Confirmed with Link: Jets/Buffalo Blockbuster! part II (Kane and Bogo)

[Whileee]

How is a perfect storm different from dumb luck?

You have to be patient and wait for the "perfect storm", and then recognize it when it arrives.

I'm having a hard time understanding how the Kane/Bogo trade could be seen as a "dumb luck". I guess it's part of the larger narrative that Chevy's mistakes are idiotic, and his good moves are "dumb luck". Fascinating.

 

[Whileee]

What if, what if, what if....the world is full of them. That works then other way as well. Fact is....the scenario played out the way it played out...and Chevy handled it the way he did. It was successful.

If it played out differently...would it not be far to assume that Chevy would have handled it differently?

Exactly. There are many complex situations that arise within teams and a GM has to have the judgment to respond when unexpected situations arise. Chevy probably didn't expect Kane to request a trade when he signed him. It is also very possible that his initial request was based on the existing coaching staff, and the Jets thought that a coaching change might alter the dynamic. These are all imponderable for fans who have no real understanding of what goes on behind the scenes. In the end, we can only judge based on what is done. He traded Kane and got an excellent return. We can only speculate whether he could have gotten a better return at another time or situation. Ascribing a good trade to "dumb luck" makes no logical sense.

 

[Gm0ney]

You have to be patient and wait for the "perfect storm", and then recognize it when it arrives.

I'm having a hard time understanding how the Kane/Bogo trade could be seen as a "dumb luck". I guess it's part of the larger narrative that Chevy's mistakes are idiotic, and his good moves are "dumb luck". Fascinating.

Well, that's an interesting way to think about it. Wait 3 years to trade a guy who's been asking to get out, who doesn't get along with his teammates, who's an embarrassment and distraction to the organization...all waiting for that perfect storm? Wow.

I didn't say the trade itself was dumb luck. The trade was good - Chevy couldn't have done better under the circumstances he created for himself. But he did create those circumstances - and he was forced into making a deal. The luck is the part where there was a trade partner at all. How can this be considered some masterstroke of genius on Chevy's part? I guess it's part of the larger narrative that Chevy's successes are all due to his careful planning and patience and his mistakes are Maurice's fault or something.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

Would both sides of this argument stop it with the "narrative" ********? It's not productive to the conversation. You all have more to offer the discussion than this.

The only thing I'm going to add: I have no idea why Chevy didn't move Kane sooner if the relationship was that strained, unless A) the value on returns being offered was low and B) he thought they could turn things around with Kane. One thing that seems to go overlooked: while Chevy was slow to react, Kane himself created the mess.

 

[DK59]

The opposite is just as true - the patient approach can open up the possibility to miss out on good opportunities. The Eichel/McDavid race to the bottom was pretty unique. What happens if the Kane mutiny happens the year before?

Or what if Kane decides to choke a girl in a bar before the tracksuit incident? Would waiting 3 years to trade him still be held up as an example of the virtues of patience? Lucky to be good, indeed...

On the flip side you can jump the gun like Boston did with Sequin and lose a franchise player in the process. Like everything there is a middle ground that usually works the best over time. Chevy may have waited longer than is ideal with Kane but we have no idea about the extent of his efforts to make the trade and whether any good opportunities presented themselves in the years preceding the trade. Personally I think we should be very happy that in the end we did get good value for Kane and traded him before his market value collapsed.

 

[Howard Chuck]

We will never know what return (if any) was offered over the years that Kane wanted out, but in the end we did very well with that trade. I think getting rid of Kane was addition by subtraction with all of the new rookies we have now. We seem to have a very good culture on the team at the moment.

Chevy and the Jets in general sure seem to be lucky a lot.

 

[wpgsilver]

Why are people saying Chevy erred in not giving into the demands of a player with no leverage?

Perhaps people believe that Kane's presence was so poisonous it hurt the team, but to Kaner's credit even while wanting out he showed up and busted his ass for the Jets.

People are making statements about the environment in the locker room without solid footing it seems. I'm skeptical that the Kane was an issue in the locker room for years. Perhaps he wasn't liked, but big whup. In a collection of 30 hyper-competitive alpha males there will always be some degree of conflict, or at least there is a level which is acceptable. The expectation that Chevy would trade a valuable asset so that Buff and Wheeler could avoid having to deal with a 22 y/o cocky punk is silly. I doubt that Buff or Wheels would want that. You make a trade when it makes sense for the team.

I doubt that Chevy ignored the requests all together. I am sure he had discussions with other teams, but Kane wanting out cannot force his hand.

 

[Gm0ney]

Why are people saying Chevy erred in not giving into the demands of a player with no leverage?

Perhaps people believe that Kane's presence was so poisonous it hurt the team, but to Kaner's credit even while wanting out he showed up and busted his ass for the Jets.

People are making statements about the environment in the locker room without solid footing it seems. I'm skeptical that the Kane was an issue in the locker room for years. Perhaps he wasn't liked, but big whup. In a collection of 30 hyper-competitive alpha males there will always be some degree of conflict, or at least there is a level which is acceptable. The expectation that Chevy would trade a valuable asset so that Buff and Wheeler could avoid having to deal with a 22 y/o cocky punk is silly. I doubt that Buff or Wheels would want that. You make a trade when it makes sense for the team.

I doubt that Chevy ignored the requests all together. I am sure he had discussions with other teams, but Kane wanting out cannot force his hand.

You're going to keep a guy for 3 years after he's asked to be traded? We should commend Chevy for sticking to his guns? That rep is not going to lure a lot of UFAs to Winnipeg - guess we'll just have to rely on the balmy weather...

It was reported that Byfuglien gave Chevy an ultimatum on Kane ("It's him or me" type of thing). Now, maybe that just came out of the blue, but I have to think Kane not getting along with his teammates was going on for a long time. Didn't he say he wanted to fight Ladd last fall (while he was a Sabre)? Did any teammates ever come to Kane's defense when various **** was hitting various fans?

I agree there's a happy medium - like earlier mentions of Droiun and Hamonic. I don't think Chevy was anywhere near that medium in this case.

 

[Whileee]

Well, that's an interesting way to think about it. Wait 3 years to trade a guy who's been asking to get out, who doesn't get along with his teammates, who's an embarrassment and distraction to the organization...all waiting for that perfect storm? Wow.

I didn't say the trade itself was dumb luck. The trade was good - Chevy couldn't have done better under the circumstances he created for himself. But he did create those circumstances - and he was forced into making a deal. The luck is the part where there was a trade partner at all. How can this be considered some masterstroke of genius on Chevy's part? I guess it's part of the larger narrative that Chevy's successes are all due to his careful planning and patience and his mistakes are Maurice's fault or something.

Do you think Chevy made a good trade with Kane? That's the focus of the thread.

If you know that Chevy passed up better trade opportunities then provide some evidence. It would be interesting to discuss. Speculation about what he might have done without any evidence doesn't really lead to interesting discussion.

 

[puck stoppa]

Do you think Chevy made a good trade with Kane? That's the focus of the thread.

If you know that Chevy passed up better trade opportunities then provide some evidence. It would be interesting to discuss. Speculation about what he might have done without any evidence doesn't really lead to interesting discussion.

Oh to be in that war room, asst gm, it would be so fun. My dream job next to hf mod.

 

[wpgsilver]

You're going to keep a guy for 3 years after he's asked to be traded? We should commend Chevy for sticking to his guns? That rep is not going to lure a lot of UFAs to Winnipeg - guess we'll just have to rely on the balmy weather...

It was reported that Byfuglien gave Chevy an ultimatum on Kane ("It's him or me" type of thing). Now, maybe that just came out of the blue, but I have to think Kane not getting along with his teammates was going on for a long time. Didn't he say he wanted to fight Ladd last fall (while he was a Sabre)? Did any teammates ever come to Kane's defense when various **** was hitting various fans?

I agree there's a happy medium - like earlier mentions of Droiun and Hamonic. I don't think Chevy was anywhere near that medium in this case.

Yes. I am 100% going to commend a GM for realizing where the leverage lies. If a player wants to be traded the Jets should accommodate them regardless of what the compensation for the player will be?
You're concerned that having a GM who doesn't capitulate to trade requests despite having all the leverage will not attract players to Winnipeg. I'm more concerned about a GM who makes poor decisions because heaven forbid he holds a player to the contract he signed. Especially when, to that players credit, he shows up and works hard everyday.
I'd rather have a GM that holds players to the contracts they sign when its in teams best interests, rather than a GM that trades good assets to keep a departing player happy.

