Roster/Rumors/Speculation/Trade Talk - 2023-24: Hotel California

[PK Cronin]

For one thing he made some decent moves including ROR, Lafferty, Schenn and Acciari at the TDL for a reasonable cost. Most of us were happy acquiring Engvall but the Leafs viewed him as a replaceable asset that they weren’t intent on signing. Getting a pick back in that situation is commendable.

Sure he paid too much for his top players but live and learn. Having Lou mentoring him ain’t a bad thing when it comes to negotiations. As for Tavares, he get a black mark on that one. He needs to take the blame but was it all his idea? The franchise as a whole had him in their sights.

And what about all the other moves he made prior to this year?

Lamoriello's had much more success with the Islanders, with much less talent, than the Maple Leafs have had with Dubas at the helm.

 

[The Wahligator]

Please. Can someone explain to me why they think Dubas is a good GM?

He was given the 3 stars and signed 91 when he didn’t need him messing up his salary structure. He’s 1-11 in series clinching wins in the POs, builds teams that can’t compete in the POs. Hes married to his ways even when they fail. He puts too much stock in personal relationships (like his coach). The only reason people clamor for him, I feel, is he’s a byproduct of the Toronto media spin machine.

For me it’s not so much that I think Dubas is amazing individually, but more so that I think he and Lou complement each other well and would make a really effective team now that Dubas has more experience.

Lou is known for his tough negotiating tactics, which is an area Dubas gets run over in, while Dubas is better at identifying new age talent and values speed and skill.

 

[JKP]

For one thing he made some decent moves including ROR, Lafferty, Schenn and Acciari at the TDL for a reasonable cost. Most of us were happy acquiring Engvall but the Leafs viewed him as a replaceable asset that they weren’t intent on signing. Getting a pick back in that situation is commendable.

Sure he paid too much for his top players but live and learn. Having Lou mentoring him ain’t a bad thing when it comes to negotiations. As for Tavares, he get a black mark on that one. He needs to take the blame but was it all his idea? The franchise as a whole had him in their sights.

But he has won nothing, so the moves by definition aren’t good.

 

[JKP]

I’d

For me it’s not so much that I think Dubas is amazing individually, but more so that I think he and Lou complement each other well and would make a really effective team now that Dubas has more experience.

Lou is known for his tough negotiating tactics, which is an area Dubas gets run over in, while Dubas is better at identifying new age talent and values speed and skill.

I just think he’s I credibly overrated by a Toronto media that constantly overrates every player / manager on that team… he’s won nothing, didn’t acquire his core, and never solved the D or G. When Luke Shenn is your second best D in the playoffs… wtf are we talking about this guy for??

 

[MJF]

I just think he’s I credibly overrated by a Toronto media that constantly overrates every player / manager on that team… he’s won nothing, didn’t acquire his core, and never solved the D or G. When Luke Shenn is your second best D in the playoffs… wtf are we talking about this guy for??

The contract he gave to Rattlesnake effectively hamstrung Dubas from ever improving the Leafs' goaltending.

 

[periferal]

Please. Can someone explain to me why they think Dubas is a good GM?

I'm still waiting on people to tell us why Lou Lamoriello is anything more than an average GM now. If we're being honest it was Trotz that was the reason for those semi-finals runs. Now that he's gone we can see what Lou has "built" - A very average roster, with limited cap space, and zero farm system.

And if the argument is...Well Lou got Trotz to come here, I'd say that's more happenstance than anything else. When Trotz was fired from the Capitals there was exactly one head coach opening in the NHL....Ours. And it takes about as much brains to offer your head coach opening to a hall of fame coach as it does to draft Connor McDavid #1 overall.

Because even after he let that Hall of Fame coach go and had to find his replacement...Lou then decided that this team he "believes is a Stanley Cup contender" he entrusted with a 1st time rookie coach. To me that's GM malpractice.

