu Barnes.
My point is this. It is my opinion. I don't think Muckler ever intended on signing Chara or Havlat. His mind was made up.
So we resign Havlat. Shave 4.5 million dollars off the team somewhere else. Gerber had to be signed because there is noway we go into this season with Emery as the number 1 and we could not bring Hasek back because the players on the team begged him to play in the playoffs in the Buffalo series and he said no, he let the team down.
So how do we shave 4.5 million dollars off the roster this year if we keep Havlat?
So we resign Havlat. Shave 4.5 million dollars off the team somewhere else. Gerber had to be signed because there is noway we go into this season with Emery as the number 1 and we could not bring Hasek back because the players on the team begged him to play in the playoffs in the Buffalo series and he said no, he let the team down.
So how do we shave 4.5 million dollars off the roster this year if we keep Havlat?
I didn't want to have to say this, but you asked me. Redden should not have been sighned to a 6.5 mill contract. Thats how.
Yes. you may think I'm crazy here, but I don't think Redden makes us that much better. Nothing more than another 3 - 4 mill dman couldn't do. And please don't mention the outlook pass.....
Yes. you may think I'm crazy here, but I don't think Redden makes us that much better. Nothing more than another 3 - 4 mill dman couldn't do. And please don't mention the outlook pass.....
Well the pass is key to the transition offense. In fact its huge. A team built on speedy forwards and an offensive attack built on transition, we need a defenseman that can make a brilliant first pass. Redden makes the best first pass in the league. 50 points in 65 games last year is awesome and I know Redden has got off to a slow start this year but hes turning it around now that hes healthy.
Last edited by The Great Below: 11-28-2006 at 12:26 PM.
Reason: grammar
Yes. you may think I'm crazy here, but I don't think Redden makes us that much better. Nothing more than another 3 - 4 mill dman couldn't do. And please don't mention the outlook pass.....
And look at our breakouts when Redden isn't playing compared to when he is.
IMO, Muckler has been awful, especially this year. I'm not talking about losing Havlat and Chara. I feel those were necessary changes. I'm talking about the gross incompetence in deciding what to bring in.
McAmmond. The one upside. He looks good, but hasn't put the puck in the net as much as we need.
Corvo. Godawful. He had one good game which got us all onboard with him, but we've since learned that he has nothing resembling a defensive game. Overpaid with a contract that lasts too long.
Preissing. Flat out brutal. There is nothing this guy does well. Can't pass, shoot, check, nothing. Softest defenseman I've seen in a long time.
Gerber. Easily the worst UFA signing in modern franchise history.
Still doesn't dimiss that IMO, we didn't get something worth well in Preissing.
But like I said, I hope he proves me wrong.
The problem is someone equal or comparable to Havlat would cost us 3-6 million. The point of trading Havlat was not to get rid of him specifically because he was locker room cancer or something, it was purely a salary issue. And all of the "comparable" talent to Havlat would be in his salary range anyway. So it had to be for someone cheaper/prospects, otherwise we'd still be handcuffed. And Preissing is 5.4 million dollars cheaper. What can you do.
