Speculation: Caps General Discussion (Coaching/FAs/Cap/Lines etc) - 2020 Offseason Pt. 3

[txpd]

Unless I am mistaken Ross Mahoney basically runs the draft. Thats the way it was with McPhee and I dont think that has changed.

 

[TheLegendOfPatPeake]

Are people really suggesting BMac needs to go? Aghhh, another day on HFBoards.

 

[BiPolar Caps]

Are people really suggesting BMac needs to go? Aghhh, another day on HFBoards.

I selected my user name as much for the Capitals fan base including this board as I did for the play of the team at times on the ice.

 

[Hivemind]

Note - please don't associate me with the "Fire GMBM" folks. I have never indicated I wanted him fired.

That being said, you can absolutely evaluate and criticize his individual moves, even if you don't want him fired. The full deferral to GMBM stifles discussion and ignores the fact that even professionals make mistakes. You are absolutely allowed to call out those mistakes, even if they have achieved a lot. Stan Bowman won 3 cups in 6 years with the Blackhawks, but is getting dragged by their fans because he has quickly made a series of blunders afterwards. It's the nature of the business.

 

[Hivemind]

Unless I am mistaken Ross Mahoney basically runs the draft. Thats the way it was with McPhee and I dont think that has changed.

Mahoney is the one selects their targets, the GM (whether McPhee or MacLellan) is the one who works out the trades and submits the picks to the league.

 

[Hivemind]

Finally anyone criticizing the Caps drafting the last 4-5 years is just smoking crack. Think its easy hitting home runs when you're drafting 24th every year? Its not. There may not be a TON of great prospects, but the quality at the top, considering draft position, is just fine. I'd venture to say, spend a few minutes comparing NHL games played by the Caps picks since 2014 vs other teams drafting in the 20+ range each year, it stacks up very well.

My criticism of their drafts isn't the players they've selected, but how many times they've traded up in the draft. GMBM has done it 8 times already. He's done it at least once in 5 of his 7 drafts. Trading up in specific scenarios for select targets would be fine, especially in the earlier rounds. But it's become a habit at this point, and the lack of picks is hurting their prospect pipeline. I've written about it in more detail in various draft threads.

 

[Rayquaza64]

My criticism of their drafts isn't the players they've selected, but how many times they've traded up in the draft. GMBM has done it 8 times already. He's done it at least once in 5 of his 7 drafts. Trading up in specific scenarios for select targets would be fine, especially in the earlier rounds. But it's become a habit at this point, and the lack of picks is hurting their prospect pipeline. I've written about it in more detail in various draft threads.

a decent amount of the trade ups have lead to higher quality prospects than probably would have been avaliable, which im assuming is brian's goal: to get high end prospects to be able to replace the core, which he's done a somewhat good job at. Not exactly sure how the mid-late round picks we've given up to trade up would really beef our prospect pool

 

[HTFN]

My criticism of their drafts isn't the players they've selected, but how many times they've traded up in the draft. GMBM has done it 8 times already. He's done it at least once in 5 of his 7 drafts. Trading up in specific scenarios for select targets would be fine, especially in the earlier rounds. But it's become a habit at this point, and the lack of picks is hurting their prospect pipeline. I've written about it in more detail in various draft threads.

It's a different philosophy but if they're getting "their guy" I'm not sure it matters too much in the long run. It's hurting the bulk amount of names coming through the system, sure, but when you look at what they've done recently it's hard to argue they're not pulling together a group with interesting potential.

If I'm not mistaken they traded up for Protas, which is a good example. If they believe Protas' chance at becoming an NHL player is even 10% better than the other names left on their board, I'm okay with that, because I think the strategy right now is to draft for that last big swing. They don't really need a bunch of guys who might end up surprisingly good third liners right now, they need one or two potential big hits (like Fehervary, although I don't remember if they traded up for him and I'm not going to look) to keep the Ovechkin window open.

When those guys are done or gone and the team is truly ready to retool or rebuild, I agree with you. Pile up the picks and draft a big wave of guys, but I can see why they'd be interested in moving up for players with that boom/bust potential right now.

 

[Ridley Simon]

Gmbm needs to go? Another lmao. He did, basically overnight, what makfi never did here in what...13 14 years?

More like 17. I think.

Plus let’s not discount the previous 26 before GMGM

 

[Rayquaza64]

a potential core for the future to dodge a full on rebuild that they are aiming for id assume would be a mix of
lapierre, mcmichael, protas, alexeyev, vanecek, samsonov, fehervary, and in the later rounds we have some potential role players that could help out as well (hughes, hugo has, malenstyn, trineyev, magnusson)

 

[Ridley Simon]

Note - please don't associate me with the "Fire GMBM" folks. I have never indicated I wanted him fired.