 

[cbcwpg]

JMO, but Chevy not moving Kane sooner boils down to one word... " potential ". No GM is going to move a "potential" 30-40 goal scorer until that player shows that he will never be that player, regardless of what the other players think of him, and regardless of him wanting out.... as long as that player plays to the best of his ability. And yes, peps can point out and say Boston did exactly that with Sequin, and yes they did, but Boston made a mistake.

If the Jets had a 40-50 goal scorer on their team that liked to kick kittens... they would keep him on the team and try to hide his questionable behavior. Even if the rest of the players didn't get along with said 40-50 goal player, they would put up with it, given that level of production.

 

[sully1410]

You're going to keep a guy for 3 years after he's asked to be traded? We should commend Chevy for sticking to his guns? That rep is not going to lure a lot of UFAs to Winnipeg - guess we'll just have to rely on the balmy weather...

It was reported that Byfuglien gave Chevy an ultimatum on Kane ("It's him or me" type of thing). Now, maybe that just came out of the blue, but I have to think Kane not getting along with his teammates was going on for a long time. Didn't he say he wanted to fight Ladd last fall (while he was a Sabre)? Did any teammates ever come to Kane's defense when various **** was hitting various fans?

I agree there's a happy medium - like earlier mentions of Droiun and Hamonic. I don't think Chevy was anywhere near that medium in this case.

You know what attracts UFAs more than anything? Winning. And not just a one off good season...but a history of success. I don't believe for one second that places like Detroit and Pittsburgh are heads and shoulders better places to live than Winnipeg...yet they have no issues attracting free agents. Why? Because they have a history of success.

I don't think that having a GM that sticks to his guns is going to have an adverse effect on that.

When was it reported that Buff gave an ultimatum? I don't remember this. Do you have a source?

I think it's entirely possible that a lot of people didn't like Kane...and that's OK. The record books are full of champion players that didn't get along. That's not news.

At the end of the day...these guys are professionals and they can make it work. I like the fact that Chevy wasn't held hostage by the locker room until it became time that Kane had to move. People need to remember that at the time we were a better team with Evander Kane than we were without. This would still be the case today. That's probably why Kane wasn't traded and it's also why the issue wasn't forced. They were a better team with him than without.

 

[puck stoppa]

You're going to keep a guy for 3 years after he's asked to be traded? We should commend Chevy for sticking to his guns? That rep is not going to lure a lot of UFAs to Winnipeg - guess we'll just have to rely on the balmy weather...

It was reported that Byfuglien gave Chevy an ultimatum on Kane ("It's him or me" type of thing). Now, maybe that just came out of the blue, but I have to think Kane not getting along with his teammates was going on for a long time. Didn't he say he wanted to fight Ladd last fall (while he was a Sabre)? Did any teammates ever come to Kane's defense when various **** was hitting various fans?

I agree there's a happy medium - like earlier mentions of Droiun and Hamonic. I don't think Chevy was anywhere near that medium in this case.

I wanted to fight Ladd too every time he took a lazy penalty or turned it over at the blue

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I do recall after year 3 there were reports that we were close to making a trade with Philly but they had cap problems that they could not work there way out of.

I suspect after the first season the focus was on getting him signed long term in advance of the lockout. And then during year 2 there were so many teams in cap trouble because of the cap being lowered it made it very hard to make significant trades.

Also there is a good argument for giving young players a few years to mature and grow up. I am sure the Jets were well aware of the issues with Kane but could also see that he had great potential and thought it made sense to exercise some patience. A reasonable level of patience and dithering are not the same thing at all. And also as you stated the absence of a trade during the first few years is not evidence that real attempts were not made. One thing we have learned about Chevy is that he is willing to make trades provided he is getting the value back that he believes is reasonable and fair. I much prefer that approach to what Boston did when they traded away Sequin for what was clearly below market value.

Good point. I stand squarely in the middle on this. I think Chevy could have and should have gotten more sooner. But I can understand why he didn't. I wouldn't go quite so far as the dithering label. In the end he got good value and it looks like he got out just in time. Kane is on a slippery slope and I'm glad he is not our problem any more.