We were in hell with snow as GM and no question Lou is better, but let's not confuse "better" with "actually great." Without an all-world coach to cover up Lou's roster-building flaws I'm afraid we're stuck in quicksand (and sinking further) as long as he isn't replaced.

He was given the 3 stars and signed 91 when he didn’t need him messing up his salary structure. He’s 1-11 in series clinching wins in the POs, builds teams that can’t compete in the POs. Hes married to his ways even when they fail. He puts too much stock in personal relationships (like his coach). The only reason people clamor for him, I feel, is he’s a byproduct of the Toronto media spin machine.

To me the nail in the Maple Leafs chances was not that they signed Tavares. I mean let's be honest...If a true #1 center comes to market and you can sign him you should do that almost any time.

The issue was that once Dubas did that he should have immediately shipped Marner out the door for defensive help. Once he gave Marner 11M/year on a long term deal they were stuck and now you're seeing the results.

My concern with Dubas is not his ability to acquire talent, but that...

A) He can overpay
B) He absolutely buckles almost every time in contract negotiations. That is going to ultimately get you in cap trouble.


And let me also say...Whether or not Dubas is the next GM here is one thing, but regardless of that...Lou should NOT be picking his successor. Only Malkin should.

 

[doublechili]

Whether or not Dubas is the next GM here is one thing, but regardless of that...Lou should NOT be picking his successor. Only Malkin should.

If our owners allow the current GM to pick his successor, we've got bigger problems than the problems that typically get posted here.

 

[leeroggy]

My recollection was that even internationally he scored some big goals for Sweden. He always reminds me of former Avalanche Alex Tanguay. Also a non-physical offensive player who was low key clutch at times.

In the 2014-15 WJHC, he was 3G/7A in 7 games

 

[Doshell Propivo]

I'm still waiting on people to tell us why Lou Lamoriello is anything more than an average GM now. If we're being honest it was Trotz that was the reason for those semi-finals runs. Now that he's gone we can see what Lou has "built" - A very average roster, with limited cap space, and zero farm system.

And if the argument is...Well Lou got Trotz to come here, I'd say that's more happenstance than anything else. When Trotz was fired from the Capitals there was exactly one head coach opening in the NHL....Ours. And it takes about as much brains to offer your head coach opening to a hall of fame coach as it does to draft Connor McDavid #1 overall.

Because even after he let that Hall of Fame coach go and had to find his replacement...Lou then decided that this team he "believes is a Stanley Cup contender" he entrusted with a 1st time rookie coach. To me that's GM malpractice.

We were in hell with snow as GM and no question Lou is better, but let's not confuse "better" with "actually great." Without an all-world coach to cover up Lou's roster-building flaws I'm afraid we're stuck in quicksand (and sinking further) as long as he isn't replaced.

Oh look! This post again.

 

[Skip To My Lou]

I'm in the middle when it comes to Dubas. I think a lot of his shortcomings can be attested to him still learning the ropes. He was inserted in this role very early and many GMs don't get to where he is until much later in life.

Which is why I'm not opposed to him coming to the Islanders, nor do I think it will happen. I think he has a ton to work on in terms of negotiations, and looking at it now, the Tavares contract was just plain dumb. I genuinely think the Leafs would've had more success if they didn't sign Tavares. Paying three forwards $11 million-plus will strangle you.

With that being said, I don't think he did a terrible job managing the roster given the lack of cap space. Altogether, Toronto was an elite team in the regular season, they just couldn't get over their own mental hurdles when it came down to the postseason.

Yeah he hasn't won anything. I just think we shouldn't be so quick to write him off. Wherever he goes next, I think he'll do fine.

 

[Big L]

For one thing he made some decent moves including ROR, Lafferty, Schenn and Acciari at the TDL for a reasonable cost. Most of us were happy acquiring Engvall but the Leafs viewed him as a replaceable asset that they weren’t intent on signing. Getting a pick back in that situation is commendable.

