Management GM Pierre Dorion/Front Office Thread - Part IX [Mod Warning in post 1)

[ksens]

The team's in a precarious position with Murray. This past season he was so so. Too many injuries. Takes time to find his groove. Finds it. Plays well. Very well. Gets injured. Rinse and repeat.

But here's the problem. You said a team needs 3 NHL goalies. Gus had a bad season. PD says he told him you were out best the year prior, figure out how to get back there. If they buyout Murray and Forsberg gets hurt, we're f***ed. I'm not worried about Forsber's play, but a 1/2 season injury and Murray bought out, all we have left are not ready for prime time AHL goalies. One bad groin pull and we're done.

Had Gus followed up 20-21 with a good season, imo the team has more options. But he didn't. And I think the team's hands are a little tied here. Even if they wanted to buy Murray out, they can't. Not without getting another NHL calibre player. Gus's poor 21-22 season is pretty concerning

Every NHL team pretty much wants the same goalie situation:
1. A starter (you can rely on to carry the load in the regular season and especially in the playoffs)
2. A backup who is proven at the NHL level (but who is a step down in GSAA but who you can sign for cheap, and who can spell your starter on back to backs, against weak teams or during injuries, etc.)
3. A prospect in the minors (who you are grooming to take #1 and who can get called up if there is an injury or issue with the play of #1 or #2)

Dorion f***ed the goalie situation all up, because he is Dorion and he f***s everything up. Although to be fair so have other GMs - anyone interested in the Petr Mrazek contract?

What he should do is get rid of the Murray contract and send Gus to the AHL even though he is on a one way deal. Then let Forsberg be #1, go get a #2 as there always are some available every year in free agency for very little money, and then either Gus (ideally not given his contract and waiver exposure, maybe someone picks him up) or one of the other prospects are #3.

Instead what he will do because he's the one who f***ed it up in the first place and can't admit mistakes is have some kind of 1a / 1b / 1c situation next year ... until Murray is hurt again or someone plays poorly for a few games or whatever and then here comes the controversy.

 

[aragorn]

Using the 7th to bring in a young elite player is one thing, using it to get rid of a player is another & certainly the wrong way to go. IMO they should keep the pick get the best player they can & draw from free agency to fill in the holes they need & try & get rid of several players they don't need.

For example, they might be able to use a pick plus Brannstrom in a package to move up in the draft, they might be able to do the same with Thomson or add him in a trade to bring in a better player. I would like to see them target someone like Whitecloud, a good young RD that could really help this team. They need to get rid of MDZ, White & Zaitsev asap although it won't be easy.

 

[Micklebot]

The team's in a precarious position with Murray. This past season he was so so. Too many injuries. Takes time to find his groove. Finds it. Plays well. Very well. Gets injured. Rinse and repeat.

But here's the problem. You said a team needs 3 NHL goalies. Gus had a bad season. PD says he told him you were out best the year prior, figure out how to get back there. If they buyout Murray and Forsberg gets hurt, we're f***ed. I'm not worried about Forsber's play, but a 1/2 season injury and Murray bought out, all we have left are not ready for prime time AHL goalies. One bad groin pull and we're done.

Had Gus followed up 20-21 with a good season, imo the team has more options. But he didn't. And I think the team's hands are a little tied here. Even if they wanted to buy Murray out, they can't. Not without getting another NHL calibre player. Gus's poor 21-22 season is pretty concerning

I feel like with Murray being so injury prone doesn't add much.

We have Soogard and Gus who should be a good option for a callup, I'm not worried on that front. Forsberg is going to have to do as our starter imo because we can't rely on Murray. I'd personally be more comfortable paying another vet backup than going with Murray but I can see the appeal of sticking it out with Murray, you won't save much money by buying him out and filling the spot with a 2mil backup, and his upside is likely higher than what we'd get if he can stay healthy, but it feels like LeClaire all over again. The sooner he is gone the sooner we can move on imo.

 

[Big Muddy]

The team's in a precarious position with Murray. This past season he was so so. Too many injuries. Takes time to find his groove. Finds it. Plays well. Very well. Gets injured. Rinse and repeat.

But here's the problem. You said a team needs 3 NHL goalies. Gus had a bad season. PD says he told him you were out best the year prior, figure out how to get back there. If they buyout Murray and Forsberg gets hurt, we're f***ed. I'm not worried about Forsber's play, but a 1/2 season injury and Murray bought out, all we have left are not ready for prime time AHL goalies. One bad groin pull and we're done.

Had Gus followed up 20-21 with a good season, imo the team has more options. But he didn't. And I think the team's hands are a little tied here. Even if they wanted to buy Murray out, they can't. Not without getting another NHL calibre player. Gus's poor 21-22 season is pretty concerning

Ya, I agree. That's what I've been saying. And based on a recent presser with Dorion, he seemed to be saying the same thing.

Would be nice to be in a better & different position, but unfortunately, that's not easily achieved.

We can go in a different direction. That's always an option. But, there's some risk. I guess in the end its about risk and making a tough decision.

And from a personal perspective, I was never a big fan of the move to get Murray. So, its definitely frustrating to be in this position.

 

[BondraTime]

If one of the top 5 is there at 7, use the pick.

If not, trade it. There is a significant drop off from the Nemec/Jiricek’s to the Gauthier/Kemell’s.

It’s pretty likely they have a trade lined up should things not fall their way

 

[Micklebot]

If one of the top 5 is there at 7, use the pick.

If not, trade it. There is a significant drop off from the Nemec/Jiricek’s to the Gauthier/Kemell’s.

It’s pretty likely they have a trade lined up should things not fall their way

That's how we did it with Rundblad, trade was lined up the night before the draft, when our target (believed to be Schwartz) wasn't available, we finalized the trade.

 

[R2010]

Dorion did a great job building the NYR...

 

[DaveMatthew]

It’s wild that Pierre Dorion traded away Mika Zibanejad, Mark Stone and Matt Duchene and all he has to show for it is Brannstrom, Thomson and Luke Loheit.

The brain is big.

 

[Wallet Inspector]

It’s wild that Pierre Dorion traded away Mika Zibanejad, Mark Stone and Matt Duchene and all he has to show for it is Brannstrom, Thomson and Luke Loheit.

The brain is big.

It's sad that rebuilds like the Ducks,Devils and Red Wings are even close to ours when we traded away WAAAAAAAAAY more valuable assets, both quality and quantity-wise.

We're fortunate that the Karlsson trade turned out amazing, and that we got a top line player in Batherson with a 4th round pick.

 

[Sens Vader]

It’s wild that Pierre Dorion traded away Mika Zibanejad, Mark Stone and Matt Duchene and all he has to show for it is Brannstrom, Thomson and Luke Loheit.

The brain is big.

he needs to be fired asap

pathetic GM

 

[Ice-Tray]

You wouldn't pick out a group, specifically, to disparage and say you'd have to be desperate to get their money if you didn't hold certain views. Also, you think making a pride logo is a good start to inclusivity? I'm sorry but that's a giant pile of horseshit. It takes nearly no effort or care to put pride colours on a logo. And it takes nearly no effort or care to send out a tweet with a generic support message. It's not even remotely the least you could do.

There are gay NHLers in the league, today. How about championing those people and creating an environment that made them feel safe and welcome in their own organizations and comfortable enough to be out publicly? That would be a good start. This is a league mired in controversies ranging from racism to sexual assault. Putting your logo in Canva and changing some colours doesn't mean shit.

Sure, agreeable. But…. Social change takes time, and it takes hammering images and messages of inclusion over generations to make things ‘normal’. The next generation already has a nice running start on us, but you have to keep at it in all the general ways to keep the oldies on script.

No social change happens immediately. We’ll know it’s a win when we no longer have to do anything at all.

 

[Ice-Tray]

It's sad that rebuilds like the Ducks,Devils and Red Wings are even close to ours when we traded away WAAAAAAAAAY more valuable assets, both quality and quantity-wise.

We're fortunate that the Karlsson trade turned out amazing, and that we got a top line player in Batherson with a 4th round pick.

Why are we fortunate? The wings still have some carry over good players, and failed to trade their stars when it was time (circumstance). NJ won the draft lottery, which would be nice. The ducks have drafted well as well, and didn’t/couldn’t trade their star.

None of those teams are at the same place as we are in terms of prospect depth. We are better than all those teams, in part because we drafted well like they did, but also because we added some better picks/players by trading our stars.

