HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Dallas Stars
Notices

Jim Lites Assures us

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-11-2007, 09:07 AM
  #1
Starsdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,523
vCash: 500
Jim Lites Assures us

He is not stupid. Some may disagree. One week into free agency and feeling the need to defend himself.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/hockey/

Starsdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 09:19 AM
  #2
Walzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: somewhere in Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,307
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Walzy Send a message via AIM to Walzy Send a message via MSN to Walzy
guess some Stars "fans" reach a new level of whining (to use Bruce Garrioch's words )

seriously, looking over some Stars' boards i'm really annoyed by all that front office basing.
There other teams with a fanbase who're experts in this, but i always thought the Stars (fans) won't reach that level. Apparently this summer proves me wrong.

Walzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 09:26 AM
  #3
Starsdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,523
vCash: 500
Walzy-I think it is 3 years of disappointment and the "same as it ever was" approach. Which older former scorer do we sign this year. There is also a bit of inconsistency in what they say given the fact last year we needed to adapt to the "new NHl" by getting quicker and this year we sign goons when we need scoring. WE blow a #1 on Nagy but won't top a 1 year deal. Why get him at all. Wasn't he the guy to get us over the hump. Basically, fans are tired of the BS.

Starsdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 09:37 AM
  #4
TrueGrit
Registered User
 
TrueGrit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starsdude View Post
Walzy-I think it is 3 years of disappointment and the "same as it ever was" approach. Which older former scorer do we sign this year. There is also a bit of inconsistency in what they say given the fact last year we needed to adapt to the "new NHl" by getting quicker and this year we sign goons when we need scoring. WE blow a #1 on Nagy but won't top a 1 year deal. Why get him at all. Wasn't he the guy to get us over the hump. Basically, fans are tired of the BS.
exactly, i love watching the stars play, i love there style but its been proven now that we need more offense and we are not getting it, maybe we re overreacting but we want to see a cup come to dallas and with this lineup i cant see it happening, and losing first rounders for the next couple years in strong drafts, its just disappointing

TrueGrit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 10:18 AM
  #5
The Frugal Gourmet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 2,529
vCash: 500
It is disappointing.

The real problem, actually, has been too much appeasement of the fans. Trading away those first round picks for a Cup run is exactly what fans wanted. Stars management wanted to make fans happy who were eager and desperate for a Cup run, and desperation often begets stupidity. Had they not, of course, 90% of Stars fans would be moaning about the supposed missed opportunity at last season's trade deadline.

Were I to guess at what was going to happen in the first few weeks of free agency, I'd have assumed we'd blow about $4 million/season (all remaining cap space) on a second tier scorer and wind up about where we finished last season. Kudos to Armstrong and company for finally at least showing some restraint and care in free agency and *not* doing something wasteful and stupid AT ANY COST just to temporarily assuage fans (who'd no doubt by crying for a trade 2 weeks into the season anyway). Sure, they *tried* to blow it. But kudos at actually having a cutoff point that the value of a free agent pickup could seemingly transgress where they'd say: "too high, let's sniff around a bit for more creative options".

There are few moves more overrated than the free agent pickup. Maybe the trade deadline pickup is the only one. But occasionally they are worth the risk, because they take a team on the cusp of greatness and really make it great.

The Stars've been trying for over half a decade to make those high-risk moves -- trade deadline acquisitions and free agent pickups alike -- and nearly each and every high profile one has backfired. Which could mean that the Stars really aren't on the cusp of greatness. Or, really they've just lacked the resources to make the necessary "great" move. Because they haven't had either the payroll flexibility (too many free agent acqusitions) or the trade flexibility (not saving/drafting enough picks, prospects and making too many deadline trades). In either of those 2 cases, don't you think that not immediately blowing the $4 million in cap space at any cost is the wisest course of action?

Furthermore, I think we need to take down our depression a notch.

1) The Stars trying to appease fans and discussing their plans openly is a good thing.
2) The Stars willingness to spend and trade draft picks is actually a great thing too, if itís tempered with wisdom on occasion.
3) The Stars willingness to try something different after 5 or so years of the same thing not working is also a good thing.

