Jump to content

What’s your max offer for Tavares


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 411
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Somebody send Tavares the link.

Yikes, are you two dweebuses really bantering back and forth in Taylor Swift code?  Why don't you both just cozy up somewhere and make each other mixed Taylor Swift tapes while you're at it?  Mixed ta

Supposedly the Wilpons are exploring adding laugh tracks to Mets games to make them more tolerable...

Posted Images

Well even though it wouldn't be fair at all to blame him in any way for Tavares leaving cause he came in a mess and very late, it's still in the books. I doubt there's another GM in NHL history with a worst track record of losing core top players with value to free agency.

Tavares, Nieds, Rafalski, Parise, Gomez, Gionta, Lemieux, Holik, Mogilny, Clarkson... Elias could also have been there too and I'm still furious thinking about it.

But for once im glad cause Tavares is out of our division now. 

Edited by SterioDesign
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, titans04 said:

I agree a terrible look for Lou. He can now build  a true steaming pile of crap. Have at it.. Then. Pass the baton onto your inept son. 

 

12 hours ago, SterioDesign said:

Well even though it wouldn't be fair at all to blame him in any way for Tavares leaving cause he came in a mess and very late, it's still in the books. I doubt there's another GM in NHL history with a worst track record of losing core top players with value to free agency.

Tavares, Nieds, Rafalski, Parise, Gomez, Gionta, Lemieux, Holik, Mogilny, Clarkson... Elias could also have been there too and I'm still furious thinking about it.

But for once im glad cause Tavares is out of our division now. 

I was thinking about this this morning, the fact that maybe it doesn't look good for Lou that he couldn't land and/or keep Tavares from leaving, but then I thought, you know what, that's not fair at all.  How can you possibly blame him for Tavares leaving when he's only been there a month, and the guy pretty clearly wanted to go home anyway?  He had no relationship with him prior to coming to NYI that we know of, and JT has likely been thinking about this time and decision for the last year or so as his impending free agency loomed - maybe even longer than that.  With the Isles bringing in both a new GM and a new coach, it signifies a pretty significant shift and rebuilding type period for them.  That probably helped sway his decision and made him see it as a good time to get out.  Even if they didn't bring in a new GM and coach, Tavares is still at about the midpoint of his career, and he may never get another opportunity like this again.  I just don't see how a guy who is 9 years into the league having never played for another team, seeking his next and possibly last huge contract, and wants to go play for his hometown, can even remotely be considered a knock on a guy who's ass has been in the chair for barely 30 days.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean if you dumb it down to 'normal person' terms..

If I had another very, very compelling job offer and my current boss/manager/whatever (who I presumably had pretty good working relationships with) was replaced a month before I needed to make my decision.. I'd probably take the other offer to.

But anyway.. I just hate that Toronto has the potential to be a freakin dynasty for a while.  Though the Lightning vs. Leafs playoff series are going to be fvcking epic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SterioDesign said:

Well even though it wouldn't be fair at all to blame him in any way for Tavares leaving cause he came in a mess and very late, it's still in the books. I doubt there's another GM in NHL history with a worst track record of losing core top players with value to free agency.

Tavares, Nieds, Rafalski, Parise, Gomez, Gionta, Lemieux, Holik, Mogilny, Clarkson... Elias could also have been there too and I'm still furious thinking about it.

But for once im glad cause Tavares is out of our division now. 

Re:  the bolded...it does help Lou's legacy a lot that the Devils continued to ice competitive hockey teams for a while, regardless of the defections...the perma-"Crash and Burn" didn't happen until after the 2012 Cup run (and ultimately maybe that was part of the problem...a few of the post-Cup-winning Devils did have a bit of a "smoke and mirrors" feel to them).

 

As for the list above:

Tavares (who is not one bit on Lou, but it sounds like you're kinda-sorta of trying to put it on him a little):  had the opportunity to play for his wet dream team, was willing to take one less year to do it.  Never much that can be done someone willing to take less money to make his personal dream come true.

Niedermayer:  wanted to play with his bro, Lou offered him the max at the time and tried to trade for Nieds' bro to keep him here, and like Tavares, was willing to take less coin.

