Jump to content

TrueBlueGED

Members
  • Content Count

    29,076
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TrueBlueGED

  1. No. Changing GMs may mean a rebuild is more likely than it is with keeping the same GM, but that doesn't put the probability of a rebuild at 51%+.
  2. This is a red herring. A GM change doesn't inherently mean a rebuild.
  3. My post was snarkier than I intended it to be. Sorry about that. I just never understood the idea that a GM could be safe in spite of poor results regardless of what the initial plan was, especially when this owner fired a GM for flawlessly executing a plan he sold him on to suffer (Regier). Meh. Ralph is fine, but I think he's one of countless coaches in the mushy middle of competence. He's utterly replaceable.
  4. You don't keep someone who is bad at their job just because you can't guarantee the replacement is better.
  5. Keeping the GM because you like the coach is like keeping a car without an engine because it has a comfy seat.
  6. I eagerly await everyone who said "Botterill is totally safe because he sold the Pegulas on a 5 year plan" spinning this. It'll be fun.
  7. The thing that's killing me about these defenses of Botterill is he has failed by his own metric for success. He said the goal was to be playing meaningful games in March. The team isn't. He has a plan and he failed. That tends to be when executives lose jobs.
  8. Thanks for the good reads. Water wet. Sky blue. And so on ? I wouldn't hate the idea, and among retreads, he gives me a lot more hope for a successful second act than somebody like Ray Shero. I just wouldn't be giddy or anything given what he started with in Van.
  9. My memory could be off, but what did Gillis actually do? Didn't he inherit nearly everything about those teams that made them so good? Granted, he'd be inheriting pieces here that could make the situations comparable and maybe he could make similar supplementary moves. But I wouldn't exactly be doing cartwheels.
  10. I don't think anyone should really care in a vacuum because the cost was so low, but I also don't think it's a huge leap to look at Simmonds as another example of poor pro player evaluation. Botterill thought enough of him that he was worth acquiring and putting us into a cap overage that faces penalty on next season's cap. It's not a big deal, but the cumulative evidence suggests we're likely to see more bad players brought in going forward, and Simmonds only adds to the evidence.
  11. I'm not sure that's accurate. After pick #3, the success rate is basically a coin flip. An article a few years back pegged picks 4-15 as equally likely to produce a half point per game NHLer, on average. And now that Casey is 3 years past his draft year, we can probably stop using his draft position as a good indicator of how he projects as a player. Substantively, I'm exactly where @nfreeman is at on Mittelstadt. And for the purposes of asset utilization, I think it's better to accept some risk and decide a year early on a player than a year late when the league has caught up. If I were
  12. Except a whole lot of 21 year olds don't improve to become NHLers. The majority don't.
  13. Just some general expectations; I'm not going to quibble over two points here or there because hockey is so flukey. But if organizational message has real value, you'd think we could approximately hold serve (6 points out), right? If the team shoots/saves crazy percentages (good or bad) over the final 20, obviously the final standings results would be quite a bit different. But if they shoot/save at rates representative of the first 62 games, 4-8 points out would be holding serve, 3 or less an improvement 9 or more the proverbial sprint to the golf course.
  14. I just feel I've read enough about culture and expectations of winning needing to come from the organization that something tangible should come of it. I wonder if it was just Tallon doing the old school thing and not trading within the division.
  15. Posted this in a trade thread, but probably more appropriate here: if the messaging from the top truly matters, we should see commensurate on ice results, right?
  16. Good move so long as Botterill doesn't head into the offseason thinking this is the 2C bridge to Mitts/Cozens being ready. Overall I think the deadline will be an interesting case study on the impact of not selling off for picks. If the message of competing for the final playoff spot has value, we should see something here, right?
  17. We've taken the Jason Botterill approach to thread utilization.
  18. Where there's a Botterill, there's a way. If he's a solid 3rd liner, then so is Kyle Okposo. And I honestly think Okposo is better, salary aside. Good teams don't have Simmonds-caliber players getting meaningful minutes. I hope we're not putting that much stock in 20 games when there's hundreds in recent years to look at.
  19. Gaudreau for Simmonds would be one way for Botterill to win me back ?
  20. I don't think acquiring bad hockey players does that. I certainly don't care about a 5th in 2021 for a pending UFA, but I will certainly argue against the notion it sends a meaningful message. This makes sense considering Botterill himself probably doesn't know what he wanted from the team. *dons tinfoil hat* This is the move of a GM who thinks he might be on the outs and wants to have a palatable enough finish to the season to keep his job without surrendering a meaningful asset he'd like to use while keeping the job.
  21. Paging @inkman to the fire Botterill thread. Inkman please pick up the red courtesy phone.
  22. So excuse Botterill's first season, not 3 years later. 3 current contracts were signed by Murray, and I believe you like one if them (Risto). That's not cap hell. Tim Murray didn't make Botterill decide Sobotka, Berglund, Vesey, etc were worthy of acquisition.
  23. Funny you say that when you continue to incorrectly assert that Murray left Botterill with a cap mess. 3 contracts: Risto, Bogo, Okposo. That's it. Botterill made his own mess by paying bad hockey players.
  24. Key to happiness: find someone who loves you as much as @Randall Flagg hates NHL talking heads.
×
×
  • Create New...