Player Discussion Claude Giroux

[robsenz]

Obvious news but sharing here regardless.
He's confirmed to be wanting to stay in Ottawa, So they'll get something done.

 

[bert]

I don't adhear to the idea of hard and fast rules. I'd rather evaluate a trade on its own merits and base my decision on that.

7 oa is just a number, it's meaningless, you need to look at the players we actually would have been selecting from, likely Kaspers or Korchenski, maybe Geekie given our penchant for big guys and PIMS.

I'm fairly confident Fiala for example, who imo was the better target that offseason, would do more to help the current core from the 2020 draft through their window than anyone we would have picked with 7OA in 2022. At the very least, I think it's debatable, and comes with some additional benefits like selling tickets in a small market, bringing in a quality vet that can help with the kids development, and showing UFA, like Giroux, and the core players like Tkachuk, that you're serious about being competitive.

We sure as hell would have been better off trading 10 oa in 2021 for a roster player, even if we'd take Sillinger like many wanted rather than boucher

I do not agree the 7th overall pick has a specific value as does every asset.

Does Winnipeg need to burn assets to appease players.... no the moment a GM gives players that type of power then he has lost his ability to run a team period.

Staios traded Norris dispite him being Tkachuks best friend. Because he has a duty to make the best decisions possible to build a winner.

One terrible draft pick doesn't mean every pick is going to be bad. That asset the pick has a specific value.

Winning sells tickets. Building a sustainable winner builds season tickets. That's the goal. Thankfully management knows this even dispute Dorions obvious blunders it's interesting that people still defend these awful decisions.

 

[BoardsofCanada]

In hindsight, both DBC and Chychrun were disasters. DBC never wanted to be here and Chychrun played the wrong side and would eventually price himself out. Dorion should've absolutely anticipated both situations. Clear example of Dorion's weakness as a GM. Good scout... bad manager. It's like he rolled the dice and was just hoping everything would work out.

But at the time, I don't remember many denouncing these moves. I remember the city being pretty pumped. I don't blame Dorion for taking a swing. He probably thought it was time for some excitement after years of misery. As Micklebot said, it wasn't the idea that was wrong, it was the execution. Neither guy was right. That's on Dorion and his braintrust.

Since this thread is on Giroux, I'll end with this: here's hoping he gives us a team discount .. maybe 3.5-4M .. allowing Staios to tinker in other areas.

 

[Micklebot]

I do not agree the 7th overall pick has a specific value as does every asset.

Does Winnipeg need to burn assets to appease players.... no the moment a GM gives players that type of power then he has lost his ability to run a team period.

Staios traded Norris dispite him being Tkachuks best friend. Because he has a duty to make the best decisions possible to build a winner.

One terrible draft pick doesn't mean every pick is going to be bad. That asset the pick has a specific value.

Winning sells tickets. Building a sustainable winner builds season tickets. That's the goal. Thankfully management knows this even dispute Dorions obvious blunders it's interesting that people still defend these awful decisions.

You're wrong about picks having specific values, this years draft is known to be not as deep as next year, 2005, 2008, 2015, and 2020 were all very strong drafts, while 2011, 2012, 2014, 2021 were less so, decisions need to consider that context. 7 OA in 2022 had a set of available prospects to weight against the asset coming back. DBC imo was too big of a risk to walk so it was a bad trade, but for another player, it may have made sense.

You're completely ignoring the context, Winnipeg absolutely needs to show it's players they are serious when they are in a rebuild stage if they want to retain or attract. If they had missed the playoffs for 7 years straight, they'd need show upcoming UFA that it's worth sticking around if they didn't want to sell off, but when they are a top team, the context is different, and they can show the players and UFA they are serious through making the tough choices. Context matters.

I'm not talking about one bad pick, I specifically said even if we'd made a better selection than Boucher like Sillinger in 2021 we'd have likely been better off trading that pick for someone in the vein of a Fiala type asset.

Winning sells tickets, I agree. Waiting around 3+ years for a pick to develop doesn't help win or sell tickets for 3+ years, if ever. Small markets can only withstand so many down years before things start to give. Current management has the luxury of an influx of money and good will to a new ownership group that allows them to be more patient, that wasn't there when Dorion was making trades, in fact, it was the polar opposite.