That being said, you can absolutely evaluate and criticize his individual moves, even if you don't want him fired. The full deferral to GMBM stifles discussion and ignores the fact that even professionals make mistakes. You are absolutely allowed to call out those mistakes, even if they have achieved a lot. Stan Bowman won 3 cups in 6 years with the Blackhawks, but is getting dragged by their fans because he has quickly made a series of blunders afterwards. It's the nature of the business.

This is an ironic post.

people on this board that call out your “mistakes” on your posts are put on ignore. You don’t want to want to hear it, yet you fight against those that don’t want to hear your “corrections” to decisions and perspectives made by the franchise.

So it’s totally ok to 2nd guess the mindset here, unless they are your mindsets?

Basically ... “do as I SAY everyone, but please ignore what I do”.

very credible. Good work

 

[Hivemind]

a decent amount of the trade ups have lead to higher quality prospects than probably would have been avaliable, which im assuming is brian's goal: to get high end prospects to be able to replace the core, which he's done a somewhat good job at. Not exactly sure how the mid-late round picks we've given up to trade up would really beef our prospect pool

Ahh, yes, replenishing our prospect pool with high quality trade up targets like Nathan Walker, Martin Hugo-Has, and Alex Kannok-Leipert. They've been huge difference makers to our prospect pool as trade up targets. Kannok-Leipert even did so well that they decided not to offer him a contract. What value!

I also seriously question if some of the players they traded up for wouldn't have been available at their later pick. I'll use Vanecek as an example. They traded up from 46 to grab him at 37 as a panic move after a mini-run on goalies early in the 2014 2nd round. No goalies were selected between 37 and 46. Only one other goalie (Brandon Halverson) was selected in the 2nd round (59th). Vanecek was not projected to be a 2nd rounder, with mock drafts having him as low as the 6th round. CSS had him 8th among European goalie prospects, and THW didn't have him among their top 10 overall goalies. The Vanecek pick was almost universally regarded as a "reach." Not only do I think Vanecek would have been there at 46, I'm willing to be he would have been there at 74 (the pick they traded away). And, hell, even if he wasn't there at 74, there were plenty of other goalie prospects of equal or better promise still on the board. Guys like Elvis Merzlikins (76), Ilya Sorokin (78), Ville Husso (94), Kaapo Kahkonen (109), and Igor Shetserkin (118). So it's not like they were going to miss out (and very well could have ended up with an even better goalie in addition to another pick). Not to mention that Brayden Point was available at 74 as well...

If it were just trades like the one he made for Hendrix Lapierre, I wouldn't have a ton of issue with it. But it's a repeated issue, and the results have been mixed at best. Moreover, as I've explained elsewhere, after the early portions of the draft, it's much better to have multiple picks than loading up on a single pick. The odds of later round picks become career NHLers are relatively small. It's a lot better to have 2 guys that have 14 or 15% odds than one player with 17 or 18% odds of sticking in the NHL for 200+ games.

 

[Hivemind]

It's a different philosophy but if they're getting "their guy" I'm not sure it matters too much in the long run. It's hurting the bulk amount of names coming through the system, sure, but when you look at what they've done recently it's hard to argue they're not pulling together a group with interesting potential.

If I'm not mistaken they traded up for Protas, which is a good example. If they believe Protas' chance at becoming an NHL player is even 10% better than the other names left on their board, I'm okay with that, because I think the strategy right now is to draft for that last big swing. They don't really need a bunch of guys who might end up surprisingly good third liners right now, they need one or two potential big hits (like Fehervary, although I don't remember if they traded up for him and I'm not going to look) to keep the Ovechkin window open.

When those guys are done or gone and the team is truly ready to retool or rebuild, I agree with you. Pile up the picks and draft a big wave of guys, but I can see why they'd be interested in moving up for players with that boom/bust potential right now.

Protas looks promising, but it's not just the Lapierre's and Protas's they're trading for. It's also guys like Alex Kannok-Leipert, who they didn't even offer a contract to. And Nathan Walker, who I've practically written essays on their bizarre asset management of, and who they should have had a pretty darn good idea of his ultimate (lack of) NHL sticking potential. One of the two picks that Capitals traded to the Rangers to draft Walker is literally the Rangers starting goaltender that drove Lundqvist out of town.

