Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Daniel

We Got Rutuu

342 posts in this topic

Is there a mandatory retirement age for General Managers, much like there is an FAA mandated retirement age for pilots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever you think of Lou, the trade deadline, the Ruutu trade, or anything else...the fact that he referenced 2009 when discussing Ruutu (his last good year) and the reasons for bringing him...is not only strange, not only concerning, but more like 'code red Lou might have lost it' bad.

 

It's 2014. He has two more years left on his deal. This is fvcking insane.

 

It used to be cute when Lou brought in ex-Devil after ex-Devil back, no matter how many years in between. But it has become quite clear that Lou knows very little and trusts very few people to help him scout at the NHL level.

 Imagine if Senile Lou had a flashback of 2005-06 and brought Scott Gomez back, too?

Edited by TheRedStorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what Mike said before:

 

"Bernier was a first round pick, and was picked before Parise.  He has the ability.  If he got legit 2nd line minutes, I can see him hitting 50 points."

 

Here's what Mike said today:

 

"Well I think Bernier COULD be a 50 point player."

 

It's two statements trying to be passed off as the same exact thing by context, but different in actual meaning. Sure, it's not as completely asinine as Mike trying to argue "on par" is the same as "equal", but it's an annoying posting style he possesses. 

 

Yes those two statements are pretty much the same thing.  

 

You're also missing something.  That something would be the whole point. You called me out when I said Ruutu is a better player than Bernier offensively and defensively.  You then asked me if I was the one who said Bernier could possibly hit 50 points, and I was.  Those two statements aren't contradictions.

 

And I already admitted I simply used the wrong phrase regarding the equal and on par thing.  I was trying to say Team Canada is clearly better than Team USA.  But Team USA is still at least in the same tier as Team Canada.

 

You're a nit picker.  And that's definitely worse than anything I do.

Edited by Mike Brown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes those two statements are pretty much the same thing.  

 

You're also missing something.  That something would be the whole point. You called me out when I said Ruutu is a better player than Bernier offensively and defensively.  You then asked me if I was the one who said Bernier could possibly hit 50 points, and I was.  Those two statements aren't contradictions.

 

And I already admitted I simply used the wrong phrase regarding the equal and on par thing.  I was trying to say Team Canada is clearly better than Team USA.  But Team USA is still at least in the same tier as Team Canada.

 

You're a nit picker.  And that's definitely worse than anything I do.

 

In your world, yes, yes they are the same thing and everything you say doesn't contradict. It's a circle jerk.

Edited by TheRedStorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your world, yes, yes they are the same thing and everything you say doesn't contradict. It's a circle jerk.

 

There is no contradiction regarding the Ruutu Bernier comparison I made.

 

And why won't you answer my previous question?  Do you not know the difference between "could have" and "is / was"?

Edited by Mike Brown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys should create your own thread and do this

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever you think of Lou, the trade deadline, the Ruutu trade, or anything else...the fact that he referenced 2009 when discussing Ruutu (his last good year) and the reasons for bringing him...is not only strange, not only concerning, but more like 'code red Lou might have lost it' bad.

 

It's 2014. He has two more years left on his deal. This is fvcking insane.

 

It used to be cute when Lou brought in ex-Devil after ex-Devil back, no matter how many years in between. But it has become quite clear that Lou knows very little and trusts very few people to help him scout at the NHL level.

 

I think some people need to calm down and have a little bit of perspective. 

 

The years and the salary are not the end of the world.  Even without knowing how much salary Carolina is picking up, this is not going to be a cap team, and with some maneuvering, you can probably still afford a big ticket free agent like Statsny even if that would have been in the cards in the first place, which is a huge assumption to make.  

 

And he's not an immovable object.  At the trade deadline next year, he has one more year when the cap the following year maybe be as high as $75 million, and you could further dice up his salary if need be.   He might even be of use to a cap floor team. 

 

Before you blow your lid on Lou referencing 2009, I suggest you read the entirety of what he said.  He said that Ruutu is a top 9 forward, i.e. third line forward.  He mentioned his 26 goal season in the context of saying that he believes there's some kind of offensive upside, especially in light of the fact that he had a good Olympics (which Lou also mentioned) and that he's not young, but he isn't ancient either.  In other words, the Devils wanted another big nasty guy to play on the third line, but we might be pleasantly surprised with his offense.  So this isn't like Lou making a trade for Dany Heatley last season and saying he's excited because he was formerly a 50 goal scorer. 