The Frugal Gourmet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 11:30 AM
  #6
Starsdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,523
vCash: 500
Frugal-not sure how this is trying something different yet. If we trade youth/picks for a guy like Murray is not different. This team refuses to get younger. Last year, we had to get faster, this year bigger-which is it-The constant flip flop is not different. The time is NOW but we need to be patient. Whatever.

Acquiring a puched out fedurek at 875k instead of playing Barch is not different.

Not resigning Nagy who cost you a first and who "only" went for 3.5 million for one year shows how bad the deal was in the first place. Why target guys who are rentals? Quite simply, DA does not have a clue. His only deals that have worked are the Riberio deal (which was at the time-I'll trade your headache for mine with his buddy Bob Gainey) and the Hagman pick-up.
He overpays for marginal talent(Robidas, Fedorek), is ever expanding core seems untouchable even as they get older.

I won't even get into draft strategy and the refusal to take talent at the expense of grit until this year when of course he overreacts in a weak draft and passes on a number of quality defensive -d-men late to sign guys that weren't even on anyone's board because they are somebody's brother or local.

Its not Depression just the exasperation of fans who put time and money into something that is run like garbage.


Last edited by Starsdude: 07-11-2007 at 11:36 AM.
Starsdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 12:20 PM
  #7
The Frugal Gourmet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 2,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starsdude View Post
Frugal-not sure how this is trying something different yet.

..etc.

Its not Depression just the exasperation of fans who put time and money into something that is run like garbage.
We are already in agreement that high-risk moves have been made to try and push this team into contender status and that many of those moves failed.

And I can guess we are in agreement that not blowing the $4 million in the first few weeks of free agency on a long-term, second-tier contract was probably wise. I can't tell from your argument, but I imagine since you're going on about the need for a youth movement you'd agree.

Other than that, I'm having a real hard time coming around to argument this thing is "run like garbage". To me, your points just aren't convincing. 29 teams failed last season and at least 8-12 of them made playoff-contending moves that totally backfired, like ballsy GM's often do.

Your argument that Armstrong's only good moves ever are Hagman and Ribeiro is patently ridiculous. You can't seriously believe that.

That he overpays for marginal talent more than others seems largely unsubstantiated. Of course, that he has done so is obvious. Everyone has done so. Looking at this roster, though, I see about 2 overpaid guys at most.

The draft strategy criticism is ridiculous. I always enjoy people who have no clue and no first-hand wisdom critiquing a group of highly-trained experts steeped in hockey knowledge. Even more hilarious is when you go back and look an look at past criticisms of Armstrong drafting and realize how time has made people's thoughts on the matter even more obsolete. Armstrong's drafting has been largely fine. His real problem has been the lack of draft picks. And he has none of those because his team made risky moves -- a GM plus if you ask me.

That he shouldn't have made those risky moves is now completely obvious. It still doesn't convince me that he is an idiot, that the organization he runs is poor -- even last season one of the 10 best teams in hockey, or that there is no direction or hope. I am happy to see him recognize that it's no longer time to make huge long-term deal, but also that's it not completely time to throw in the towel. That's about how I feel as well.

The Frugal Gourmet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 12:25 PM
  #8
User Name
Registered User Name
 
User Name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Indian lands
Country: United States
Posts: 296
vCash: 500
I stumbled onto this board yesterday and like the knowledgeable posts here. Some here really know the game!

I'm one of the management bashers on other boards. There'd be more punches thrown at Doug, Jim and Hicks here if the moderation wasn't as gracious to the team. Not a bad thing, just an observation.

I had to post after I read Frugal's message. I disagree with most of it, which has not always been the case with his posts throughout the years.

Frugal stated that the Stars have 4 millon to spend. These guys say 10 million. http://nhlnumbers.com/dal.html . Plenty of money to go after anyone and no need to take the dregs from the bottom of the FA barrel. Too late now...

