HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Habs management doesn't get it...(umpteenth toughness thread)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-01-2011, 02:56 PM
  #451
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
It is most, by far. And if we look at it post lockout (a very small size) it's still 50% of the cup winners that are rebuilds.

As for Carolina winning without Cam Ward... you're right. But that's not the point. You can't have a team made up of top picks... there aren't enough to go around. The point is that the Canes had Staal as a principal reason why they won. And they don't win it without him.
it's still 50% of the cup winners that are not rebuilds


wrong, without Ward they dont even make it past the first round.

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 03:16 PM
  #452
FF de Mars
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 42 rue Fontaine
Country: Martinique
Posts: 5,950
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
it's still 50% of the cup winners that are not rebuilds


wrong, without Ward they dont even make it past the first round.
Yup. I remember Staal showing his appreciation to Ward during the All Star game, he picked him first !

FF de Mars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 04:50 PM
  #453
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
On that note, I've been looking at Staal's last few seasons for an unrelated matter, and outside of 08-09 where Pleks cratered, I'm not convinced that he's been a better overall player than Plekanec over the last few years.

I'm sure some of you think this is preposterous, but consider. Last season, for example, Pleks was a slightly better match-up center and practically equal 5-on-5 point producer based on icetime. Staal got more points mostly because of more PP production (he gets 50% more PP time than Plekanec, and his total PP production is conversely about 50% greater; the per-icetime numbers are just about equal) and a trifle more ES time. Interestingly, Plekanec spends about as much extra time relative to Staal as Staal spends on the PP relative to Plekanec.

Of course, calling Staal a "superstar" would be borderline to begin with, but I think it goes to show that the traditional evaluations of top-end players (which largely rest on total number of points to the exclusion of all else) are actually terrible at measuring their impact. And also of the importance of circumstance and context; if Pleks spent less time on the PK and more on the PP, he might be less useful to his team, but he'd get more points and, probably, more recognition. But would that make him more valuable to the Habs?
The year the Canes won it, Staal was a 100 point player and among the best in the league. It's silly to try to say that he wasn't a key component of that team.

And uh... I'll take Staal over Pleks. So would anyone not on this board.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Oh, there might have been some market, but that market's value might not have outweighed the risk-weighed gain of keeping him.

There were only so many first-round picks to go around, and the teams that might have been interested might not have thought it was worth a first-round pick to acquire him, and I doubt Gainey thought moving him for a second round pick would've been worth it. Like I said, when I looked over the clubs back then, there just wasn't a fit.

I just don't think there was a Rivet-type deal out there for Souray.
I'm just going to say that I strongly disagree with you here and I've posted the reasons why in this thread and many times before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeBey View Post
All teams were bad at one point. Just because they're bad then good doesn't mean they had a drastic rebuild. How awful were the Red Wings before they finally picked up Yzerman? How much longer did they wait before they won the cup in '97? You also can't really compare pre-lockout champions because teams are built differently now.
You're absolutely right. Look at the Leafs. They were terrible and still kept on trading away picks.

As for the Wings, they had several top picks in the 80s and hit the jackpot on their very first high pick. They were starting from absolute scratch and were pretty much an expansion club they were so terrible. They had several top picks and it took them almost a decade to become a contender. Unlike Quebec/Colorado and NJ who drafted multiple stars, the Wings really only got Yzerman out of it. Fortunately for them though, he turned into one of the best players of all-time.

Once they did become a contender they leveraged another top pick (who turned into Brind'Amour) for Shanahan and won multiple cups.

Yes, they won it again without Yzerman and yes they drafted huge superstars very, very late. But their turnaround began with Yzerman and he was a huge contributor to those three cups.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeBey View Post
Of course they don't win it without him, but my point is they did it with one real lottery pick. They didn't have to draft at the bottom for 5-10 years before being a contender.
You're right again (except he wasn't a lottery pick, he was 2nd overall.) Bottom line though is that their top pick turned into a 100 point player and led them to winning a cup. Sure Ward played a huge role, so did others... but Staal was a major reason for them winning the cup. Some clubs have to have multiple kicks at the can to get a superstar, others get it on the first try. The more you have the better you are.

Bottom line though is that if they don't have Staal, they don't win.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UniverStalinGraduate View Post
There was certainly a market for him, you have to remember though, they offered 5.5 to Souray. They did want to keep him.