 

[ps241]

Yea as long as Kane kept bringing it on the ice I didn't feel a massive sense of urgency to move him? Kane was being shopped at the 2014 draft (according to Friedman and what I heard from another source at the draft) so my guess is Chevy wasn't sitting on his hands with EK he was attempting to maximize asset value. Also I don't think you pull off an 8 player trade like Kane, Bogosian, Kasdrof for Stafford, Myers, Armia, Lemieux, and a 1st round on a quick lets get Kane out of town on the midnight move deal? That scope of blockbuster feels like it was part of something that might have been in the works for a while (just a thought). The trade took 7 days to pull off so it is possible the deal was one of many Chevy might have had percolating.

Now had we got bent over on a fire sale for Kane I might have been a bit pissed but that didn't happen so this feels a bit like much ado about nothing?

 

[Gm0ney]

Do you think Chevy made a good trade with Kane? That's the focus of the thread.

If you know that Chevy passed up better trade opportunities then provide some evidence. It would be interesting to discuss. Speculation about what he might have done without any evidence doesn't really lead to interesting discussion.

Well, interesting discussion or not, this is probably the most active thread of the day...

It's not speculating to say that Kane would've been more valuable if he were uninjured and 29 teams were interested. It's speculation to say we could've had Segiun for Kane or some specific deal like that. But the claim that a damaged good with only one prospective buyer would fetch less than an undamaged good with 29 prospective buyers needs no evidence to support it. It's common sense economics.

You're the one speculating that Chevy was patiently waiting for a perfect storm to take advantage of. Where's the evidence for that?

 

[peg]

You're going to keep a guy for 3 years after he's asked to be traded? We should commend Chevy for sticking to his guns? That rep is not going to lure a lot of UFAs to Winnipeg - guess we'll just have to rely on the balmy weather...

It was reported that Byfuglien gave Chevy an ultimatum on Kane ("It's him or me" type of thing). Now, maybe that just came out of the blue, but I have to think Kane not getting along with his teammates was going on for a long time. Didn't he say he wanted to fight Ladd last fall (while he was a Sabre)? Did any teammates ever come to Kane's defense when various **** was hitting various fans?

I agree there's a happy medium - like earlier mentions of Droiun and Hamonic. I don't think Chevy was anywhere near that medium in this case.

3 years might be just a bit of an exaggeration. Kane signed his contract in September, 2012. He was ultimately traded in February, 2015. 2 years and 5 months from signing to trading. I assume that Kane did not sign his 6 year contract and immediately ask for a trade so the first trade request might have been at the earliest the end of the 2012/13 season. That would be about 1 and 3/4 years before he was ultimately traded.

 

[Shazzam]

I agree he is on the road to it. "IF" he contains the current damage, and "IF" he can clean up his off ice act, and "IF" produces on the ice he will probably be ok but it will take him time to distance himself from this ****. However, his ability to maximize contract value on his next deal is hanging in the balance here. I am not sure any GM would get desperate enough for the current Kane but there are a few wacky owners (couch cough Aquilini) that might give it a go now. If he stays the coarse he is not getting paid much when this deal runs out.

I don't disagree with this, because it's basically the similar thing to what I said. Except the last IF. He's been remarkably consistent in his play on ice. Scoring has fluctuated somewhat, but he's always given it all on the ice and there's no reason to believe that will change. So that is the key reason some GMs will take a chance. His style of play is too sexy for some to resist.
My original comment is that barring a complete meltdown off the ice, a major issue where his image becomes toxic, he will have suitors. If he's got any brains, he'll keep his nose clean during his contract year. If Buffalo is wanting to trade him today, they won't get max value. I'm sure EK isn't losing sleep over that.
What does he have, 2 more years on his current contract?

 

[Gm0ney]

Yes. I am 100% going to commend a GM for realizing where the leverage lies. If a player wants to be traded the Jets should accommodate them regardless of what the compensation for the player will be?
You're concerned that having a GM who doesn't capitulate to trade requests despite having all the leverage will not attract players to Winnipeg. I'm more concerned about a GM who makes poor decisions because heaven forbid he holds a player to the contract he signed. Especially when, to that players credit, he shows up and works hard everyday.
I'd rather have a GM that holds players to the contracts they sign when its in teams best interests, rather than a GM that trades good assets to keep a departing player happy.

You know what attracts UFAs more than anything? Winning. And not just a one off good season...but a history of success. I don't believe for one second that places like Detroit and Pittsburgh are heads and shoulders better places to live than Winnipeg...yet they have no issues attracting free agents. Why? Because they have a history of success.

