Agent Zuuuub
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2015
- 15,201
- 12,682
Do you think you would have outperformed Dorion?
- Thread starter Agent Zuuuub
- Start date
- Status
Arthur Morgan
Registered User
Well I wouldn't have traded Mark Stone. I always heard how he loved it here and no doubt in my mind he would have signed long term.
I feel like I could have done better as GM
I feel like I could have done better as GM
BonHoonLayneCornell
Registered User
I would have been fired after telling Melnyk to get stuffed.
Beyond that my high fives would definitely be of a lower quality, I always miss, then we have this awkward moment where we don't know if we should try again, hug it out, or just drop it.
Beyond that my high fives would definitely be of a lower quality, I always miss, then we have this awkward moment where we don't know if we should try again, hug it out, or just drop it.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
I think my drafting acumen is worse enough for any kind of perceived advantage in trades and UFA signings to make a difference.
So, no.
So, no.
Last edited:
Hard to tell, considering I don't know what Melnyk and him were talking about behind the closed doors and how much did he have to run by the owner before making any decision. I just know I would look less silly and incompetent on the TV. But then, I also wouldn't get as many high fives as he did, so he wins in that.
stempniaksen
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2008
- 11,167
- 4,492
About the same. I wouldn't have made some of mind boggling moves, but I'd have given Karlsson all the money. Not better, just different bad.
Do Make Say Think
& Yet & Yet
- Jun 26, 2007
- 51,438
- 10,253
I honestly thing Dorion is one of the better GM's (Not to be mistaken as best) in this league. As far as his scouting and drafting, I'd say he's top 5 in the league.
Definite no.
Definite no.
I would have paid Karlsson the money too. That being said, the return turned out to be so amazing, can't hate at the end result too. Especially watching Karlsson's game in San Jose slowing down and injuries.
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 35,408
- 9,822
Hard to answer the question considering there would be a wildly divergent timeline.
In my case, Zibby would still be here, Duchene never would've been a Sen, and I wouldn't have signed that Murray contract.
If Stone and Erik wanted to stay here, they likely would be here, although that isn't a guarantee. Both contracts are a bit high for my liking and I wonder if they would've been approved here (doubtful). In any case, decisions on both would've been made the year before their contracts expired, not at the last minute. I have a feeling, dispite what both players say publicly about wanting to stay, that behind closed doors it would've been mutually beneficial for both sides to move on.
In terms of drafting, that's the scouts' call. I don't know how much of the draft was Dorion and how much was the scouts, so it's hard to know where the differences would be there. I would tell scouts to focus on skating, hockey IQ, and determination/work ethic as the top 3 things to look for....whether that changes our scouting lists enough to make different choices, I don't know.
In my case, Zibby would still be here, Duchene never would've been a Sen, and I wouldn't have signed that Murray contract.
If Stone and Erik wanted to stay here, they likely would be here, although that isn't a guarantee. Both contracts are a bit high for my liking and I wonder if they would've been approved here (doubtful). In any case, decisions on both would've been made the year before their contracts expired, not at the last minute. I have a feeling, dispite what both players say publicly about wanting to stay, that behind closed doors it would've been mutually beneficial for both sides to move on.
In terms of drafting, that's the scouts' call. I don't know how much of the draft was Dorion and how much was the scouts, so it's hard to know where the differences would be there. I would tell scouts to focus on skating, hockey IQ, and determination/work ethic as the top 3 things to look for....whether that changes our scouting lists enough to make different choices, I don't know.
BondraTime
Registered User
I would have folded like a cheap lawn chair a month into the job
Interesting question.
I championed trading Karlsson immediately following his playoff run, knowing the rift between he and Melnyk would result in his departure at the end of his contract. Dorion did get a haul for him, but I'd like to think that trading a top 3 player at his peak (with a slight injury concern to be fair) with term at low dollars would have brought in resources that would have prevented a bottom out for 5 years. I truly think I could have timed that trade better and beaten his performance.
I also championed pre-empively trading Mark stone when he had 1 RFA year left, knowing the writing was on the wall. We would have gotten significantly more in return for him.
I didn't mind the Brass - Zib swap in principle, but hated the draft picks involved, so that wouldn't have gone through. In fairness to Dorion, I liked the Brass addition at the time, and was lukewarm on Zib. But we'd still have him if it was me.
And I'd have been less inclined to pick from the waiver wire, and more inclined to philosophically bring up talent in a non-basement dwelling environment.
So from a standings perspective, yes, I think we would have been better, without the bottom out. I'd give the edge to Pierre in drafting and development, that's his thing. PR wise, I'd have been better without question. Fewer (zero) girlfriend references, self doxxing moments, and showing of cards.
He could still fumble his way into a contender as the years go by, while who knows what heights my team would have reached. As I said, no bottom out though.
