Traded Korpisalo (5 years/20M)

[UglyPuckling]

Idk maybe it's just me but I think it is fairly safe to assume that given Dorion didn't speak to the DeBrincat camp during the trade process he couldn't because he wasn't allowed

It would be asinine to be allowed to speak to his camp but choose not to do so

I guess you'd also have to assume then that he failed to mention this in that press conference where he mentioned he didn't ask about the extension? Seems like an ideal time for Dorion to mention that, but whatever I suppose.

Seems like a lot of conjecture and assumptions regardless of what side of the argument posters are taking.

Like I've said a few times, if Korpisalo is the starter (plays a starter level of games versus a backup/1b), I would have no issues at all with the contract or his performance assuming he plays well for multiple years.

 

[BondraTime]

What edguy said, Korpy's gonna be fine and if one of our other two goalers hold up we'll easily maintain playoff pace. This isn't a bad deal and Andlauer can just buy it out by dipping into his tip jar.
The big issue is if the Sens miss the playoffs and there's a change at GM/Coaching this handcuffs the next guy pretty badly.

There is going to be a change at GM, and likely in coaching regardless of the season. Both are deadmen walking.

 

[Big Muddy]

My final take on the player is, he was the best option available to us. We aren't in a position to give up assets for a goalie like Hart/Helebuck/Swayman/Thompson (and by the sounds of it even when we did ask we were on some of their no-trade lists). That left us with the UFA options, We've known Varlamov was going back to NYI for days now, so that left us with a choice of Andersen, Jarry, or Korpisalo. Jarry was the biggest risk so he's out. So we are down to Korpi vs Andersen. Andersen is older and more injury prone, and likely on the back end of his prime, while Korpisalo is younger and has had one major injury but looked the best he ever looked coming back from said major injury. So given our universally accepted need for a goaltender, and the options available to us to be considered, Korpisalo was the best option.

As for the contract, 4 million is not the end of the world. I actually like the AAV. As for the length sure it may be a year or 2 too long, but it's not crippling by any means. The cap is expected to rise drastically in that five-year span and it's not unrealistic to believe coming on years 4 and 5, 4 million will be the going rate of a good backup. As for today, he is the 24th highest-paid goalie in the league, it's not like we are paying him elite #1 goalie money, we are paying him 1A money. My guess is we are expecting somewhere around 50 starts a year from him, so 11 more than his current career high. He will also now be behind the best defensive personnel he has ever been behind. So if the guys who get paid to know hockey and goalies believe he can come in and be that 1A option for us then those are the guys we should be trusting not random people on the internet complaining for the sake of complaining. Shitting on the player and the deal do nothing good for the team, the player, or the community of fans who want to see this team finally bring a cup home to Ottawa.

Those who are ripping on this deal would be the same people ripping on the team for not doing a damn thing to address goaltending. Is it the perfect deal? No. Is it fair to be ripping on a team for taking a chance on a guy when he was realistically our best option available to us at a position of need? No. We were all crying for a goalie, we got one who has been playing some of the best hockey of his career. Could it fail? Sure, every contract can. Could he come out and prove to be an ideal #1 guy on a playoff team? Absolutely. A bunch of keyboard warriors, some of whom have admitted to only stat watching, aren't a reliable source on the quality of a player, or a contract for that matter. Some people just like to complain for the sake of complaining around here, and it must be exhausting for them.

A lot boils down to what the thinking and objectives were.

If they are confident that Sogaard would be ready with another year (or even 2) of seasoning in the AHL, then signing a backup to a shorter term contract was an alternative. You've narrowed it down to just three alternatives, but no shorter term contract signings were included/listed.

I would also guess that Dorion isn't confident in Forsberg being the starter to go with another goalie signed short term as the backup. I'm just trying to figure out the logic (reverse engineering) that was being applied by Dorion.

I like that you mentioned that the metric that should be used is 50 games started. It's probably something not talked about enough in this debate. If that's the amount of games he plays, and he plays well, I think it's going to be a good contract. There's an equal amount of hyperbole that goes on when people use phrases like haters, keyboard warriors, etc. Refreshing to see a little more detail and metrics being applied to a post.

