Are you OK with management Mistakes when they make them?

[Indca]

Hello there guys;
So, I see there is two tokens to every transactions; some trades or signings or drafts pan out while other fall flat on the face.

I understand the risk and have accepted that we might not hit and may fail on certain moves, but I want to back this management for their willingness to take the risk.

What is your take on how management is handling the team rebuild?

Click to read more...

 

[Canadienna]

Hello there guys;
So, I see there is two tokens to every transactions; some trades or signings or drafts pan out while other fall flat on the face.

I understand the risk and have accepted that we might not hit and may fail on certain moves, but I want to back this management for their willingness to take the risk.

What is your take on how management is handling the team rebuild?

So long as the mistakes were made in earnest, and weren't a product of a deeper flaw in the thought process, then I won't hold it against them.

I think the new management has brought a breath of fresh air into an organization that was in desperate need.

Whether or not they all pan out, I agree with the rationale of many/all of their choices.

 

[MasterD]

Depends on the mistake.

For the record, people will talk about Slafkovski and Wright for years, but they have to keep in mind the overconfident Wright we would have had at 1st OA isn't the same player that got smacked in the face 3 times before being taken 4th overall. He might become better than Slaf, we'll see. But that's not necessarily how it would have played out if we picked him.

I understand the rational behind the pick, especially with the Dach move. Wright could become the next McDavid, I'm not gonna hold that against Hughes.

 

[DougHarvey]

No matter what happens in the future Slaf over Wright will always be their defining move.

No team is perfect , so yes , I can excuse mistakes. The NHL draft/trade game is a crapshoot so there is bound to be failure with certain moves.

 

[Spearmint Rhino]

As my first boss told me "If you don't f*** up you're not trying, just don't make a habit of it"

 

[JuicyHam]

They get a few mulligans. Even the greatest management teams of all time make mistakes. The biggest thing is the team improving over time despite mistakes. Like if they're genuinely not much better by the end of next season something must have gone seriously wrong in between

 

[Rapala]

Mistakes are fine obvious stupidity isn't.

 

[Mandala]

Except for first round pick mistakes. Unacceptable to miss since just random odds are such that you have to be real bad to miss a top 10 or top 20 for many years.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Depends on the mistake.

Some gambles are worth taking.

Example: Sergachev for Drouin. It was worth it. If Drouin had played consistently like in his good flashes, we would have had a star forward (French-Canadian to boot), and our window in the Price/Weber era would have been much stronger and more likely to bring home a cup.

Yeah, we lost that gamble. So be it.

However, something like McDonagh for Gomez was asinine. It was incredibly obvious that Gomez was done and severely overpaid already, and Gainey locked us with a non-contending core for the next 5 years. I could never accept what he did after 2009 before leaving.

 

[Kojo]

As long as they hit above average I don't care about the mistakes. Bergevin won about 40% of the times, that's not good enough.

 

[David Suzuki]

Sure as long as the moves are consistent with a vision. If nothing comes from the toffoli trade, I will not get mad at management because the move made sense in the scope of the vision they've laid out. Not every move is going to be a home run but as long as it's logical I won't waste time getting mad at them.

 

[Xirik]

Huh, with all the Hughes love I thought there would be someone saying that "Hughes can't make mistakes".

 

[BLNY]

We're human. Mistakes will happen. It's when patterns repeat because they don't learn from them that there is a problem.

 

[expy]

Mistakes are bad, but everyone makes them.

 

[Milhouse40]

Mistakes will be made.
Not one hit 100%

Only the end result matters for me....and not individually but collectively.

Doesn't matter player X become better than player Y......if the team wins, no one will care.
The opposite is equally true, no matter how great the moves or the pick, if the team can't win, no one will care.

 

[CHwest]

Depends on the mistake.

Some gambles are worth taking.

Example: Sergachev for Drouin. It was worth it. If Drouin had played consistently like in his good flashes, we would have had a star forward (French-Canadian to boot), and our window in the Price/Weber era would have been much stronger and more likely to bring home a cup.

Yeah, we lost that gamble. So be it.

However, something like McDonagh for Gomez was asinine. It was incredibly obvious that Gomez was done and severely overpaid already, and Gainey locked us with a non-contending core for the next 5 years. I could never accept what he did after 2009 before leaving.

On what planet was Sergachev for Drouin worth it. Stupid trade just to get a French player. I knew we were screwed when that happened, no hockey sense to bargain bin at all.

 

[HabsQC]

On what planet was Sergachev for Drouin worth it. Stupid trade just to get a French player. I knew we were screwed when that happened, no hockey sense to bargain bin at all.

I disagree. Drouin just had 14 points in 17 playoffs games and then 53 in 73 while Sergachev didn't even play a game in the NHL.

How could you possibly know that we were screwed at that point ?

It's easy to say afterwards that it didn't turn so well for us, but at the day of the trade it actually made sense.

 

[Goldenhands]

Hello there guys;
So, I see there is two tokens to every transactions; some trades or signings or drafts pan out while other fall flat on the face.

I understand the risk and have accepted that we might not hit and may fail on certain moves, but I want to back this management for their willingness to take the risk.