I just wanted to throw the figures from nhlnumbers into the conversation.


Last edited by User Name: 07-11-2007 at 02:05 PM.
User Name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 01:44 PM
  #9
Chad_
 
Chad_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 3,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by User Name View Post
Frugal stated that the Stars have 4 millon to spend. These guys say 10 million. http://nhlnumbers.com/dal.html . Plenty of money to go after anyone and no need to take the dregs from the bottom of the FA barrel. Too late now...

I just wanted to throw the figures from nhlnumbers into the conversation.
That's before the RFAs are signed, which the Stars figure will cost around $4 to $5 million and hopefully leave a little cushion room for a trade later. Therefore, the figure of having $4 million to spend on a UFA is accurate.

Chad_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 01:55 PM
  #10
Starsdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,523
vCash: 500
You cannot really defend DA's trading record. As bad as this year ended up, it may not have been his worst. In 2004, he picks up Tugnutt who was never going to be more than abackup for the 32d pick in the draft, The Teppo deal cost us a second and Sydor, how about fleecing UFA to be Val Bure at the deadline for asecond and Bagnall when Fla would have likely paid us to take Huselius who was in Keenan's doghouse. How about a3rd and an 8th for Therien. 2005-6 Trading for Mitchell but not steeping up then one year later blowing another first on Nordstrom-the list is longer but I think everyone gets the point

Starsdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 02:01 PM
  #11
User Name
Registered User Name
 
User Name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Indian lands
Country: United States
Posts: 296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad_ View Post
That's before the RFAs are signed, which the Stars figure will cost around $4 to $5 million and hopefully leave a little cushion room for a trade later. Therefore, the figure of having $4 million to spend on a UFA is accurate.
Another numbers site has the Stars at 12M before RFAs. The team had the money, just didn't want to spend it.

Eklund says they're talking to NJ, trading Norstrom for Gionta...would be nice, but unlikely. He also says Edmonton wants Jokinen or Ribero for Horcroff, which is more the Stars style; trading youthful talent for veteren 2nd/3rd liners.

User Name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 02:05 PM
  #12
Walzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: somewhere in Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,307
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Walzy Send a message via AIM to Walzy Send a message via MSN to Walzy
i still don't mind the Norstrom deal.
i won't say Army is doing a great job, but he isn't that bad. He knows more about what he's doing than Gainey after 99

Walzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 02:11 PM
  #13
DaStars99
Purdue Alumnus
 
DaStars99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,931
vCash: 1425
I would do the Norstrom deal

DaStars99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 02:25 PM
  #14
Chad_
 
Chad_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 3,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by User Name View Post
Another numbers site has the Stars at 12M before RFAs. The team had the money, just didn't want to spend it..
When in the past history of the Stars under Hicks has the team not spent money?

Chad_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 02:25 PM
  #15
Starsdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,523
vCash: 500
I agree taken in and of itself the Nordstrom deal was okay. The problem to me is that we essentially did the same deal the year before with Mitchell and then failed to resign him or address him signing in VAN in the offseason and therefore DA felt he had to do it again just one year later. Its just poor asset management

Starsdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 02:48 PM
  #16
Stars-Preds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 477
vCash: 500
There is no way New Jersey would give up Brian Gionta for Norstrom. The guy is only 28 and has scored 73 goals over the past two seasons. Norstrom is 35 and a free agent after next season. Why would they trade their top offensive player - after already losing Scott Gomez - for a 35-year-old defenseman? If we really are talking to New Jersey I would guess the talks involve Jamie Langenbrunner and not Gionta.

Lou is a very good GM and rarely makes a deal benefitting the other team (see the last time we made a blockbuster trade with NJ).

Stars-Preds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 02:48 PM
  #17
________
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 4,641
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to ________ Send a message via MSN to ________
Quote:
Originally Posted by User Name View Post
Another numbers site has the Stars at 12M before RFAs. The team had the money, just didn't want to spend it.