The Habs were right in the middle of the playoff hunt, to completely give up on the season would have been something other teams would do. Not the Habs. They got an offer they really liked on Rivet and moved him out, and then they decided they'd try to sign Souray and if he didn't sign they had some back up options, one of which was apparently Hamrlik. It's a shame we didn't move out Souray too, I wish the habs were a team that could work like that, and the thing is now I think they are a team like that because they have guys in the minors that at the very least are young and have some upside and could be thrown in in a "let the rookie learn in some games that you know aren't ultimately going to be that important in the long run. A guy like Brendon Nash, or Raphael Diaz, or Mark Mitera at htis point in time. Look at their 2006/2007 Hamilton roster, and Habs roster and tell me what the habs defensive pairings are if they move out both Souray and Rivet. Even if Gorges came back in the Rivet deal as a somewhat regular contributor.
Like I said above, I'm not going to debate this further. We'll just agree to disagree here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FF de Mars View Post
Yup. I remember Staal showing his appreciation to Ward during the All Star game, he picked him first !
Sure. And Ward was awesome in helping the club to win the cup that year for sure. It doesn't change the fact that Staal was also a key component and a huge part of that team.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 09-01-2011 at 05:08 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 05:19 PM
  #454
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
The year the Canes won it, Staal was a 100 point player and among the best in the league. It's silly to try to say that he wasn't a key component of that team.
I didn't say that; obviously he was. Keep in mind though that it was the year right after the lockout, the bold Year One of the New NHL (tm). That year Gomez had 33 goals and 84 points and Gionta was an 48-goal scorer with 89 points. Defenders hadn't adjusted to the new game yet and there were lots of PP. Context again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
And uh... I'll take Staal over Pleks. So would anyone not on this board.
And yesterday, I might not have disagreed. But it turns out that, at least over the last couple of years, that would be a reputation call. Quantitatively it would pretty much fall under "too close to call". Both are first-line centers, playing top-line matchups, with Plekanec looking to be the slightly better two-way matchup center, but with the caveat that he has better teammates as well. The difference in scoring between the two over the last year is largely due to Plekanec spending more time killing penalites and Staal spending that time on the PP.

The similarity between their 2009-2010 offensive seasons is much more striking -- despite, again, Staal getting much more PP time while Plekanec spent it on the PK.

I was surprised when I found this out, to be honest. A reminder that context is supremely important and we don't look at it nearly enough. And that our player evaluations, which are based almost entirely on overall points total, are questionable at best.

Probably explains why Pleks shows up on a lot of most-underrated lists, too.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 05:39 PM
  #455
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I didn't say that; obviously he was. Keep in mind though that it was the year right after the lockout, the bold Year One of the New NHL (tm). That year Gomez had 33 goals and 84 points and Gionta was an 48-goal scorer with 89 points. Defenders hadn't adjusted to the new game yet and there were lots of PP. Context again.



And yesterday, I might not have disagreed. But it turns out that, at least over the last couple of years, that would be a reputation call. Quantitatively it would pretty much fall under "too close to call". Both are first-line centers, playing top-line matchups, with Plekanec looking to be the slightly better two-way matchup center, but with the caveat that he has better teammates as well. The difference in scoring between the two over the last year is largely due to Plekanec spending more time killing penalites and Staal spending that time on the PP.

The similarity between their 2009-2010 offensive seasons is much more striking -- despite, again, Staal getting much more PP time while Plekanec spent it on the PK.

I was surprised when I found this out, to be honest. A reminder that context is supremely important and we don't look at it nearly enough. And that our player evaluations, which are based almost entirely on overall points total, are questionable at best.

Probably explains why Pleks shows up on a lot of most-underrated lists, too.
Plekanec is harder to evaluate superficial than most. There aren't many players that handle both the most important defensive minutes on even strength and the penalty kill as it is, but to also be the team's leading offensive forward and part of the first power play unit is rarer still. I don't think there's another forward in the league right now that plays both the most important ES and penalty kill minutes and also leads his team offensively. The Keslers, Richards and Bergerons have someone else to lead the offense.

Perhaps people say a guy is underated because people don't account for his defense, but for Plekanec that is almost certainly the case.

The distribution of his ice time is a lot more like an elite number one defenseman like Lidstrom or Chara that can play every situation rather than your typical number one centerman. No wonder he always looks burned out by the end of the season.

