Dougie Hamilton III

[LSCII]

Lonnie, you would know more about being on the receiving end of this sort of thing more than anybody else here, so I will take your word for it...

I think they should have gotten a bit more for Dougie, but as usual you are exaggerating. Let's see how it looks in a couple of years. As far as Neely goes, he's the boss so he deserves some blame, but Chia was the GM, and was making the day to day decisions. If he's getting the credit for building a Cup winner, he should also get the blame for not maintaining it.

Really? Let's wait and see is the best answer you have? You do realize that professional sports in terms of fandom is about instantaneous gratification, right? Let's wait and see how it works out is the mantra of a GM, not the fan. In terms of what they did though, is they gave up a current player from the roster for a guy who may or may not ever make it to the league. So what's the worth of 3-4 years of NHL caliber play before you even get to find out what the guy they drafted is capable of, if anything at all? They made the current roster worse for nothing more than a possibility. It's a risk all GM's make, but as a fan, I hate the idea of it. A regular player/contributor to their NHL team today is worth far more than the potential of someone who may or may not even make it. And even if they do make it, are they going to be as good as the guy they gave up? All in all, the fans have every right to be critical of this move, because this move sucks in the short term, and the long term is nothing more than a chance.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Me too,and will produce some head scratching plays both good and bad.

Yup, but funny how when 3 years ago I said the guy in my avatar was better, I had few agreeing with me. I even remember 1 guy here who said he wouldn't trade Hamilton for Pieterangelo or Subban. Wonder if that view has changed.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Really? Let's wait and see is the best answer you have? You do realize that professional sports in terms of fandom is about instantaneous gratification, right? Let's wait and see how it works out is the mantra of a GM, not the fan. In terms of what they did though, is they gave up a current player from the roster for a guy who may or may not ever make it to the league. So what's the worth of 3-4 years of NHL caliber play before you even get to find out what the guy they drafted is capable of, if anything at all? They made the current roster worse for nothing more than a possibility. It's a risk all GM's make, but as a fan, I hate the idea of it. A regular player/contributor to their NHL team today is worth far more than the potential of someone who may or may not even make it. And even if they do make it, are they going to be as good as the guy they gave up? All in all, the fans have every right to be critical of this move, because this move sucks in the short term, and the long term is nothing more than a chance.

Don't you know that the "let's wait and see" thing is the tool used by the "man" to hold down dissent.

Offer up an opinion that management made a bad deal and you get hit with "Well, let's wait and see how it turns out before we judge".

Then when it becomes apparent to all that it has worked out like crap, when you want to bring the subject up then, those same people say, "Hey that's in the past and over. The player is gone and nothing we can say will bring him back, so what's the use in talking about it."

I sometimes wonder exactly what is valid conversation for some. I'm thinking something like "Quien es mas macho... Patrice or Zdeno"?

 

[Daishi]

Really? Let's wait and see is the best answer you have? You do realize that professional sports in terms of fandom is about instantaneous gratification, right? Let's wait and see how it works out is the mantra of a GM, not the fan. In terms of what they did though, is they gave up a current player from the roster for a guy who may or may not ever make it to the league. So what's the worth of 3-4 years of NHL caliber play before you even get to find out what the guy they drafted is capable of, if anything at all? They made the current roster worse for nothing more than a possibility. It's a risk all GM's make, but as a fan, I hate the idea of it. A regular player/contributor to their NHL team today is worth far more than the potential of someone who may or may not even make it. And even if they do make it, are they going to be as good as the guy they gave up? All in all, the fans have every right to be critical of this move, because this move sucks in the short term, and the long term is nothing more than a chance.

Great post and I for one agree wholeheartedly. In the NHL a bird in the hand is worth much more than two in the bush. The only potential gain in losing real players for these 'future maybes' is adjusting your salary structure and shifting your cup window from the present towards the future. You're hoping all of your eggs hatch at the same time and that it would lift you to the cup, but in the league where a lot of teams are doing that you're just scratching lottery tickets.