 

We'll know this offseason whether Lou is really living in the past, if he hasn't completely lost his marbles.  If he gives Marty an extension, even at the league minimum, it'll be a really bad sign.  Same if he does nothing to alleviate the defensive logjam, if he extends Bernier, Gionta or Carter for longer than one year, if he does something really stupid with the young defensemen, or if he decides to play hard ball with Schneider.   At this point though, I think it's unfair to assume that he'll do any of that, and the smart money says that he actually won't.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After all the deals and possible deals Lou could have swung to trade some D prospects and picks getting Ruutu seems like him just doing as little as he can to get this team moving forward. This is the tipping point. IMO this is the tipping point. Lou is now causing more damage to this franchise. He should have all his stuff packed and be escorted off the premises by security on Friday. BTW he can take Marty with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After all the deals and possible deals Lou could have swung to trade some D prospects and picks getting Ruutu seems like him just doing as little as he can to get this team moving forward. This is the tipping point. IMO this is the tipping point. Lou is now causing more damage to this franchise. He should have all his stuff packed and be escorted off the premises by security on Friday. BTW he can take Marty with him.

 

Please enlighten us with all of these amazing deals that were available and at what price?

 

The worst you can say is that he didn't take the opportunity to move Salvador or Volchenkov for whatever.  But even that doesn't make the team that much better for the remainder of the season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please enlighten us with all of these amazing deals that were available and at what price?

 

The worst you can say is that he didn't take the opportunity to move Salvador or Volchenkov for whatever.  But even that doesn't make the team that much better for the remainder of the season. 

Pens got Stempniak for 2014 3rd

Wild didn't pay too much for Moulson

Kings got Gabs for Frattin and a couple picks

Hemsky to Ott for 2014 5th and 2015 3rd

 

Lou could have traded some later round picks and a prospect, maybe Mark Fayne or another roster player and gotten someone we actually needed back. Instead he overpaid basically for a younger Dainius Zubrus.

I predict Ruutu will be getting 4th line minutes and getting healthy scratched before the season is out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what Mike said before:

 

"Bernier was a first round pick, and was picked before Parise.  He has the ability.  If he got legit 2nd line minutes, I can see him hitting 50 points."

 

Here's what Mike said today:

 

"Well I think Bernier COULD be a 50 point player."

 

It's two statements trying to be passed off as the same thing by context, but different in actual meaning. Sure, it's not as completely asinine as Mike trying to argue "on par" is the same as "equal", but it's an aggravating posting style he possesses. 

It's funny, because it's you arguing semantics. Semantics is simply the meanings of words and terms. When someone says "Bernier could" or "I could see Bernier doing...", they're really making the same point. The one arguing semantics is the one that roars in, guns blazing, telling someone else what they were trying to say based on narrow interpretations of phrases and terms. That's what you're doing.

Edited by thecoffeecake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pens got Stempniak for 2014 3rd

Wild didn't pay too much for Moulson

Kings got Gabs for Frattin and a couple picks

Hemsky to Ott for 2014 5th and 2015 3rd

 

Lou could have traded some later round picks and a prospect, maybe Mark Fayne or another roster player and gotten someone we actually needed back. Instead he overpaid basically for a younger Dainius Zubrus.

I predict Ruutu will be getting 4th line minutes and getting healthy scratched before the season is out.

 

It's not that simple man.  When a team puts a player on the trading block, there are 29 options where a GM can send the said player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not that simple man.  When a team puts a player on the trading block, there are 29 options where a GM can send the said player.

 

I'm aware of that, but we have a bottleneck with D prospects and it's not like anyone was sending a ton of 1st and 2nd round picks in trades. I think the Rags were the only ones that sent a 1st in the St. Louis deal. Lou could have parted with a package of later round picks in this weak draft plus a prospect, maybe a roster player. He dropped the ball and we overpaid for something we didn't need.

Oh and it's Ruutu not Rutuu. Can we get a mod to correct that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny, because it's you arguing semantics. Semantics is simply the meanings of words and terms. When someone says "Bernier could" or "I could see Bernier doing...", they're really making the same point. The one arguing semantics is the one that roars in, guns blazing, telling someone else what they were trying to say based on narrow interpretations of phrases and terms. That's what you're doing.

 

Not in his world. I told you before, you do not understand his style. If you do, then you'd understand where the half dozen or so people who have said the same exact things i've said are coming from.

 

What i am doing? He does it with his own work, i.e., having to explain the meanings of the words and terms he uses and how he uses them because he often cant make himself clear one way or the other. He fvcking has to analyze his own work because he gets it pointed out to try to make him understand what he's doing, to stop doing it. 

