Wamsley01
-
Posts
5530 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Wamsley01
-
-
A Penguin, a Red Wing, whatever. Like I say, the Habs never seem to get these guys.
How much of that is tied to the emotional and historical attachment to the name Jagr? If you remove the name and analyze the players current skill set, couldn't you say the Habs did get this player in Robert Lang in 2008?
They also went for Tanguay and it didn't turn out so well.
I am not concerned about winning the free agent PR battle on July 1st.
-
Anyways, I said what I had to say. I'm not trying to absolve all GM's of their mistakes, the original point I was trying to make is that crying over spilt milk won't serve us in the present in any way, shape or form.
No it won't, but some times it is justified. It is justified for fans to cry and whine about the Patrick Roy trade, it isn't justified to whine and cry about a middling player like Latendresse when we received a middling player in return.
If a GM makes a franchise altering mistake, then crying won't change anything, but I have no problem with it.
-
It's less like rolling the dice - always a highly random event - and more like deciding to play out the hand in poker. You can never know what the other guy has and therefore whether you can win the hand, but a good player will be taking informed, well-calculated risks based on probabilities.
YEP. You know you will lose a lot of hands, but you know that if you use your information correctly and read the players well, the more you play the more likely you will be to profit. Sometimes you win going all in pre-flop with 2,7, but you make that call 100 times and you will lose money.
-
This whole discussion got started when I observed that if Latendresse has a strong season, it's going to be painful to see, considering that we got Pouliot back for him and that we just cut Pouliot loose, in effect getting no return for the asset that was Latendresse.
Wamsley's reply that Lats is NOT a 40-goal scorer is altogether reasonable (although his shooting % could conceivably increase if he's playing top-line minutes and getting higher-quality chances as a result). The most likely outcome for Lats IMHO is a third-liner role (which he provided very nicely for us for a couple of years before being dealt).
ForumGhost argued that was Lats does is irrelevant; that even if he scores 50 goals, we shouldn't care (!). This attitude is what's triggered all the debate. While there is always an element of uncertainty in dealing with young players, Wamsley's right that it's their JOB to evaluate talent and make the appropriate decision. Look at Vancouver trading Cam Neely for a washed-up Barry Pederson. They've never lived that down - and rightly so. ForumGhost's attitude would basically relieve GMs of all responsibility for outcomes. 'OOPS! Accidents happen!!' Uh, no...it's the GMs job to minimize the variables that lead to accidents.
If I wanted to be a worry-wart about Lats, I'd point out that he had put together a couple of solid seasons as a role player on our team and had scored 16 goals with minimal PP time; and that he was to some extent collateral damage from the Great Gainey Purge of 2009. He clearly was not prepared to adjust to the JM regime and, indeed, seemed to have mentally checked out on the team after that summer. In other words, he may have been evaluated by JM on the basis of an exceptionally poor and unmotivated two-month body of work prior to the trade rather than his overall development. Having said that, conditioning was always an issue with him and continues to be an issue in Minny - which doesn't say much for his learning curve.
Given the number of NHLers we've drafted only to send elsewhere, asset management IS a legitimate concern for thoughtful fans. Lats/Pouliot are just the latest element in an ongoing debate. But I think it's a valid question.
Agreed. GMs have a responsibility whether it is a good deal or not.
This is not a guessing game, if it was then every team's success would be based on luck and the Cup would be passed around equally as every team eventually lucked out. The Wings would not have been able to compete for the Cup on a yearly basis when they pick late in every draft if that was the case.
Some decisions are 99% fool proof (1% being injury, think Crosby). Some decisions have a 10% success rate from the beginning (think of the stab in the dark Houle took with Thibault) and some are 50/50 coin tosses (Latendresse/Pouliot). The teams that do the work and get closer to 99% are the ones who come out ahead more often than not. They ARE accountable if at the end of the day their balance sheet is 50% or below. Every single one of these decisions can come up roses, but the more Thibault type deals you make the more you will lose. Thibault could have evolved into the best goaltender in the league and Houle would have received a pass even though it was a stupid decision. That is why analyzing the though process is more beneficial than analyzing the individual result.
If the rumour that Gainey offered Price/Plekanec for Lecavalier is true then it is one of those decisions where his thought process was poor but he ended up getting lucky.
Nobody can predict the future, but you can offer up a solid view of it that can replicate 90% of reality. History is a great reference point to predict future outcomes and although flawed because of individual circumstance, injury etc, it provides a solid blueprint of how players will advance. Sometimes you do the research, make all the proper reads and you get a curveball. We should be all willing to accept that, but it doesn't remove accountability.
I am all for criticism of GMs if it is done with the proper perspective. The perspective of the factors leading to the trade, not the 100% crystal clear view that 3 extra years of observation provide. If the deal made sense to me at the time and it failed, I can't kill the GM. If the deal looked like it was the result of panic or flawed logic, then it is openly assailable.
-
As for Price/Halak, it was a gamble and everyone knew it. It paid off, but it could have just as easily backfired.
As for Mara, I know he isn't gunna turn into a premier shutdown defenseman - but that's not the point. The point is there's a large amount of guesswork that goes into building and maintaining a team, and faulting a GM for every little failure just isn't fair. The best any GM can do is make a call given the information they have at any given moment. It's calculated risk, and it's an essential part of the job. But obviously they wouldn't call it calculated risk if there wasn't any risk in it.
It's easy to sit in our computer chairs and pretend we would have made all the right moves without actually having the options in front of us real time with the potential health of the franchise on the line. PG, Gainey and GM's in general take a lot more grief from their fans than they honestly deserve.
GMs are going to take grief, but it is their responsibility to project forward. It is their responsibility to assess the talent they have and make decisions based on the future.
Carey Price wasn't an eeny meenie miney moe gamble. It was likely a decision based on analysis of his ability (technical, physical, mental etc) by Giroux and every other goaltending scout in the organization made by a team that knows him better than anybody else in the league. It was based on historical context and what other 23 year old goaltenders had accomplished at that point, not the knee jerk analysis of the media and fans. It was based on them having an intimate understanding of his attitude, work ethic, maturity etc.
All of that was likely contrasted against Halak's and the decision was made with a projection in mind. It was a logical decision to make, it could have turned out wrong if they misjudged/analyzed any of those factors incorrectly, but the thought process was likely much more deliberate than the knee jerker who took the last 20 games to make up his mind.
We all know that GMs, coaches and players take heat from people with zero knowledge or insight of the relevant factors. One can make an intelligent dissection of a situation, but if that dissection is based on incorrect information, all it becomes is a brilliantly crafted incorrect answer. If a GM does his due diligence but makes a poor decision based on flawed information than he is responsible for that wrong decision. We see it happen all the time.
If they misjudged Latendresse's work ethic, potential, ceiling etc. than damn right they are responsible. Are they at fault? Not necessarily, because you never know when the lightbulb will come on with players. Some people look like lost causes and then something triggers their understanding. Maturity maybe, the shock of being traded, who knows.
To me there is a difference between trading Patrick Roy for a bag of pucks and dealing a 22 year old who shows up to camp fat and complains about playing time. One offense is indefensible, the other is understandable.
-
Well, the whole thing is a bit of a bummer. First, we acquire him in exchange for a Québécois power forward who is problematic but nonetheless scores 25 in 55 with Minny...then he teases us with a nice run with Gomez...then he reverts back into his default position of 'enigma'...then we (apparently) lose him just because his cap hit is skewed as a result of his high draft position. The Benny Pouliot story is a frustrating one.
His most likely future is probably playing in Europe after bouncing around the NHL a little more. Still, there remains a chance that he will click either as a productive player in some no-pressure market like Florida, or as a decent role-player. But really, Latendresse is the wild card; if he finally discovers the value of physical fitness and returns to his 2009-10 form, it's going to be a pretty excruciating state of affairs.
Latendresse posted a ridiculous shooting percentage to register that mark. Just like Sergei this season. No chance he replicates that next season.
The fact is that in 2011 there were 2 players who registered better than an 18.8% that Lats measured during his 25 goal season. Anything over 15% would have registered a top 25 finish this season. People don't want to look at these factors, but 3% is the difference between Latendresse registering between 20 or 25. If he had shot his career average of .14% he would have been at 18 goals.
Lats scored 12 goals in 56 games shooting 12% playing on the third line in 2009. What happened in 2010 wasn't really a big jump in his performance. He is pretty much the same player he was in Montreal.
