No QO for Pirri

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Qualify him and use the pressure of just how ugly arbitration is to sign him to a reasonable contract. Give him a qualifying offer then flip him for a pick somewhere that could use him. I'm not sure I see the point of even spending the 6th on him if there was never any intention of qualifying him, considering he was injured when the trade was made.

There's nothing remotely like him in the system. The team will be worse again next year in all likelihood, unless our streaky players decide to not be streaky again.

You have that pretty much backwards. The team isn't going to be able to use arbitration as pressure to sign a better deal, that's ridiculous. Their camp would use it to sign a greatly inflated one, it's probably why quite a few names didn't get a QO. In Pirri's case, who knows what he would've gotten, but it almost certainly would've been well more than his worth. Now they don't have that leverage, and even UFA brings less.

If they're moving on, it probably would've been better to get something, but I doubt he has much value. He had little value in March and didn't really do anything to boost it.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Considering we split Getzlaf and Perry and had a big gaping hole on Getzlaf's right wing all year I think he would have done ok...

He just needed a consistent opportunity to play RW on a scoring line and to catch a break and not get hurt. Plenty of posters on this forum could see it was only a matter of time before he broke out. Unfortunately he did it in NJ and not here.

And for those ripping his one bad post season, he was clearly playing through something. Compare how he looked then compared to how he looked in December, he was slower and his shoulder looked completely off. Before last season he had one very good and one decent playoff showing with limited ice time.

He was given a consistent opportunity on a scoring line, he just didn't do a whole lot with it. It's pretty telling when people just assume he was left off the top two lines, when that actually wasn't the case.

More than anything his jump in production was due to staying healthy and getting more PP time.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

You really like Pirri at 4 mil?

That can go to bringing back Perron.

Please. He wouldn't score four million in arbitration.

 

[mightyquack]

Pretty disappointing, would have been pretty cheap production to have which you would think BM would value given the financial situation at the moment. Guess not.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

Pretty disappointing, would have been pretty cheap production to have which you would think BM would value given the financial situation at the moment. Guess not.

Maybe we can still resign him. Murray just doesn't seem okay with arbitration.

 

[mightyquack]

Maybe we can still resign him. Murray just doesn't seem okay with arbitration.

Could be, and I hope that's the case as Pirri would be a very useful player for us. But I remember the same arguments after MP wasn't given a QO. Fool me once...

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

Please. He wouldn't score four million in arbitration.

He had a shot at 3, so up until this point I wouldn't have even blamed his camp for refusing to take anything reasonable.

Didn't realize you could only walk away from awards that were quite high. I definitely can't blame the Ducks for doing this, then, although I suspect they might just be moving on.

 

[mytduxfan*]

I don't consider Getzlaf a reliable goal scorer, especially without a complementary player. I don't consider Silfverberg a reliable goal scorer at all. Yet. Way too streaky. Same with Rakell, who's no good unless he's with Getzlaf and/or Perry. Kesler is a goal scorer when he wants to be, but not when he goes into troll mode.

So you don't consider Getzlaf, Silfverberg, Rakell or Kesler to be consistent goal scorers, but you're insistent on having Pirri back and you feel moving Palms, arguably our most inconsistent scoring forward, was mistake? Again, I think you have a selective memory. None of the guys you listed were "consistent" scorers apart from maybe Perron and McGinn who were here for what 30 and 20 games respectively and were in contract years i.e. small sample size from guys trying to impress before their next contract.

I think your idea of what this team should have been is significantly worse then the team we currently have today.

I'm judging him for losing all those players, not for the individual moves. This roster is nowhere near the offensive juggernaut it was a couple years ago, and he's already made the goaltending worse (not that he had a choice, and I mean that whoever replaces Andersen won't be remotely as good as him), and he's about to make the defense worse if he ships out Fowler.

Why are you criticising a guy who is being forced to move players because of cap/salary? You know the situation, so why use it as a negative towards BM? Moving out Andersen was totally justified. I mean, you seriously seem to be suggesting that BM should be able to add without substracting and that his inability to do so makes him a bad GM.

When you write stuff this this, I don't know what you're expecting tbh. Go and tot up the contracts of all the guys you listed and see how much they come to. I'm sure it comes out being far more then we could afford moving forward. So what's the problem? BM moved out guys who we couldn't afford and the kept guys he wanted - guys with better 2-way games. I don't have a problem with it at all. I mean, are you seriously suggesting that BM should have moved Getzlaf and Silf, two inconsistent scorers in your eyes, to keep Beleskey, Perreault and Bones on the books? That would have been a completely foolish decision by BM and I'm glad he's GM and not you.

Ritchie is likely another year away from being an actual top 6 player, and there's no way we can afford Eriksson IMO. That roster to me does not compare favorably with San Jose or any of the top teams in the Central.

So that line-up "does not compare favourably with San Jose or any of the top teams in the Central", but a line-up with Beleskey, Perreault, