Around the NHL XXXIX

[2CHAINZ]

Because this is not a GDT. This is the appropriate place to have this discussion.

This is around the NHL thread not around Sweden thread

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I can agree with this. That extension was not ideal. Not the end of the world either.

The big freakout around here was around Dahlen though, not the extension. We had multiple 1000+ threads about that trade, and every single GDT was derailed by Dahlen talk. I kind you not, more ink was spilled over losing Dahlen than losing Karlsson. Now that Dahlen is not panning out, everyone is acting like it was no big deal. It's pathetic and cowardly. Typical online community echo-chamber behavior.

Ya, that's fair. I was happy with the acquisition and argued extensively about his contributions on the run. I even thought he could hold it together enough the next year to not be a total waste, but he was done and it was a good lesson for me about misguided faith in aging players getting their game back.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Agreed on a lot of people being very vocal about how good a prospect Dahlen was and how unacceptable it was that we traded him for Burrows.

It bordered on hysteria from some of our resident "I don't enjoy insulting Dorion, I just do it all the time 24/7 because it is true" posters.

 

[Micklebot]

I can agree with this. That extension was not ideal. Not the end of the world either.

The big freakout around here was around Dahlen though, not the extension. We had multiple 1000+ threads about that trade, and every single GDT was derailed by Dahlen talk. I kind you not, more ink was spilled over losing Dahlen than losing Karlsson. Now that Dahlen is not panning out, everyone is acting like it was no big deal. It's pathetic and cowardly. Typical online community echo-chamber behavior.

Idk, people never suggested Dahlen wasn't expendable, he was getting lumped in around Chlapik in terms of his quality, or a late first round pick (ie about a 30% chance of panning out)

People who were opposed to the trade just thought we gave up too much value for Burrows given what other players that same deadline went for.

Those people were probably the same people who had low opinions of Burrows.

In the end, both extremes were partially right, burrows was trash and didn't live up to the contract we gave him to facilitate the trade, and Dahlen hasn't lived up to the late 1st value some pegged him at.

The problem is people viewed the opposing position in the most extreme way possible resulting in strawman arguments

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Agreed on a lot of people being very vocal about how good a prospect Dahlen was and how unacceptable it was that we traded him for Burrows.

It bordered on hysteria from some of our resident "I don't enjoy insulting Dorion, I just do it all the time 24/7 because it is true" posters.

Dahlen was one thing. The 2 year extension is what got me. He was burned out. No extension its a lot more palatable.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Dahlen was one thing. The 2 year extension is what got me. He was burned out. No extension its a lot more palatable.

Absolutely agreed but that wasn't an option unfortunately. We definitely needed more sand and paper on top of that. At the end of the day the money thing doesn't bother me a lot because it isn't our money.

How about this or that: trade a better prospect for a year of Burrows or trade a lesser prospect and have to sign Burrows to an extension? I take the latter with no hesitation.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Absolutely agreed but that wasn't an option unfortunately. We definitely needed more sand and paper on top of that. At the end of the day the money thing doesn't bother me a lot because it isn't our money.

How about this or that: trade a better prospect for a year of Burrows or trade a lesser prospect and have to sign Burrows to an extension? I take the latter with no hesitation.

At that time Dahlen wasn't considered a lesser prospect. When he first got to Vancouver they were pretty excited to have him

 

[Do Make Say Think]

At that time Dahlen wasn't considered a lesser prospect. When he first got to Vancouver they were pretty excited to have him

All I can say, and I think you'd agree, is that HF overvalues prospects.

Dahlen wasn't garbage but he wasn't a surefire prospect either.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

More on this

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

 

[Very Stable Genius]

Marc Crawford now:

 

[TheDebater]

Man some people were not joking when they predicted a sweeping avalanche of accusations after the Bill Peters one.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Marc Crawford now:

 

[benjiv1]

There is likely some Ottawa / Crawford stories that are going to come out unfortunately.

I heard about one a couple of years ago, from a very reliable source.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

There is likely some Ottawa / Crawford stories that are going to come out unfortunately.

I heard about one a couple of years ago, from a very reliable source.

There were a few circulating last year when he took over or around that time.
This is an abridged version of this blasting Chabot in his rookie year for a bad read at the blue line. I like how Chabot gobs on the ice

 

[Xspyrit]

Absolutely agreed but that wasn't an option unfortunately. We definitely needed more sand and paper on top of that. At the end of the day the money thing doesn't bother me a lot because it isn't our money.

How about this or that: trade a better prospect for a year of Burrows or trade a lesser prospect and have to sign Burrows to an extension? I take the latter with no hesitation.

Moot point, Burrows doesn’t agree going to Ottawa without an extension in place

Burrows would have been a good acquisition as a rental and would have cost less than Dahlen (even though we overreacted on him). Dorion should have just went with another option if he needed a 2 years extension for AB. Even though it wasn’t a lot of money for the NHL (except for us in Ottawa apparently), it was « risky » for a player who was on his last NHL miles

 

[BloodRedArmy]

View media item 2793

 

[TheDebater]

View media item 2793

Was this not the "popular" type of coach from the late 90's through the 2000's? Was a coach like Jacques Martin not criticized for being too calm behind the bench and not loud enough like Crawford or Pat Quinn for example?

Times sure have changed, and the new generation obviously has zero tolerance for that kind of crap myself included. I am in my 30's and I have quit every job where my boss would lose his shit for no reason or disrespect me or other employees. Young hockey players are probably in the same boat, show me respect, talk to me like a human being and I will return the respect and do my best, treat me like an animal and I will show you nothing in return.

 

[BankStreetParade]

Are people surprised at the stories or are people surprised that the stories are coming out?

 

[Silencio]

No wonder Crawford's voice always sounds strained when he speaks....his vocal cords must be shredded to pieces after all that unhinged shrieking.

 

[Cat Herder]

Crawford deserves a medal and so much more if he kicked Avery

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Ok that is legit awesome!

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Yes, but Crawfords crazy was well known by the public for a long time. Unless there was even worse things behind the scenes. For everyones' sake, I hope not.

But we all know what he's like...same with Keenan and Torts. It's a bit hard to be shocked when the whole tough guy persona was what got them hired to begin with.

 

[Sun God Nika]

I knew Crawford was going to be the next pin to be dropped as soon the Bill Peters stuff started, don't know who is next but the snowball is only gonna get bigger and its about f***ing time.