Taken to the extreme, your hard and fast rule of don't trade 7OA when rebuilding would mean Boston shouldn't swap 7oa for Dahlin, Q.Hughes, or B.Tkachuk, but they'd be crazy to turn any of those offers if they were on the table. You need to weight the potential of the pick, against the impact the incoming player will have, both directly on the ice, and indirectly through things like making the team a more attractive destination and aiding in the development of the kids.

 

[BigRig4]

In hindsight, both DBC and Chychrun were disasters. DBC never wanted to be here and Chychrun played the wrong side and would eventually price himself out. Dorion should've absolutely anticipated both situations. Clear example of Dorion's weakness as a GM. Good scout... bad manager. It's like he rolled the dice and was just hoping everything would work out.

But at the time, I don't remember many denouncing these moves. I remember the city being pretty pumped. I don't blame Dorion for taking a swing. He probably thought it was time for some excitement after years of misery. As Micklebot said, it wasn't the idea that was wrong, it was the execution. Neither guy was right. That's on Dorion and his braintrust.

Since this thread is on Giroux, I'll end with this: here's hoping he gives us a team discount .. maybe 3.5-4M .. allowing Staios to tinker in other areas.

I think a big part of it was self-preservation. He’d just missed the playoffs for 5 years straight. They were entering an ownership transition, and I think he knew if he didn’t make playoffs he was getting canned.

 

[DrEasy]

I think a big part of it was self-preservation. He’d just missed the playoffs for 5 years straight. They were entering an ownership transition, and I think he knew if he didn’t make playoffs he was getting canned.

Sometimes it also helps to get out of the vicious cycle of losing -> fewer tickets sold -> less money for payroll -> more losing.

The DBC trade energized the fan base. More people showed up to games! With higher attendance and more resulting income the team could spend more on players! etc.

In a different sport, there's the example of the Blue Jays GM Alex Anthopoulos making the blockbuster Jose Reyes + Josh Johnson + Buehrle deal, which created a lot of excitement after years of middling to bad results under the previous GM and with an owner (Rogers!) who was unwilling to spend. Crowds came back to watch, and even though the trade didn't exactly work out, the added income persuaded Rogers to spend more, which led to more trades and acquisitions down the road, which, this time around, worked out a lot better.

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

In hindsight, both DBC and Chychrun were disasters. DBC never wanted to be here and Chychrun played the wrong side and would eventually price himself out. Dorion should've absolutely anticipated both situations. Clear example of Dorion's weakness as a GM. Good scout... bad manager. It's like he rolled the dice and was just hoping everything would work out.

But at the time, I don't remember many denouncing these moves. I remember the city being pretty pumped. I don't blame Dorion for taking a swing. He probably thought it was time for some excitement after years of misery. As Micklebot said, it wasn't the idea that was wrong, it was the execution. Neither guy was right. That's on Dorion and his braintrust.

Since this thread is on Giroux, I'll end with this: here's hoping he gives us a team discount .. maybe 3.5-4M .. allowing Staios to tinker in other areas.

I do wonder, do you factor the strength of scouting in how they're able to see through character flaws or not? Because if you don't, then I don't consider DBC as a scouting failure. If DBC was willing to stay with us, and we weren't stupid enough to trade away Gustavsson, we'd have a stronger team. Chychrun was definitely a scouting issue due to him not fitting our style.

 

[bicboi64]

I do wonder, do you factor the strength of scouting in how they're able to see through character flaws or not? Because if you don't, then I don't consider DBC as a scouting failure. If DBC was willing to stay with us, and we weren't stupid enough to trade away Gustavsson, we'd have a stronger team. Chychrun was definitely a scouting issue due to him not fitting our style.

I think the issue here was Dorion acquiring DeBrincat despite Chicago's GM not letting Dorion speak to Cat about an extension. That is a red flag and Dorion should've walked away but he prioritized short term ticket sales + whatever good it will supposedly do for his image over the team.

 

[GoodinOsgoode]

Sometimes it also helps to get out of the vicious cycle of losing -> fewer tickets sold -> less money for payroll -> more losing.