 

[Loach]

Idk maybe it's just me but I think it is fairly safe to assume that given Dorion didn't speak to the DeBrincat camp during the trade process he couldn't because he wasn't allowed

It would be asinine to be allowed to speak to his camp but choose not to do so

Maybe he did and Debricat said the same thing. I want to see how it goes...and Dorion was confident that he would sign once he got to play with Brady, Stu and the gang. You could assume this scenario too. But we agree on one thing..It would be asinine to make the trade without talking to his camp..be it PD choice or Chicagos.

 

[Micklebot]

I didn't specify the year in the original post that I made. I did however add that point to Post #511. I used regular season starts.

What seems to have gotten lost in this is that Jarry has started more games in the regular season and will be expected to be the starter in Pittsburgh in the future.

Is Korpisala the starter and Forsberg the backup now? What are folks thinking the split of games will be between the 2 goaltenders?

And he had 37 regular season starts this year, 26 with Clb, 11 with LA, then another 6 starts in the post season with LA.

His best season for regular season games started was this year, with 37 starts, 39 games played, and another 6 starts in the post season.

Thats all, it was a simple mistake, not a big deal, ESPN doesn't show the combined season stats across multiple teams, so you must have missed it, not a big deal.

Wrt Jarry starting more, Clb seems to have had a 1a, 1b mentality, while the Pens lean more towards having a defined starter, and defined backup. Not sure how much you can read into that, but it does create some uncertainty as to whether Korpisalo can handle a larger workload, maybe he's the type that thrives on it, maybe he's the type that gets fatigued and becomes inconsistent, idk.

 

[Micklebot]

Idk maybe it's just me but I think it is fairly safe to assume that given Dorion didn't speak to the DeBrincat camp during the trade process he couldn't because he wasn't allowed

It would be asinine to be allowed to speak to his camp but choose not to do so

So, a lot of this seems to be bogged down in the mechanics, but here are the possibilities.

a) He didn't bother asking for permission, and finalized the trade without giving it any though.
b) He asked for permission to speak to DeBrincat before finalizing the trade, and was denied.
c) He asked for permission to speak to DeBrincat before finalizing the trade, and was given permission but didn't bother to speak with him (or has since lied about having speaking to him).


Scenario c) is pretty much a throw away, so we're left with two realistic options, neither of which are smart moves for a team rebuilding and spending a lot of assets on a player they want to be a long term piece.

In both scenarios you have a team that really should be spending high end assets on a 1-2 year rental that doesn't line up with their competitive window deciding that they'll throw caution to the wind and not ensure they are trading for a player who is open to extending long term. That's what people are concerned about. Dorion is quick to bring up that some players don't want to come here, they have NTC, or whatever, so you either got to go after guys with term, or guys that are open to extending. He didn't ensure that DeBrincat fit that mold, and now we're in the mess we're in because of that.

 

[UglyPuckling]

And he had 37 regular season starts this year, 26 with Clb, 11 with LA, then another 6 starts in the post season with LA.

His best season for regular season games started was this year, with 37 starts, 39 games played, and another 6 starts in the post season.

Thats all, it was a simple mistake, not a big deal, ESPN doesn't show the combined season stats across multiple teams, so you must have missed it, not a big deal.

Wrt Jarry starting more, Clb seems to have had a 1a, 1b mentality, while the Pens lean more towards having a defined starter, and defined backup. Not sure how much you can read into that, but it does create some uncertainty as to whether Korpisalo can handle a larger workload, maybe he's the type that thrives on it, maybe he's the type that gets fatigued and becomes inconsistent, idk.

Ya, my bad. I didn't notice the additional row for LAK 2022-23 stats. I just looked at the row at the very bottom (CBJ stats). This is my official apology.

I hope the point about carrying a starter's load in the regular season doesn't get lost in this. That was my objective and most important point.

 

[JackieDaytona]

We could have had TWO Daniel Sprongs’!

2 sprongs don’t make a wright.

 

[aragorn]

A GM has to have about 25 players give or take for his NHL team about the same amount of players for his AHL team & some GMs also stock an ECHL team with a few players. That's over 50 players & the chance of hitting a home run with every player is slim & none. Most teams have good players on their NHL team & every team seem to have a few players that are either over paid & not living up to their contracts or playing better than what they are paid. It's the nature of the beast & looking at this roster PD clearly has the same thing going on. You know when we are complaining about 4th liners & 3rd pairigs it can't be that bad, although some will also find something to complain about.