Shooting percentage fluctuates wildly and it isn't a proven skill. Some years you get more luck than others and those usually result in career years. Gomez is a career 7% shooter, but in 2006 he put up 14%, it is no surprise that he has not been able to replicate that season. Latendresse is not going to get 50 goals. Latendresse has averaged about 145 shots per season, so in order for him to drop 50 he would need to double his regular shot output and match his career high 18%.
-
Yeah, but hindsight is always perfect. If Lats showed no signs of being an offensive powerhouse back then (which he clearly didn't), how were the Habs supposed to mystically know to retain him. And even then, who's to say he could have gotten to that point in our system? There are so many variables.
With that logic, we should be retaining Paul Mara just in case he because a premiere shutdown defenseman.
They retained Price even though it looked like Halak was better 12 months ago. That is what GMs are PAID to do.
Paul Mara will not turn into a premier shutdown defenseman at the age of 32. If he was going to, it would have happened.
-
Well...there WAS the terrifying rumour that Gainey had offered a package including Price and Subban for Lecavalier and that the deal was only nixed by Tampa ownership...
I thought it was Price/Plekanec. Either way, once again would prove that sometimes you need to be lucky.
-
I would hold on to him for one more season. The financial landscape is not going to change and with half the teams under the salary floor his contract will be easy to unload in 2011.
http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2011/6/22/2238529/can-scott-gomez-be-traded-next-summer
-
The difference between what Philly has done and what the Habs did in 2009 is that we destroyed a core of players that had conspicuously failed to deliver the goods on the ice, and replaced it with a core of proven veterans with Cup rings. Philly did something approaching the reverse of that, shattering a team that had made the Finals and replacing it with kids just out of kindergarten.
Elliotte Friedman was on the Team 1040 in Vancouver this morning and he basically confirmed Wamsley's suspicion: Ed Snyder's an old man desperate for a Cup and commanded Holmgren to sign Bryzghalov at all costs. Whether this ownership intrusion extended to these specific moves is a unclear, but Friedman implied as much, and for one of the all-time-tough SOBs in the sport (Holmgren) to break down in public really suggests that something has gone off the rails in Philly.
I sure hope so. With them in meltdown mode, the biggest single obstacle to the Habs coming out of the East would be removed.
I agree 100%. I had empathy for the Philly fans (I may never say this again) because I understood the emotional tear they felt, only there's was 10x worse. It would be the equivalent to Price/Subban driving the horse to the precipice of the Stanley Cup championship and the Habs turning around and trading them for Jack Campbell and Victor Hedman the next season. I would lose my mind after investing a decade in those players.
The funny thing is, the Philly fans are already in rationalization mode.
-
Maybe this situation is comparable to the 2008-09 Habs, the summer Gainey cleaned out Koivu, Kovalev, Tanguay, Komisarek et al and replaced them with Gomez, Cammalleri, Gionta, Spacek and Gill over 24 hours.
There is a lot of talk of locker room issues in Philly, of a feud between Richards and Pronger that divided the team in half. It is probably a way of putting an end to that. I think it was that same season for the Habs where lots of pictures started popping up of people like Price and Higgins in bars which were shortly followed by allegations that their play was struggling because the young players were too busy partying - well, similar thing with Richards and other young players on the Flyers, and there were rumours he didn't get along with Laviolette (probably not true) and that he was getting more irritated by the media. The question is: if you're shopping Carter but then decide to trade Richards, shouldn't you then hang on to Carter?
Also there's the fact that Richards is intimidated by Subban being in the same conference so he requested a trade.
I immediately thought of July 1st 2009 when it was all going down yesterday.
The shock I felt as a Hab fan was likely the same jolts going through the Flyers faithful yesterday. I am not going to guess why they did it, but Holmgren looked like he didn't want to do it.
-
True. But all we can go by is the knowledge we possess. And by those lights, this was a questionable deal if your goal is to contend now.
Richards and Pronger have butted heads before, so you could be quite correct. But having dealt one of the league's blood-and-guts all-around players and a 40-goal scorer, they're now relying on a guy with 8 games NHL experience (Schenn), another who has never scored more than 40 points (Simmonds) and an enigmatic youngster who frustrated Columbus (Voracek).
Add in the draft picks, and Philly is set with young talent for years to come. But does this make them better for next season? Maybe - but only if everything breaks their way.