I don't think that having a GM that sticks to his guns is going to have an adverse effect on that.

When was it reported that Buff gave an ultimatum? I don't remember this. Do you have a source?

I think it's entirely possible that a lot of people didn't like Kane...and that's OK. The record books are full of champion players that didn't get along. That's not news.

At the end of the day...these guys are professionals and they can make it work. I like the fact that Chevy wasn't held hostage by the locker room until it became time that Kane had to move. People need to remember that at the time we were a better team with Evander Kane than we were without. This would still be the case today. That's probably why Kane wasn't traded and it's also why the issue wasn't forced. They were a better team with him than without.

Sorry, I started a sidebar debate by accident!

To be clear, I'm not advocating that Chevy should immediately acquiesce to any trade demand and move a player to his most desired location for whatever return he can get, no matter how paltry.

I will say that refusing to attempt to deal a player who's been asking for a trade for 3 years is bad for everyone - and every player in the league is going to take a dim view of this. Making a guy miserable for 3 years is a ****** thing to do. Players will notice GMs who do ****** things. And Winnipeg has enough going against it as a destination for millionaire hockey players - cold, cheap, middle of nowhere, high taxes, no anonymity...you want to add ***hole GM to that list? Would you be proud of Chevy if he jerked Laine around over the bonuses on his ELC like Lou was apparently doing with Matthews? What leverage does Laine have, after all?

BTW: Here's the article that talks about Buff's ultimatum.
http://www.tsn.ca/byfuglien-remains-the-nhl-s-most-enigmatic-force-1.388494

Not sure if it meets the high credibility standards required to prove something around here. I mean, it's not like it's a tweet from Frolik's wife saying the beach in Florida has better winter weather than Winnipeg or anything that substantial.

 

[sully1410]

Sorry, I started a sidebar debate by accident!

To be clear, I'm not advocating that Chevy should immediately acquiesce to any trade demand and move a player to his most desired location for whatever return he can get, no matter how paltry.

I will say that refusing to attempt to deal a player who's been asking for a trade for 3 years is bad for everyone - and every player in the league is going to take a dim view of this. Making a guy miserable for 3 years is a ****** thing to do. Players will notice GMs who do ****** things. And Winnipeg has enough going against it as a destination for millionaire hockey players - cold, cheap, middle of nowhere, high taxes, no anonymity...you want to add ***hole GM to that list? Would you be proud of Chevy if he jerked Laine around over the bonuses on his ELC like Lou was apparently doing with Matthews? What leverage does Laine have, after all?

BTW: Here's the article that talks about Buff's ultimatum.
http://www.tsn.ca/byfuglien-remains-the-nhl-s-most-enigmatic-force-1.388494

Not sure if it meets the high credibility standards required to prove something around here. I mean, it's not like it's a tweet from Frolik's wife saying the beach in Florida has better winter weather than Winnipeg or anything that substantial.

But you don't deal him for less than what you think is worse. Why wold you place the needs of an individual over the needs of the team. The GM's job is to build the best team possible...not make everyone of his players happy.

I don't think that Chevy wasn't dealing him to be a ****, and if you honestly believe that he did...I don't know what to tell you.

These guys are pro hockey players and even if you request a trade...sometimes it takes awhile. They know that better than most. Being cut, being traded, waiting for a trade...it's all in the game. I'm pretty sure everyone gets that.

And either way...I don't think players care whether or not a GM is an *******. If understand the job correctly. ..their day to day dealings with the players is limited. More than anything...aside money...players want to win. Build a winner...the free agents will come.

 

[Gm0ney]

But you don't deal him for less than what you think is worse. Why wold you place the needs of an individual over the needs of the team. The GM's job is to build the best team possible...not make everyone of his players happy.

I don't think that Chevy wasn't dealing him to be a ****, and if you honestly believe that he did...I don't know what to tell you.

These guys are pro hockey players and even if you request a trade...sometimes it takes awhile. They know that better than most. Being cut, being traded, waiting for a trade...it's all in the game. I'm pretty sure everyone gets that.

And either way...I don't think players care whether or not a GM is an *******. If understand the job correctly. ..their day to day dealings with the players is limited. More than anything...aside money...players want to win. Build a winner...the free agents will come.