Not sure why we should be feeling bad. The reality is that we have a ton of talent, but we still have to progress as fast as they can arrive at the NHL, and develop. There is no fast tracking that no matter how many extra picks you get.

We have a new exciting core, I wouldn’t trade our situation for any of those squads. Whould you?

 

[Ice-Tray]

Every NHL team pretty much wants the same goalie situation:
1. A starter (you can rely on to carry the load in the regular season and especially in the playoffs)
2. A backup who is proven at the NHL level (but who is a step down in GSAA but who you can sign for cheap, and who can spell your starter on back to backs, against weak teams or during injuries, etc.)
3. A prospect in the minors (who you are grooming to take #1 and who can get called up if there is an injury or issue with the play of #1 or #2)

Dorion f***ed the goalie situation all up, because he is Dorion and he f***s everything up. Although to be fair so have other GMs - anyone interested in the Petr Mrazek contract?

What he should do is get rid of the Murray contract and send Gus to the AHL even though he is on a one way deal. Then let Forsberg be #1, go get a #2 as there always are some available every year in free agency for very little money, and then either Gus (ideally not given his contract and waiver exposure, maybe someone picks him up) or one of the other prospects are #3.

Instead what he will do because he's the one who f***ed it up in the first place and can't admit mistakes is have some kind of 1a / 1b / 1c situation next year ... until Murray is hurt again or someone plays poorly for a few games or whatever and then here comes the controversy.

Eh, or….

Why not just have all three for a spell and see if Murray can hit a healthy spot.

We have first hand experience with a injury prone player finally finding his long term stride.

We have little to lose in the short term, so no need to make a hasty decision. Goaltending is a critical position, and this playoffs has exposed how lopsided many teams have gotten.

 

[SensontheRush]

It’s wild that Pierre Dorion traded away Mika Zibanejad, Mark Stone and Matt Duchene and all he has to show for it is Brannstrom, Thomson and Luke Loheit.

The brain is big.

Would it not be fair include everything received from the Brassard trade? And I personally like Sokolov a lot as a prospect, but I can't argue with the overwhelming point of your post.

 

[JD1]

Like I said, yeah, probably an overreaction to move the 7th for Zaitsev's entire contract...but I guess a 2nd would be fine because you know and i know, this team will not spend to the cap. We cannot seriously contemplate that.

I find it disturbing that, and if you believe the reports from today, that it was Bettman's suggestion to do the 5 games in QC. The only reason you would think a commissioner would suggest that is due to the very low revenues coming out of Ottawa. So, when I have no money, maybe I should clarify that they have no money in the context of trying to win. They don't, or they won't and that is why they have to get creative to remove guys like Zaitsev, and they must buyout White.

I am not worried about moving to QC, but am annoyed by the story

It was Bettman's idea to play the games in QC? That's concerning. If that's true, that says to me the NHL will listen to stories of a "revenue problem" in Ottawa

 

[JD1]

Dorion did a great job building the NYR...

Absolutely. As far as I understand, Dorion was THE key factor in getting Panarin and Fox for nothing

 

[Masked]

It’s wild that Pierre Dorion traded away Mika Zibanejad, Mark Stone and Matt Duchene and all he has to show for it is Brannstrom, Thomson and Luke Loheit.

The brain is big.

You forgot Sokolov, Gus and JBD.

Assen na yo!

 

[IpsoPostFacto]

It was Bettman's idea to play the games in QC? That's concerning. If that's true, that says to me the NHL will listen to stories of a "revenue problem" in Ottawa

I couldn't possible know what is really going on, but my read is that Péladeau is doing a master class in trolling here.

The working theory we have always believed is that the NHL doesn't like to move teams other than as a final resort as it is not a good image for the league. I think this would mean absolutely nobody willing to purchases a team and run it in the current location. We know in some markets that the NHL has literally run teams while working on new ownership.

Playing 5 games in Quebec as a one-off does not do anything tangible in terms of revenue in the big picture, so, unless things are way more dire than reports of potential buyers is completely incorrect, I don't think it makes sense for Bettman to suggest such a thing in a vacuum.