Picks rarely if ever replace top tier talent. The only sure picks are the top two picks of the draft really, and the rest as you said might not even make it to the league. Considering the picks received, this was a bad trade with utmost certainty.

 

[finchster]

Great post and I for one agree wholeheartedly. In the NHL a bird in the hand is worth much more than two in the bush. The only potential gain in losing real players for these 'future maybes' is adjusting your salary structure and shifting your cup window from the present towards the future. You're hoping all of your eggs hatch at the same time and that it would lift you to the cup, but in the league where a lot of teams are doing that you're just scratching lottery tickets.

Picks rarely if ever replace top tier talent. The only sure picks are the top two picks of the draft really, and the rest as you said might not even make it to the league. Considering the picks received, this was a bad trade with utmost certainty.

It's apparent Sweeney got all those picks to try and move up to get a more highly touted prospect. He failed and got three average first round prospects.

 

[BruinsBtn]

It's apparent Sweeney got all those picks to try and move up to get a more highly touted prospect. He failed and got three average first round prospects.

That's not apparent.

 

[Sweeney Tard]

I'm not sure exactly which 19 games you are talking about, but how about these games between OCT and DEC:

1st 6 games of the season, 3 of them he was a minus player and none of them was he a + player. He also went pointless.

Then his first pts and + game.... against Buffalo.

Then another -1 pointless game and an even pointless game, then hey look some more points and a + game..... against Toronto.

First 20 games:

-7 with 1g, 1a in 15 games against anyone not TOR, EDM or BUFF

3g, 6a, 9pts +9 in 5 games against BUFF, TOR and EDM

You have to get to game 24 against WPG before he gets a goal against a decent team. Then he's -4 with 1 assist in the next 3 games against good teams.

Then hey, it's ARI!!! So of course 2a and a +2

Oops here come good teams again- 5 pointless games with a -2.

Guess we need a trip to western NY! He gets 2g and 1a against BUFF and is +3.

Whoops didn't check the thread for a few days, but to clarify the 19 game stretch I was referring to was when Chara was out with the knee injury. I find it fascinating to look at what Hamilton was able to do when tasked with a bigger role and without Big Papa Z around, and while you're absolutely right there were a couple cupcake games against the leafs and another pair vs Edmonton and Buffalo, there were also contests against Pens, Blues, Ducks, Kings, and Habs x 2 over that stretch.

While you bring up a good point that he did a lot of his damage against weaker competition, it tends to make me agree with Wintersej that he was maybe miscast here Zdeno's partner and we would have perhaps been better off giving him more Krug-like minutes with lots of offensive zone starts and less assignments vs top lines, to play to his strengths. Instead we again tried to fit a square peg in a round hole (Seguin on wing, anyone?) Maybe that's the right decision development wise, he could very well benefit from that experience, but it somewhat defeats the purpose if you trade the developing player and can't reap the rewards.

 

[finchster]

That's not apparent.

Yes it was, he admitted so much

http://nesn.com/2015/06/don-sweeney-bruins-tried-to-move-up-in-first-round-of-2015-nhl-draft/

 

[DKH]

It's apparent Sweeney got all those picks to try and move up to get a more highly touted prospect. He failed and got three average first round prospects.

you are smarter than this

 

[BNHL]

Yes it was, he admitted so much

http://nesn.com/2015/06/don-sweeney-bruins-tried-to-move-up-in-first-round-of-2015-nhl-draft/

He must have been looking for pick 1,2 or 4.

 

[LSCII]

Don't you know that the "let's wait and see" thing is the tool used by the "man" to hold down dissent.

Offer up an opinion that management made a bad deal and you get hit with "Well, let's wait and see how it turns out before we judge".

Then when it becomes apparent to all that it has worked out like crap, when you want to bring the subject up then, those same people say, "Hey that's in the past and over. The player is gone and nothing we can say will bring him back, so what's the use in talking about it."