Talks to Goalposts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 05:45 PM
  #456
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I didn't say that; obviously he was. Keep in mind though that it was the year right after the lockout, the bold Year One of the New NHL (tm). That year Gomez had 33 goals and 84 points and Gionta was an 48-goal scorer with 89 points. Defenders hadn't adjusted to the new game yet and there were lots of PP. Context again.
Doesn't matter. Staal was 7th in points and 8th in goals. He was also 2nd team All-Star Center that year. Regardless of how you slice it and even if we say that his points were inflated, he was still awesome vs. his contemporaries. And what' more impressive is that he did it at 21 and in his second year in the league.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
And yesterday, I might not have disagreed. But it turns out that, at least over the last couple of years, that would be a reputation call. Quantitatively it would pretty much fall under "too close to call". Both are first-line centers, playing top-line matchups, with Plekanec looking to be the slightly better two-way matchup center, but with the caveat that he has better teammates as well. The difference in scoring between the two over the last year is largely due to Plekanec spending more time killing penalites and Staal spending that time on the PP.

The similarity between their 2009-2010 offensive seasons is much more striking -- despite, again, Staal getting much more PP time while Plekanec spent it on the PK.

I was surprised when I found this out, to be honest. A reminder that context is supremely important and we don't look at it nearly enough. And that our player evaluations, which are based almost entirely on overall points total, are questionable at best.

Probably explains why Pleks shows up on a lot of most-underrated lists, too.
Staal is a better goal scorer, point getter, playoff player is more consistent and is more physical. He's probably among the few players in the league that can actually 'boast' that he's done it with worse teammates than Plekanec has. He's played with very poor offensive teammates and he and Ward have carried the team for a long time now. Regardless, he's done far more in his career than Pleks has and was selected to Team Canada for good reason. More PP time? Okay. But the man is still playing on mostly bad teams.

Pleks is a top 20 center at best. As many folks here have said, he's better suited to 2nd line duty and he himself has described some of his postseason performances as 'playing like a little girl.' There's no way Pleks sniffs a spot on Team Canada (regardless of Nationality issues) as he'd be nowhere close to being good enough to making that team.

I'm not saying Pleks sucks by any stretch. He's a very good player and is actually pretty decent in the playoffs but this one is cut and dried and I'll let somebody else take up this debate with you if they wish but there's no way on God's green earth that it's even close. Once again, you're holding your calculator to close to your face and can't see the game.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 09-01-2011 at 06:01 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 06:09 PM
  #457
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Doesn't matter. Staal was 7th in points and 8th in goals. He was also 2nd team All-Star Center that year. Regardless of how you slice it and even if we say that his points were inflated, he was still awesome vs. his contemporaries. And what' more impressive is that he did it at 21 and in his second year in the league.

Staal is a better goal scorer, point getter, playoff player is more consistent and is more physical. He's probably among the few players in the league that can actually 'boast' that he's done it with worse teammates than Plekanec has. He's played with very poor offensive teammates and he and Ward have carried the team for a long time now. Regardless, he's done far more in his career than Pleks has and was selected to Team Canada for good reason. More PP time? Okay. But the man is still playing on mostly bad teams.

Pleks is a top 20 center at best. As many folks here have said, he's better suited to 2nd line duty and he himself has described some of his postseason performances as 'playing like a little girl.' There's no way Pleks sniffs a spot on Team Canada (regardless of Nationality issues) as he'd be nowhere close to being good enough to making that team.

I'm not saying Pleks sucks by any stretch. He's a very good player and is actually pretty decent in the playoffs but this one is cut and dried and I'll let somebody else take up this debate with you if they wish but there's no way on God's green earth that it's even close. Once again, you're holding your calculator to close to your face and can't see the game.
you're right for once, i'll give it to you.


except for Earth being mostly blue

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 06:28 PM
  #458
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
The distribution of his ice time is a lot more like an elite number one defenseman like Lidstrom or Chara that can play every situation rather than your typical number one centerman. No wonder he always looks burned out by the end of the season.
I wonder if Martin would ever consider giving him more offensive responsabilities, specifically cutting down on his PK time. Then he might rack up enough points to get the credit he's actually due.

@Lafleurs' Guy: the point is precisely that the player valuation tools that are used in the mainstream are bad, about as bad as the pre-Sabremetrics tools used to evaluate hockey player, if not worse. So parroting these player evaluations back at me as if their obviously rightness should be self-evident, when the point is precisely that they're too limited, isn't precisely convincing.