In his favour are the contracts with the core locked up for a number of yrs & against are the contracts where guys are being over paid for what they bring & IMO there aren't that many. On top of that they also have to deal with the players who don't want to play in Canada, who don't want to play in Ottawa & those players who can get better deals including more money &/or term somewhere else.

It's a very difficult line to walk to get value from every contract & production from every player, players too have good yrs & bad yrs & sometimes you have to overpay to get a player you really want. And even when you get the guy you want you can't control injuries which can easily derail your season. On the whole with this team so far is seems to be decently managed. Could it be better? Of course, but it could also be worse & has been but it also looks like it's improving & trending in the right direction. DBC is a setback, but they might still be able to get out of that situation with something.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

what part of TAMPERING is so hard to understand. The Chicago GM did NOT grant permission for PD to talk to DBC or his agent, and therefore was NOT allowed to talk extension until DBC became the property of the Ottawa Senators…AFTER the trade.

this is black and white, night and day…NOT “splitting hairs”….

We know that. You're just outlining how it went down and screaming that it would be TAMPERING. We know how that specific deal went down so we don't just need a reminder.

The whole context of the points you were disputing is from people that were saying it should be handled differently, like how they're now attempting to handle DeBrincat themselves and have teams work out a trade, then get access to work out an extension, and then only proceed with the trade if an extension is agreed to. That's become pretty common practice.

 

[thinkwild]

Those were interesting goalie stats last year that most teams went through a few goalies. Some teams even contemplating a 3 goalie rotation now. I wonder if that will happen at all.

I guess this is our 3rd try at the solid tandem. Really good upside risk. A goalie with promise, coming into his prime, played with Forsberg before on a championship AHL team. A swede and a Finn pushing each other, that has to be good competition Everyone seems to like the money and the player.

But as hockey fans we are all aware of that old hockey expression - risk is death. Or something like that. We got rid of all the other contracts everyone thought we were stuck with. This hardly seems a debilitating risk if we have to retain a mil for a couple years. But that downside risk seems less likely than the upside risk that he emerges into our best bet. I would have thought the upside risk of everything but term being good would leave a more positive impression. A couple extra years shouldnt be enough to drag down all the positives id think.

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

So, I guess if you're saying a GM could grant permission for the GM that's interested in the player, this could be done then. It seems different from what you were saying before i.e, it was not permitted at all.

people are saying PD should have contacted DBC, before the trade, to see if he would consider signing an extension if he became a Senator…… PD was not allowed to do so, unless given permission by the Chicago GM….he was not.

this is pretty simple… contact without permission is TAMPERING…

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

Not all info surrounding trades is released for public consumption. Pierre could always ask and then make a decision based on the response he gets. All folks are doing are assuming and making conjectures regardless of what side of this debate they are supposedly taking.

It is very simple to know whether or not was granted permission to talk to DBC, by Chicago …… PD asked DBC, after he became a Senator, if he would consider signing an extension….DBC is not interested

it is therefore obvious he was not granted permission to contact DBC when he was under contract with Chicago.

 

[Micklebot]

It is very simple to know whether or not was granted permission to talk to DBC, by Chicago …… PD asked DBC, after he became a Senator, if he would consider signing an extension….DBC is not interested

it is therefore obvious he was not granted permission to contact DBC when he was under contract with Chicago.

I'm not sure if you're intentionally missing the point or just don't get it.

When people say Dorion should have talked to DeBrincat and found out if he was willing to extend, they are implying that Dorion should have sought permission, and if denied, should have walked away.

You can scream tampering, or say he didn't have permission as much as you like, it doesn't change the validity of the initial position that without first ensuring DeBrincat was open to an extention, we should never have completed the trade.

A valid argument would be Dorion took a calculated risk that after spending a season in Ottawa he would become open to an extention, but "TAMPERING!" and Dorion was NOT granted permission" are strawmen arguments.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

people are saying PD should have contacted DBC, before the trade, to see if he would consider signing an extension if he became a Senator…… PD was not allowed to do so, unless given permission by the Chicago GM….he was not.

this is pretty simple… contact without permission is TAMPERING…

View attachment 725502

We don't know if the request was made and declined or if the request just wasn't made though.

The debate has always been about whether or not he should have moved forward with the deal without both getting said permission to discuss an extension, and negotiating the extension, so these seem like unimportant details that nobody was really disputing.

