Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Devilsfan118

If the team continues to struggle, does Lou start to feel the heat?

188 posts in this topic

I don't ever think you'll ever ever understand that i don't want to kill you because he lost or didnt trade Zach. I never even said he should have traded him. You keep bringing that point even though i keep on telling you thats not it. Not sure what else i can say at this point. 

 

The first two paragraphs of my post had nothing to do with Zach.  They explain why, though recent years haven't been as kind to Lou, not all of us are so quick to kill him.  That doesn't mean we think he's God and incapable of doing no wrong.  We just understand that being a GM is a tough business, and not many GMs do their jobs for as long as Lou has without experiencing a true lean period SOMEWHERE (by lean, I mean irrelevant for multiple years).  This potential three-years-in-four of missing the playoffs is the ONLY lean period Devils fans have had to endure since he's come aboard...and even then, the one year they did go the playoffs they got to within two games of winning a Cup. 

 

The last blurb was piggy-backing onto Tri's response.  Zach has been one of your main bitching points in reference to how Lou does his job, re: free agents.  You take swipes at Lou constantly for this...when another GM locks up a player long-term, you chime in with "Must be nice for [insert team's] fans to see their team lock up their star player before he goes UFA."  You don't do it ALL of the time, but you do it enough that people notice. 

 

Like I've said, Lou isn't perfect, but he's also had his share of lousy circumstances, from Pat Burns getting cancer to financial problems to a guy who was supposed to be the cornerstone bailing on him.     

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's one to think about from a different POV...

 

What GM has had to deal with the crap that Lou has had too?

 

Maybe Darcy Regier, other than that, who?

 

The amount of owners, financial problems, the red ink, the 'small market', the stars wanting to go home, stars wanting to go play with brothers,  cancer, and the list goes on.

 

 

 

I dunno, there is this team in the desert that I've heard about... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest problem with Lou is his stubbornness of doing things just cause he want to do it that way and refusing to adapt. Him REFUSING to talk during the season is absolutely idiotic to me, why turn your back on informations or talks that could seriously help you in negotiations or save you money in some cases not waiting til the player has total leverage? I understand you don't have to for certain guys of course but in SOME situations thats the way to go. Look around the league and you'll see that other GMs are not waiting after the season to get it done once it could be too late to minimize losses. It's been bothering Elias and other players too. My whole point is that talking during the season "could" help, it seriously could. But he's REFUSING to do it for absolutely no good reasons other than he just don't want to. So in situations where it would be needed to be done that way (doesnt happen often but it does) well he's NOT gonna benefit from it, and for no reasons.

 

Lou has a really good record and it was working cause he had great players and success, of course because of the great job he did building the team. But just like Pittsburgh or Chicago or Boston now, players WANT to stay there or sign there and they are willing to take a discount cause they'll play with good players on good teams. So you can play hard ball a little. 

 

So of course his "way" of handling of UFAs always bothered me for years but it was working cause guys we're not that tempted to leave cause everything was fine here.

 

Now that NJ is not in a great situation Lou is getting exposed, success and stability is not backing him up so he's starting to lose more and more guys and it's biting him in the ass. I was especially frustrated lately cause of that, cause i always thought it was a dumb way to do it but he was getting away with it so it was fine but now it's failing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lou has a really good record and it was working cause he had great players and success, of course because of the great job he did building the team. But just like Pittsburgh or Chicago or Boston now, players WANT to stay there or sign there and they are willing to take a discount cause they'll play with good players on good teams. So you can play hard ball a little.

So of course his "way" of handling of UFAs always bothered me for years but it was working cause guys we're not that tempted to leave cause everything was fine here.

Now that NJ is not in a great situation Lou is getting exposed, success and stability is not backing him up so he's starting to lose more and more guys and it's biting him in the ass. I was especially frustrated lately cause of that, cause i always thought it was a dumb way to do it but he was getting away with it so it was fine but now it's failing.

this is ridiculous. Chi and Pitt not only have lost some players to free agency but they also are resigning players that will tie up their cap in serious ways for years.

And you say fa's don't want to sign here yet parise and clarkson clearly did consider returning, and we signed Brunner jagr and Ryder to great team friendly, no risk contracts.