I sometimes wonder exactly what is valid conversation for some. I'm thinking something like "Quien es mas macho... Patrice or Zdeno"?

This is so spot on that I want to print it out, bronze it, frame it, and then beat everyone over the head with it thats says "it's in the past and over" when the guy turns out to be a bust...

 

[LSCII]

Great post and I for one agree wholeheartedly. In the NHL a bird in the hand is worth much more than two in the bush. The only potential gain in losing real players for these 'future maybes' is adjusting your salary structure and shifting your cup window from the present towards the future. You're hoping all of your eggs hatch at the same time and that it would lift you to the cup, but in the league where a lot of teams are doing that you're just scratching lottery tickets.

Picks rarely if ever replace top tier talent. The only sure picks are the top two picks of the draft really, and the rest as you said might not even make it to the league. Considering the picks received, this was a bad trade with utmost certainty.

Exactly. Look at Buffalo for instance. They were in a similar spot with Myers, and decided to move on. But rather than trading a known commodity for an unknown like a pick, they bundled him with a package and got Kane and Bogosian in return. Like or dislike the return, they knew what they were getting and could make adjustments to fit their team and system, and those players are there and can make an impact today. With the Hamilton deal, the Bruins are years away from even knowing if the guy they picked with that selection is even an NHL caliber player, let alone whether he can even be an approximation of what Hamilton was here. Basically, this deal sets them back in the short term, and the long term is virtually unknown. That's a ton of risk, and bad asset management, IMO.

 

[Zac Rinaldo*]

if the pick turns out to be a 2nd line scoring winger the deal still sucks for us because of where we are lacking, quick ups, defenseman that aren't slow and mundane passers, and guys who can competently make a powerplay work beyond throwing the puck at the net.

if you want a young guy who can score, you have him in koko. put him on the ****ing wing and on the pp for more than 3 games.

hamilton is a terrific young dman. he is not as good as pieterangelo and if you ever thought he was it's because you haven't seen the latter play and read about him online somewhere.

statistically, the pick won't, btw ofc. lol

 

[Stone Clode]

I think thats bullcrap, the mantra that 'the real player is always worth more than the future prospects'. That's so goddamn hypocritical. You know what happens when you try to do that? You end up like 2014-15 Boston Bruins. After years of doing EXACTLY THAT, they got stuck in a brutal cap situation. They had to re-sign the Chris Kelly's of the world instead of going with their prospects. Shocker...Ryan Spooner can actually ****ing play hockey.

I agree, they got bent over in the Hamilton deal. They absolutely, positively should have gotten more from him. But the way I see it...they identified what kind of defenseman Hamilton was developing into. He was a high powered offensive guy that left a bit to be desired defensively. He was consistently committing the same mistakes. They didn't think he'd develop the offensive type game and the physicality that a Hedman or a Doughty or a Keith developed. Whether they are right or wrong on that in the end will be interesting.

But guess what? They won a cup and made another without that kind of guy spearheading their defensive core. Does it mean they still can't do that WITH him? Sure. But they've found success in other ways, and that's the path they chose. We see teams all too often put too much stock into one player and trying to build around that player. More often than not, that's the wrong player. For every Kopitar, Toews, Kane, and Bergeron, there are more than a few Iginlas, Ovechkins, Sedins, Nashs that have won squat. For every Pronger, Niedermayer, and Keith, there are plenty of Jovanovski's, MacInnis's, Kaberles, and Gonchars (latter two won cups, but weren't exactly at the forefront).

The Bruins realized that the way to keep Hamilton was to pay him like a number 1 and make him the centerpiece. They felt that wasn't a way for them to succeed, and so they chose to go a different route, and we can only hope they're right.

They knew he was their most valuable asset. Unfortunately, they didn't maximize his return. But they still a decent return out of him that hopefully shapes their future. At the very least, I'm glad they got pick compensation for them so they can draft and develop guys THEY want instead of picking from a team's pool. They already screwed that one up before.