I actually think you might just be the one who needs to watch the game more closely -- more systematically, and without pre-existing biases, and see how often Plekanec outchances and outscores the opposition's top line. Two-way players like Plekanec have real value that's just not considered by traditional evaluation tools; and since those tools revolve around "who's got the most points" and "who's got the most Cups", perhaps I'm not the one who should lay down the calculator...


Last edited by MathMan: 09-01-2011 at 06:53 PM.
MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 06:28 PM
  #459
UniverStalinGraduate*
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post

Like I said above, I'm not going to debate this further. We'll just agree to disagree here.

I'm all for that, but I'm not personally sure what your stance is on Souray. Do you really think that the Montreal Canadiens franchise, while in a cup run are going to play the final stretch after trading someone who was as instrumental in their success at the time as Souray was?

You know nothing of the franchise if you think that's the case. They simply aren't going to fold up shop and say 'we'll see you next season' unless they're truly bottomed out. Like out of the playoffs by January types of seasons.

UniverStalinGraduate* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 07:18 PM
  #460
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I wonder if Martin would ever consider giving him more offensive responsabilities, specifically cutting down on his PK time. Then he might rack up enough points to get the credit he's actually due.
I think I actually heard Martin mentions this before, like one or two years ago, in the context of some FA signing.

Problem is that Plekanec is always the better PKer than whoever is brought to replace him. He's a victim of his own success

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 07:27 PM
  #461
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
I think I actually heard Martin mentions this before, like one or two years ago, in the context of some FA signing.

Problem is that Plekanec is always the better PKer than whoever is brought to replace him. He's a victim of his own success
The weird thing is that I get the impression he actually likes it this way. He seems to have the soul of a Guy Carbeneau player in the body of a first line talent.

In any event, its probably easier to find a player with equivalent offensive talent to Plekanec that it is to find someone so good at defense so the marginal value definitely seems to tilt towards using him defensively. The only way that changes is if Montreal finds themselves an equivalent of Manny Malhotra or David Bolland to Plekanec's Kesler or Toews (Kesler and Toews are better players but their role was analogous).

Talks to Goalposts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 07:51 PM
  #462
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
Manny Malhotra or David Bolland to Plekanec's Kesler or Toews (Kesler and Toews are better players but their role was analogous).
Toews' 62% zonestart points to a more offensive role than Kesler had though. Bolland is really that team's defensive horse.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 07:59 PM
  #463
FF de Mars
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 42 rue Fontaine
Country: Martinique
Posts: 5,950
vCash: 500
It's going to be scary to have Pleks and Cole on the PK. I have a feeling they will score many goals shorthanded.

FF de Mars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 08:06 PM
  #464
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Toews' 62% zonestart points to a more offensive role than Kesler had though. Bolland is really that team's defensive horse.

The general point was those two were used in more of a shutdown role until an extrordinarily good defensive center was identified to take it of their hands. Although Toews may have been a bad example, looking back through the past 3 years Bolland always played the bigger matchups.

Talks to Goalposts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 08:15 PM
  #465
MathMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
The general point was those two were used in more of a shutdown role until an extrordinarily good defensive center was identified to take it of their hands. Although Toews may have been a bad example, looking back through the past 3 years Bolland always played the bigger matchups.
Just goes to show how much of a reputation play NHL awards like the Selke are. Toews is a great player, but probably had no business being nominated for that one.

MathMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 08:32 PM
  #466
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Just goes to show how much of a reputation play NHL awards like the Selke are. Toews is a great player, but probably had no business being nominated for that one.
The even when the Selke acknowledging someone actually good at defense its seems to have a lag time of a couple years, by which time the player often has moved on to somewhat different role, Kesler is a great example.

Talks to Goalposts is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2011, 09:39 PM
  #467
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,413
vCash: 500
I'll answer your question one more time and then I'm leaving this alone. You can look back on older threads this one's been done a long time ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UniverStalinGraduate View Post
I'm all for that, but I'm not personally sure what your stance is on Souray. Do you really think that the Montreal Canadiens franchise, while in a cup run are going to play the final stretch after trading someone who was as instrumental in their success at the time as Souray was?

You know nothing of the franchise if you think that's the case. They simply aren't going to fold up shop and say 'we'll see you next season' unless they're truly bottomed out. Like out of the playoffs by January types of seasons.
"Cup run?" Are you serious? We were in a run for 8th place which we lost even though we kept Souray. A run for last place is not a "cup run." Our goalie had gone down to injury and we were trading away Rivet. And even if we made the playoffs we were going nowhere. So instead of folding and keeping some chips for the next hand we went all in with a 7-2 and predictably lost. It didn't make sense to me then and it doesn't make sense to me now.