 

[Loach]

It is very simple to know whether or not was granted permission to talk to DBC, by Chicago …… PD asked DBC, after he became a Senator, if he would consider signing an extension….DBC is not interested

it is therefore obvious he was not granted permission to contact DBC when he was under contract with Chicago.

Can you talk about parking again? This is old.

 

[Ice-Tray]

I'm not sure if you're intentionally missing the point or just don't get it.

When people say Dorion should have talked to DeBrincat and found out if he was willing to extend, they are implying that Dorion should have sought permission, and if denied, should have walked away.

You can scream tampering, or say he didn't have permission as much as you like, it doesn't change the validity of the initial position that without first ensuring DeBrincat was open to an extention, we should never have completed the trade.

A valid argument would be Dorion took a calculated risk that after spending a season in Ottawa he would become open to an extention, but "TAMPERING!" and Dorion was NOT granted permission" are strawmen arguments.

In the end I don’t think it matters. I think we always should assume that players don’t want to stay, and that we are banking on the team, the city, and the players to gradually grow on guys while they are here. It’s a gamble.

But at least at this time, with this group, and with that player, it was a pretty solid gamble to take in terms of being able to bring him around.

I still don’t think he’ll end up in a better hockey situation where ever he ends up up. thankfully Chych seems like a better bet to want to stay with us.

 

[DylanSensFan]

In the end I don’t think it matters. I think we always should assume that players don’t want to stay, and that we are banking on the team, the city, and the players to gradually grow on guys while they are here. It’s a gamble.

But at least at this time, with this group, and with that player, it was a pretty solid gamble to take in terms of being able to bring him around.

I still don’t think he’ll end up in a better hockey situation where ever he ends up up. thankfully Chych seems like a better bet to want to stay with us.

As long as Chychrun can stay healthy, i would re-sign him in a heart beat.

 

[Micklebot]

In the end I don’t think it matters. I think we always should assume that players don’t want to stay, and that we are banking on the team, the city, and the players to gradually grow on guys while they are here. It’s a gamble.

But at least at this time, with this group, and with that player, it was a pretty solid gamble to take in terms of being able to bring him around.

I still don’t think he’ll end up in a better hockey situation where ever he ends up up. thankfully Chych seems like a better bet to want to stay with us.

Idk that it's fair to assume all players don't want to stay until we win them over, I mean, Chychrun pretty clearly bucks that trend.

I think there's a valid argument to be made that the risk was worth taking with DeBrincat, Idk that I personally agree, but I can accept that position, just as I can accept the position that we should have walked away from the trade if we couldn't at least talk to the player and see.

I don't have a strong position one way or the other tbh, it was a risky trade from the get go, it hasn't worked out. I thought we'd be able to get a better return trading him than it seems we will end up with, so I might have soured a bit on the risk proposal due to recency bias. But I do feel that those who were initially concerned about the trade were justified, I also felt at the time (and still feel) that a top 6 forward wasn't what we should have been targeting, we needed help on the backend much more (and have since gotten it). That changes the calculus a bit for me, we took a big risk on something that we didn't desperately need (imo).

Anyways, this is getting way off topic, I just realized this is the Korpisalo thread, so uh... how about that goalie...

Hoping he kills it for us, third times the charm, right?

 

[Ice-Tray]

Idk that it's fair to assume all players don't want to stay until we win them over, I mean, Chychrun pretty clearly bucks that trend.

I think there's a valid argument to be made that the risk was worth taking with DeBrincat, Idk that I personally agree, but I can accept that position, just as I can accept the position that we should have walked away from the trade if we couldn't at least talk to the player and see.

I don't have a strong position one way or the other tbh, it was a risky trade from the get go, it hasn't worked out. I thought we'd be able to get a better return trading him than it seems we will end up with, so I might have soured a bit on the risk proposal due to recency bias. But I do feel that those who were initially concerned about the trade were justified, I also felt at the time (and still feel) that a top 6 forward wasn't what we should have been targeting, we needed help on the backend much more (and have since gotten it). That changes the calculus a bit for me, we took a big risk on something that we didn't desperately need (imo).

Anyways, this is getting way off topic, I just realized this is the Korpisalo thread, so uh... how about that goalie...

Hoping he kills it for us, third times the charm, right?