And for whoever mentioned instant gratification, I don't want this team sacrificing the future of the team for the chance to make the second round of the playoffs for the next two years and be an absolute trainwreck. You know...like the last 2 years. These trades set them back a year or so, but it actually gave them a future. I get it, you're miserable and want them to compete every year, but the fact of the matter was last year's team sucked, there was no farm system or future, and the team needed a drastic shake up. That's exactly what they did. You can certainly not like how they chose to do it, but at least they sucked it up and did it. It's not as if this team has NO future.

 

[Fire Sweeney]

He must have been looking for pick 1,2 or 4.

He wasn't going to get a sniff at any of these picks with whatever picks/players he was going to package.

 

[LSCII]

Stone, you can say that, but it's not true. Keeping and overpaying bottom of the roster veterans is a far different problem than dealing 23 year old puck moving defensemen who are still growing into their game for futures. The only commonality they have is that they end up stripping the roster of the youth they have with upside.

And yes, we know, they won a cup. But you know what you call a team that won a single cup doing it the opposite way most other teams are built? An anomaly.

 

[BNHL]

He wasn't going to get a sniff at any of these picks with whatever picks/players he was going to package.

Maloney said he was never approached by the Bruins for the number 3 so what was Sweeney looking for with his 3 picks,if not 1 or 2?

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Really? Let's wait and see is the best answer you have? You do realize that professional sports in terms of fandom is about instantaneous gratification, right? Let's wait and see how it works out is the mantra of a GM, not the fan. In terms of what they did though, is they gave up a current player from the roster for a guy who may or may not ever make it to the league. So what's the worth of 3-4 years of NHL caliber play before you even get to find out what the guy they drafted is capable of, if anything at all? They made the current roster worse for nothing more than a possibility. It's a risk all GM's make, but as a fan, I hate the idea of it. A regular player/contributor to their NHL team today is worth far more than the potential of someone who may or may not even make it. And even if they do make it, are they going to be as good as the guy they gave up? All in all, the fans have every right to be critical of this move, because this move sucks in the short term, and the long term is nothing more than a chance.

Lonnie, here's the thing, you are critical about every ******* thing the Bruins do. Sweeney could wear a tie you didn't like and there would be a multi-page rant about him being out of touch with style and how could Neely choose a guy like that for a GM. I'm pretty damn sure that if the roles had been reversed and the B's had acquired Hamilton for that package, you would have been critical of the cost and critical of Hamilton's play.

There is NO winning with you as far as management is concerned.

Please excuse me if I take a longer term approach to the team and am not in the instant gratification crowd. Hamilton didn't want to be here, wish the B's had gotten more, don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on the way out, deal hurts them now, looking forward to what the prospects they got for him do down the road.

End of ******* story...period.

 

[Stone Clode]

Stone, you can say that, but it's not true. Keeping and overpaying bottom of the roster veterans is a far different problem than dealing 23 year old puck moving defensemen who are still growing into their game for futures. The only commonality they have is that they end up stripping the roster of the youth they have with upside.

And yes, we know, they won a cup. But you know what you call a team that won a single cup doing it the opposite way most other teams are built? An anomaly.

The New Jersey Devils in 2012 were an anomaly. The Flyers in 2010 were an anomaly. The Bruins weren't an anomaly. Like it or not, they made 2 cup finals in a span of 3 years. If you've noticed, there are 2 ways to build a cup team in this era: either stack your roster and go for it all ('06 Oilers, '07 Sens, '07 Ducks, '11 Nucks, '14 Rangers, '13 Bruins, '08 Penguins and '09 Penguins) or you can try to develop your farm to excel at the right time combined with the right vets ('11 Bruins, '10 Hawks, '13 Hawks, '15 Hawks, '14 Kings, '08 and '09 Wings)...or the case where you get **** luck or get extremely hot ('12 Kings, '12 Devils, '10 Flyers, '06 Canes).

The fact that in the cap era, the Bruins are one of only 5 teams (Pens, Wings, Hawks, Kings, and B's) to make the cup final MORE than once tells me that they definitely aren't an anomaly.