It just seems that you think the grass is always greener with other teams, especially teams that have been successful lately after years and years of ineptitude.

Edited by dmann422

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest problem with Lou is his stubbornness of doing things just cause he want to do it that way and refusing to adapt. Him REFUSING to talk during the season is absolutely idiotic to me, why turn your back on informations or talks that could seriously help you in negotiations or save you money in some cases not waiting til the player has total leverage? I understand you don't have to for certain guys of course but in SOME situations thats the way to go. Look around the league and you'll see that other GMs are not waiting after the season to get it done once it could be too late to minimize losses. It's been bothering Elias and other players too. My whole point is that talking during the season "could" help, it seriously could. But he's REFUSING to do it for absolutely no good reasons other than he just don't want to. So in situations where it would be needed to be done that way (doesnt happen often but it does) well he's NOT gonna benefit from it, and for no reasons.

 

Lou has a really good record and it was working cause he had great players and success, of course because of the great job he did building the team. But just like Pittsburgh or Chicago or Boston now, players WANT to stay there or sign there and they are willing to take a discount cause they'll play with good players on good teams. So you can play hard ball a little. 

 

So of course his "way" of handling of UFAs always bothered me for years but it was working cause guys we're not that tempted to leave cause everything was fine here.

 

Now that NJ is not in a great situation Lou is getting exposed, success and stability is not backing him up so he's starting to lose more and more guys and it's biting him in the ass. I was especially frustrated lately cause of that, cause i always thought it was a dumb way to do it but he was getting away with it so it was fine but now it's failing. 

 

You're making a big hooplah about nothing...again. Who did we lose because of this, besides Parise? It seems that was out of his hands anyways, with ownership. Clarkson, whose demands exceeded his ability? Paul Martin? Brian Gionta? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Lou would've dealt ZP at the 2011 draft. Remember, he wasn't signed until late in the summer and I doubt Lou would've traded an unsigned RFA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we can discuss 2012 for the next five years

Agree. Just going to watch some of those games over and over and convince myself it's real

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we can discuss 2012 for the next five years

fans of most teams would kill to discuss a cup finals appearance once every ten years, never mind once every five.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO Lou SHOULD never feel the pressure. He's been too good for too long, and even now, he's done some very good stuff (Brunner, Ryder, Jagr, Schneider).

 

That said, his lack of consistency is bothering me. His unwillingness to budge on a player's perceived value based on the market cost us Clarkson, and maybe Parise (though going home clearly contributed there as well). I'd be okay with that, but IMO he overpaid Clowe because Clowe's value was inflated. I'd rather be short a man, but not have a bad contract, or keep our guys, contracts be damned. We seem stuck in a weird middle ground.

 

Of course, if Kovalchuk was still here, we'd be having a much different conversation, and IMO that whole thing fvcked up any long term planning we might have otherwise been able to do.

Edited by mouse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so whats the point of that whole post? We all knew all of that and we all know Lou did some great things. My point was sarcastically pointing out that it's easy to just say "well he had that guy and that guy" and ignore everything else.

 

Become a Penguin fan why? Cause I'm not closing my eyes on some mistakes Lou did and strictly focusing on the good moves he did in the past like some of you guys and cause i can give credits to other GMs outside of NJ ? yeah let's talk about having a close mind.

 

Jesus christ you guys, you're seriously like super religious people in a cult who can't stand someone saying something bad about your beloved God. Like... its identically the same thing.

THE IRONY IS HILARIOUS. You 100% missed the point of the post where Tri points out that all those other GMs came on board and already had franchise players. Then you point out two generational talents that LL had to identify, then acquire and you make it out like it was easy as pie.

You're constantly saying LL should make moves like Shero. What moves, please, list the moves here that Shero made that worked out SOOOO great that LL could have made and didn't.

You are in the cult, not us. The cult of anti LL and anti good moves. Yes, lets trade every pending ufa for picks. Sign every guy super early to big giant contracts just so we can keep them. We should be able to just always draft REALLY good players. I mean c'mon,  LL picked Matteau, like he totally could have gotten a Subban type at 29.

This is what you sound like 99% of time. You make it out like LL always has a better option, yet you can never explain how exactly he is supposed to do what you want.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE IRONY IS HILARIOUS. You 100% missed the point of the post where Tri points out that all those other GMs came on board and already had franchise players. Then you point out two generational talents that LL had to identify, then acquire and you make it out like it was easy as pie.

You're constantly saying LL should make moves like Shero. What moves, please, list the moves here that Shero made that worked out SOOOO great that LL could have made and didn't.

You are in the cult, not us. The cult of anti LL and anti good moves. Yes, lets trade every pending ufa for picks. Sign every guy super early to big giant contracts just so we can keep them. We should be able to just always draft REALLY good players. I mean c'mon,  LL picked Matteau, like he totally could have gotten a Subban type at 29.

This is what you sound like 99% of time. You make it out like LL always has a better option, yet you can never explain how exactly he is supposed to do what you want.

 

shero's acquisitions of kunitz and neal were pretty good. then again, the devils didn't have a guy like goligoski or ryan whitney to fool another team with because their defenseman don't put up points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

shero's acquisitions of kunitz and neal were pretty good. then again, the devils didn't have a guy like goligoski or ryan whitney to fool another team with because their defenseman don't put up points.

Goligoski fooled me. I thought Pittsburgh made out worse when the deal was made. Boy was I wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE IRONY IS HILARIOUS. You 100% missed the point of the post where Tri points out that all those other GMs came on board and already had franchise players. Then you point out two generational talents that LL had to identify, then acquire and you make it out like it was easy as pie.

You're constantly saying LL should make moves like Shero. What moves, please, list the moves here that Shero made that worked out SOOOO great that LL could have made and didn't.

You are in the cult, not us. The cult of anti LL and anti good moves. Yes, lets trade every pending ufa for picks. Sign every guy super early to big giant contracts just so we can keep them. We should be able to just always draft REALLY good players. I mean c'mon,  LL picked Matteau, like he totally could have gotten a Subban type at 29.

This is what you sound like 99% of time. You make it out like LL always has a better option, yet you can never explain how exactly he is supposed to do what you want.

 

Alright, seriously? First i mentioned my post about the 2 players was sarcastic pointing out how easy it is to look at a situation and discard stuff to make it look either good or bad. Shero got 2 good players yeah, but he made lots of good moves to build a good team around it. Edmonton has like 15 first rounds pick, they are not doing too good either, it takes more than that.

 

What i want Lou to do like Shero or any other GM? I'll repeat it for you, im a designer i can even make a sign for you if you really need visual to understand once for all. Shero or most GM are NOT restraining themselves to talk to players ONLY before or after the season thats my ONLY problem with Lou. Most of my jabs are STRICTLY directed at that procedure. I NEVER said he has to talk / sign / trade every single players during the season, i'll repeat for you... (you know) I NEVER said he has to talk / sign / trade every single players during the season.

 

Like, i seriously never ever want to have to go through this ever again with you its ridiculous. If you ever ever say that im saying that Lou should either trade guys or sign them to huge contract during the season im literally gonna snap cause it's bullsh!t.

 

Let's walk through the Clarkson's final year:

Came off a 30 goals season, last year on his contract. Already bunch of rumours about the Leafs planning on going for him and him being interested in playing in his hometown. We go the full season without both sides talking (this based on reports from Clarkson & his agent / Lou himself, plus thats the way Lou does it, he refuse to talk during the season) so we're in a shaky spot comes trade deadline but we go all in and miss the playoffs. Begin talks at some point before the draft and already by the draft Lou gives up on Clarkson cause his demand is way too high for what he's willing to give. He GAVE UP on him based on talks and Clarkson refusing his offer. Right there we we're done and lost a very good asset and had to throw huge money for a replacement who's not getting the job done so far.

 

Now, you're gonna jump to conclusions now that i'm saying he should have traded him at the deadline. No. All i wish is that at the trade deadline Lou would have known everything he knew on draft day about Clarkson's demand and everything so that he has all he needs to make the RIGHT decision. If he's willing to gamble going for the playoffs knowing there's a high chance he couldnt re-sign him OR see what he could get for him and then see if it would be worth it to give up on him. The way he's doing it now and every time he's in the dark until it might be too late, and why? it's not because of the management or anything else. It's cause he refuse to do it cause he think it's distraction.