The DBC trade energized the fan base. More people showed up to games! With higher attendance and more resulting income the team could spend more on players! etc.

In a different sport, there's the example of the Blue Jays GM Alex Anthopoulos making the blockbuster Jose Reyes + Josh Johnson + Buehrle deal, which created a lot of excitement after years of middling to bad results under the previous GM and with an owner (Rogers!) who was unwilling to spend. Crowds came back to watch, and even though the trade didn't exactly work out, the added income persuaded Rogers to spend more, which led to more trades and acquisitions down the road, which, this time around, worked out a lot better.

Yeah, it almost seemed like that the goal of these Dorion trades (DBC & Chychrun and I will put Duchene in this as well) was primarily to generate a buzz and sell tickets, which is obviously not what you should be primarily focusing on, when building a team.

In the case of DBC, there didn't seem to be any pre-discussion with DBC or his agent, in terms of signing a contract in Ottawa.

With Chychrun, it didn't seem to matter that he was LHD and that we already had two top-4 LHD already in place with Sanderson & Chabot.

In both cases, it just seemed to be wishful thinking that it would all work out but instead, we were basically forced to trade both after just one season and in both cases, we had no real leverage and/or we lost value in the trades that were made to ship these guys out.

Unfortunately, all of this cost us a pile of top draft picks/assets that very well could have been a huge difference maker in what this team looks like now.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

Yeah, it almost seemed like that the goal of these Dorion trades (DBC & Chychrun and I will put Duchene in this as well) was primarily to generate a buzz and sell tickets, which is obviously not what you should be primarily focusing on, when building a team.

In the case of DBC, there didn't seem to be any pre-discussion with DBC or his agent, in terms of signing a contract in Ottawa.

With Chychrun, it didn't seem to matter that he was LHD and that we already had two top-4 LHD already in place with Sanderson & Chabot.

In both cases, it just seemed to be wishful thinking that it would all work out but instead, we were basically forced to trade both after just one season and in both cases, we had no real leverage and/or we lost value in the trades that were made to ship these guys out.

Unfortunately, all of this cost us a pile of top draft picks/assets that very well could have been a huge difference maker in what this team looks like now.

Even if it is true that they decided to rebuild in early 2018 when Dorion went down to Barbados, I think that Dorion knew that the team was in "win now" mode because it was highly unlikely that Melnyk would pay market value (terms+money) for Karlsson and Stone, and also be able to keep the team together under a budget.

So I think that the Duchene trade was a misguided "win now" move to make the team better. I also think that he didn't view the price as high, because he may have viewed Turris as a sunk cost. As in, he was not going to trade Turris in season since they HAD to make the playoffs, but he was not going to re-sign Turris. Turris had 1 year left, Duchene had 2. So Dorion may have looked at it like he was paying Bowers, a 1st, and a 3rd for 1 extra year of Duchene, and the value of Turris didn't factor in since Duchene was his replacement and Turris wasn't going to be sold off.

Obviously, that didn't work out that way because we collapsed, and they almost certainly would have moved Turris for a 1st++.

Debrincat and Chychrun were a different deal. They were about polishing up the team for a sale, and also saving Dorion's career. Season ticket numbers were in the dump because of Melnyk's "rebuild". Dorion had two jobs, build short-term excitement in the fan base so that people go to games, and build a team that could make the playoffs. He did fantastic at the first part of that job, to the point that people were making "Summer Of Dorion" t-shirts, but unfortunately it was a mirage since the acquisitions he made were not the right ones, and the team stunk on the ice.

If you look at the contracts he offered out in the summer the team was sold like offering long-term deals to Korpisalo and Tarasenko, it's completely transparent how he was operating. Dorion knew he wouldn't be around to have to deal with the fallout from giving up 7th, 12th, a billion 2nds, and signing contracts that might age poorly. It was all about first trying to polish up the team in the short term for the sale, and second throwing multiple hail mary passes to try and improve his reputation.

 

[Micklebot]

I think a big part of it was self-preservation. He’d just missed the playoffs for 5 years straight. They were entering an ownership transition, and I think he knew if he didn’t make playoffs he was getting canned.