Sure he paid too much for his top players but live and learn. Having Lou mentoring him ain’t a bad thing when it comes to negotiations. As for Tavares, he get a black mark on that one. He needs to take the blame but was it all his idea? The franchise as a whole had him in their sights.

For the record, that was the ONLY time he made decent moves.

 

[PK Cronin]

I'm still waiting on people to tell us why Lou Lamoriello is anything more than an average GM now. If we're being honest it was Trotz that was the reason for those semi-finals runs. Now that he's gone we can see what Lou has "built" - A very average roster, with limited cap space, and zero farm system.

And if the argument is...Well Lou got Trotz to come here, I'd say that's more happenstance than anything else. When Trotz was fired from the Capitals there was exactly one head coach opening in the NHL....Ours. And it takes about as much brains to offer your head coach opening to a hall of fame coach as it does to draft Connor McDavid #1 overall.

Because even after he let that Hall of Fame coach go and had to find his replacement...Lou then decided that this team he "believes is a Stanley Cup contender" he entrusted with a 1st time rookie coach. To me that's GM malpractice.

We were in hell with snow as GM and no question Lou is better, but let's not confuse "better" with "actually great." Without an all-world coach to cover up Lou's roster-building flaws I'm afraid we're stuck in quicksand (and sinking further) as long as he isn't replaced.

I'm in agreement that Trotz was great and I love his defense first style and prefer him to Lambert, but I think you're being a bit too dismissive of what Lamoriello did.

The roster was largely the same year in and year out but there were key pieces and adjustments Lamoriello made along the way to try and get the team to win.

2018-19 had Filpulla and Lehner as key contributors for the team.
2019-20 Lamoriello moved on from the Vezina nominated Lehner for Varlamov. Brought in Brassard to replace Filpulla, and most importantly brought in Pageau to stabilize the third line when Brassard was more suited for the top 6. Green was brought in to stabilize the defense.
2020-21 Greiss was let go and replaced with Sorokin, who only came over because Lamoriello was here/Snow was gone. Palmieri and Zajac were added to provide more scoring and depth up front for the run.
2021-22 Not much roster change at all in a miserable year. Eberle was lost to the expansion draft. Chara brought in along with Parise. One of them worked out much better than the other.
2022-23 Romanov brought in to help stabilize the defense and get younger. Horvat was brought in a bit before the deadline for Beauvillier, and Engvall brought in at the deadline.

I think a lot of the criticism is because people quickly forget about a bunch of these moves. We saw how important bringing in the right pieces was in 2021-22 when the team missed the playoffs because they had lost some key contributors/gotten older. Who remembers him walking away from Lehner? That's such a bold and decisive move that gets you fired if it doesn't work out right. Turns out, that was a great call and led the team to have more success. He hasn't been able to land a big fish yet so that deserves criticism, while Horvat is close but not quite what any of us were hoping for.

He hasn't made the biggest of splashes, took some risks, and made some miscalculations along the way but the team has been competitive during his time here, all while rotating out or bringing in pretty significant pieces, dealing with a flat cap, expansion, and whatever COVID nonsense was thrown into the mix. Not infallible, but Trotz shouldn't get all the credit. The first season without Trotz the team made it back to the playoffs while their most talented forward and defenseman missed a ton of time. Was that all Lambert or does Lamoriello deserve some credit?

 

[Glorydays22]

I'm still waiting on people to tell us why Lou Lamoriello is anything more than an average GM now. If we're being honest it was Trotz that was the reason for those semi-finals runs. Now that he's gone we can see what Lou has "built" - A very average roster, with limited cap space, and zero farm system.

And if the argument is...Well Lou got Trotz to come here, I'd say that's more happenstance than anything else. When Trotz was fired from the Capitals there was exactly one head coach opening in the NHL....Ours. And it takes about as much brains to offer your head coach opening to a hall of fame coach as it does to draft Connor McDavid #1 overall.

Because even after he let that Hall of Fame coach go and had to find his replacement...Lou then decided that this team he "believes is a Stanley Cup contender" he entrusted with a 1st time rookie coach. To me that's GM malpractice.

We were in hell with snow as GM and no question Lou is better, but let's not confuse "better" with "actually great." Without an all-world coach to cover up Lou's roster-building flaws I'm afraid we're stuck in quicksand (and sinking further) as long as he isn't replaced.





To me the nail in the Maple Leafs chances was not that they signed Tavares. I mean let's be honest...If a true #1 center comes to market and you can sign him you should do that almost any time.

The issue was that once Dubas did that he should have immediately shipped Marner out the door for defensive help. Once he gave Marner 11M/year on a long term deal they were stuck and now you're seeing the results.

My concern with Dubas is not his ability to acquire talent, but that...

A) He can overpay
B) He absolutely buckles almost every time in contract negotiations. That is going to ultimately get you in cap trouble.


And let me also say...Whether or not Dubas is the next GM here is one thing, but regardless of that...Lou should NOT be picking his successor. Only Malkin should.

Your concerns sound exactly like what Lou does here now....

 

[The Real JT]

Oh look! This post again.

Oh look! Another post belittling anyone who questions the great and powerful Oz (Lou).

Reupping Lou is a mistake. I think you’ve heard that before. It’s repetitive but so is Lou’s m.o. He’s emptying the cupboard to acquire good but not great players at a premium salary and costing assets to do so.

Eventually those assets become so limited that we hang our hopes on a hockey trade. I too believe that’s the route we need to pursue but there’s one other thing no one is talking about.

Trading futures as we have done to date for a proven player that underperforms is disappointing but doesn’t negatively impact the franchise all that much in the short term. When a “hockey trade” is made the potential downside is far worse in the short term if your team gets the worst of the deal. It’s what I want but I’m keeping my fingers crossed.

 

[leeroggy]

I think we need to stop going back and forth on the Trotz/Lou thing. They are judged as a MANAGEMENT TEAM, just like all GM/HC pairs are around the league (does anyone separate Keefe and Dubas?). We had great success but fell short of the goal, and it's likely we maxed out on what we had to work with.

Let's look at a few stats so we don't keep going back and forth on what actually happened instead of our perceptions. The 4 Trotz years and Lambert's first year.

Goals For/Against:
22-23: 242 for in 82 games and 217 in 82 games against - 2.95 / 2.65
21-22: 231 for in 82 games and 237 in 82 games against - 2.82 / 2.89
20-21: 156 for in 56 games and 128 in 56 games against - 2.79 / 2.29
19-20: 192 for in 68 games and 193 in 68 games against - 2.82 / 2.84
18-19: 228 for in 82 games and 196 in 82 games against - 2.78 / 2.39

One thing that sticks out is that for all the perception that the Trotz years were defensively sound, there was definitely a big difference from year to year. The perception that we were such a top-notch defensive team in all 4 of BT's years is not backed up by these stats. Our offense was actually more consistent than our defense.

We outscored all the Trotz years last year, and over the four years under Trotz we gave up 2.62 goals per game (754/288), which is almost exactly what we gave up this year. Yet we scored more this year too. Anything can randomly happen in the short term, but over 5 years that evens out.

So why do we feel so bad?

Now let's take the available playoff numbers:

Goals For/Against:
22-23: 15 goals for in 6 games and 16 goals in 6 games against - 2.50 / 2.67
21-22: Missed
20-21: 54 goals for in 19 games and 54 goals in 19 games against - 2.84 / 2.84
19-20: 68 goals for in 22 games and 51 goals in 22 games against - 3.09 / 2.32
18-19: 19 goals for in 8 games and 19 goals in 8 games against - 2.38 / 2.38

The total for the 3 Trotz playoff years is 2.88 / 2.53

So if we go year by year:

22-23: Reg Season - 2.95 / 2.65 vs Playoffs - 2.50 / 2.67
21-22: Not applicable
20-21: Reg Season - 2.79 / 2.29 vs Playoffs - 2.84 / 2.84
19-20: Reg Season - 2.82 / 2.84 vs Playoffs - 3.09 / 2.32
18-19: Reg Season - 2.78 / 2.39 vs Playoffs - 2.38 / 2.38

For the two runs to the ECF, it's clear that it wasn't a similar playoff run. In 19-20, we were clearly a better overall team than in 20-21 when it came to these numbers. One year it was the offense that carried us (20-21), while in 19-20 it was both sides pulling the wagon. The perception that we won in the playoffs solely because of BT's defensive approach is hard to argue if it wasn't consistent across playoff runs. The failure in 18-19 in round 2 was the lack of offense, and the sweep by Carolina was not because we gave up goals.

It's also kind of premature to say Lambert's approach was so much worse. It was the offense that let us down vs Carolina, not the defense. It just seems like it wasn't because Sorokin struggled a little more in the playoffs than the regular season when we assumed we had the edge in goal. 6 games is too small a sample size to make sweeping conclusions.

 

[periferal]

If our owners allow the current GM to pick his successor, we've got bigger problems than the problems that typically get posted here.

Exactly. My whole point.

So if Dubas or Chris Lamoriello becomes the next GM, do you think Malkin would have chosen either 100% on his own?

 

[Richie Daggers Crime]

And what about all the other moves he made prior to this year?

Engvall was a cap issue, not an asset issue.

 

[leeroggy]

Exactly. My whole point.

So if Dubas or Chris Lamoriello becomes the next GM, do you think Malkin would have chosen either 100% on his own?

Those two are not similar anymore. One is an experienced NHL GM who had a lot of regular season success and less in the playoffs, while the other has no NHL GM experience at all. If Lou was not in the picture, wouldn't Dubas be far higher on the totem pole as an option than Chris anyhow to Malkin?

Whether Malkin picks either isn't how he has handled himself over the years. And the other side of the coin is, do you WANT Malkin making the GM choice instead of who he hired as President? Do we really want an NHL version of George Steinbrenner?

 

[periferal]

I'm in agreement that Trotz was great and I love his defense first style and prefer him to Lambert, but I think you're being a bit too dismissive of what Lamoriello did.

The roster was largely the same year in and year out but there were key pieces and adjustments Lamoriello made along the way to try and get the team to win.

2018-19 had Filpulla and Lehner as key contributors for the team.
2019-20 Lamoriello moved on from the Vezina nominated Lehner for Varlamov. Brought in Brassard to replace Filpulla, and most importantly brought in Pageau to stabilize the third line when Brassard was more suited for the top 6. Green was brought in to stabilize the defense.
2020-21 Greiss was let go and replaced with Sorokin, who only came over because Lamoriello was here/Snow was gone. Palmieri and Zajac were added to provide more scoring and depth up front for the run.
2021-22 Not much roster change at all in a miserable year. Eberle was lost to the expansion draft. Chara brought in along with Parise. One of them worked out much better than the other.
2022-23 Romanov brought in to help stabilize the defense and get younger. Horvat was brought in a bit before the deadline for Beauvillier, and Engvall brought in at the deadline.

I think a lot of the criticism is because people quickly forget about a bunch of these moves. We saw how important bringing in the right pieces was in 2021-22 when the team missed the playoffs because they had lost some key contributors/gotten older. Who remembers him walking away from Lehner? That's such a bold and decisive move that gets you fired if it doesn't work out right. Turns out, that was a great call and led the team to have more success. He hasn't been able to land a big fish yet so that deserves criticism, while Horvat is close but not quite what any of us were hoping for.

He hasn't made the biggest of splashes, took some risks, and made some miscalculations along the way but the team has been competitive during his time here, all while rotating out or bringing in pretty significant pieces, dealing with a flat cap, expansion, and whatever COVID nonsense was thrown into the mix. Not infallible, but Trotz shouldn't get all the credit. The first season without Trotz the team made it back to the playoffs while their most talented forward and defenseman missed a ton of time. Was that all Lambert or does Lamoriello deserve some credit?

Again no one is saying Lou is a terrible GM, but what I'm saying is that he isn't much better than average.

This team is still mostly made up of players snow acquired. We're really giving Lou that much credit for Sorokin being here? Then you should give snow even more for getting him into the organization.

And no one is saying that Lou deserves zero credit...Just saying that if we were looking at a pie graph of credit Trotz deserves the most.

End of day after all these "OK" moves and Lou on the job for 5 years this team barely snuck into the playoffs. With Trotz gone and the core aging, this team seems to be getting further away from true contention, and Lou seems unaware or incapable of accepting that fact. And worse he seems to be compounding the problems by continually borrowing against the future at wild "interest rates."

So great...Lou deserves credit. Get him a plaque. Hang his jersey from the rafters. I don't care as long can we move on to a GM that recognizes this roster is bleeding, stop it, and head in a more productive direction (which is at minimum not selling off futures for a present that is a pipe dream).

Those two are not similar anymore. One is an experienced NHL GM who had a lot of regular season success and less in the playoffs, while the other has no NHL GM experience at all. If Lou was not in the picture, wouldn't Dubas be far higher on the totem pole as an option than Chris anyhow to Malkin?

Whether Malkin picks either isn't how he has handled himself over the years. And the other side of the coin is, do you WANT Malkin making the GM choice instead of who he hired as President? Do we really want an NHL version of George Steinbrenner?

Since I want to replace the current GM and President, I'm very cool with Malkin hiring the new president...And that president hiring the new GM.

 

[PK Cronin]

I think we need to stop going back and forth on the Trotz/Lou thing. They are judged as a MANAGEMENT TEAM, just like all GM/HC pairs are around the league (does anyone separate Keefe and Dubas?). We had great success but fell short of the goal, and it's likely we maxed out on what we had to work with.

Let's look at a few stats so we don't keep going back and forth on what actually happened instead of our perceptions. The 4 Trotz years and Lambert's first year.

Goals For/Against:
22-23: 242 for in 82 games and 217 in 82 games against - 2.95 / 2.65
21-22: 231 for in 82 games and 237 in 82 games against - 2.82 / 2.89
20-21: 156 for in 56 games and 128 in 56 games against - 2.79 / 2.29
19-20: 192 for in 68 games and 193 in 68 games against - 2.82 / 2.84
18-19: 228 for in 82 games and 196 in 82 games against - 2.78 / 2.39

One thing that sticks out is that for all the perception that the Trotz years were defensively sound, there was definitely a big difference from year to year. The perception that we were such a top-notch defensive team in all 4 of BT's years is not backed up by these stats. Our offense was actually more consistent than our defense.

We outscored all the Trotz years last year, and over the four years under Trotz we gave up 2.62 goals per game (754/288), which is almost exactly what we gave up this year. Yet we scored more this year too. Anything can randomly happen in the short term, but over 5 years that evens out.

So why do we feel so bad?

Now let's take the available playoff numbers:

Goals For/Against:
22-23: 15 goals for in 6 games and 16 goals in 6 games against - 2.50 / 2.67
21-22: Missed
20-21: 54 goals for in 19 games and 54 goals in 19 games against - 2.84 / 2.84
19-20: 68 goals for in 22 games and 51 goals in 22 games against - 3.09 / 2.32
18-19: 19 goals for in 8 games and 19 goals in 8 games against - 2.38 / 2.38

The total for the 3 Trotz playoff years is 2.88 / 2.53

So if we go year by year:

22-23: Reg Season - 2.95 / 2.65 vs Playoffs - 2.50 / 2.67
21-22: Not applicable
20-21: Reg Season - 2.79 / 2.29 vs Playoffs - 2.84 / 2.84
19-20: Reg Season - 2.82 / 2.84 vs Playoffs - 3.09 / 2.32
18-19: Reg Season - 2.78 / 2.39 vs Playoffs - 2.38 / 2.38

For the two runs to the ECF, it's clear that it wasn't a similar playoff run. In 19-20, we were clearly a better overall team than in 20-21 when it came to these numbers. One year it was the offense that carried us (20-21), while in 19-20 it was both sides pulling the wagon. The perception that we won in the playoffs solely because of BT's defensive approach is hard to argue if it wasn't consistent across playoff runs. The failure in 18-19 in round 2 was the lack of offense, and the sweep by Carolina was not because we gave up goals.