I championed trading Karlsson immediately following his playoff run, knowing the rift between he and Melnyk would result in his departure at the end of his contract. Dorion did get a haul for him, but I'd like to think that trading a top 3 player at his peak (with a slight injury concern to be fair) with term at low dollars would have brought in resources that would have prevented a bottom out for 5 years. I truly think I could have timed that trade better and beaten his performance.
I also championed pre-empively trading Mark stone when he had 1 RFA year left, knowing the writing was on the wall. We would have gotten significantly more in return for him.
I didn't mind the Brass - Zib swap in principle, but hated the draft picks involved, so that wouldn't have gone through. In fairness to Dorion, I liked the Brass addition at the time, and was lukewarm on Zib. But we'd still have him if it was me.
And I'd have been less inclined to pick from the waiver wire, and more inclined to philosophically bring up talent in a non-basement dwelling environment.
So from a standings perspective, yes, I think we would have been better, without the bottom out. I'd give the edge to Pierre in drafting and development, that's his thing. PR wise, I'd have been better without question. Fewer (zero) girlfriend references, self doxxing moments, and showing of cards.
He could still fumble his way into a contender as the years go by, while who knows what heights my team would have reached. As I said, no bottom out though.
Yeah, I admit, I would likely throw money at EK65 back then. But I also don't know what PD knew back then about EK's health etc.
I would also do my best to get Alfie back into this organization and keep him here. Not that it's Pierre's job to do that, but I would strongly support that and fight for it. Imagine having Alfie as a face of this franchise and removing Dorion? Sigh....
I would also do my best to get Alfie back into this organization and keep him here. Not that it's Pierre's job to do that, but I would strongly support that and fight for it. Imagine having Alfie as a face of this franchise and removing Dorion? Sigh....
Agent Zuuuub
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2015
- 15,201
- 12,682
I would have kept Karlsson which is Dorions biggest win but sort of a fluke considering SJ injuries hit (maybe I'm being unfair)
Not to mention trading Karlsson was all Melnyk, if it was up to Dorion he would have kept EK as well ( 7th day ).
And that also opens up a can of worms about what Melnyk forced Dorion to do or not.
However I sure as shit know I would not have traded Zibanejad and we also have one of Byram or Zegras.
Not to mention trading Karlsson was all Melnyk, if it was up to Dorion he would have kept EK as well ( 7th day ).
And that also opens up a can of worms about what Melnyk forced Dorion to do or not.
However I sure as shit know I would not have traded Zibanejad and we also have one of Byram or Zegras.
Adele Dazeem
Registered User
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 29,281
- 9,984
No one would without dumb luck, but my team wouldn't get pushed around. 
Humm? When other teams make trades & it works out they are genius, but when we do it it's just dumb luck.
Humm? When other teams make trades & it works out they are genius, but when we do it it's just dumb luck.
The fact anyone says yes to this question shows how out of touch with reality this board is. There are likely hundreds of hockey people around the NHL and other leagues who could do as well if not better than Dorion, none of them post here.
I don't think anyone here is incompetent enough to turn Zibanejad, Stone, Duchene and Hoffman into Brannstrom, JBD, Thomson, Gustavsson and Sokolov.
Yes. I would have been fired before 5 straight years of unparalleled failure within the Sens organization.
I would have done much less damage.
I would have done much less damage.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 56,709
- 34,507
The thing is, there's a team of people advising Dorion, that would presumably be advising any poster here as well. Some of that advice might have been good, and some of it may have been very bad, hard to say I would have better sifted through what was good advice and what was bad any better than Dorion. There's a slew of information we don't have as well, players health and medical records, budget constraints, influence from ownership ect.
I think on a single trade, or draft pick, I might be tempted to say I'd have made a better decision, but that's cherry picking and even then there are potentially other factors that come into play.
It's not really a fair question to ask because Dorion's performance has to be evaluated with his limitations in mind, and we don't know what limitations were in place.
Agent Zuuuub
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2015
- 15,201
- 12,682
so you would have performed much worse than Dorion and the moves he made?
damn that would have been something. at least you are honest
Sens Vader
Registered User
- Jan 23, 2016
- 7,496
- 5,334
stempniaksen
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2008
- 11,167
- 4,492
I think there's an argument that if he'd sat on his hands and made no trades and just drafted/re-signed that the team might be in a better spot. For people that buy into this theory, an inanimate object would have done a better job than Dorion.
I don't think anyone here thinks they're some hockey genius (so far), Dorion has just set that low of a bar.
Exactly what I came here to say. The only positive about this front office seems to be the drafting, but after last year I'm not even sure about that. It would be interesting to compare (over many years) the drafting record of an inanimate object that would just use Bob's list vs what the Sens did.
- Status