Eklund says they're talking to NJ, trading Norstrom for Gionta...would be nice, but unlikely. He also says Edmonton wants Jokinen or Ribero for Horcroff, which is more the Stars style; trading youthful talent for veteren 2nd/3rd liners.
They had $4 million total to use, not the $12 million. $2 million saved for call ups/trades and $4 million(about) in RFA's qualifying offers and then $2 million more to sign the RFAs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Starsdude View Post
You cannot really defend DA's trading record. As bad as this year ended up, it may not have been his worst. In 2004, he picks up Tugnutt who was never going to be more than abackup for the 32d pick in the draft,
18-Jun-02: Columbus Blue Jackets traded Ron Tugnutt and a 2nd round selection (Janos Vas) in 2002 to the Dallas Stars for a 1st round selection (previously acquired, later traded to Buffalo - Dan Paille) in 2002.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Starsdude View Post
The Teppo deal cost us a second and Sydor,
Nope it didn't the Stars gained a second in the deal, which was Johan Fransson.
22-Jul-03: Phoenix Coyotes traded Teppo Numminen to the Dallas Stars for Mike Sillinger.
22-Jul-03: Dallas Stars traded Darryl Sydor to the Columbus Blue Jackets for Mike Sillinger and a 2nd round selection in 2004.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Starsdude View Post
how about fleecing UFA to be Val Bure at the deadline for asecond and Bagnall when Fla would have likely paid us to take Huselius who was in Keenan's doghouse.
It wasn't a fleecing at all. Panthers used that pick on David Booth(I believe, besides only Bagnall. Only a bad deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Starsdude View Post
How about a3rd and an 8th for Therien. 2005-6
And he was the Stars leading goal scorer in the 2004 playoffs.
Besides here's who the picks were.
Quote:
08-Mar-04: Philadelphia Flyers traded Chris Therien to the Dallas Stars for a 8th round selection (previously acquired, Philadelphia selected Martin Houle) in 2004 and 3rd round selection (later traded to Tampa Bay - Tampa Bay selected Chris Lawrence) in 2005.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starsdude View Post
Trading for Mitchell but not steeping up then one year later blowing another first on Nordstrom-the list is longer but I think everyone gets the point
The Stars offered more money to Mitchell, but he took less money to go to Vancouver. (Not sure if this ended up being true or not, but it's what he had said on some Team 1040 after signing with Vancouver last year.)

Besides, the Stars still won that trade. Belle was starting to fade, they picked up a second for him, which they used to pick Sacchetti, then Skoula for Mitchell, easily a win for the Stars.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cottonking View Post
So do we think Thomas Vanek or Scott Gomez constitute "a risk" ?

Case in point: Stu Barnes. By all accounts, Stu Barnes is a fine player. But he's in his late 30's and he's signing 1-year deals. If we're rebuilding, why is a player in his late 30's getting contracts? If we're competing for the Cup, why aren't we taking a shot on a Scott Gomez or a Keith Tkachuk? Signing vetarns like Barnes and Halpern and Zubov to short contracts, and then not making the impact signing Lites claims "could put us behind the 8-ball "forever" makes no sense. Either sign Barnes and sign more veterans and trade away prospects with value (Jokinen, Daley maybe, Smith) or stop signing veterans and rebuild. Doing half of both makes no sense.
Handing out long term deals to Blake, Gomez, Drury or Briere makes no sense.
How could the Stars have even signed Tkachuk? When he signed with the Blues before July 1st? and I hope you don't mean trading for him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walzy View Post
guess some Stars "fans" reach a new level of whining (to use Bruce Garrioch's words )

seriously, looking over some Stars' boards i'm really annoyed by all that front office basing.
There other teams with a fanbase who're experts in this, but i always thought the Stars (fans) won't reach that level. Apparently this summer proves me wrong.
There's one especially that rips on Armstrong in about every post.

________ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 02:49 PM
  #18
User Name
Registered User Name
 
User Name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Indian lands
Country: United States
Posts: 296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad_ View Post
When in the past history of the Stars under Hicks has the team not spent money?
Other than Guerin, when in recent history has Hicks spent the money to get the right players?