Rafalski:  had the chance to go home, he took it

Parise:  see above, also the Devils finances were messy at the time

Gomez:  vastly overpaid by Rag$ (got superstar dollars despite the fact he was never going be a superstar himself), and just two years after he was signed, suddenly his deal was such an albatross that the Rangers rid themselves of him.

Gionta:  Scored 55 goals in 90 regular games after the 2004-05 lockout ended, then scored 60 in his next 217...there was lots of complaining about Gio's "logoseekers" over his final couple of seasons, and it wasn't like anyone was that sorry

Lemieux:  had a deal agreed to, then tried to renege on it once he had his big playoff run...kinda forced Lou's hand, though it kind of sucked that the Devils got the worst player (Steve Thomas) in that three-team deal...I would've rather have seen the Devils get Wendel Clark.

Holik:  see Gomez.  Devils win the 2003 Cup while Holik watches from across the river.

Mogilny:  did little in the 2001 playoffs, I could understand Lou being a little wary about re-signing him, especially if you look at Mogs' 1997-98 to 1999-00 numbers (only 169 regular games total over 3 years). 

Clarkson:  not a top core player, had one fluke 30 goal season and a nice start to the following season, was an absolute disaster in Toronto, but to his credit, he managed to cash on in 2011-12 and 2013, due to another franchise's absolute stupidity. 

Elias:  this one would've hurt Lou's legacy for sure had he left (especially now knowing as much as we do), but the funny thing is if he had turned in the same first two seasons in NY that he did here after his mega-deal (remember the 4 goals in 42 GP run over two seasons), everyone here would've been chuckling about how yet another ex-Devil went on to be nothing special as a Ranger.  His productive Year 3 of that deal really turned his rest of his Devils career around, until decline and age finally caught up with him. 

If you're going to hint that Lou is kind of a screw-up or to blame for most of these players leaving, I think the better case to be made against Lou's later Devil years is all the poor drafts that meant that there weren't enough pieces from within to try to replace these guys...that, and the shaky forays into UFA (resulting from the unproductive drafts), which I don't think was ever going to be much of a strength for Lou...just too outside his comfort zone.  Devils possibility could've benefitted from an earlier bottom-out season (the way Shero did, in being able to snag Hischier as a result)...maybe then, in such an alternate timeline, Lou gets assets for a couple of guys on the list.   

Quite sadly, I think Lou's Islander tenure is going to be a complete disaster...as in really, really, REALLY bad (and relatively short-lived...I think he resigns within three seasons, and it wouldn't surprise me if he was done after two).  It's not Lou's fault (blame Snow and the franchise pre-Lou), but losing Tavares is just brutal for them.  I don't think this version of Lou has any miracles or magic waiting to dazzle the hockey world. 

---------------------------------------------------------

And on another note, re:  JT...maybe he thought he was doing the right thing in trying to share his feelings, but the girlfriend you just dumped and basically told "It's not you, it's me" as you can't wait to skip on over to your new love doesn't want to hear about how awesome and wonderful she was...especially after you gave her strong hints about staying with her was what you really wanted in the first place.  It never comes off as anything but phony. 

These guys are really better off just saying little to nothing in these situations.  Fans hate that too, but it's definitely better than giving them false hope. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really have any problems with the entire Tavares situation, out of the six options Toronto was probably the best Eastern Conference one for us, I'd much rather JT be lacing em up for the Leafs than with the Isles, Bruins, or Lightning, and from just an entire outlook of the situation I can't really fault JT for a lot of what happened. Certainly can't blame him for leaving the Island as they completely squandered the first 9 years of career and at the end of the day it's not like he went and chased money, he went to play for his childhood team and he gets a real chance at playing for a Cup with the Leafs. Maybe his goodbye to the Islanders wasn't the greatest, but I think the sentiment was fine, I think he wanted to communicate how much the Islanders meant to him and I don't think he's lying on that front, maybe just release it a few days later when the wound is a little less fresh. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

Re:  the bolded...it does help Lou's legacy a lot that the Devils continued to ice competitive hockey teams for a while, regardless of the defections...the perma-"Crash and Burn" didn't happen until after the 2012 Cup run (and ultimately maybe that was part of the problem...a few of the post-Cup-winning Devils did have a bit of a "smoke and mirrors" feel to them).