Maybe? I think the ownership/board would have wanted final say in big deals like that so even if he was in self preservation mode, it would have needed endorsement from above, assuming it wasn't directed from above to help goose the numbers and facilitate a sale .

Tbh, I think the team made it's decision that the time to start winning was "now" back when they went after Murray and Dadonov. Those two not panning out as planned resulted in us getting a few more high picks (10oa, 7oa and 12oa) which we squandered but I think the bigger issue was the better targets weren't interested in coming here.

We apparently went after Markstrom and Murray was the fall back option,
Markstrom signed a 4 year deal with CGY and was pretty good while there before moving on to NJD, where he's been alright.

We apparently tried to get Toffoli too, but he went to Mtl over us, so we fell back on Dadonov.
Toffoli led mtl in scoring that year and was pretty good the next year split between Mtl and Cgy,

Maybe with those guys, we make the playoffs in 2020-21, and go down an entirely different path.

In the end, it's about getting the right people at the right time. there's only 20 spots in the lineup, and we probably want to be competitive for Brady's prime years, so the next 5 seasons are pretty important. Guys like Chychurn, Debrincat, Fiala, and Marino are all within a couple years of Brady in age, same age as Chabot, they fit the window imo, what you lose is the ELC when compared to using the picks. Tofolli and Markstrom are older guys, wouldn't make sense to give up assets for them imo, they fit in more in the same vein as Giroux and Perron.

 

[bicboi64]

Tbh, I think the team made it's decision that the time to start winning was "now" back when they went after Murray and Dadonov. Those two not panning out as planned resulted in us getting a few more high picks (10oa, 7oa and 12oa) which we squandered but I think the bigger issue was the better targets weren't interested in coming here.

I think Dorion thinking Murray and Dadanov are the type of players that can be key players in the win now mode is part of the issue. Nothing wrong with the notion of getting hypothetical win now players, but Dorion's pro evaluation of guys is piss poor.

At least with Dadanov, we didn't use assets aside from capspace. Murray's acquisition could be justified, the extension was bewildering.

 

[DrEasy]

Even if it is true that they decided to rebuild in early 2018 when Dorion went down to Barbados, I think that Dorion knew that the team was in "win now" mode because it was highly unlikely that Melnyk would pay market value (terms+money) for Karlsson and Stone, and also be able to keep the team together under a budget.

So I think that the Duchene trade was a misguided "win now" move to make the team better. I also think that he didn't view the price as high, because he may have viewed Turris as a sunk cost. As in, he was not going to trade Turris in season since they HAD to make the playoffs, but he was not going to re-sign Turris. Turris had 1 year left, Duchene had 2. So Dorion may have looked at it like he was paying Bowers, a 1st, and a 3rd for 1 extra year of Duchene, and the value of Turris didn't factor in since Duchene was his replacement and Turris wasn't going to be sold off.

Obviously, that didn't work out that way because we collapsed, and they almost certainly would have moved Turris for a 1st++.

Debrincat and Chychrun were a different deal. They were about polishing up the team for a sale, and also saving Dorion's career. Season ticket numbers were in the dump because of Melnyk's "rebuild". Dorion had two jobs, build short-term excitement in the fan base so that people go to games, and build a team that could make the playoffs. He did fantastic at the first part of that job, to the point that people were making "Summer Of Dorion" t-shirts, but unfortunately it was a mirage since the acquisitions he made were not the right ones, and the team stunk on the ice.

If you look at the contracts he offered out in the summer the team was sold like offering long-term deals to Korpisalo and Tarasenko, it's completely transparent how he was operating. Dorion knew he wouldn't be around to have to deal with the fallout from giving up 7th, 12th, a billion 2nds, and signing contracts that might age poorly. It was all about first trying to polish up the team in the short term for the sale, and second throwing multiple hail mary passes to try and improve his reputation.

Turris was cooked after the Gumby injury. Trading him was the right move IMO. The difficult part was figuring out whether to sell Turris for picks or improve on him like we did. It required correctly assessing the team's playoff chances.

 

[Micklebot]

I think Dorion thinking Murray and Dadanov are the type of players that can be key players in the win now mode is part of the issue. Nothing wrong with the notion of getting hypothetical win now players, but Dorion's pro evaluation of guys is piss poor.

