Wrong again. You have no idea what I believe. If you ever actually read my posts, you'd know that I don't believe Dubas is perfect or infallible. I don't believe anybody is perfect. I just don't share your irrational hatred of him, which you falsely equate to "believing he is perfect" in order to deflect from your contradictions and lack of answers. Looking at how and why things happened and considering the context and impacting factors behind it are not "excuses", and attacking people for discussing them is extremely hypocritical considering you bring up the exact same stuff when it comes to Treliving. There are things that a GM is and isn't in control of, and both should be looked at. My methods of evaluation have remained exactly the same with both GMs, while you flipped on every fundamental belief and methodology that you previously argued for, once Treliving took charge. You refused to answer any of the questions asked of you in our earlier discussion, because it would expose those contradictions.
Actually, I identified plenty. You just ignored them. We over focused on snot at the expense of the team. We failed to acquire a top-4 defenseman, but did acquire some of the worst defensive players in the league, and our defensive results and ultimately our overall team quality suffered for it. We shifted cap from defense/goalie to forward, when we should have done the opposite. We made the stupid decision to sign Reaves to a 3 year contract and then traded a younger, cheaper, superior player. Made the stupid decision to sign Klingberg. Signed Kampf to a pricey contract and then created a team that he didn't fit into. Traded assets to have one-dimensional bottom pairing clones on every pairing that sunk our transition ability. We could go on, but I've already been over this stuff like 10 times.
I didn't say that signing Samsonov was stupid. That's the least of the things I hold against Treliving. I just asked you to establish your position on whether it is okay to use hindsight against a GM when the choice made at the time was reasonable. Should we consider the situation and realistic options or just demand results? You didn't answer, of course. You've also failed to explain what exactly about walking into a goalie coming off a good season - that Treliving had the choice and cap space to re-sign or go an alternate route - and a backup signed to a great contract, is bad. Your expectation seems to be something that there are only a handful of in the league and tend to be home-grown over a decade.
Once again, you didn't actually read what I wrote. Certain types of "grit" can be useful, and having some players with "grit" isn't inherently bad. However, abandoning critical roles, attributes, and what a team needs in order to overload on some of the least useful aspects of grit in heavily flawed players we don't need, is an issue. The grit itself wasn't why signing Bertuzzi, Domi, Reaves, etc. was problematic, but the excessive focus on grit, grit, and more grit for grit's sake was stupid. There's a difference between valuing grit and overvaluing grit. It should not be top priority.