 

As for the list above:

Tavares (who is not one bit on Lou, but it sounds like you're kinda-sorta of trying to put it on him a little):  had the opportunity to play for his wet dream team, was willing to take one less year to do it.  Never much that can be done someone willing to take less money to make his personal dream come true.

Niedermayer:  wanted to play with his bro, Lou offered him the max at the time and tried to trade for Nieds' bro to keep him here, and like Tavares, was willing to take less coin.

Rafalski:  had the chance to go home, he took it

Parise:  see above, also the Devils finances were messy at the time

Gomez:  vastly overpaid by Rag$ (got superstar dollars despite the fact he was never going be a superstar himself), and just two years after he was signed, suddenly his deal was such an albatross that the Rangers rid themselves of him.

Gionta:  Scored 55 goals in 90 regular games after the 2004-05 lockout ended, then scored 60 in his next 217...there was lots of complaining about Gio's "logoseekers" over his final couple of seasons, and it wasn't like anyone was that sorry

Lemieux:  had a deal agreed to, then tried to renege on it once he had his big playoff run...kinda forced Lou's hand, though it kind of sucked that the Devils got the worst player (Steve Thomas) in that three-team deal...I would've rather have seen the Devils get Wendel Clark.

Holik:  see Gomez.  Devils win the 2003 Cup while Holik watches from across the river.

Mogilny:  did little in the 2001 playoffs, I could understand Lou being a little wary about re-signing him, especially if you look at Mogs' 1997-98 to 1999-00 numbers (only 169 regular games total over 3 years). 

Clarkson:  not a top core player, had one fluke 30 goal season and a nice start to the following season, was an absolute disaster in Toronto, but to his credit, he managed to cash on in 2011-12 and 2013, due to another franchise's absolute stupidity. 

Elias:  this one would've hurt Lou's legacy for sure had he left (especially now knowing as much as we do), but the funny thing is if he had turned in the same first two seasons in NY that he did here after his mega-deal (remember the 4 goals in 42 GP run over two seasons), everyone here would've been chuckling about how yet another ex-Devil went on to be nothing special as a Ranger.  His productive Year 3 of that deal really turned his rest of his Devils career around, until decline and age finally caught up with him. 

If you're going to hint that Lou is kind of a screw-up or to blame for most of these players leaving, I think the better case to be made against Lou's later Devil years is all the poor drafts that meant that there weren't enough pieces from within to try to replace these guys...that, and the shaky forays into UFA (resulting from the unproductive drafts), which I don't think was ever going to be much of a strength for Lou...just too outside his comfort zone.  Devils possibility could've benefitted from an earlier bottom-out season (the way Shero did, in being able to snag Hischier as a result)...maybe then, in such an alternate timeline, Lou gets assets for a couple of guys on the list.   

Quite sadly, I think Lou's Islander tenure is going to be a complete disaster...as in really, really, REALLY bad (and relatively short-lived...I think he resigns within three seasons, and it wouldn't surprise me if he was done after two).  It's not Lou's fault (blame Snow and the franchise pre-Lou), but losing Tavares is just brutal for them.  I don't think this version of Lou has any miracles or magic waiting to dazzle the hockey world. 

---------------------------------------------------------

And on another note, re:  JT...maybe he thought he was doing the right thing in trying to share his feelings, but the girlfriend you just dumped and basically told "It's not you, it's me" as you can't wait to skip on over to your new love doesn't want to hear about how awesome and wonderful she was...especially after you gave her strong hints about staying with her was what you really wanted in the first place.  It never comes off as anything but phony. 

These guys are really better off just saying little to nothing in these situations.  Fans hate that too, but it's definitely better than giving them false hope. 

 

We've been through this before so let's not go at it again, nobody wants to read all that again lol.

But all those examples still fall under  "he let them reach the point where he had no leverage". No good businessman does that, it's as simple as that. How often do you see core guys locked up a year before or months before free agency on other teams compared to how many do get to free agency? There's a reason for that, you CAN'T risk it and need to protect yourself. And i do understand that SOME situation had complications in the background, but he always did things the same way so nothing suggests that it would have been any different anyway. It just gives an easy excuse really. So most of these guys walking is 100% because of his approach of waiting last minute and how he dealt with free agents, not because of situations. Nothing more. You don't give 100% control to your top guys to walk, you lock them up before you're in a tough spot. 