Edited by TheRedStorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pens got Stempniak for 2014 3rd

Wild didn't pay too much for Moulson

Kings got Gabs for Frattin and a couple picks

Hemsky to Ott for 2014 5th and 2015 3rd

 

Lou could have traded some later round picks and a prospect, maybe Mark Fayne or another roster player and gotten someone we actually needed back. Instead he overpaid basically for a younger Dainius Zubrus.

I predict Ruutu will be getting 4th line minutes and getting healthy scratched before the season is out.

 

I'll grant you Hemsky.  The other deals are either unrealistic or worse than the deal for Ruutu.  Stempniak blows, and the Penguins arguably paid more in that we gave up a player that in all likelihood would not have been on the team next year.  We could not afford to give two second round picks for Moulson.  The same goes for Gaborik.

 

You do have a point to a certain extent in that we would have had a lot more options had Lou not held on to the 2012 pick.  But it's irrelevant at this point.

Edited by Daniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not in his world. I told you before, you do not understand his style. If you do, then you'd understand where the half dozen or so people who have said the same exact things i've said are coming from.

 

He does it with his own posting, i.e., explaining the meanings of the words and terms he uses and how he uses them. He fvcking has to analyze his own work. dude. He gets it pointed out to try to make him understand what he's doing, to stop doing it. 

 

Answer my question.  Do you know the difference between "could have" and "was / is"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Answer my question.  Do you know the difference between "could have" and "was / is"?

 

Look, I've been clear with you and if you don't like it, too bad. You've set a precedent and you're going to live with it until you can form a fvcking thought and stick with it in a clear manner without it being open to interpretation each time. 

Edited by TheRedStorm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Answer my question.  Do you know the difference between "could have" and "was / is"?

 

Why don't you take your arguments with other fans off line?

 

Did you post 3003 in one year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll grant you Hemsky.  The other deals are either unrealistic or worse than the deal for Ruutu.  Stempniak blows, and the Penguins arguably paid more in that we gave up a player that in all likelihood would not have been on the team next year.  We could not afford to give two second round picks for Moulson.  The same goes for Gaborik.

 

You do have a point to a certain extent in that we would have had a lot more options had Lou not held on to the 2012 pick.  But it's irrelevant at this point.

 

I think the Kovy fiasco and what we paid to get him really fvcked Lou up on trades.

If Lou is as clever and shrewd as we all think he is, Lou could have made a package to acquire a top 6 forward. Fayne, a pick and a prospect could have brought back something decent. We have Larsson languishing down in the A and he'll continue to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some people need to calm down and have a little bit of perspective. 

 

The years and the salary are not the end of the world.  Even without knowing how much salary Carolina is picking up, this is not going to be a cap team, and with some maneuvering, you can probably still afford a big ticket free agent like Statsny even if that would have been in the cards in the first place, which is a huge assumption to make.  

 

And he's not an immovable object.  At the trade deadline next year, he has one more year when the cap the following year maybe be as high as $75 million, and you could further dice up his salary if need be.   He might even be of use to a cap floor team. 

 

Before you blow your lid on Lou referencing 2009, I suggest you read the entirety of what he said.  He said that Ruutu is a top 9 forward, i.e. third line forward.  He mentioned his 26 goal season in the context of saying that he believes there's some kind of offensive upside, especially in light of the fact that he had a good Olympics (which Lou also mentioned) and that he's not young, but he isn't ancient either.  In other words, the Devils wanted another big nasty guy to play on the third line, but we might be pleasantly surprised with his offense.  So this isn't like Lou making a trade for Dany Heatley last season and saying he's excited because he was formerly a 50 goal scorer. 

 

We'll know this offseason whether Lou is really living in the past, if he hasn't completely lost his marbles.  If he gives Marty an extension, even at the league minimum, it'll be a really bad sign.  Same if he does nothing to alleviate the defensive logjam, if he extends Bernier, Gionta or Carter for longer than one year, if he does something really stupid with the young defensemen, or if he decides to play hard ball with Schneider.   At this point though, I think it's unfair to assume that he'll do any of that, and the smart money says that he actually won't.

 

Is Lou a relative or your neighbor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Kovy fiasco and what we paid to get him really fvcked Lou up on trades.

If Lou is as clever and shrewd as we all think he is, Lou could have made a package to acquire a top 6 forward. Fayne, a pick and a prospect could have brought back something decent. We have Larsson languishing down in the A and he'll continue to do so.

 

The Kovy trade was actually very good.  The only things that turned out to have any value in the trade were Oduya and a late first rounder.  The contract, who knows whether that was VBK or Lou, although Lou probably could have nixed it if he wanted to.