It's also kind of premature to say Lambert's approach was so much worse. It was the offense that let us down vs Carolina, not the defense. It just seems like it wasn't because Sorokin struggled a little more in the playoffs than the regular season when we assumed we had the edge in goal. 6 games is too small a sample size to make sweeping conclusions.

Great breakdown, but the only thing I'd add is that these numbers don't take individual games/moments into account. One of the bigger issues we've seen is that the team struggles to generate offense when they need it most. While the stats look good for a season or during the entirety of the playoffs when you start to isolate moments when the team needed something, the something they're missing is someone who can generate offense.

How did the Islanders goal scoring dip when they went from facing Pittsburgh in round 1 to when they were facing Tampa Bay in round 3? How did their goaltending do? How did the team/players do in the early part of series verses later in the series?

 

[MJF]

Great breakdown, but the only thing I'd add is that these numbers don't take individual games/moments into account. One of the bigger issues we've seen is that the team struggles to generate offense when they need it most. While the stats look good for a season or during the entirety of the playoffs when you start to isolate moments when the team needed something, the something they're missing is someone who can generate offense.

How did the Islanders goal scoring dip when they went from facing Pittsburgh in round 1 to when they were facing Tampa Bay in round 3? How did their goaltending do? How did the team/players do in the early part of series verses later in the series?

Nuance

 

[PK Cronin]

Again no one is saying Lou is a terrible GM, but what I'm saying is that he isn't much better than average.

This team is still mostly made up of players snow acquired. We're really giving Lou that much credit for Sorokin being here? Then you should give snow even more for getting him into the organization.

And no one is saying that Lou deserves zero credit...Just saying that if we were looking at a pie graph of credit Trotz deserves the most.

End of day after all these "OK" moves and Lou on the job for 5 years this team barely snuck into the playoffs. With Trotz gone and the core aging, this team seems to be getting further away from true contention, and Lou seems unaware or incapable of accepting that fact. And worse he seems to be compounding the problems by continually borrowing against the future at wild "interest rates."

So great...Lou deserves credit. Get him a plaque. Hang his jersey from the rafters. I don't care as long can we move on to a GM that recognizes this roster is bleeding, stop it, and head in a more productive direction (which is at minimum not selling off futures for a present that is a pipe dream).




Since I want to replace the current GM and President, I'm very cool with Malkin hiring the new president...And that president hiring the new GM.

Snow gets credit for drafting him, he also gets credit for him not wanting to come over until after he was gone.

Would you want Trotz to be the coach if the team went in a more youthful direction or would you only want him around as long as the team was trying to win the cup? Some people say he stifles creativity and isn't as effective with the younger players but I think guys like him are useful because they force the younger players to be fundamentally sound.

 

[Richie Daggers Crime]

Oh look! Another post belittling anyone who questions the great and powerful Oz (Lou).

That's not what's happening at all. It's belittling people who operate in a dogmatic manner.

 

[periferal]

Would you want Trotz to be the coach if the team went in a more youthful direction or would you only want him around as long as the team was trying to win the cup? Some people say he stifles creativity and isn't as effective with the younger players but I think guys like him are useful because they force the younger players to be fundamentally sound.

The record under Trotz was the best since Arbour was here so I'll go with that.

We're now in the "Lou is on his own" GM tenure and it sure falls short of the results of when Trotz was coaching a roster consisting of roughly 80% snow's players.

 

[mm11]

Bottom line is, Lou is great. LGI!