As for what the club was going to do, it didn't surprise me in the least that we kept him. That doesn't mean it was the right thing to do or that I agreed with what we did. It also doesn't make sense to me that a player who was so "instrumental in our success" was supposedly worth zero on the trade market.

YES, I think we should've traded him.

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 01:41 AM
  #468
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I'll answer your question one more time and then I'm leaving this alone. You can look back on older threads this one's been done a long time ago.

"Cup run?" Are you serious? We were in a run for 8th place which we lost even though we kept Souray. A run for last place is not a "cup run." Our goalie had gone down to injury and we were trading away Rivet. And even if we made the playoffs we were going nowhere. So instead of folding and keeping some chips for the next hand we went all in with a 7-2 and predictably lost. It didn't make sense to me then and it doesn't make sense to me now.

As for what the club was going to do, it didn't surprise me in the least that we kept him. That doesn't mean it was the right thing to do or that I agreed with what we did. It also doesn't make sense to me that a player who was so "instrumental in our success" was supposedly worth zero on the trade market.

YES, I think we should've traded him.
Never does and never will, the ONLY option in your mind is to tank... so...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 09:24 AM
  #469
Fozz
Registered User
 
Fozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,329
vCash: 500
Just to go back to the original topic of this thread...

Comparing the team at the start of this year vs. last year does show that the Habs are in a much better position to compete on the toughness front. 4 players will start the year with the team that weren't there last year and will help in that regard:

Cole - Pacioretty - Yemelin - White

Some will say it's not enough but it's still better than what they had last year and that means management does get it.

Fozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 10:47 AM
  #470
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fozz View Post
Just to go back to the original topic of this thread...

Comparing the team at the start of this year vs. last year does show that the Habs are in a much better position to compete on the toughness front. 4 players will start the year with the team that weren't there last year and will help in that regard:

Cole - Pacioretty - Yemelin - White

Some will say it's not enough but it's still better than what they had last year and that means management does get it.
These 4 guys will help the Habs play a better brand of hockey...Cole alone, will create alot of turnovers with his hitting in the offensive zone...

BLONG7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 03:34 PM
  #471
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
Never does and never will, the ONLY option in your mind is to tank... so...
Once again, you're adding a whole bunch of nothing to this conversation.

LG has said himself he doesn't want to lose on purpose ie tanking. He wants to put the team in the best position to win sustainably down the road. Getting to 8th place year in and year out is never going to amount to anything, much the same way that finishing 6 or 7th rarely ever does. When we are basically out of contention he would rather trade our aging parts for newer young guys in hopes of them developing together to give a strong standing later.

If you have virtually no chance in your current season, your best bet is to make changes for the upcoming seasons, keeping your team nearly the same is unlikely to yield results you wish for.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 03:44 PM
  #472
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
Once again, you're adding a whole bunch of nothing to this conversation.

LG has said himself he doesn't want to lose on purpose ie tanking. He wants to put the team in the best position to win sustainably down the road. Getting to 8th place year in and year out is never going to amount to anything, much the same way that finishing 6 or 7th rarely ever does. When we are basically out of contention he would rather trade our aging parts for newer young guys in hopes of them developing together to give a strong standing later.

If you have virtually no chance in your current season, your best bet is to make changes for the upcoming seasons, keeping your team nearly the same is unlikely to yield results you wish for.
doesnt have to say it, anyoneone with half a brain know that's the only thing he think of... main two points are 1. trading vets unless contenders (so, not only if you're 8th) and 2. get a top 5 pick...

please, tell me how this is not tanking ?

I mean, trading players unless being contenders IS making the team worse and how do you get that top 5 pick if you're a team that constantly finish around 7th/9th ??? (unless tanking...)

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 05:58 PM
  #473
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
doesnt have to say it, anyoneone with half a brain know that's the only thing he think of... main two points are 1. trading vets unless contenders (so, not only if you're 8th) and 2. get a top 5 pick...

please, tell me how this is not tanking ?

I mean, trading players unless being contenders IS making the team worse and how do you get that top 5 pick if you're a team that constantly finish around 7th/9th ??? (unless tanking...)
No, it's a buzz word you guys that disagree like to use to try and somehow discredit his views. Grow up.

It's not tanking, you're still icing a competitive team, you're just repositioning yourself for the following season, because you realize the current team doesn't have what it takes. You call it tanking, I call it being smart and managing assets more efficiently.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 09:44 PM
  #474
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
No, it's a buzz word you guys that disagree like to use to try and somehow discredit his views. Grow up.