 

Otherwise, tell me the top 6 forward we could have obtained, and at what price.  I agreed you with that Hemsky could have been gotten for virtually nothing.  On the other hand, except for St. Louis, which wasn't happening anyway, I would not have traded Fayne, a useful draft pick, and a prospect who would have to have been one of Santini, Matteau, Severson, Gelinas, Merrill, Larsson, or Boucher for any of the people that got traded today, and it wouldn't have been enough to land someone like Kesler, who has issues of his own.

 

The situation with Larsson is not ideal, but at the same time he would not make the team appreciably better this year.  As I've been saying, this is one of the best teams in the league defensively by whatever metric you want to go on.  It needs offense, which Larsson might marginally improve in the short term. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kovy trade was actually very good.  The only things that turned out to have any value in the trade were Oduya and a late first rounder.  The contract, who knows whether that was VBK or Lou, although Lou probably could have nixed it if he wanted to.

 

Otherwise, tell me the top 6 forward we could have obtained, and at what price.  I agreed you with that Hemsky could have been gotten for virtually nothing.  On the other hand, except for St. Louis, which wasn't happening anyway, I would not have traded Fayne, a useful draft pick, and a prospect who would have to have been one of Santini, Matteau, Severson, Gelinas, Merrill, Larsson, or Boucher for any of the people that got traded today, and it wouldn't have been enough to land someone like Kesler, who has issues of his own.

 

The situation with Larsson is not ideal, but at the same time he would not make the team appreciably better this year.  As I've been saying, this is one of the best teams in the league defensively by whatever metric you want to go on.  It needs offense, which Larsson might marginally improve in the short term. 

 

I'm talking about how the Kovy thing turned out with him splitting to Russia. We have a few more prospects than the ones you mentioned. Severson like you mentioned, Scarlett is another one. I don't think Matteau is going to be anything better than a third liner so I would have traded him too. Larsson would only be a marginal improvement, but he'd be an improvement nonetheless.

 

Even if we didn't bring up Larsson we could still dress him as a 7th D man.

 

Lou is out to lunch

 

tumblr_mqtq3bxDUL1s3y9slo2_500.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm talking about how the Kovy thing turned out with him splitting to Russia. We have a few more prospects than the ones you mentioned. Severson like you mentioned, Scarlett is another one. I don't think Matteau is going to be anything better than a third liner so I would have traded him too. Larsson would only be a marginal improvement, but he'd be an improvement nonetheless.

 

Even if we didn't bring up Larsson we could still dress him as a 7th D man.

 

Lou is out to lunch

 

 

 

 

Not quite sure how you can blame Lou for Kovy going to Russia. 

 

I don't really see another team going all that crazy over Reece Scarlett.  The prospects that actually did get exchanged for the brand name guys are all better than him.

 

And oh boy, I can just imagine the howls if Larsson were the seventh defenseman every night.  Actually, I don't have to imagine it, since it happened at the beginning of the year and everyone was freaking out then. 

 

You want out to lunch, go examine the moves of Mike Gillis, Nonis or Garth Snow.  Or better yet, if you want awful asset management, just imagine if Lou traded Larsson for Martin Erat, which is pretty close to what the Caps did when they gave up on Forsberg for him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite sure how you can blame Lou for Kovy going to Russia. 

 

I don't really see another team going all that crazy over Reece Scarlett.  The prospects that actually did get exchanged for the brand name guys are all better than him.

 

And oh boy, I can just imagine the howls if Larsson were the seventh defenseman every night.  Actually, I don't have to imagine it, since it happened at the beginning of the year and everyone was freaking out then. 

 

You want out to lunch, go examine the moves of Mike Gillis, Nonis or Garth Snow.  Or better yet, if you want awful asset management, just imagine if Lou traded Larsson for Martin Erat, which is pretty close to what the Caps did when they gave up on Forsberg for him. 

 

I'm not blaming Lou for Kovy leaving. What I'm saying is Lou did give up a good grip of stuff for Kovy especially if you include the 1st round forfeit. Then Kovalchuk leaves and Lou is left with nothing. Just speculation, but that has to influence Lou's decision making process concerning trades. This is definitely not the same Lou that made some pretty good trades in the early 2000s. 2012 was the only season in recent memory where Lou truly brought in some guys to help fill those gaps we were having trouble with sans the Kovy trade. The past several years it's been 4th line, 3rd line guys and back pairing d men like Steckel, Sullivan , Havelid and Skoula.

I'm not saying that Larsson could be a 7th D, but if you packaged Fayne, Lokti maybe and some other items you could come up with a solid return. Hell, Volchenkov could be the 7th D with Larsson in his place. In addition I'm still perplexed and a bit ticked that Lou didn't forfeit that 29th pick. IMO drafting Matteau is a bust. He'd be better off as trade bait. His ceiling is at best Dainius Zubrus.

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