Very good trades as measured by the team actually improving? Or measured by posters proclaiming a win on trade day?
George McPhee III
- Thread starter Langway
- Start date
Very good trades as measured by the team actually improving? Or measured by posters proclaiming a win on trade day?
SDBondra
Registered User
- Jul 24, 2005
- 1,201
- 489
I don't necessarily disagree - just pointing out that probably 90% of the people here felt like George McPhee completely fleeced Colorado at the time. Just a reminder to all the back seat GMs who think they could do better that nobody has a crystal ball.
Even though McPhee flubbed the pick and then traded Forsberg for the wrong player I still think it was a good trade. Varly was stamping his feet because he wanted to be the number one but he wasn't really outplaying Neuvy enough to earn it. And with Holtby in the wings, we could afford to move Varly. He brought back a ton of value. It was a sound move at the time and while Varly has been great this year, I still believe Holtby will end up being the superior goaltender.
Zoidberg Jesus
Trotzkyist
- Oct 25, 2011
- 3,814
- 0
That's a horrible way to judge trades. Why would you judge a decision based on information that wasn't available at the time? You're basically holding him accountable for not being able to see the future.
("Nod," singular. Not plural.)
He was mishandled, maybe, by Boudreau. Should the GM be intervening in the coach's goalie decisions? That's Oates management. Varlamov outplayed Neuvirth when he played in 2011, but he was hurt all the time. I agree not going to him was the wrong decision, but there was a justification for it, and it certainly wasn't McPhee's fault.
I already said his overall asset management (and his vision) was inadequate. Measured by the value he was able to get. That's what trading, in isolation, is. He was good at trading. Very good.
Holy carp, that's his entire job - predict players future performance and make the right calls. Thats the entire essence of the draft, trades and free agency.
That's his job description in a nutshell. That was an absurd post.
Are you actually defending McPhee here? I'm confused by this sudden zeal to excuse his piss poor performance as GM.
No. His job is to do that insofar as it actually can be done with the available information. That something ends up happening doesn't mean it was actually projected by either party. (I'm not talking about Varlamov.)
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
Your point is absurd given the particular situation.
There were three options with the Varlamov situation:
1- Guarantee him the starting job and pay him as a starter
2- Let him go to the KHL (which he was threatening to do)
3- Trade him.
Considering the return they got, he picked, by far, the best option. Option 1 cuts your feet out from under you in all future contract negotiations and option 2 loses a valuable asset for nothing.
Right. It's not that McPhee didn't know Varlamov's potential. It just wasn't relevant because keeping him wasn't an actual option.
Zoidberg Jesus
Trotzkyist
- Oct 25, 2011
- 3,814
- 0
If you think a typical GM would've seen Varly's turnaround coming based on what he'd shown at that point, you're seriously overrating their abilities.
I think everyone saw it coming (other than getting past the injuries), including McPhee. It just had no role in the decision, because they couldn't keep him.
All you're doing is making excuses for him (or any GM) making bad trades, bad draft picks or bad FA moves. "Well, he didn't know the player would suck after we signed him".
This is the hallmark of rationalizing poor GM moves. His entire job is to make better guesses as to the future output than his peers. Some things are impossible to predict. Varly becoming a top goaltender in the league wasn't one of them. He had other options. He chose Neuvy/Holtby over Varly then almost immediately awarded Neuvy a much bigger contract than he deserved, and had to give up on Neuvy shortly thereafter. Meanwhile Oates destroys Holtby.
The entire thing was mismanaged. And now GMGM is gone.
Varly had always played at a high level, it was only his injuries that held him back. Predicting he would get past a few injuries was hardly clairvoyant.
I'm not making excuses. I'm not pro-McPhee. I'm anti-people saying things that aren't true.
I do agree that, in theory, the job of a GM is as you describe it. It is possible for someone to be intelligent/etc. enough to be able to read every situation and know how any decision is going to play out, what a player's potential really is, etc. The basis for those conclusions does exist. But no actual person is capable of making them...so you can blame McPhee for not predicting the future, but no other current, past, or future GM could/can/will be able to do so either.
Anyway, where Varlamov is concerned, it's not that both GMs involved didn't see his potential. McPhee knew he was trading away a promising player. He also knew that player was either going to play in the KHL or for another NHL team than his own. With the KHL threats public knowledge, McPhee got an excellent return.
Jacoby4HOF66
Pull my finger
- Mar 13, 2009
- 30,522
- 7,726
Zoidberg Jesus
Trotzkyist
- Oct 25, 2011
- 3,814
- 0
The injuries are what I was referring to. No one thought he could carry the load as a starter over a full season.
If you look at his handling of Varly in the vacuum of that week with the KHL threats out there, the return seems "excellent". But it was McPhee's handling of the entire situation that lead to the threats, a situation that could have been handled differently/better. In the end I don't grade his performance in a vacuum of individual trades without background or future output considered. Its all part of his overall grade. Which just got him fired.
Colorado's GM thought so. He bet heavily on it, and he was right. Now they are in the playoffs, largely due to Varly carrying them there.
Guess again.
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
They're in the playoffs largely due to making a good coaching hire. Varly didn't get them anywhere near the playoffs the last two seasons.
It doesn't matter. Keeping him wasn't one of the two actual options.
I've already explained that any mishandling of Varlamov was Boudreau's and not McPhee's. Varlamov's arrogant reaction was also exceptional and inappropriate.
I see, the trade didn't immediately pan out so the final grade was issued in 2012? Please.
You don't imagine the coach riding Varly for 60 games had anything to do with it?
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
It had something to do with it, sure, but it wasn't the deciding factor. Big years from Duchene, O'Reilly, and Stastny had just as much of an effect, if not more.
We get it, you're going to re-write history to fit your narrative of McPhee bashing.
Because Boudreau gives out the contracts?
This is one of those "back yourself into a corner then get praised for escaping the ensuing fight" sort of scenarios.
GMGM not being on the same page as his coaches is not something that he should get excused for.
History isn't static. The grades on trades takes years to write, not on the day they are made, just like draft picks. As of now, GMGM made the wrong call on Varly, Colorado's GM made the right call. The more Varly wins, and the less we get out of that return, which as of right now is about nothing, the worse this trade will get.
Ad
Latest posts
-
GDT: ECSF: Game 3 - New York Rangers @ Carolina Hurricanes, 7pm ET, TNT- Latest: Chalfdiggity3
-
-
Upcoming events
-
Game 2 Dallas Mavericks @ Oklahoma City Thunder - OKC leads series 1-0Wagers: 5Staked: $1,505.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 2 Colorado Avalanche @ Dallas Stars - COL leads 1-0Wagers: 14Staked: $32,982.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-