 

I mean, is it really too much to ask that i'd like my GM to make decisions based on known calculated risks.

 

So tell me you got this. I'm not saying i wanted Lou to deal Clarkson (if thats what you got from what i wrote though... i seriously dont know what to tell you) All i want is that in those situations that Lou gives himself the best chances to make the right decision. He's not, out of pure stubbornness and thats whats pissing me off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another good example of a good asset handling by Shero is the Staal trade. (and wtv it just happen this was shero but it's a perfect example)

 

He talked and made a good offer EARLY but Staal refused, he then went and got a 8th overall pick, Sutter and Dumoulin while he could still get value out of him. He KNEW he was gonna lose him anyway and was able to make the decision. May have sucked to miss Jordan during the playoffs but in the long run they certainly did the right move.

 

So i don't think it's even debatable or deniable that if he would have made that same offer to Jordan a week before free agency that he would have lost him for nothing and he would have simply sign with Carolina anyway.

 

Same thing with Letang, made an offer early and if Letang would have refused the offer he would have try to get something good in return to make sure he's not losing that talent for nothing.

 

It's all about setting himself up to minimize your losses and act on calculated risks. Using Shero in those examples but any businessman should do things that way, you can't turn your back on infos for no reasons into making decisions.

Edited by SterioDesign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, seriously? First i mentioned my post about the 2 players was sarcastic pointing out how easy it is to look at a situation and discard stuff to make it look either good or bad. Shero got 2 good players yeah, but he made lots of good moves to build a good team around it. Edmonton has like 15 first rounds pick, they are not doing too good either, it takes more than that.

 

What i want Lou to do like Shero or any other GM? I'll repeat it for you, im a designer i can even make a sign for you if you really need visual to understand once for all. Shero or most GM are NOT restraining themselves to talk to players ONLY before or after the season thats my ONLY problem with Lou. Most of my jabs are STRICTLY directed at that procedure. I NEVER said he has to talk / sign / trade every single players during the season, i'll repeat for you... (you know) I NEVER said he has to talk / sign / trade every single players during the season.

 

Like, i seriously never ever want to have to go through this ever again with you its ridiculous. If you ever ever say that im saying that Lou should either trade guys or sign them to huge contract during the season im literally gonna snap cause it's bullsh!t.

 

Let's walk through the Clarkson's final year:

Came off a 30 goals season, last year on his contract. Already bunch of rumours about the Leafs planning on going for him and him being interested in playing in his hometown. We go the full season without both sides talking (this based on reports from Clarkson & his agent / Lou himself, plus thats the way Lou does it, he refuse to talk during the season) so we're in a shaky spot comes trade deadline but we go all in and miss the playoffs. Begin talks at some point before the draft and already by the draft Lou gives up on Clarkson cause his demand is way too high for what he's willing to give. He GAVE UP on him based on talks and Clarkson refusing his offer. Right there we we're done and lost a very good asset and had to throw huge money for a replacement who's not getting the job done so far.

 

Now, you're gonna jump to conclusions now that i'm saying he should have traded him at the deadline. No. All i wish is that at the trade deadline Lou would have known everything he knew on draft day about Clarkson's demand and everything so that he has all he needs to make the RIGHT decision. If he's willing to gamble going for the playoffs knowing there's a high chance he couldnt re-sign him OR see what he could get for him and then see if it would be worth it to give up on him. The way he's doing it now and every time he's in the dark until it might be too late, and why? it's not because of the management or anything else. It's cause he refuse to do it cause he think it's distraction.

 

I mean, is it really too much to ask that i'd like my GM to make decisions based on known calculated risks.

 

So tell me you got this. I'm not saying i wanted Lou to deal Clarkson (if thats what you got from what i wrote though... i seriously dont know what to tell you) All i want is that in those situations that Lou gives himself the best chances to make the right decision. He's not, out of pure stubbornness and thats whats pissing me off.

If your argument isn't that we should have traded pending UFAs or tried to sign them during the season, I'm not sure what your point is.

Also, LL knew everything by the trade deadline, I'm sure he was of what could occur before the season even started. He chose not to sign Clarky, he didn't not try.

