Management Rate Staios so far

[thinkwild]

Regarding Ullmark, i thought i remember reading, maybe even here, that alfie was a behind the scenes ambassador to Ullmark, feeling him out and selling him on the city. So when Staois made the offer it was still a risk, but a much more measured one. And indeed everything was risk managed well. Making the goalie swap brilliantly well done.

 

[Micklebot]

Regarding Ullmark, i thought i remember reading, maybe even here, that alfie was a behind the scenes ambassador to Ullmark, feeling him out and selling him on the city. So when Staois made the offer it was still a risk, but a much more measured one. And indeed everything was risk managed well. Making the goalie swap brilliantly well done.

Might be true but with Alfie being a coach for the team, that might be considered tampering so it would be risky.

 

[DrEasy]

A 7OA pick is worth 2 25OA picks AND you can throw in an additional 2nd rounder for good measure.

Examining the value of NHL Draft picks - Sound Of Hockey

Sound Of Hockey is your new home for Seattle hockey news, coverage, and analysis. NHL | Seattle Kraken | WHL | Seattle Hockey Community

soundofhockey.com

 

[Micklebot]

A 7OA pick is worth 2 25OA picks AND you can throw in an additional 2nd rounder for good measure.

Examining the value of NHL Draft picks - Sound Of Hockey

Sound Of Hockey is your new home for Seattle hockey news, coverage, and analysis. NHL | Seattle Kraken | WHL | Seattle Hockey Community

soundofhockey.com

Getting rid of 4 years of Korpisalo (3 mil per year after the retention) has significant value too, we paid a 2nd to get 2 mil of Brassards contract paid back in the day, what's dumping 12 mil of the worst goaltending in the league worth.

 

[BondraTime]

Getting rid of 4 years of Korpisalo (3 mil per year after the retention) has significant value too, we paid a 2nd to get 2 mil of Brassards contract paid back in the day, what's dumping 12 mil of the worst goaltending in the league worth.

Giving up a 25th for Korpisalo would have been an acceptable price. That’s the going price for a long term, high salary anchor.

 

[Golden_Jet]

It's a yes or no question: did we pay a 1RP for a guy who we hadn't discussed a contract extension with yet?

We don't need to debate the outcomes. If the vast majority of people fundamentally disagreed with the concept of paying a 1RP for a guy before discussing a contract extension then it should apply to this situation too.

Could have paid to offload Joseph just like we did this year to make space. We'd still have the same cap space to start our offseason to sign Amadio on July 1st.

Another yes or no question: did we have enough cap space, with the moves that were made in free agency, to sign Pinto long term?

I'm fine with you believing that. No need to argue over who's the better player.

4 of 10 scouts had him in the top 10, which means 6 of 10 did not. 1/10 had him #20 on their list. Again, you can say the draft was tight from whatever arbitrary number you like but the majority of scouts polled my McKenzie did not have him at #7.

One second you guys say the coaching was terrible, the next you say it was the goaltending, the next you say it was the GM's fault...it doesn't change the fact that teams are always looking for young, top4 D. You don't see a lot of guys his age traded for guys in their mid-30s, do you? So why were we so quick to sell him for so little. It's this double-standard critique of the team I don't get. Years of talking about asset management and now it's fine because you want it to be.

Yes, generally speaking, old players have been around for much, much longer. Perron is 36, Tarasenko is 32. Jensen is 34, Chychrun is 26. Kastelic, Gregor and Kelly don't make any difference to me, all 4th line guys with limited roles. Cousins brings experience, we'll see if it amounts to anything. I'm already on record saying I don't believe most of these guys were the right veterans to bring in.

It's a yes or no question: did we pay a 1RP for a guy who we hadn't discussed a contract extension with yet?

We don't need to debate the outcomes. If the vast majority of people fundamentally disagreed with the concept of paying a 1RP for a guy before discussing a contract extension then it should apply to this situation too.

Could have paid to offload Joseph just like we did this year to make space. We'd still have the same cap space to start our offseason to sign Amadio on July 1st.

Another yes or no question: did we have enough cap space, with the moves that were made in free agency, to sign Pinto long term?

I'm fine with you believing that. No need to argue over who's the better player.