It's not just about boom/bust, which is more a philosophy of who they pick rather than trading up/down. If they had some more prospect depth (and perhaps a better pipeline of turning middle rounders into capable NHLers), they wouldn't have to be turning to guys like Hagelin and Panik as opposed to younger depth players working through their system.

The organization is one of the best in the NHL, if not the very best, at hitting on late 1st round picks. But a lot of their draft selections and draft strategy outside of the 1st round is pretty questionable. It's a lot better to take a shotgun approach with these later picks and hope they pan out than to tunnel vision on a couple and deprive your organization of more opportunities. Especially if they aren't going to be super aggressive in the undrafted free agent and NCAA free agent markets.

 

[txpd]

Are people really suggesting BMac needs to go? Aghhh, another day on HFBoards.

I get the feeling, not sure why, that the Schultz signing isnt popular in some quarters

 

[txpd]

Mahoney is the one selects their targets, the GM (whether McPhee or MacLellan) is the one who works out the trades and submits the picks to the league.

I realize Mahoney doesnt make trades. But, Mahoney tells McPhee that they want Carlson and tells him it is worth the assets to trade up. IMO, the Caps would be damaged if Mahoney left

 

[HTFN]

Protas looks promising, but it's not just the Lapierre's and Protas's they're trading for. It's also guys like Alex Kannok-Leipert, who they didn't even offer a contract to. And Nathan Walker, who I've practically written essays on their bizarre asset management of, and who they should have had a pretty darn good idea of his ultimate (lack of) NHL sticking potential. One of the two picks that Capitals traded to the Rangers to draft Walker is literally the Rangers starting goaltender that drove Lundqvist out of town.

It's not just about boom/bust, which is more a philosophy of who they pick rather than trading up/down. If they had some more prospect depth (and perhaps a better pipeline of turning middle rounders into capable NHLers), they wouldn't have to be turning to guys like Hagelin and Panik as opposed to younger depth players working through their system.

The organization is one of the best in the NHL, if not the very best, at hitting on late 1st round picks. But a lot of their draft selections and draft strategy outside of the 1st round is pretty questionable. It's a lot better to take a shotgun approach with these later picks and hope they pan out than to tunnel vision on a couple and deprive your organization of more opportunities. Especially if they aren't going to be super aggressive in the undrafted free agent and NCAA free agent markets.

Yeah, the Walker one was weird and sticks out from the others. I don't really get that one but it was also some time ago. Kannok-Leipert, well, that sounds like someone they thought would work, didn't, and making a concise organizational move to cut bait. It sucks, but that's not enough to get me to say they need to stop doing what they're doing.

If it's a 2-3% chance of success we're talking about, you're right. If they think someone like Protas has a 5-10% chance of surpassing what's left on the field I'm okay with that risk.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I’m trying to decide if the “fire GMBM” discussion is better or worse than the “trade Orlov” discussion yesterday. Looking forward to the “bench TJ Oshie” debate tomorrow.

as the world turns.....at least it’s mostly civil lol...

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

1. They're not ready if a defenseman who's barely playing 20 minutes a night gets injured and they fall apart. Tampa lost Stamkos and won the cup. I don't wanna hear about how Kempny is a more important player than Stamkos. No, it's just that Tampa is a much deeper team.
2. What personal relationship Orpik's had with the core and how much weight his word carried in that locker room is entirely different topic. We're talking about his on ice performance and he's been brutal more often than not.
3. No, it's not the same to expect from Burakovsky to play the way he did in the cup run and from Orpik. Burakovsky was a young, inconsistent player playing for the money young, inconsistent talented player should get. Orpik was getting paid like a leader and should have played like one if not all 5 years but at least 3-4 .
4. No, you don't understand that correctly. CapitalsCupreality was making a point that getting out of that contract wasn't as difficult as people imagined. I was making a point that it was a nice trick but had someone had to get rid of that contract now and keep the player after it would've been a problem because they closed that loophole back then and now you can't do that same thing.

1) he was a top pair guy not playing insignificant minutes. Sure he just clicked, but let’s not pretend it wasn’t a big loss.

2) no you cannot choose to separate Orpik’s leadership and influence, part of the package. By my memory he had at least 2 good playoff years with the Caps on ice.

4) it wasn’t difficult in that he deftly pulled it off (just as he moved Niskanen when performance and cap hit collided) and you want to discount the guile of the roster move by GMBM to fit your argument. Give the guy credit....whatever you want to speculate he could or could not do down the road for another player is different. The bitching and moaning that those contracts would doom us was loud. Hell, I don’t even know if you’re were one of those voices back then, but you’re sure digging in like it lol....