At least with Dadanov, we didn't use assets aside from capspace. Murray's acquisition could be justified, the extension was bewildering.

Murray was a gamble but was 26 year old with two stantley cups to his name. He had the talent to be really good, but health was a concern. When we acquired him, he was one year removed from a .919 sv%. He obviously wouldn't have been available if there wasn't some risk, the upside though was massive, it all hinged on health imo, and as we saw, he wasn't able to stay healthy long enough to get into a groove.

I don't mind the risk on grabbing him, it didn't pan out, but shit happens. Had he found his form from one year earlier and stayed heathy, it would have been a massive win for the franchise. Edit: I agree the bigger issue was the contract, I don't mind the AAV or the Term individually, but both together is tough with his health.

Dadonov was coming off a 56 pt pace season, he went on to put up 43 pts with VGK after we traded him. Heck, he's being productive in Dallas right now. He wasn't expected to come in and be elite, he was that year's Perron, a good vet to help bring the kids along. Certainly a much better acquisition than a guy like Stepan who we grabbed the same year (and imo overpaid to get). Again, it didn't work out, but I don't think there was anything obviously wrong with the scouting on him. Sometimes things just don't work out.

 

[Micklebot]

Turris was cooked after the Gumby injury. Trading him was the right move IMO. The difficult part was figuring out whether to sell Turris for picks or improve on him like we did. It required correctly assessing the team's playoff chances.

He put up 55 pts the year after the gumby incident, and paced at 55 the year we traded him, things didn't fall off for him until a year later. The problem was that he was due for an extension, and was going to be 29 at the start of that contract. Basically signing a contract right when your production is expected to start it's decline, and his decline ended up being steep.

That was the year everything went sideways in the locker room, idk how you bake in players wives accusing one another of cyber bullying into a playoff chance assessment...

 

[Agent Zub]

In hindsight, both DBC and Chychrun were disasters. DBC never wanted to be here and Chychrun played the wrong side and would eventually price himself out. Dorion should've absolutely anticipated both situations. Clear example of Dorion's weakness as a GM. Good scout... bad manager. It's like he rolled the dice and was just hoping everything would work out.

But at the time, I don't remember many denouncing these moves. I remember the city being pretty pumped. I don't blame Dorion for taking a swing. He probably thought it was time for some excitement after years of misery. As Micklebot said, it wasn't the idea that was wrong, it was the execution. Neither guy was right. That's on Dorion and his braintrust.

Since this thread is on Giroux, I'll end with this: here's hoping he gives us a team discount .. maybe 3.5-4M .. allowing Staios to tinker in other areas.

what's weird is that they played debrincat and stutzle together for like 1 game.

 

[bert]

I don't adhear to the idea of hard and fast rules. I'd rather evaluate a trade on its own merits and base my decision on that.

7 oa is just a number, it's meaningless, you need to look at the players we actually would have been selecting from, likely Kaspers or Korchenski, maybe Geekie given our penchant for big guys and PIMS.

I'm fairly confident Fiala for example, who imo was the better target that offseason, would do more to help the current core from the 2020 draft through their window than anyone we would have picked with 7OA in 2022. At the very least, I think it's debatable, and comes with some additional benefits like selling tickets in a small market, bringing in a quality vet that can help with the kids development, and showing UFA, like Giroux, and the core players like Tkachuk, that you're serious about being competitive.

We sure as hell would have been better off trading 10 oa in 2021 for a roster player, even if we'd take Sillinger like many wanted rather than boucher

I do not agree the 7th overall pick has a specific value as does every asset.

Does Winnipeg need to burn assets to appease players.... no the moment a GM gives players that type of power then he has lost his ability to run a team period.

Staios traded Norris dispite him being Tkachuks best friend. Because he has a duty to make the best decisions possible to build a winner.

One terrible draft pick doesn't mean every pick is going to be bad. That asset the pick has a specific

You're wrong about picks having specific values, this years draft is known to be not as deep as next year, 2005, 2008, 2015, and 2020 were all very strong drafts, while 2011, 2012, 2014, 2021 were less so, decisions need to consider that context. 7 OA in 2022 had a set of available prospects to weight against the asset coming back. DBC imo was too big of a risk to walk so it was a bad trade, but for another player, it may have made sense.