4 of 10 scouts had him in the top 10, which means 6 of 10 did not. 1/10 had him #20 on their list. Again, you can say the draft was tight from whatever arbitrary number you like but the majority of scouts polled my McKenzie did not have him at #7.

One second you guys say the coaching was terrible, the next you say it was the goaltending, the next you say it was the GM's fault...it doesn't change the fact that teams are always looking for young, top4 D. You don't see a lot of guys his age traded for guys in their mid-30s, do you? So why were we so quick to sell him for so little. It's this double-standard critique of the team I don't get. Years of talking about asset management and now it's fine because you want it to be.

Yes, generally speaking, old players have been around for much, much longer. Perron is 36, Tarasenko is 32. Jensen is 34, Chychrun is 26. Kastelic, Gregor and Kelly don't make any difference to me, all 4th line guys with limited roles. Cousins brings experience, we'll see if it amounts to anything. I'm already on record saying I don't believe most of these guys were the right veterans to bring in.

Certainly an opinion, not a good one though.
Still pining for Dorion eh.

 

[Micklebot]

Giving up a 25th for Korpisalo would have been an acceptable price. That’s the going price for a long term, high salary anchor.

Yeah, that's my initial thought too, though back not too long ago we dumped Murray for a 3rd and a 7th, he wasn't as bad of a contract, but I do think goalies are a bit of a wild card. At one point it was rumoured that it would cost moving from 7 to the mid teens to dump Murray but he blocked the trade.

 

[BondraTime]

Yeah, that's my initial thought too, though back not too long ago we dumped Murray for a 3rd and a 7th, he wasn't as bad of a contract, but I do think goalies are a bit of a wild card. At one point it was rumoured that it would cost moving from 7 to the mid teens to dump Murray but he blocked the trade.

Yeah, that's a bit of a one off, where we got very, very lucky IMO

We were dealing with the Leafs and Dubas has a hard on for former players from the Soo. He legit thought they were getting a guy who would be their starter. He was their starter to begin 2022-23.

They also have the ability to "Robidas Island" guys.

Yeah it seems we had planned on dropping back with Buffalo to 16 and then sending that pick to Chicago in the DBC trade but Murray blocked the trade.

 

[lancepitlick]

It's a yes or no question: did we pay a 1RP for a guy who we hadn't discussed a contract extension with yet?

We don't need to debate the outcomes. If the vast majority of people fundamentally disagreed with the concept of paying a 1RP for a guy before discussing a contract extension then it should apply to this situation too.

Could have paid to offload Joseph just like we did this year to make space. We'd still have the same cap space to start our offseason to sign Amadio on July 1st.

Another yes or no question: did we have enough cap space, with the moves that were made in free agency, to sign Pinto long term?

I'm fine with you believing that. No need to argue over who's the better player.

4 of 10 scouts had him in the top 10, which means 6 of 10 did not. 1/10 had him #20 on their list. Again, you can say the draft was tight from whatever arbitrary number you like but the majority of scouts polled my McKenzie did not have him at #7.

One second you guys say the coaching was terrible, the next you say it was the goaltending, the next you say it was the GM's fault...it doesn't change the fact that teams are always looking for young, top4 D. You don't see a lot of guys his age traded for guys in their mid-30s, do you? So why were we so quick to sell him for so little. It's this double-standard critique of the team I don't get. Years of talking about asset management and now it's fine because you want it to be.

Yes, generally speaking, old players have been around for much, much longer. Perron is 36, Tarasenko is 32. Jensen is 34, Chychrun is 26. Kastelic, Gregor and Kelly don't make any difference to me, all 4th line guys with limited roles. Cousins brings experience, we'll see if it amounts to anything. I'm already on record saying I don't believe most of these guys were the right veterans to bring in.

This is the dumbest, most obtuse argument I've ever seen. Yes, they traded a first round pick for a guy with no extension. But you don't magically get to ignore the fact that a) they then re-signed the guy in short order (I.e. the GM probably worked some back channels before making the trade so had an inkling this was possible) b) a first round pick at 7OA is for more valuable than 27OA (duh).