And as it stands, what 'bottom of the roster' veterans are they paying? Kelly is off the team after next year, so I don't really count that anymore (plus, he wasn't a Sweeney guy). The only truly awful deal he made was McQuaid's contract, when in the grand scheme of things, will be neither a difficult contract to move if need be, and with the current state of the roster and the cap increase, isn't particularly damning. They have 8 guys essentially making entry level money.

They are a team in transition. They have no real bad contracts on the team (McQuaid at 2.75 in an increasing cap is hardly a bad thing), they had SIX PICKS IN THE FIRST 60 in what is considered the deepest draft in years, they have 2 talented players in their system/on their roster from last year's draft (Pastrnak and Heinen), they have 2 high level goaltending prospects to prep for the decline of one of the league's top 5 goalies, and they have a bunch of guys on this roster who have a LOT to prove and fight for (Hayes proving he belongs, Beleksey proving his year wasn't a fluke, Pastrnak and Spooner proving they are legit, Connolly proving his worth, Krug proving he's a top 4 guy). This is certainly a team in transition. They can still be a potential playoff team. But they are a team with a future, a decent foundation, and a good prospect pool. They are without a great talent in Hamilton, but this organization as a whole is in much better shape now than they were 5 months ago, when they had no direction, no future, and very little hope.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Wasting...your...breath.

Good post though.

 

[LSCII]

Lonnie, here's the thing, you are critical about every ******* thing the Bruins do. Sweeney could wear a tie you didn't like and there would be a multi-page rant about him being out of touch with style and how could Neely choose a guy like that for a GM. I'm pretty damn sure that if the roles had been reversed and the B's had acquired Hamilton for that package, you would have been critical of the cost and critical of Hamilton's play.

There is NO winning with you as far as management is concerned.

Please excuse me if I take a longer term approach to the team and am not in the instant gratification crowd. Hamilton didn't want to be here, wish the B's had gotten more, don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on the way out, deal hurts them now, looking forward to what the prospects they got for him do down the road.

End of ******* story...period.

Yes, I am critical of them. And I think more fans should be. The free pass they've gotten because of one cup has to end at some point, no? Look at what they've done over the short term here. They've kept overpriced veterans in bottom of the roster spots at the expense of the prospects you so desperately love. They've moved on from young elite offensive forwards not once, but twice, with no replacement either time. They've moved on from one of the only young, PMD they had that was able to actually play in the NHL, and they did it for what is at best right now is an unknown, and at worst, a possible career minor league guy. You can take a long view if you want, but I don't give a flying **** how the team could possibly be set up 5 years from now. I care about the present. And as a fan, you should too. Why give them a free pass on moving known assets for unknowns, when they've already shown a track record of moving on from those unknowns even if they get lucky enough for them to turn into something?

This has nothing to do with who's running the team either. It's simply all about them doing what's wrong and folks like yourself not only accepting it, but trying to rationalize it and make excuses as to why it had to happen. It didn't. And it shouldn't. You want to move guys like Hamilton, go right ahead. But don't sell me on making the team worse in the short run, while talking about the bright future. Future in sports is meaningless. It's all about the now. And right now, this team is worse than it was last year. And last year? This team sucked. Not only to watch, but to root for. They played a terrible style, and looked like they didn't give a **** about anything. But hey, 5 years from now, maybe one of the guys they drafted this year will be in the league, and maybe he'll give a ****. Right?

I just don't get how you can float out such a nonsensical argument and then try to make it about me being negative. I'm not being critical just to be critical. I'm seeing a track record of dealing youth with upside for either crappy quantity type of deals or nothing but futures. It's a pattern that is not only misguided, IMO, but also in direct conflict with winning games and championships.

You mention that Hamilton didn't want to be here. The same was said about Kessel. The same can be said about Seguin (if you take his rumored actions into account). Rather than just accept it and move on, why not question it? Why do elite offensive players want out as soon as they possibly can? Why do offensive minded players (according to reports) shoot their way out of town the first chance they get? You don't find it odd that other teams are able to integrate young offensive minded players into the mix, yet the B's fail to do so over and over again?