 

[ChaosLord]

Still somewhat surprised how underappreciated Brooks Orpik was here. He changed the culture. Opposing players were afraid of him. He was a team reputation builder.

I'm also one who believes he was overrated. IMO he cost us the Pittsburgh series in 2017. Game 1 saw the Caps utterly dominating the Pens -- basically telling them firmly "this year is going to be different" -- only to see their efforts completely wiped clean by Orpik when he let Nick Bonino race past him in the third period and score the go ahead goal. Losing that first game -- largely on Orpik's shoulders -- set the tone for the rest of the series. Had Orpik and Holtby played better that game, we might be talking about the Caps with two Cups in 2020, instead of just one.

 

[txpd]

You assume tht without Orpik and maybe Holtby that the Caps are good enough to win. Which i would disagree with. MacLellan specifically wanted Orpik for a reason and by all evidence Orpik delivered what they hired him to do.

 

[ChaosLord]

You assume tht without Orpik and maybe Holtby that the Caps are good enough to win. Which i would disagree with. MacLellan specifically wanted Orpik for a reason and by all evidence Orpik delivered what they hired him to do.

txpd, name me a worse player on the Caps 2017 roster than Brooks Orpik. Take as much time as you need.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

I'm also one who believes he was overrated. IMO he cost us the Pittsburgh series in 2017. Game 1 saw the Caps utterly dominating the Pens -- basically telling them firmly "this year is going to be different" -- only to see their efforts completely wiped clean by Orpik when he let Nick Bonino race past him in the third period and score the go ahead goal. Losing that first game -- largely on Orpik's shoulders -- set the tone for the rest of the series. Had Orpik and Holtby played better that game, we might be talking about the Caps with two Cups in 2020, instead of just one.

More likely we'd be crying with no Cups without him.

Amazing that you can hold onto a beef over one single play and call that whole series on Orpik.

I thought many others didn't do their jobs at times myself just like Orpik that play...they didn't score enough or cover their man well enough or stop enough shots....maybe I'm misremembering, everyone else was freakin amazing...ALL dragged down by 44......what a bum.

 

[Rayquaza64]

Ahh, yes, replenishing our prospect pool with high quality trade up targets like Nathan Walker, Martin Hugo-Has, and Alex Kannok-Leipert. They've been huge difference makers to our prospect pool as trade up targets. Kannok-Leipert even did so well that they decided not to offer him a contract. What value!

I also seriously question if some of the players they traded up for wouldn't have been available at their later pick. I'll use Vanecek as an example. They traded up from 46 to grab him at 37 as a panic move after a mini-run on goalies early in the 2014 2nd round. No goalies were selected between 37 and 46. Only one other goalie (Brandon Halverson) was selected in the 2nd round (59th). Vanecek was not projected to be a 2nd rounder, with mock drafts having him as low as the 6th round. CSS had him 8th among European goalie prospects, and THW didn't have him among their top 10 overall goalies. The Vanecek pick was almost universally regarded as a "reach." Not only do I think Vanecek would have been there at 46, I'm willing to be he would have been there at 74 (the pick they traded away). And, hell, even if he wasn't there at 74, there were plenty of other goalie prospects of equal or better promise still on the board. Guys like Elvis Merzlikins (76), Ilya Sorokin (78), Ville Husso (94), Kaapo Kahkonen (109), and Igor Shetserkin (118). So it's not like they were going to miss out (and very well could have ended up with an even better goalie in addition to another pick). Not to mention that Brayden Point was available at 74 as well...

If it were just trades like the one he made for Hendrix Lapierre, I wouldn't have a ton of issue with it. But it's a repeated issue, and the results have been mixed at best. Moreover, as I've explained elsewhere, after the early portions of the draft, it's much better to have multiple picks than loading up on a single pick. The odds of later round picks become career NHLers are relatively small. It's a lot better to have 2 guys that have 14 or 15% odds than one player with 17 or 18% odds of sticking in the NHL for 200+ games.

not gonna lie, i forgot we traded up for vanecek and walker

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

txpd, name me a worse player on the Caps 2017 roster than Brooks Orpik. Take as much time as you need.

Karl Alzner. What do I win?

Also, that goal happened because Alzner and Orpik were on the ice together. Whose genius idea was that? And why was Alzner even playing at all?

 

[txpd]

txpd, name me a worse player on the Caps 2017 roster than Brooks Orpik. Take as much time as you need.

Rolling my eyes. You dont like him. Fine. You would scratch Orpik for Taylor Chorney, eh?