They didn't unnecessarily lose an asset. They traded Parent for the right to talk to Hamhuis before the start of FA. They talked to him. It didn't work out. They got another asset for those rights. Would you have rather they kept him until FA just to save face?
I don't know about that 1st round pick stuff. Going from a 1st this year to a 3rd next year is too hard to believe. There may have been more to it.
No, but "damage control" is called "damage control" for a reason... you took damage.
From the Pens perspective? Absolutely... would have been terrible. I just enjoy that apparently that's what we were trying to talk 'em into giving us.
I could see Holmgren trying to talk them into it, but it's still rather ambitious. Hamhuis being a pending UFA, if Holmgren has Shero in a spot where he's willing to give up more than other offers, you gotta pull the trigger before he starts thinking about it too much.
The damage could have been in signing him. After talking to him, maybe they decided he was a player they didn't want to sign. I hope when he said that stuff about wanting to be named #3 their conclusion was they didn't want him at any price. I have no problem with any of what they've done with Hamhuis, if the press reports are to be believed.
The damage could have been in signing him. After talking to him, maybe they decided he was a player they didn't want to sign. I hope when he said that stuff about wanting to be named #3 their conclusion was they didn't want him at any price. I have no problem with any of what they've done with Hamhuis, if the press reports are to be believed.
See, that's all fine... and I don't disagree. But it ignores the attached observation that the original decision to go after him so aggressively was, clearly, a mistake. Ya know?
The only bad part is that its to Pittsburgh. Parents value was probably less then a 4th.
It had taken a beating, but he was worth more to us than that. He was cheap and serviceable on the bottom pairing... and he had a summer to recuperate from his surgery and this season.
No, but "damage control" is called "damage control" for a reason... you took damage.
These are things you have to do when you are a GM. You take risks to make your team better, and if it doesn't work out, you make the best of your situation.
A third for Ryan Parent.. Took so much damage there...
On one hand, this kind of is a **** deal, as I beleive Parent could have fetched a little more (a mid 2nd rounder at most), but on the other, Homer rolled the dice, as he did with Kimo and Hartnell a few years ago, but this time unfortunatly, failed. That's the price you pay to take a chance I guess.
I'm a bit bummed we lost Parent, but honestly, he wasn't going to develop here. As long as he gets Coburn signed, an upgrade in goal, and a bottom pairing vet, I'll be content.
See, that's all fine... and I don't disagree. But it ignores the attached observation that the original decision to go after him so aggressively was, clearly, a mistake. Ya know?
No, because I don't think it's a mistake for them to aggressively go after a guy they think can help the team. Especially when it's a top 4 dman, and that 3rd pairing really let them down in the playoffs. It's not like they flew in blindly either, Hartnell and Timmonen had both played with him. Timonen probably would have been his defense partner. So, I'm not seeing a mistake. They're being careful in who they bring in to the team. It's doing their due dilligence before they offer a guy a sizable contract.
The fact that the team means nothing to him. At first said he was excited to join this defence
Yea, apparently saying he was excited was just a bunch of ****.
Anyway, what's done is done. Hamhuis won't be here, and that's not the end of the world. If we don't find an upgrade between the pipes, then yes, the world just might end (at least my world).
The fact that the team means nothing to him. At first said he was excited to join this defence
I mean, whatever, it's nice response to a question... I'm not sure it's fair to hold the guy accountable for that. Also not sure why the Flyers as a team should mean anything to him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrieresSalary
These are things you have to do when you are a GM. You take risks to make your team better, and if it doesn't work out, you make the best of your situation.
A third for Ryan Parent.. Took so much damage there...
If Ryan Parent gets over his injury problems, we will miss him. He also was going to be a cheap depth defenseman for us and we just sold him for low.
Additionally, lets think about taking risks. We already had a solid top 4 defense... there was no need to take a risk to get another top 4 guy (who was going to make more than 2 of our current group). As said, unnecessary risk and losing assets there's no good reason to lose.
Losing Parent will likely cost us salary cap space for our top 7 D, too... as of now I don't believe any of our AHL guys are necessarily guys you want in the 7 hole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovercraft
Keep the top 4 together now I'd say.
Sign a vet like Mara, Lydmen, Tallinder,Eaton
for the 3rd pairing with Bartulis
Likely what we always should have done and let Bartulis/Parent fight for the 6 spot.
Oh, this is a classic case of damage control. There's no question Homer screwed this up and is trying to save face.
You get what you can get in this instance. It doesn't matter if it's a divisional rival, in my opinion. If that's the best you can do, you do it. We are competing with 29 other teams, not 4.
I mean, whatever, it's nice response to a question... I'm not sure it's fair to hold the guy accountable for that. Also not sure why the Flyers as a team should mean anything to him.
If Ryan Parent gets over his injury problems, we will miss him. He also was going to be a cheap depth defenseman for us and we just sold him for low.
Additionally, lets think about taking risks. We already had a solid top 4 defense... there was no need to take a risk to get another top 4 guy (who was going to make more than 2 of our current group). As said, unnecessary risk and losing assets there's no good reason to lose.
Losing Parent will likely cost us salary cap space for our top 7 D, too... as of now I don't believe any of our AHL guys are necessarily guys you want in the 7 hole.
Likely what we always should have done and let Bartulis/Parent fight for the 6 spot.
I dont mean he should be faithful to the Flyers, I mean the fact that he doesnt care which team he plays for.
No, because I don't think it's a mistake for them to aggressively go after a guy they think can help the team. Especially when it's a top 4 dman, and that 3rd pairing really let them down in the playoffs. It's not like they flew in blindly either, Hartnell and Timmonen had both played with him. Timonen probably would have been his defense partner. So, I'm not seeing a mistake. They're being careful in who they bring in to the team. It's doing their due dilligence before they offer a guy a sizable contract.
Due diligence...? If they'd "done their due diligence" they never would have traded for him because they would have known he was uncomfortable with playing on a team with our defensive depth.
We acquired him (without having spoken to him) and then found out he didn't really want to sign with us all that much. They DID fly in blindly.
And there are a lot of guys out there that can help the team. Under the salary cap you CANNOT aggressively go after everyone that can help... that's how you bleed assets.