You're completely ignoring the context, Winnipeg absolutely needs to show it's players they are serious when they are in a rebuild stage if they want to retain or attract. If they had missed the playoffs for 7 years straight, they'd need show upcoming UFA that it's worth sticking around if they didn't want to sell off, but when they are a top team, the context is different, and they can show the players and UFA they are serious through making the tough choices. Context matters.

I'm not talking about one bad pick, I specifically said even if we'd made a better selection than Boucher like Sillinger in 2021 we'd have likely been better off trading that pick for someone in the vein of a Fiala type asset.

Winning sells tickets, I agree. Waiting around 3+ years for a pick to develop doesn't help win or sell tickets for 3+ years, if ever. Small markets can only withstand so many down years before things start to give. Current management has the luxury of an influx of money and good will to a new ownership group that allows them to be more patient, that wasn't there when Dorion was making trades, in fact, it was the polar opposite.

Taken to the extreme, your hard and fast rule of don't trade 7OA when rebuilding would mean Boston shouldn't swap 7oa for Dahlin, Q.Hughes, or B.Tkachuk, but they'd be crazy to turn any of those offers if they were on the table. You need to weight the potential of the pick, against the impact the incoming player will have, both directly on the ice, and indirectly through things like making the team a more attractive destination and aiding in the development of the kids.

Dont agree just leave it at that. Fiala was never coming here just like Debrincat never wanted to play here. Defending these decisions and making up false narratives to prove you point just doesnt fly. You are a very detailed poster and I appreciate your conversations and contributions on here but sometimes it feels like you just argue to argue. This is one of those situations.

The 7th OA pick had alot of value period. Stop trying to change the perspective because Ottawa made a bad selection another year. The pick value isnt based on misses or hits of the past its based on the pick at the time of the draft and that had a specific value.

The boucher year there were plenty of good options that went in the next 50 picks or so just limiting it to one player without knowing who the scouts had on their list is another strawman. A top 10 pick always has value. Even looking in retrospect.

Winnipeg had Laine, Trouba and Dubois that wanted out they did not panic and just take the best immediate deal in those situations they took the best value. That is how a small market team needs to be run. Not big swings like Dorion made when the team wasnt close for redundant players that didnt fit into the mold of the team of where its weaknesses were.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

Turris was cooked after the Gumby injury. Trading him was the right move IMO. The difficult part was figuring out whether to sell Turris for picks or improve on him like we did. It required correctly assessing the team's playoff chances.

My point is that I think Dorion viewed the situation as "win now" before Karlsson/Stone need to get paid. So that meant he wasn't trading Turris for futures if we were anywhere close to a playoff spot at the deadline.

Meaning, Girard++ was a sunk cost to him. He may have seen it like he was paying Bowers+1st+3rd for an extra year of Duchene (and the upgrade).

 

[bicboi64]

Murray was a gamble but was 26 year old with two stantley cups to his name. He had the talent to be really good, but health was a concern. When we acquired him, he was one year removed from a .919 sv%. He obviously wouldn't have been available if there wasn't some risk, the upside though was massive, it all hinged on health imo, and as we saw, he wasn't able to stay healthy long enough to get into a groove.

I don't mind the risk on grabbing him, it didn't pan out, but shit happens. Had he found his form from one year earlier and stayed heathy, it would have been a massive win for the franchise. Edit: I agree the bigger issue was the contract, I don't mind the AAV or the Term individually, but both together is tough with his health.

Dadonov was coming off a 56 pt pace season, he went on to put up 43 pts with VGK after we traded him. Heck, he's being productive in Dallas right now. He wasn't expected to come in and be elite, he was that year's Perron, a good vet to help bring the kids along. Certainly a much better acquisition than a guy like Stepan who we grabbed the same year (and imo overpaid to get). Again, it didn't work out, but I don't think there was anything obviously wrong with the scouting on him. Sometimes things just don't work out.