Holmgren was in tears during the press conference. Have you ever seen that?
I don't know anything outside of perception and analyzing the moves from outside, but considering all the shrewd moves Holmgren has made in rebuilding this team and reading the Philly fans reaction, this seems like a move that was requested from up above. They proved that you can almost win a Cup with a tin can in goal two seasons ago, to sell the soul of the team for Bryzgalov seems like a knee jerk reaction.
The peaks of the youth and the goaltender/All-Star defenseman don't match up. This is a bizarre move and if the trades were made by somebody like Milbury I would just think idiotic, but when a guy pulls all the right strings for 5 years and then melts down over 2 hours, I am calling shenanigans.
-
One of the reasons they like having Detroit in the West is they boost the attendance of some softer markets, like C-bus and Nashville. They might grant them their wish of going East but make them do the same for Tampa and Florida.
They cut out the Caps from the Patrick over a decade ago... they've maintained some level of rivalry with the other teams despite this.
I'm not sure I understand divisional playoffs without going full out like the old days. This proposal is interesting, but really weird on that front. So the NHL wants every geographical region represented by at least two teams in the Conference semifinals, and then they don't care.
I like it. It almost assures a future Leaf/Hab playoff series should they make the playoffs for any sustained period together.
I think they set it up that way to get the divisional playoff games that we don't always see (outside of Boston/Montreal which seem to have magnets attached to them regardless of the situation). It is like half old system/half new system.
As for the Red Wings propping up the weak sisters, I would like to see the individual numbers to take that as gospel. The Wings play the Coyotes 4 times, leaving 2 Phoenix home dates. If the Wings bring in 80% capacity instead of 50% capacity, what are we talking? Considering a team like the Coyotes make about $450K per game in gate revenue, how much are we talking for two games in contrast to what their average attendance is? $100,000?
Add in the factors like travel costs that will change with an alignment that is geographically based and isn't the difference negligible per team?
-
Maybe it would be NE+NY: Montreal, Boston, Toronto, Ottawa, Buffalo, NYI, NYR, New Jersey.
Then: Detroit, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Philly, Washington, Carolina, Tampa, Florida.
Then you sever the Rangers/Philly/Pitt rivalry that has been in existence since the Patrick days.
The question becomes do you sever the Pens from those rivalries or the Rangers.
The geographical argument favours the NY/NE alignment. The rivalry argument favours re-uniting the Wings with the Leafs and the Habs as well as adding in Crosby and the Pens. The East Division would begin to produce Cup contenders because of the competitiveness just to make the playoffs.
-
Mind-blowing. Presumably it's maneouvering to fit Bryzghalov under the cap, but holy macaroni.
There are no words. Is that team a contender now? I don't know if I have ever been more shocked.
-
Philly traded Carter and Richards today!
-
You forgot the Whalers. And by that, I mean Carolina.
This proposal would be a 16/14 conference split. Until they award two expansion franchises out west to any of Seattle, Vegas, Kansas City, Houston or Austin.
So putting Carolina in... dear God, does that mean Pittsburgh joins our new division, too?
Yikes. That would be scary!
-
Years ago, when the Habs were annual contenders, I used to notice that we had more grudge matches/rivalry games per season than anyone else. Quebec? Check. Leafs? Check. Boston? Check. Calgary? Check. Hartford? Check. Buffalo? Check. Philly? Check. When Ottawa showed up, they considered us 'rivals' as well. Check. Any Original Six team? Check.
Even now, despite 20 years of mediocrity and thus little opportunity to build up playoff grudges, teams still get up to play the Habs, the team of myth and fable. And our recent resurgence means that Philly and Boston, once again, genuinely hate our guts.
This has its pros and cons. The 'con' is that you're going to lose games strictly due to being unable to match the intensity of your opponent. For instance, back when we were elite and the Leafs were total crap, they used to beat us a disproportionate per centage of the time, because they'd be totally hyped for the game and our guys would snooze. You're also at heightened risk of injury with all these grudge battles. When you're a so-so team, all this becomes really aggravating.
The 'pro' is that, if you have a good team, all these challenges make you better. You're accustomed to playing at a high level in high intensity games. This makes you a battle-tested squad come playoff time.