What is your take on how management is handling the team rebuild?

Our depth at every positions is insane and Im counting on the next draft to get that offensive superstar that is lacking, preferably a center. Then, a #1 defenseman should be the priority, but I do think that if one of Engstrom or Hutson pans out, we will be fine since we badly lack a dominant PP quarterback for and foremost, guys like Guhle, Xhakaj can eat big minutes. The goaltending situation Im confortable with, Im especially very high on Dobes, but I still believe that Primeau will be a good one in 2-3 yrs from now. goaltenders take longer to develop and reach their prime, so with Dobes and Primeau we are in good shape IMO.

Hughes made a great job to collect 1st rounders and get us Heineman, who will be a solid piece of the rebuild, so we potentially could find another solid defenseman with those picks.

The last draft is shaping up to be our best one since the year we got Patch, Mcdo and Subban. Engstrom is IMO a very high upside player, has the size, great mobility,skating, puck skills and IQ, he is really really good in the offensive zone and solid in his own end, Only watched 1 of his games, but he looked great, cant wait to watch him at the next WJC. I think everybody love Beck, such a great pick and a surefire middle 6 center. Slaf, Mesar, Hutson, its going to be an awesome draft.

Hughes has been doing an exceptional job so far.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

I disagree. Drouin just had 14 points in 17 playoffs games and then 53 in 73 while Sergachev didn't even play a game in the NHL.

How could you possibly know that we were screwed at that point ?

It's easy to say afterwards that it didn't turn so well for us, but at the day of the trade it actually made sense.

A lot of the board at the time thought the trade was likely a lateral trade (at best).

Turns out we were right to think that, Drouin crashed and burned worse than most people imagined and Sergachev turned out to be pretty much what people expected.

 

[admiralcadillac]

Hello there guys;
So, I see there is two tokens to every transactions; some trades or signings or drafts pan out while other fall flat on the face.

I understand the risk and have accepted that we might not hit and may fail on certain moves, but I want to back this management for their willingness to take the risk.

What is your take on how management is handling the team rebuild?

Listen criticizing decision as they happen is one thing. Foe example I think Hughes criticizing Slafkosvky at a press conference, even if mildly, was a mistake. Maybe he was right to do so.

Hindsight mistake gm’ing is however so f***ing irritating

 

[MakeTheGoalsLarger]

Yeah I get it's the honeymoon phase and some fans will back the management for 100% of their decisions and do the exact opposite when they decide they've had enough or just because it's trendy to do so.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

Listen criticizing decision as they happen is one thing. Foe example I think Hughes criticizing Slafkosvky at a press conference, even if mildly, was a mistake. Maybe he was right to do so.

Hindsight mistake gm’ing is however so f***ing irritating

I don’t think Hughes was wrong for saying what he said about Slafkovsky. The fan base is thinking the same thing, we have eyes.

We were told from the draft interviews that Slafkovsky was very open to critique in his game and wanted to hear how to improve, it was one of the reasons they liked his character over Wright. I’m sure he can handle the comment, there wasn’t a shred of lie in the comment.

It’s early, but he needs to be better and show more. If people can’t handle that truth, they’re soft.

 

[RealityHurts]

For now, it all depends on Slafkovskiy.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

To answer the OP’s question:

It depends on the mistake and how it transpired. There’s varying degrees of errors and misjudgements and how we perceive them.

For instance, would I look back in hindsight and give Hughes a hard time for the Lane Hutson pick if another player picked a few spots later turned out better? No, I don’t think you can. With the information at hand, and the risk/reward at that pick you have to take chances and Hutson was an excellent value pick at that spot. Doesn’t mean it may not be a “mistake” 5 years from now.

The Slafkovsky pick is a different story. That’s a make or break pick for a GM, and he had better hope he got that one right. There was a strong case for any of Wright, Cooley, Nemec, Slafkovsky at #1 this year. It’s going to be a heavily watched situation over the next 5ish years as these players develop.

I can absolutely live with mistakes, but there needs to be rhyme or reason why the decisions were made.

Signing Karl Alzner over Andrei Markov, for example, made no f***ing sense in any universe.

While I don’t agree with every single move Hughes has done to date, I can honestly say I can see the reasons why he’s made them and that there is a logical and in depth thought process behind them.

Overall I’m extremely pleased with the work he’s done thus far.

 

[MasterD]

I disagree. Drouin just had 14 points in 17 playoffs games and then 53 in 73 while Sergachev didn't even play a game in the NHL.

How could you possibly know that we were screwed at that point ?

It's easy to say afterwards that it didn't turn so well for us, but at the day of the trade it actually made sense.

This is super off-topic so I'm not going to answer past this, but we're talking about the guy who refused to play for a QJMHL team and had to be traded, and refused to go to the AHL for Tampa and would rather skate in circles in Ste-Agathe. (and I was told something similar happened in Midget before the Q, but haven't really loked into it...) We traded Sergachev for that guy.

No matter his stats, he was clearly a head case, and putting the Mtl pressure on him was an obvious mistake from the get go.