Edited by ATLL765

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another good example of a good asset handling by Shero is the Staal trade. (and wtv it just happen this was shero but it's a perfect example)

 

He talked and made a good offer EARLY but Staal refused, he then went and got a 8th overall pick, Sutter and Dumoulin while he could still get value out of him. He KNEW he was gonna lose him anyway and was able to make the decision. May have sucked to miss Jordan during the playoffs but in the long run they certainly did the right move.

 

So i don't think it's even debatable or deniable that if he would have made that same offer to Jordan a week before free agency that he would have lost him for nothing and he would have simply sign with Carolina anyway.

 

Same thing with Letang, made an offer early and if Letang would have refused the offer he would have try to get something good in return to make sure he's not losing that talent for nothing.

 

It's all about setting himself up to minimize your losses and act on calculated risks. Using Shero in those examples but any businessman should do things that way, you can't turn your back on infos for no reasons into making decisions.

 

Ray Shero has an open checkbook and 40 million tied up in 6 players next year. He utilizes a different strategy where he has the freedom to throw the money out there and fix it later. I'd also argue that a big reason for Shero trading Staal was less about being able to lock him up and more about having to extend Crosby, Malkin, and Letang. Additionally, he had the advantage of not having to worry about replacing Staal since they had a glut of good centers.

 

Lou's approach is different in that he evaluates the team as a whole at the end of a season. What you call stubborn others would consider crafty. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong.  It's a more patient and steady approach and until recently, there were few seasons like this one because he made few knee-jerk decisions. It isn't the same as Ray Shero's approach, but it's one that survived four different ownership reigns, some of which were very frugal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your argument isn't that we should have traded pending UFAs or tried to sign them during the season, I'm not sure what your point is.

Also, LL knew everything by the trade deadline, I'm sure he was of what could occur before the season even started. He chose not to sign Clarky, he didn't not try.

 

well thats clearly your problem cause i explained myself many times. If you still don't get my point after all this, it's on you.

 

And no he didnt knew everything by the trade deadline. How could he possibly does. Everyone involved said there has been absolutely no discussions between the 2 sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well thats clearly your problem cause i explained myself many times. If you still don't get my point after all this, it's on you.

 

And no he didnt knew everything by the trade deadline. How could he possibly does. Everyone involved said there has been absolutely no discussions between the 2 sides.

You use examples, then say not to use that in a rebuttal, ok. You say he should do this or that, but then say, well don't rebut that either because you just don't get what I mean. Do you even know what you're saying?

I'm pretty sure there's others that are just as lost as to what your point is. That's def on you, not everyone else.

And from what I gather your point is that LL should instinctively know what players want to stay or go and somehow manage to trade them for 1st rd picks that always turn into Scott Niedermayer or sign them for significantly below market value. Did I get it this time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 It isn't the same as Ray Shero's approach, but it's one that survived four different ownership reigns, some of which were very frugal.

 

Oh my and how. Dr. McMullen may be remembered fondly because he brought the team here, etc. but he was a guy whose fist was so tight it could pinch quarters out of pennies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ray Shero has an open checkbook and 40 million tied up in 6 players next year. He utilizes a different strategy where he has the freedom to throw the money out there and fix it later. I'd also argue that a big reason for Shero trading Staal was less about being able to lock him up and more about having to extend Crosby, Malkin, and Letang. Additionally, he had the advantage of not having to worry about replacing Staal since they had a glut of good centers.

 

Lou's approach is different in that he evaluates the team as a whole at the end of a season. What you call stubborn others would consider crafty. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong.  It's a more patient and steady approach and until recently, there were few seasons like this one because he made few knee-jerk decisions. It isn't the same as Ray Shero's approach, but it's one that survived four different ownership reigns, some of which were very frugal.

 

Thats fair about Shero's situation but keep in mind that what im trying to point out that you have to adapt to situations. In his specific situation he can still trade those players in the future if he's strapped and get a really good return for them, it's certainly not a loss on his side. Plus it was not about being able to resign all the other guys since he made him a pretty good offer, and only acted after he refused, it was not about the money. It comes down to "he did what he had to and figured he would not be able to keep Staal before it was too late to minimize the loss."

