Obvious cross-post from the Schmidt thread. It was closed as I was typing this.
Seems maybe that you are more focused on “process” than you are on “results”.
Guys you are throwing some shade at are making huge differences — Right now. Wilson, Orpik, etc.
I'm not "throwing shade" at anyone. Calling Wilson a complimentary player is not throwing shade.
If you want me to "throw shade" at someone, I will say that Orpik's first goal in two millennia doesn't change that he's been a liability more often than he's been a benefit this post-season.
Would you rather be “right” and have Nate win the Cup? Or be “wrong” and have the Caps win, on the continued back of the guys we should have exposed or let go?
I honestly cannot tell.
Another false dilemma. I can both enjoy the Capitals winning the cup AND have an opinion on the roster moves that occurred along the way.
There are a million things that went right for the Capitals to get this far, many of which were outside of the Caps control. In one respect, the Caps have simply had a lot more "puck luck" than any post-season I can remember. Remember Eller's 2OT goal in game 3 against Columbus to stop them from going down 0-3? A crazy bounce. Pittsburgh rang the iron in game 6 OT shortly before Kuznetsov closed out that series. Yanni Gourde not being able to convert on a puck that was sitting in the crease in front of an open net in game 7 against Tampa was huge for the Capitals. These are all examples of plays that would typically go against the Capitals in previous post-seasons. To an extent, you can even view Holtby's miraculous save in game 2 against Vegas in a similar light (thank goodness that Tuch didn't elevate that puck). The hockey gods have finally (
finally!) smiled upon the Capitals this post-season. I'm enjoying every second of the magic that has transpired. We also had the good fortune that Pittsburgh played like mortals finally (Kessel, Malkin, and Hagelin all hurt, Letang playing like garbage, no Fleury, Murray not in god-mode, etc), as opposed to the near flawless level they displayed in the previous two post-seasons. And even among the things that are within the realm of Capitals "control," so much of it has come from the continued development of some players that haven't always come up big in past post-seasons. Kuznetsov, Orlov, Stephenson, and Wilson (yes, Wilson) have elevated their games at the right times. Not to mention Holtby returning to form after he faltered last off-season and in the second half of this regular season.
If we roll two dice, and I let you guess what the outcome will be, if you pick 12 and then we happen to roll 12, does that mean picking 12 was the best decision? No, it just happened to be a lucky one. The odds are six times higher that you will roll a 7 than a 12. If a team wins the cup, it doesn't mean every roster move was the optimal roster move, or even a positive decision. Case in point - Marcus Johansson, Tyler Graovac, and Jakub Jerabek. They traded for Graovac in order to be able to meet the requirements for exposing enough veteran forwards. One of the forwards they protected as a result of that trade (Johansson) was traded a couple weeks later. The dissonance between those two roster moves is obvious. Graovac did nothing to help this team, and was almost instantly replaced by the players in Hershey. They also spent a draft pick on Jerabek, who did nothing but be a terrible liability in games 1 and 2 against Columbus and get his ass shipped off to the press box for the rest of the post-season. Almost any hockey fan should be able to look at moves like these and understand that it's possible to have legitimate criticisms of roster decisions, regardless of the outcome of the season. Once you accept that paradigm, you can understand my perspective a little better. Winning a Stanley Cup doesn't mean that every decision along the way was ideal.
The trade demands of McPhee after the protection lists were submitted doesn't change the core of my gripe here. Read back through all the pages in this thread, I never once said they should have made a trade with Vegas to save Schmidt from being picked once the protection lists were locked in. I said they should have foreseen the issues coming better than they did (both with regards to protection and the salary cap), and made the corresponding moves ahead of the expansion draft. By the time the protection lists are submitted, McPhee and Vegas have all the leverage.
@Langway has posts in this thread along similar lines. Other franchises were able to navigate out of even worse positions before the expansion draft.
Any idea why that is? I’m expecting a smug retort....but maybe you will surprise me.
Because the pot and the kettle are both black. Smug enough?