First reports indicated that his was tied to the World Jr. bid for Ottawa/Quebec. Perhaps Péladeau was trying to exploit some scheduling issue - "oh, say, i see the medal round is all in Ottawa; maybe we can help with Sens home games" or something like that. If there is any truth to this, I think Péladeau would have really screwed up a relationship with Bettman by leaking that little tidbit. Notice how quickly the joint bid became not a joint bid when the first reports came out. I suppose that Bettman could have been telling the Sens to get their shit together, but that doesn't feel reasonable.

More recent reports indicate that it was the Quebec Gov't contacted the team on a couple of times on this issue and were told "no thanks" each time.

IMO, Péladeau is trying to keep this story alive to, at a bare minimum, keep Quebec's name in the minds of the NHL and maybe even any other owner that is in trouble.

 

[BankStreetParade]

Relative to what was done previously it's a step in the right direction.

Sure, agreeable. But…. Social change takes time, and it takes hammering images and messages of inclusion over generations to make things ‘normal’. The next generation already has a nice running start on us, but you have to keep at it in all the general ways to keep the oldies on script.

No social change happens immediately. We’ll know it’s a win when we no longer have to do anything at all.

Respectfully, I disagree. If we're being honest, they were doing nothing before and they still continue to do nothing now. Changing your profile picture or logo is still doing nothing. It's not a step in the right direction because there's nothing about it that you could say is helping anyone. A community of marginalized people who continue to experience discrimination, hate and are always fighting for their rights need something more tangible than a colourful logo on a Twitter account they most likely don't follow.

I understand why some would think it's "something" but it really isn't unless someone could explain what measurable progress is associated with this action.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

It’s wild that Pierre Dorion traded away Mika Zibanejad, Mark Stone and Matt Duchene and all he has to show for it is Brannstrom, Thomson and Luke Loheit.

The brain is big.

I agree that he got very little for those guys but we also have Gus and JBD from the Zibby trade (via Brassard).

Still nothing resembling a star player. When you trade three players like that you should have at least one high end player in return.

 

[Micklebot]

Respectfully, I disagree. If we're being honest, they were doing nothing before and they still continue to do nothing now. Changing your profile picture or logo is still doing nothing. It's not a step in the right direction because there's nothing about it that you could say is helping anyone. A community of marginalized people who continue to experience discrimination, hate and are always fighting for their rights need something more tangible than a colourful logo on a Twitter account they most likely don't follow.

I understand why some would think it's "something" but it really isn't unless someone could explain what measurable progress is associated with this action.

Visibility for a movement is important, just us having the conversation adds to that, which we wouldn't be doing if not for that small action. It's not enough imo, but to dismiss it as nothing isn't accurate either. The marginalized people know full well about their struggles, so it's not necessarily them, but when my kids saw a rainbow flag for the first time, or a colourful logo on twitter, and they asked what that was, it started a dialogue. If more people have those types of discussions, it's a tangible benefit that should lead to progress and that's not nothing.

All that to say, I take no issue with you thinking that more is needed, in fact I agree. I don't think we get more by being critical of the org for dipping it's toe in the water though, I think we get more by telling them that's great, give us more of that, and show that them that it's worth investing in.

 

[BankStreetParade]

I agree that he got very little for those guys but we also have Gus and JBD from the Zibby trade (via Brassard).

Still nothing resembling a star player. When you trade three players like that you should have at least one high end player in return.

Zibanejad is the only one that we should have expected more for. Teams just don't trade big packages for UFA rentals. Stone and Duchene both dictated their destinies. We could start the whole debate again over whether we should have traded them earlier in the season but I really think they tried hard to get them on fair contracts and as far as we know they made good offers to both guys. I honestly don't believe the rebuild plan involved trading Stone and Duchene or, at the least, not both.

 

[SensHulk]

Can we retroactively fire Dorion for the debacle that is the Zibanejad trade? His very first trade might have been the absolute worst, and Zibanejad has turned into an absolute rock star

 

[umma gumma]

Can we retroactively fire Dorion for the debacle that is the Zibanejad trade? His very first trade might have been the absolute worst, and Zibanejad has turned into an absolute rock star

DJs don't do rock.

 

[cudi]

DJs don't do rock.

someone on twitter said he's the NHL's version of Hannah Montana and i cant get that out of my head.