 

And i disagree about the "crafty" thing, it's not crafty it's black on white repetitive procedure. Like i mentioned earlier his one and only approach worked in the past cause we had a good team that guys wanted to play for. It's kind of like a super hot bitch, she can do wtv she want and let guys hang on for months she knows she can get them when she has to. Well Lou is not too hot anymore lol

 

So my whole point is that you have to adjust to certain situations in order to get the best results. If you "automate" an approach you will fail in the cases where a different approach would have been needed 100% of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You use examples, then say not to use that in a rebuttal, ok. You say he should do this or that, but then say, well don't rebut that either because you just don't get what I mean. Do you even know what you're saying?

I'm pretty sure there's others that are just as lost as to what your point is. That's def on you, not everyone else.

And from what I gather your point is that LL should instinctively know what players want to stay or go and somehow manage to trade them for 1st rd picks that always turn into Scott Niedermayer or sign them for significantly below market value. Did I get it this time?

 

lol wow, i did not do what you just said i did, you absolutely went around what i said cause you're stuck in a corner here.

 

alright i get it, you're not even really trying to understand you're clearly just trolling me all along. If you have a diploma of any kind theres absolutely no way you would have understood what you just said you think my point was. 

Edited by SterioDesign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ray Shero has an open checkbook and 40 million tied up in 6 players next year. He utilizes a different strategy where he has the freedom to throw the money out there and fix it later. I'd also argue that a big reason for Shero trading Staal was less about being able to lock him up and more about having to extend Crosby, Malkin, and Letang. Additionally, he had the advantage of not having to worry about replacing Staal since they had a glut of good centers.

 

Lou's approach is different in that he evaluates the team as a whole at the end of a season. What you call stubborn others would consider crafty. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong.  It's a more patient and steady approach and until recently, there were few seasons like this one because he made few knee-jerk decisions. It isn't the same as Ray Shero's approach, but it's one that survived four different ownership reigns, some of which were very frugal.

 

Having Crosby and Malkin makes dealing a 3rd center very simple.  If Shero had just one of those guys, Staal, and two guys clearly worse, is he still making that deal?  It's impossible to say.  It's just far easier to deal from a position of strength like that, and that's a position the Devils haven't been in for some time.

 

The thing that's impressive about the Wings and Devils is that they've outlasted assets gained by being a terrible team.  The Devils late 90s-early 00s run was built off assets gained in the early 90s, mostly, combined with shrewd drafting, but players drafted early like Muller, Shanahan, Rolston, Guerin, etc. - the Devils reduced those assets to 0 and still had a good team anyway.

 

As for Clarkson, there's just no way the Devils would've considered trading him.  They had Kovalchuk, him, and a bunch of guys who weren't very good.  This is what teams who have UFAs who are going to the playoffs do in tons of cases, in the vast majority of cases.  They keep the player, maybe they sign him to an extension at that point or after the season, but in Clarkson's case, I don't think it would've made sense at any price point.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the team continues on this path and has a high draft pick this year, I can't imagine another GM surviving the decision to keep the first round draft pick in 2012.  I wonder if it the fact that the Devils have to forfeit the pick this year caused Lou to make some moves (Clowe contract, trade for Schneider) that he wouldn't have made otherwise.  

Edited by halfsharkalligatorhalfman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats fair about Shero's situation but keep in mind that what im trying to point out that you have to adapt to situations. In his specific situation he can still trade those players in the future if he's strapped and get a really good return for them, it's certainly not a loss on his side. Plus it was not about being able to resign all the other guys since he made him a pretty good offer, and only acted after he refused, it was not about the money. It comes down to "he did what he had to and figured he would not be able to keep Staal before it was too late to minimize the loss."

 

 

So do you give up the Finals run? If the Devils were less than optimistic about Parise and chose to trade him, that run never happens. IMO Lou followed the same logic last year with Clarkson. It worked once, it didn't work the second time. This isn't evidence of some colossal issue with Lou's style. Also, with the possible exception of Toronto, who don't have many assets (maybe draft picks, but doubt even they'd give a first or second rounder), no one was giving up that much for a Clarkson rental. It's not like Lou cost himself much by letting Clarkson try free agency. I wish he hadn't replaced Clarkson with Clowe, especially for the contract he gave, but I have no problem with the way the Clarkson situation was handled, or the Parise situation before that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0