It's not tanking, you're still icing a competitive team, you're just repositioning yourself for the following season, because you realize the current team doesn't have what it takes. You call it tanking, I call it being smart and managing assets more efficiently.
The problem lies there. No proof has come forward that this is more efficient then say, finishing 8th, then 6th, then battling for division and possibly being a contender.
I agree that we could have traded some players (granted they were actually attracting a worthy return. No need in trading Souray for a 5th pick at the deadline.).

Trading away vets that are set to become UFAs for prospects/picks when you have difficulty making the POs is one thing, asking to trade away players to make your team bad enough to get a top 5 pick (which means finishing in the bottom of the NHL) is another.
I have no issues with calling it quits on a season and trading away vets that you don't want to re-sign in order to get any type of value in return. I'm all for it actually. We missed out on a few opportunities but I was glad to see Gauthier trade Wiz's rights this summer. It shows he's at least more proactive than Gainey in that regard.
You have to be careful not to close the curtains early every year though because all you'll be doing putting forth a bad team. Keep in mind that picks are just that...picks. In no way does it guarantee you a great team, let alone a Cup winning one, just look at the NYI, ATL, FLA, etc..

Personally, I think you need to rebuild on the fly, which is what we've been doing. If making the POs isn't really assured and you have low confidence in the team, then move the players you don't want back (Souray doesn't fall into that category as he was offered a deal). If you're in battling hard to make them and show good things, then go for it. You can adapt as you go, and you can draft very good players regardless.

It isn't as simple as if contender, go for it, if not, then trade away vets to rebuild through higher picks.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-02-2011, 10:35 PM
  #475
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
The problem lies there. No proof has come forward that this is more efficient then say, finishing 8th, then 6th, then battling for division and possibly being a contender.
I agree that we could have traded some players (granted they were actually attracting a worthy return. No need in trading Souray for a 5th pick at the deadline.).

Trading away vets that are set to become UFAs for prospects/picks when you have difficulty making the POs is one thing, asking to trade away players to make your team bad enough to get a top 5 pick (which means finishing in the bottom of the NHL) is another.
I have no issues with calling it quits on a season and trading away vets that you don't want to re-sign in order to get any type of value in return. I'm all for it actually. We missed out on a few opportunities but I was glad to see Gauthier trade Wiz's rights this summer. It shows he's at least more proactive than Gainey in that regard.
You have to be careful not to close the curtains early every year though because all you'll be doing putting forth a bad team. Keep in mind that picks are just that...picks. In no way does it guarantee you a great team, let alone a Cup winning one, just look at the NYI, ATL, FLA, etc..

Personally, I think you need to rebuild on the fly, which is what we've been doing. If making the POs isn't really assured and you have low confidence in the team, then move the players you don't want back (Souray doesn't fall into that category as he was offered a deal). If you're in battling hard to make them and show good things, then go for it. You can adapt as you go, and you can draft very good players regardless.

It isn't as simple as if contender, go for it, if not, then trade away vets to rebuild through higher picks.
Sure, it's a combination of both. After our first place finish there was reason to be optimistic, but then we fell back to being borderline playoff bound. We would likely be further ahead today if we sold some assets that would bring back cheap, cost controlled youngsters. As it is, we're still a borderline playoff team and not much more. We could of traded Markov for example when we knew we weren't there and we would probably still be a borderline playoff team with a brighter future. It doesn't mean you're going to be a lottery pick team just because you get rid of a few guys who you deem expendable. Now I just used Markov as a hypothetical and I'm not saying he shouldn't have or shouldn't be in the plans, but it's something that should of been explored.

Depends, what would you rather happen, build slowly and watch a semi competitive team hopefully get better with time, or watch a slightly inferior team with hopes of accelerating the progress a little quicker. Were not in terrible shape, we're in the best shape we've been in in years, but I think we could be slightly closer to our goals had we gone in a different direction. Especially if we avoided the gomez, gionta type trades/dealings. No way were we ready for these acquisitions, we still had too many holes. It's unlikely, but not impossible that we reach our goals of winning a cup before those contracts expire.

There is no sure fire way to win a cup, but the idea should be as a GM to give your team the best possible chance. Finishing 6th-8th each year does little towards that goal. If you don't have a good enough team, something needs to change.

habsjunkie2* 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 12:37 AM.

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.