You know I've been praising Shero for a long time, long before he came to NJ. The way he handled things is simply the right way to do business, as simple as that. Staal and Letang IS the way to go. You meet with them a year before (NOT DAYS) they are free agents to get a sense of what they want and give them an ultimatum and you act accordingly. Then you have all the info you need to make the best decision and it gives you a better turnaround town to work something before the season or at the deadline. Letang, he gave him an ultimatum that he either signed him or he had to trade him, couldn't let him walk after the season and lose a player of his calibre for nothing. And he did. Same with Staal, he saw that Staal wanted to get a bigger role and wasn't a fit anymore and he got something for him and managed to get something for him. It's only common sense. To refuse to talk contracts during the season or prior is absolutely dumb, it's stripping yourself from any leverage. 

Clarkson is the best example. Not the best player we all know BUT he had value when he walked, we could have got a decent return for him at that time, that's undeniable. But nope, they didn't even discuss contracts before the deadline, we went all out for the playoffs with a very average team trending downward, missed them. And once they started talking about the contract after the season, once Clarkson established what kind of money he wanted Lou said "ok bye" and off he went.  That's the worst possible way to handle that situation and it could have been avoided by doing it the right way.

And that same scenario x all these guys stripped us from a lot of assets. There's a reasons our prospects pool was so poor and that we didn't have much assets by the end. It's just an accumulation of "going all in blindly and losing guys left and right". And THAT i feel is the real reason of the downfall of the team. Patchwork and losing assets going all out every year. That plus horrible drafting really.

Hell just look at the FEW times he actually did the right thing. Trading Jagr, that got us Palmieri basically. And it never seem that bad cause like you said we were successful and he got a pass for assembling a very good core of players that kept the team very good for a long time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

Clarkson:  not a top core player, had one fluke 30 goal season and a nice start to the following season, was an absolute disaster in Toronto, but to his credit, he managed to cash on in 2011-12 and 2013, due to another franchise's absolute stupidity. 

The idea of Clarkson as a core player is actually hysterical. If you want to get technical about it, he was a big free agent signing that the Devils missed out on. But every team in the league should have missed him at that price, and now he's one of those dead contracts on LTIR. I definitely don't fault Lou on that one. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have mixed feeling with how this Tavares situation went down.  I actually feel terrible for Islanders and their fans.  This is worse than when Parise walked as we at least still had a proven Kovalchuk.  The franchise is now being placed on the shoulders of a player entering his sophomore season.  Not only that, but I do feel like Tavares lead them on a little bit with asking not to be traded at the deadline.  The guy took a significant amount less to "go home" and play in Toronto.  Maybe I am off-base, but to me that feels like he was forcing his former team to spend stupid money to even consider staying and that he had Toronto in mind for quite some time (like Parise did when we later found out him and Suter were texting during the playoffs about playing in Minnesota together).

This whole dog and pony show came down to Tavares took less money to sign for his childhood wet-dream team where he can play as the second line center where the media will be hounding him for every missed shot he takes and every detail about his personal life.  Sounds like a wonderful upcoming 7 years to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SterioDesign said:

We've been through this before so let's not go at it again, nobody wants to read all that again lol.

But all those examples still fall under  "he let them reach the point where he had no leverage". No good businessman does that, it's as simple as that. How often do you see core guys locked up a year before or months before free agency on other teams compared to how many do get to free agency? There's a reason for that, you CAN'T risk it and need to protect yourself. And i do understand that SOME situation had complications in the background, but he always did things the same way so nothing suggests that it would have been any different anyway. It just gives an easy excuse really. So most of these guys walking is 100% because of his approach of waiting last minute and how he dealt with free agents, not because of situations. Nothing more. You don't give 100% control to your top guys to walk, you lock them up before you're in a tough spot. 

You know I've been praising Shero for a long time, long before he came to NJ. The way he handled things is simply the right way to do business, as simple as that. Staal and Letang IS the way to go. You meet with them a year before (NOT DAYS) they are free agents to get a sense of what they want and give them an ultimatum and you act accordingly. Then you have all the info you need to make the best decision and it gives you a better turnaround town to work something before the season or at the deadline. Letang, he gave him an ultimatum that he either signed him or he had to trade him, couldn't let him walk after the season and lose a player of his calibre for nothing. And he did. Same with Staal, he saw that Staal wanted to get a bigger role and wasn't a fit anymore and he got something for him and managed to get something for him. It's only common sense. To refuse to talk contracts during the season or prior is absolutely dumb, it's stripping yourself from any leverage. 