Of course Winnipeg wants to draw us for its opening game. When all is said and done, there is only one Greatest Franchise in the History of the Game. And it's us. For better and worse, it's a compliment. Take it in that spirit. But yes, we'll likely lose that game.
That didn't take long for the negativity to arise. We are already 0-1?
-
http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/06/22/nhl-maps-out-major-changes
The top 4 teams in each division make the playoffs in this proposal, if that is the case who makes up the Eastern division?
My guess is the East would be
7 TEAMS
Montreal
Boston
Ottawa
Toronto
Buffalo
Detroit
Collumbus
The South
8 TEAMS
NY Rangers
NY Islanders
NJ Devils
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington
Tampa
Florida
This would keep most of the established rivalries intact, but making the playoffs would be a bitch!
-
Because at the time he hadn't proven otherwise. Now he's been healthy for two years and has shown that the injuries haven't impaired his ability to play. Markov is still in the uncertainty phase.
He hadn't, but it WAS the same decision then (mind you he was much younger).
The risk is equal on both sides, but we are commenting without any inside knowledge or injury reports. It comes down to what can I live with. Can I live with Markov returning and blowing out his knee in January more than I can live with him going to Detroit and putting up 65 points?
I want him back.
-
Wiz played 75 games last season and 69 games the season before that. He's shown that he's 'still got it' and isn't made of glass. Markov hasn't proven that yet. Any time somebody only manages to play 8 games in a season you have to wonder whether he'll be the same player when he comes back.
If I asked you if Wiz was made of glass after 2008 your answer may have been different.
It is a 50/50 risk. Markov leaving as a UFA and being healthy is just as great a risk.
-
I'm sure i'm in the minority here but 5.5 and 6 mill for a guy that played 20 games or so in the last 2 years with a bad knee. that's crazy. I like Markov as a player and when healthy he is a top 10 d amn for sure but this one may come back to bite them.
i assume it will be
markov Gorges
Gill Subban
Spacek Yemelin and Weber
No room for Wiz or Hamrlik.
On average, but he played 45 games in 2010. Wisniewski has had 3 major knee surgeries before the age of 27 and nobody is hesitant to offer him big money. This is not 1980, players recover from reconstructive surgery.
If you allow Markov to hit the UFA market he likely gets $6M per and that could come back to bite them as well.
Both sides of the coin are a gamble.
-
Love Desharnais and I share Habs29's hope that he spends time on the wing. Although his faceoff prowess is useful. Another good, no-brainer signing.
Those are the type of players that nobody notices when you sign and don't know there name until they are holding up the Cup.
The Wings pickup and develop these cheap players all the time.
-
Talk is cheap, but I love this kind of stuff:
"Watching the playoffs I know how important it is to have a forward like me and I think going into my injury I had a little bit of a hot streak going and I found a way to get to the front of the net," Pacioretty said. "I think that really makes a difference, especially in the playoffs. You look at the guys that are successful, they're the ones who are battling in front of the net. I want to be that type of player for Montreal for many years."
There's nothing about that paragraph I don't like
Yes. Watching the playoffs! We never want him watching the playoffs again!!
Hammer Time
in Habs & Hockey Talk
Posted
From what I have read and seen, Emelin can pass the puck. Either way, how many Boston Bruins offer up a nice transition pass? Their forwards collapse down low and they to create offense off turnovers.
Nobody thought Streit was going to have an impact in September 2007. Nobody thought that Subban would be our best player in the playoffs in September 2010. The Habs can be a better version of the one that took the Bruins to the seventh game in OT if Markov replicates Wisniewski's play and one of Emelin or Weber are better than any of us have penciled them in for.
July 1st is not the end of team building. The Bruins added Kaberle, Kelly and Peverley in February and the Habs added Wiz in December. I am 100% comfortable in moving forward with a solid 4 of Markov, Subban, Gorges and Gill and watching how the three wildcards develop in Emelin, Weber and Diaz.
You may look back in 12 months and wonder how anybody considered trading Weber or talking about how Emelin replaced Hamrlik. 99% of the league would die for horses like Gomez and Subban who can carry the puck ala Chelios in 1988. I am not concerned about the transition game in the least. Markov and Subban are going to be on the ice for 70% of the game and with Gomez overlap they will be fine even if they don't have another puck mover. Add in a possible wildcard and this team will be fine in transition.