Audette, Rucinsky, Turgeon, Young...all poor fits and second day choices when the big name UFAs were taken.

User Name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 02:52 PM
  #19
________
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 4,641
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to ________ Send a message via MSN to ________
Quote:
Originally Posted by User Name View Post
Other than Guerin, when in recent history has Hicks spent the money to get the right players?

Audette, Rucinsky, Turgeon, Young...all poor fits and second day choices when the big name UFAs were taken.
Belfour, Hull, Boucher, Halpern, just to name a couple.
Keeping players they've developed, trades also.

________ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 03:06 PM
  #20
User Name
Registered User Name
 
User Name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Indian lands
Country: United States
Posts: 296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ________ View Post
They had $4 million total to use, not the $12 million. $2 million saved for call ups/trades and $4 million(about) in RFA's qualifying offers and then $2 million more to sign the RFAs.
6 million for RFAs and 2M in reserve?

Creative accounting...

User Name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 03:13 PM
  #21
User Name
Registered User Name
 
User Name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Indian lands
Country: United States
Posts: 296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ________ View Post
Belfour, Hull, Boucher, Halpern, just to name a couple.
Keeping players they've developed, trades also.
Belfour is almost ancient history.

Scratch Hull who practically begged to stay with the Stars.

Boucher is a winner

Halpern who?

User Name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 03:51 PM
  #22
Chad_
 
Chad_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 3,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by User Name View Post
Other than Guerin, when in recent history has Hicks spent the money to get the right players?

Audette, Rucinsky, Turgeon, Young...all poor fits and second day choices when the big name UFAs were taken.
Spending money and spending money wisely are two different things. Your previous criticism was that the Stars have not spent money. Your list above proves that wrong.

I won't defend where that money went, it's almost impossible given how some of the players acquired have panned out which also defends the current off-season's approach not to spend huge money, but the team has spent pre-cap and been right up to the cap after the lockout season. Spending money is not a reasoned criticism of the Stars. Where that money went though is fair game.

Chad_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 03:55 PM
  #23
Chad_
 
Chad_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 3,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by User Name View Post
6 million for RFAs and 2M in reserve?

Creative accounting...
How is that creative accounting?

RFAs: Ribeiro ($3 million), Jokinen ($1 million), Lundqvist and Miettinen ($1 million)

That's $5 million figured rather conservatively. It's wise to budget more than that $5 million figure. The Stars have done that, and the $2 million wiggle room is for call-ups and trades. It's how most teams operate either at the NHL mandated cap or a self-imposed cap.

Chad_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 04:40 PM
  #24
OttMorrow
Registered User
 
OttMorrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,262
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to OttMorrow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starsdude View Post
You cannot really defend DA's trading record. As bad as this year ended up, it may not have been his worst. In 2004, he picks up Tugnutt who was never going to be more than abackup for the 32d pick in the draft, The Teppo deal cost us a second and Sydor, how about fleecing UFA to be Val Bure at the deadline for asecond and Bagnall when Fla would have likely paid us to take Huselius who was in Keenan's doghouse. How about a3rd and an 8th for Therien. 2005-6 Trading for Mitchell but not steeping up then one year later blowing another first on Nordstrom-the list is longer but I think everyone gets the point
Totally agree man. DA's track record when it comes to the trading department is horrendous, which makes me nervous to see him going the trade route this year even though its the right way to go. I have zero confidence in DA's ability to make a trade to better the team.

OttMorrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-11-2007, 06:46 PM
  #25
User Name
Registered User Name
 
User Name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Indian lands
Country: United States
Posts: 296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad_ View Post
Spending money and spending money wisely are two different things. Your previous criticism was that the Stars have not spent money. Your list above proves that wrong.
My previous criticism said that the Stars had money to spend this year and didn't. The criticism that you referred to regarding the list of players agrees that they have not spent money wisely.

User Name is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:30 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.