Clarkson is the best example. Not the best player we all know BUT he had value when he walked, we could have got a decent return for him at that time, that's undeniable. But nope, they didn't even discuss contracts before the deadline, we went all out for the playoffs with a very average team trending downward, missed them. And once they started talking about the contract after the season, once Clarkson established what kind of money he wanted Lou said "ok bye" and off he went.  That's the worst possible way to handle that situation and it could have been avoided by doing it the right way.

And that same scenario x all these guys stripped us from a lot of assets. There's a reasons our prospects pool was so poor and that we didn't have much assets by the end. It's just an accumulation of "going all in blindly and losing guys left and right". And THAT i feel is the real reason of the downfall of the team. Patchwork and losing assets going all out every year. That plus horrible drafting really.

Hell just look at the FEW times he actually did the right thing. Trading Jagr, that got us Palmieri basically. And it never seem that bad cause like you said we were successful and he got a pass for assembling a very good core of players that kept the team very good for a long time.

More or less agree.  They even said it on NHL network yesterday.  With players of this caliber, you need to give them an ultimatum of the trade deadline leading into their UFA.  If they don't sign, trade them, no matter what their name.  The only caveat is if your team is such a strong cup contender that year that it forces your hand to keep them.  With the Isles, they are not in that category and should have absolutely dealt JT.  Black and white for me.  Now they got nothing.  Why did they keep him when they could have gotten certainly something of interest, even if it was just a pick or two.  JT would have definitely netted one 1st rounder at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Sharifijanov2099 said:

More or less agree.  They even said it on NHL network yesterday.  With players of this caliber, you need to give them an ultimatum of the trade deadline leading into their UFA.  If they don't sign, trade them, no matter what their name.  The only caveat is if your team is such a strong cup contender that year that it forces your hand to keep them.  With the Isles, they are not in that category and should have absolutely dealt JT.  Black and white for me.  Now they got nothing.  Why did they keep him when they could have gotten certainly something of interest, even if it was just a pick or two.  JT would have definitely netted one 1st rounder at least.

In the Isles' case, this was the big exception.  Those Devils always felt like they were in the hunt, and Lou was obviously hesitant to kill a potential playoff run before it had a chance to begin (especially with Brodeur still being there)...not saying that he was always 100% in the right to think that way, but like I said in my post, maybe if there had been some clearer "we're definitely NOT making the playoff"-type seasons prior to the deadline, maybe Lou thinks a little differently.  We never saw that scenario enough while he was there to really know for sure.  One can make the argument that maybe Lou had a little more faith in some of those post-Cup teams than he should have, but can't change any of it now.

The Isles were 29-27-7 on February 24 (two days prior to the deadline), and had gone 14-20-5 after a 15-7-2 start, and clearly were giving up too many goals to think that a legit run was coming...they were not making a run that year...in a way that start hurt them more than if they had just sucked right out of the gate.  Unfortunately I think Tavares was probably leading the Isles to believe that there was a very good chance that he was going to stick around...I sure never got the impression that he was ever out to maliciously screw the team that had drafted him.  And it's all hindsight now, but maybe the Isles shouldn't have taken him at whatever word Tavares seemed to be feeding them, and taken the "Dammit gotta get SOMETHING for him" approach.  Only problem would've been that the haul probably wouldn't have been as nearly as much as you'd think...sure, you can always say that SOMETHING is better than nothing, but the team trading for him would've basically been paying for 20 regular season games or so, some playoff games (hopefully several rounds' worth), and exclusive negotiating rights with no guarantees that he'd re-sign.  I think you would've seen a lot of "That's IT?!"-type comments had JT been traded.  The Isles gambled that keeping him around would work out with an extension, and yeah, they lost. 

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mfitz804 said:

The idea of Clarkson as a core player is actually hysterical. If you want to get technical about it, he was a big free agent signing that the Devils missed out on. But every team in the league should have missed him at that price, and now he's one of those dead contracts on LTIR. I definitely don't fault Lou on that one. 