I think we're on the same page about right idea in theory, but poor execution except on Dorion's overall vision. Dorion banking on Murray being healthy is one thing, expecting him to play at a decent level, especially behind our defence, is a whole other issue. Murray was regressing on a Pittsburgh team that had Letang, Marino, Pettersson, and Schultz in their top 4. Expecting him to play well behind Chabot, DeMelo,Zaitsev, and Reilly is next level impressive, especially when the only addition the next year was Gudbranson. It's Dorion overestimating how good Murray could be.

Same with Dadanov. He scored at a 56 point pace after needing 3 min of PP time on a Panthers team that had Huberdeau and Barkov. He's not particularly good defensively and expecting him to do much to go in a 'win now' mode or even mentor younger players is just poor pro evalutation. He was better than Stepan, no disagreement there, but that bar is lower than my expectations for good traffic on the 417 around 4pm.

Those were just poor gambles if we look at them as win now moves and are symptoms of a larger problem (Dorion's pro scouting).

 

[Larionov]

I'm going to be the contrarian here and say that it is far from a done deal that Giroux makes a deal to stay.

Do I think he wants to stay? Absolutely, but he is a proud guy, and I'm not sure that either he or his agent are inclined to take too steep of a home town discount to stay. If they feel that Staios is lowballing them, I could see a world where Giroux goes to market, gets a two year offer at about the same money he is making now, and takes it. I have no idea how the market might unfold, but I'm just saying that it isn't realistic to assume that he will just take any offer from Sens management just because he would like to stay home...

 

[bicboi64]

Fiala was never coming here just like Debrincat never wanted to play here.

Anonymity in LA would've been huge, but we could've offered Fiala the same money LA did and his take home salary would be more. We could've made a better offer than LA did as well.

 

[bert]

Anonymity in LA would've been huge, but we could've offered Fiala the same money LA did and his take home salary would be more. We could've made a better offer than LA did as well.

They got Faber and a first which is now Ohgren. I dont think the sens offer was better than that. He wanted L.A apparently.

 

[Micklebot]

I do not agree the 7th overall pick has a specific value as does every asset.

Does Winnipeg need to burn assets to appease players.... no the moment a GM gives players that type of power then he has lost his ability to run a team period.

Staios traded Norris dispite him being Tkachuks best friend. Because he has a duty to make the best decisions possible to build a winner.

One terrible draft pick doesn't mean every pick is going to be bad. That asset the pick has a specific

Dont agree just leave it at that. Fiala was never coming here just like Debrincat never wanted to play here. Defending these decisions and making up false narratives to prove you point just doesnt fly. You are a very detailed poster and I appreciate your conversations and contributions on here but sometimes it feels like you just argue to argue. This is one of those situations.

The 7th OA pick had alot of value period. Stop trying to change the perspective because Ottawa made a bad selection another year. The pick value isnt based on misses or hits of the past its based on the pick at the time of the draft and that had a specific value.

The boucher year there were plenty of good options that went in the next 50 picks or so just limiting it to one player without knowing who the scouts had on their list is another strawman. A top 10 pick always has value. Even looking in retrospect.

Winnipeg had Laine, Trouba and Dubois that wanted out they did not panic and just take the best immediate deal in those situations they took the best value. That is how a small market team needs to be run. Not big swings like Dorion made when the team wasnt close for redundant players that didnt fit into the mold of the team of where its weaknesses were.

Fiala not being willing to come here is a different argument, maybe that's the case and if it is, you move on, the point I was making was that the issue wasn't that we trade 7 oa it's that we didn't do it for a player that made sense

Of course 7 oa has lots of value, DeBrincat also had lots of value as a 40 goal scorer, I'm not changing perspective, I'm acknowledging that more context exists and that context makes a difference.

There weren't a lot of realistic options the voucher year, the fact that you want to go 50 picks deeper just devalues the puck sice by that logic, we could have used a second and gotten the same player you're now claiming was a viable option. Realistically there were maybe 5-10 players teams would have been considering at 10th, not 50. Nobody was picking Hutson that early, even Wyatt Johnston went far earlier than expect but still a dozen picks after Boucher.

There's a difference between players wanting out and showing players you are willing to do what is needed to get better, you can't control a player wanting out and the players all know when someone wants out, what I'm talking about is showing players you are going to do what it takes to be competitive, something made all the more important when the team missed 5 consecutive playoffs and had a reputation of an owner unwilling to spend.