1) Sure, get full value for the player. In 2014 pundits were talking about how Kane was droolworthy because of his decent long term deal and his scoring chops. Was no one interested or was Chevy asking too much?

2) ...Or was he asking at all? Is there any evidence that Chevy was really trying to deal Kane? A guy wants out for 3 years and with 29 potential dance partners and Chevy just can't make it happen? But then he has him gone in a week after the tracksuit incident with 1 dance partner and Kane on the IR for the rest of the season? Sorry - I just can't do those kind of mental gymnastics...

3) I'm sure players understand that having a trade demand met within a week or two is unreasonable (except in the case of the tracksuit incident where things somehow came together incredibly quickly) - but 3 years? In a situation you hate, with few friends in the locker room. Does this seem reasonable to ask of a professional? Kane showed up to every game, played hard, didn't go obviously public with his trade demands (though he didn't hide it terribly well)...Chevy sits on his hands for 3 year. Who's the professional again?

4) Right - who cares if Chevy's a jerk when the team is winning? Oh wait - 1 playoff year in 5 (and he sort of dismantled the team that had that 1 good year). He's also the guy who signed the terrible goalie that's been holding the team back too.

Anyway, I'm not even saying Chevy didn't trade Kane for 3 years to be a jerk - maybe it was dithering or incompetence.

 

[sully1410]

1) Sure, get full value for the player. In 2014 pundits were talking about how Kane was droolworthy because of his decent long term deal and his scoring chops. Was no one interested or was Chevy asking too much?

2) ...Or was he asking at all? Is there any evidence that Chevy was really trying to deal Kane? A guy wants out for 3 years and with 29 potential dance partners and Chevy just can't make it happen? But then he has him gone in a week after the tracksuit incident with 1 dance partner and Kane on the IR for the rest of the season? Sorry - I just can't do those kind of mental gymnastics...

3) I'm sure players understand that having a trade demand met within a week or two is unreasonable (except in the case of the tracksuit incident where things somehow came together incredibly quickly) - but 3 years? In a situation you hate, with few friends in the locker room. Does this seem reasonable to ask of a professional? Kane showed up to every game, played hard, didn't go obviously public with his trade demands (though he didn't hide it terribly well)...Chevy sits on his hands for 3 year. Who's the professional again?

4) Right - who cares if Chevy's a jerk when the team is winning? Oh wait - 1 playoff year in 5 (and he sort of dismantled the team that had that 1 good year). He's also the guy who signed the terrible goalie that's been holding the team back too.

Anyway, I'm not even saying Chevy didn't trade Kane for 3 years to be a jerk - maybe it was dithering or incompetence.

Or he knew exactly what he was doing. You don't trade a player that just had back to back thirty goals (lockout was a pace for 30ish) at such a young age. The thought was that he was going to develop more and have real game breaking talent. IIRC there was not a lot of teams lining up to meet Chevy's asking price of two top six forwards, a first and a blue chip prospect...and in hind sight you could say...well yeah, obviously not. But at the time...everyone expected great things out of him after he was so successful at such a young age.

Obviously...that has not happened. So when it became clear that he wasn't going to reach that level , he settled a bit on the asking price.

With our prospect pool and then players we have up and coming...what exactly is it that you think we are doing? Playing tiddlywinks? Chevy is building a winner in what he believes the best way. You can disagree with that...but we have a pretty good young roster that is poised to make the next step.

And yes Pavelec was bad...but I don't think anyone outside other fans cared about success then. It was about building through the draft and it is easier when you have higher picks to do that. Without Pavelec we wouldn't have been able to draft Ehlers, Trouba, etc.) There very well could be a method to his madness after all.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

While I'd like to buy the sandbagging theory (and have thought about that myself) regarding Pav, I'm not sure anyone would be so maniacal to actually do that on purpose.

 

[sully1410]

While I'd like to buy the sandbagging theory (and have thought about that myself) regarding Pav, I'm not sure anyone would be so maniacal to actually do that on purpose.

Pavelec was bought for a performance that he has never been able to repeat, except once. I'm sure it was done with the best of
intentions and thinking he was their guy going forward...but..I think it became pretty clear, pretty quickly that he wasn't. I think they never bothered to get rid of him because it wasn't important to win. And with Hellebuyck looking really good...I don't really blame them.