That's like saying what's the difference between trading Mark Stone, who went on help his new team win a championship and was traded for a former top 15 pick, compared to trading Joe Niewendyuk, who also helped his new team win a championship and got a top 15 pick in return? Same thing right? Except one guy coming back was NHL HOFer Jerome Iginla and the other is barely an NHL player. You don't just get to exclude whatever criteria fits your argument.

One move was objectively amazing and the other was terrible. Just because they share some characteristics doesn't change that.

Jury is out on Linus, but the Chychrun/Debrincat trades were objectively bad. They did not achieve any of the stated objectives and the asset management was plain terrible.

 

[BankStreetParade]

This is the dumbest, most obtuse argument I've ever seen. Yes, they traded a first round pick for a guy with no extension. But you don't magically get to ignore the fact that a) they then re-signed the guy in short order (I.e. the GM probably worked some back channels before making the trade so had an inkling this was possible) b) a first round pick at 7OA is for more valuable than 27OA (duh).

Except it's not just 25OA vs 7OA. It's 25OA + $1M in cap space for 3 years + a young roster player vs 7OA. It's also a guy with 1 year of control vs. a young, multiple 40G scorer with 2 years of team control. You know, if you don't want the argument to be dumb and obtuse...

 

[Answer]

I give him a big fat F

Unable to acquire any significant missing piece ever since he got here. Also unable to get Sanderson a NHL caliber partner, let alone a legitimate top4 Defenseman

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I give him a big fat F

Unable to acquire any significant missing piece ever since he got here. Also unable to get Sanderson a NHL caliber partner, let alone a legitimate top4 Defenseman

Ignoring anything else done, Ullmark and Jensen have filled huge holes, one of which the previous GM was never able to fill adequately even after spending 50+ million on various tenders over 6 or 7 years.

Zub being injured doesn't negate him being on the team. We now have 4 top 4 D men, slotted on the correct side, that all actually belong in a top 4.

 

[bicboi64]

If he wanted to replace Joseph on the roster how else could he have done it other than buying him out?

Yakemchuk looks like a fantastic pick. Anyway who says otherwise didn't watch him in training camp. And he's a perfect fit on the roster.

There was no way to get rid of Hamonic.

My issue is the need to replace Joseph. We could've not signed one of Amadio or Perron and kept Joseph and still iced a very good top 9.

Yak looks like a good pick, but its just my personal preference as to why I wish we'd taken a different player.

 

[Loach]

Except it's not just 25OA vs 7OA. It's 25OA + $1M in cap space for 3 years + a young roster player vs 7OA. It's also a guy with 1 year of control vs. a young, multiple 40G scorer with 2 years of team control. You know, if you don't want the argument to be dumb and obtuse...

We saved 3m in cap space right?

 

[Micklebot]

Except it's not just 25OA vs 7OA. It's 25OA + $1M in cap space for 3 years + a young roster player vs 7OA. It's also a guy with 1 year of control vs. a young, multiple 40G scorer with 2 years of team control. You know, if you don't want the argument to be dumb and obtuse...

Well, if you're going to include all the facts, you should probably mention

7oa, 39oa, 72oa
for
1 year of DBC before a QO of 9 mil was required, and no warm fuzzy feeling he'd extend

vs

25oa, 1 mil retention while dumping the leagues worst goalie that year with 4 yrs left at 4 per, a 25 year old 4th line center with a career high of 11 pts
for
1 year of Ullmark before UFA, though he specifically did not have Ottawa on his NTC of 16 teams and was extended before the season started.

There is a stark difference in the value we gave up, and while you can technically say DBC had 2 years of team control left, his QO made it such that he could walk himself to UFA while crippling our financial/cap situation so he was as good as UFA for all intents and purposes, which is exactly why he was able to dictate a trade to only one team.

Anyone can see the situations are objectively very different, yet you keep doubling down on the false equivalency.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Dorion also said himself that he asked to speak to DeBrincat's camp before the trade and was denied. That is a pretty big consideration to it all imo since it tells us the red flags were there before the trade call was even made.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Well B+ I guess? B subject to change

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Ullmark or not, there was no path forward with Korpisalo, so whatever retention involved was going to be a sunk cost either way. If he didn't go in the Ullmark deal, he still needed to go and some retention was all but guaranteed.