You know full well what the answer is, and it's Claude and his vaunted system. It's his insistence that everyone adhere to the system rather than him tweaking it to better fit the players skill sets. And with Sweeney coming out saying he wants the system and style to be adjusted, is Claude really the right guy for this job any more? I think not, yet he was retained by the new GM. To me, that not only was a dumb move, but one that should be criticized, often.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

I didn't "float" out any nonsensical argument.

1) I had concerns about Hamilton's play last season, and am not as broken up about him leaving as most are.

2) I have good reason to believe that Dougie didn't want to be in Boston and preferred playing for a Canadian team.

I think it absolutely hurts the team in the short term, but as BB would say,

"I am moving on to Cincinnati."

I know that the Hamilton, Seguin, Thornton, Bourque, and Bernie Parent trades make great message board fodder, but I'm over it. Bring on this year's version of the B's and see what they have. You can acknowledge management's mistakes without dwelling on them, over and over...




and over...





and over...




and over...





and over...

 

[Estlin]

They are a team in transition. They have no real bad contracts on the team (McQuaid at 2.75 in an increasing cap is hardly a bad thing), they had SIX PICKS IN THE FIRST 60 in what is considered the deepest draft in years, they have 2 talented players in their system/on their roster from last year's draft (Pastrnak and Heinen), they have 2 high level goaltending prospects to prep for the decline of one of the league's top 5 goalies, and they have a bunch of guys on this roster who have a LOT to prove and fight for (Hayes proving he belongs, Beleksey proving his year wasn't a fluke, Pastrnak and Spooner proving they are legit, Connolly proving his worth, Krug proving he's a top 4 guy). This is certainly a team in transition. They can still be a potential playoff team. But they are a team with a future, a decent foundation, and a good prospect pool. They are without a great talent in Hamilton, but this organization as a whole is in much better shape now than they were 5 months ago, when they had no direction, no future, and very little hope.

I agree that the team is in better shape than it was earlier this year. I expect Boston not to make the playoffs this year and am fine with that. It makes the team's 2016 first-round draft pick more valuable (and San Jose's, too, if the Sharks don't qualify either) and avoids the team making stupid short-term moves to get into the playoffs. The coming season is a transitional one; the following one will have increased hope (and expectations).

You mention that Hamilton didn't want to be here. The same was said about Kessel. The same can be said about Seguin (if you take his rumored actions into account). Rather than just accept it and move on, why not question it? Why do elite offensive players want out as soon as they possibly can? Why do offensive minded players (according to reports) shoot their way out of town the first chance they get? You don't find it odd that other teams are able to integrate young offensive minded players into the mix, yet the B's fail to do so over and over again?

You know full well what the answer is, and it's Claude and his vaunted system. It's his insistence that everyone adhere to the system rather than him tweaking it to better fit the players skill sets. And with Sweeney coming out saying he wants the system and style to be adjusted, is Claude really the right guy for this job any more? I think not, yet he was retained by the new GM. To me, that not only was a dumb move, but one that should be criticized, often.

I think that there is truth in this. I suspect that Claude was the main (and perhaps only) reason why Hamilton wanted out. Julien is a good coach, but I believe that he's the wrong one for this team moving forward. He shouldn't have been kept on after last season, but maybe he is being set up to be the fall guy for what is expected to be a difficult season for the team.

 

[LSCII]

The New Jersey Devils in 2012 were an anomaly. The Flyers in 2010 were an anomaly. The Bruins weren't an anomaly. Like it or not, they made 2 cup finals in a span of 3 years. If you've noticed, there are 2 ways to build a cup team in this era: either stack your roster and go for it all ('06 Oilers, '07 Sens, '07 Ducks, '11 Nucks, '14 Rangers, '13 Bruins, '08 Penguins and '09 Penguins) or you can try to develop your farm to excel at the right time combined with the right vets ('11 Bruins, '10 Hawks, '13 Hawks, '15 Hawks, '14 Kings, '08 and '09 Wings)...or the case where you get **** luck or get extremely hot ('12 Kings, '12 Devils, '10 Flyers, '06 Canes).