Goalies good!!! Lol

 

[Crosside]

GARRIOCH: Ottawa Senators goalie Joonas Korpisalo excited about new chapter

"There were a couple of options and I think Ottawa stood right up there. Playing against them, it's not fun being a goalie at the other end."

ottawasun.com

 

[Big Muddy]

It is very simple to know whether or not was granted permission to talk to DBC, by Chicago …… PD asked DBC, after he became a Senator, if he would consider signing an extension….DBC is not interested

it is therefore obvious he was not granted permission to contact DBC when he was under contract with Chicago.

Despite all your bluster and hooting and hollering, all you're doing is making an assumption. I could see some even thinking this is revisionist history.

What we do know, is that in an interview that many of us have heard, that when he was asked if he discussed an extension during the negotiations, Dorion said while being recorded that he did not. It does seem a trifle odd that he didn't mention at that time that he asked for permission to speak to Debrincat about an extension. That's a curious omission or oversight on Dorion's part (see 6th paragraph).

Let's discuss the 2nd subject which is the risk scenario or debate. Last summer the Senators were still in the late stages of a rebuild. Our core players were still very young and we had a weak defense. Was it wise to trade away and expend three draft picks one of which was a 7th overall pick for a team in in this situation?

Aren't some of the people who are most inclined to think "no players want to come to Ottawa, or extend in Ottawa" also the same ones saying that Dorion asked about an extension but was denied?

So for those that think along those lines, you are also likely then to assume that Debrincat wasn't going to extend, so that this trade would be a one (year) and done. It seems rather predictable and understandable how some/many are going to question whether this was too big of risk for something with a very high potential for too little reward.

What is interesting about this forum is the different kind of personalities and to see how they think. A lot of detail isn't known when it comes to situations like this, but of course, people are going to make assumptions based on their ingrained personalities.

Maybe the reason for the trade is the most obvious one that is right in front of our noses? The team was going to be sold to new owners and the current GM was realizing he could potentially lose his job. So, he took a big risk.

For those seeking something more positive, you could focus on the idea that it created more enthusiasm and attendance for the team which may have had some positive impact on the sale. There we go, we have happy ending now. LOL.

I agree that this thread should be about Korpisalo. The trade is done now, so all you can do is hope he plays well.

 

[Xspyrit]

GARRIOCH: Ottawa Senators goalie Joonas Korpisalo excited about new chapter

"There were a couple of options and I think Ottawa stood right up there. Playing against them, it's not fun being a goalie at the other end."

ottawasun.com

"There were a couple of options and I think Ottawa stood right up there. Playing against them, it's not fun being a goalie at the other end."

It's not fun being a goalie in any Ottawa game bruv

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Idk that it's fair to assume all players don't want to stay until we win them over, I mean, Chychrun pretty clearly bucks that trend.

I think there's a valid argument to be made that the risk was worth taking with DeBrincat, Idk that I personally agree, but I can accept that position, just as I can accept the position that we should have walked away from the trade if we couldn't at least talk to the player and see.

I don't have a strong position one way or the other tbh, it was a risky trade from the get go, it hasn't worked out. I thought we'd be able to get a better return trading him than it seems we will end up with, so I might have soured a bit on the risk proposal due to recency bias. But I do feel that those who were initially concerned about the trade were justified, I also felt at the time (and still feel) that a top 6 forward wasn't what we should have been targeting, we needed help on the backend much more (and have since gotten it). That changes the calculus a bit for me, we took a big risk on something that we didn't desperately need (imo).

Anyways, this is getting way off topic, I just realized this is the Korpisalo thread, so uh... how about that goalie...

Hoping he kills it for us, third times the charm, right?

Spot on

 

[R2010]

AAV is respectable. Term is nutty.

Meh. I'm fine with it. Very little risk when you can buyout at such a small cap hit with a rising cap. If that's what it took to get him then I'd much rather give that extra year than not have him as an option. I'd much rather have him at 4 million x 5 years than a bigger number over a shorter time window. In the latter scenario, if he works out then you'll have to pay him more on a higher cap. If he doesn't then you're still spending more than you should for the next couple years with flatter cap. Seems like lower AAV / longer term is a good bet to have more options.

That being said - i've always liked him as a goalie so there might be some bias there. Like his style of play when healthy. Has a lot of athleticism and can steal games from time to time.