The point is not that we lost Clarkson as a core player.

We were like 6-10 pts out of a playoffs spot with a team who clearly couldn't make a deep run and we had a guy about to hit free agency at the top of his prime that many playoffs teams could have used. I truly believe we could have got a first or a good player / prospect in return of him (at that time) his value only dropped after.

And Lou didn't even bother looking into what kind of money he was looking for. So when he gambled going all in for the playoffs he simply didn't have all the data he needed to make the best decision. At the moment he knew what clarkson was looking for he moved on a week before the draft. 

If you know Clarkson wants ridiculous money and won't re-sign him, and see that you can get something decent for him and that your chance at a cup is very very slim. You obviously do it at the trade deadline.

With extra picks the next summer we might have got Brett Pesce, Guentzel, burakovsky, wennberg, zadorov etc etc who knows? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SterioDesign said:

The point is not that we lost Clarkson as a core player.

We were like 6-10 pts out of a playoffs spot with a team who clearly couldn't make a deep run and we had a guy about to hit free agency at the top of his prime that many playoffs teams could have used. I truly believe we could have got a first or a good player / prospect in return of him (at that time) his value only dropped after.

And Lou didn't even bother looking into what kind of money he was looking for. So when he gambled going all in for the playoffs he simply didn't have all the data he needed to make the best decision. At the moment he knew what clarkson was looking for he moved on a week before the draft. 

If you know Clarkson wants ridiculous money and won't re-sign him, and see that you can get something decent for him and that your chance at a cup is very very slim. You obviously do it at the trade deadline.

With extra picks the next summer we might have got Brett Pesce, Guentzel, burakovsky, wennberg, zadorov etc etc who knows? 

The Devils were in 8th place at the trade deadline.  The year before, they had just made a run to the Cup Finals from 6th place.  They had a very old team whose window was probably already closed, but this was likely the last shot.  If he sells Clarkson, he should also sell Elias and Zidlicky and everyone else, even though they came back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Sharifijanov2099 said:

More or less agree.  They even said it on NHL network yesterday.  With players of this caliber, you need to give them an ultimatum of the trade deadline leading into their UFA.  If they don't sign, trade them, no matter what their name.  The only caveat is if your team is such a strong cup contender that year that it forces your hand to keep them.  With the Isles, they are not in that category and should have absolutely dealt JT.  Black and white for me.  Now they got nothing.  Why did they keep him when they could have gotten certainly something of interest, even if it was just a pick or two.  JT would have definitely netted one 1st rounder at least.

Aren't other teams hip to that game though?  I mean, unless you can get something in writing, the guy is most likely going to bolt after the season's over, so why would anyone pay top dollar for a rental?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Triumph said:

The Devils were in 8th place at the trade deadline.  The year before, they had just made a run to the Cup Finals from 6th place.  They had a very old team whose window was probably already closed, but this was likely the last shot.  If he sells Clarkson, he should also sell Elias and Zidlicky and everyone else, even though they came back.

Which is my point. You're sacrificing the future for a very very slim chance of winning something, with the state of the team at that time, that's a verybad gambling. You can gamble lots of money if you're well off and young and can turn it around. But if you're old a retired with no retirement plans... you just can't gamble that much. Obviously wtv return they could have got for Clarkson was also not a guarantee of turning into anything of course but it's still building towards the future for the best of the franchise, it was UNDENIABLE that they were trending downward then. I'm sure you'll agree that the patchwork / win now approach of those last few years did more damage than good to the franchise.

Imagine seeing what Shero did with such a mess as a foundation what he could of done with more assets?

 

Edited by SterioDesign
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

Which is my point. You're sacrificing the future for a very very slim chance of winning something, that's bad gambling. Obviously wtv return they could have got for Clarkson was also not a guarantee of turning into anything of course but it's still building towards the future for the best of the franchise, it was UNDENIABLE that they were trending downward then. I'm sure you'll agree that the patchwork / win now approach of those last few years did more damage than good to the franchise.

Imagine seeing what Shero did with such a mess as a foundation what he could of done with more assets?

 

From the position the Devils were in, I think they made the right move to go for it.  No matter what Lou did, the Devils were going to start losing a lot in the coming years.  What he did has prolonged the losing, but it was never going to be easy to transition from a team going for the Cup every year to a team that had limited talent and wouldn't compete for anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DevsMan84 said:

I have mixed feeling with how this Tavares situation went down.  I actually feel terrible for Islanders and their fans.  This is worse than when Parise walked as we at least still had a proven Kovalchuk.  The franchise is now being placed on the shoulders of a player entering his sophomore season.  Not only that, but I do feel like Tavares lead them on a little bit with asking not to be traded at the deadline.  

I don't feel bad for them at all, fvck em. I've found their fans to be extremely obnoxious the past handful of seasons when we have played them at home so it's nice to see them be kicked down a peg and be reminded their franchise still sucks and that they have only won 1 playoff series since 1993.

Edited by Satans Hockey
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

The point is not that we lost Clarkson as a core player.

We were like 6-10 pts out of a playoffs spot with a team who clearly couldn't make a deep run and we had a guy about to hit free agency at the top of his prime that many playoffs teams could have used. I truly believe we could have got a first or a good player / prospect in return of him (at that time) his value only dropped after.

And Lou didn't even bother looking into what kind of money he was looking for. So when he gambled going all in for the playoffs he simply didn't have all the data he needed to make the best decision. At the moment he knew what clarkson was looking for he moved on a week before the draft. 

If you know Clarkson wants ridiculous money and won't re-sign him, and see that you can get something decent for him and that your chance at a cup is very very slim. You obviously do it at the trade deadline.

With extra picks the next summer we might have got Brett Pesce, Guentzel, burakovsky, wennberg, zadorov etc etc who knows? 

You referred to him as a core player, that was my point. He wasn't. 

Is it documented somewhere that Lou didn't bother looking into what kind of money he was looking for? Or that he moved on as soon as he knew what he wanted? How would you know anything about that? Are you saying an NHL GM can't figure out that a guy coming off a 30 goal season, followed by a 15 goal half season, isn't going to be looking for $5m a year? He had no idea? Come on now...

39 minutes ago, Triumph said:

The Devils were in 8th place at the trade deadline.  The year before, they had just made a run to the Cup Finals from 6th place.  They had a very old team whose window was probably already closed, but this was likely the last shot.  If he sells Clarkson, he should also sell Elias and Zidlicky and everyone else, even though they came back.

This too. We were trying to make another run, and we were still "in it". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Triumph said:

From the position the Devils were in, I think they made the right move to go for it.  No matter what Lou did, the Devils were going to start losing a lot in the coming years.  What he did has prolonged the losing, but it was never going to be easy to transition from a team going for the Cup every year to a team that had limited talent and wouldn't compete for anything.

Well I don't agree but it's fine. What people ultimately want will dictate their decisions and we're simply not wishing for the same outcome when it comes to that.

I knew we didn't have the team to win the cup and wanted to build towards the future. But i see that Lou was more interested in keeping his playoffs streak alive than thinking long-term, i get it but it was selfish and not for the best of the franchise IMO. And well the results kind of shows he was wrong ultimately

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mfitz804 said:

You referred to him as a core player, that was my point. He wasn't. 

Is it documented somewhere that Lou didn't bother looking into what kind of money he was looking for? Or that he moved on as soon as he knew what he wanted? How would you know anything about that? Are you saying an NHL GM can't figure out that a guy coming off a 30 goal season, followed by a 15 goal half season, isn't going to be looking for $5m a year? He had no idea? Come on now...

This too. We were trying to make another run, and we were still "in it". 

it was said that they didn't discuss contract during the season or prior and it was reported that Lou "gave up" on trying to sign him a week before the trade deadline as he realized no deal would be made.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mfitz804 said:

This too. We were trying to make another run, and we were still "in it". 

Devils started 8-1-3 that season and were 15-12-9 by the time the deadline rolled around (and had gone 0-1-3 in the four games leading up to the deadline)...Kovalchuk was also out of the lineup at this point, and had been for about 10 days. 

One of those real "do we or don't we?" crossroads kind of seasons, in terms of do we try to get to the playoffs one last time, or just start trading off older players or soon-to-be UFAs...unfortunately, the Devils went 0-5-1 after the deadline (a total of 0-6-4 over ten games) that pretty much killed their season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.