The fact that in the cap era, the Bruins are one of only 5 teams (Pens, Wings, Hawks, Kings, and B's) to make the cup final MORE than once tells me that they definitely aren't an anomaly.

And as it stands, what 'bottom of the roster' veterans are they paying? Kelly is off the team after next year, so I don't really count that anymore (plus, he wasn't a Sweeney guy). The only truly awful deal he made was McQuaid's contract, when in the grand scheme of things, will be neither a difficult contract to move if need be, and with the current state of the roster and the cap increase, isn't particularly damning. They have 8 guys essentially making entry level money.

They are a team in transition. They have no real bad contracts on the team (McQuaid at 2.75 in an increasing cap is hardly a bad thing), they had SIX PICKS IN THE FIRST 60 in what is considered the deepest draft in years, they have 2 talented players in their system/on their roster from last year's draft (Pastrnak and Heinen), they have 2 high level goaltending prospects to prep for the decline of one of the league's top 5 goalies, and they have a bunch of guys on this roster who have a LOT to prove and fight for (Hayes proving he belongs, Beleksey proving his year wasn't a fluke, Pastrnak and Spooner proving they are legit, Connolly proving his worth, Krug proving he's a top 4 guy). This is certainly a team in transition. They can still be a potential playoff team. But they are a team with a future, a decent foundation, and a good prospect pool. They are without a great talent in Hamilton, but this organization as a whole is in much better shape now than they were 5 months ago, when they had no direction, no future, and very little hope.

I appreciate the effort you took compiling that data and then trying to draw a conclusion, and I don't want you to think I'm dismissing your point. I just simply disagree with it.

So to that end, what players did the Chiarelli lead front office find and develop for that roster? All the guys like Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, Rask, and Marchand predated them. If anything, they moved young players like Wheeler, Colborne, and homegrown guys like Stuart for veterans. Those same veterans that they ended up retaining and overpaying to do so after the cup win.

If you want to talk about the second trip to the finals, they took the only young guy they had on the team who played regularly during the season and playoffs was bumped off the second line in favor of a dude who was a million years old (Jagr). And the young guys who did play in the playoffs were mainly defensemen (Hamilton, Krug and Bart) who only got the chance to play then because of the sheer amount of injuries to veteran players. If Wade Redden stays healthy, we never see Torey Krug, do we?

 

[LSCII]

I didn't "float" out any nonsensical argument.

1) I had concerns about Hamilton's play last season, and am not as broken up about him leaving as most are.

2) I have good reason to believe that Dougie didn't want to be in Boston and preferred playing for a Canadian team.

I think it absolutely hurts the team in the short term, but as BB would say,

"I am moving on to Cincinnati."

I know that the Hamilton, Seguin, Thornton, Bourque, and Bernie Parent trades make great message board fodder, but I'm over it. Bring on this year's version of the B's and see what they have. You can acknowledge management's mistakes without dwelling on them, over and over...




and over...





and over...




and over...





and over...

Concerns over his play are fine. Moving him for less than they should have gotten in return is not. That's the heart of the issue. Not that they moved a guy (no matter how badly you want to turn it into that kind of argument), but that they moved a current roster player for the chance the guy they drafted turns into a roster player in 4 years. They weakened the now for a chance at the future, and the guy they took is literally an unknown. And to make it even worse, the now looked pretty shaky before the deal, and flat out crappy now. So you can enjoy watching Adam McQuaid be misused as a top 4 and dream about the future if you want, I'll stay in the now and see how stupid this deal is for today and the next 3-5 years, until we know what the future really is.

but hey, enjoy those day dreams about 5 years from now. Everyone they drafted will surely pan out because every one of their first round picks always do!!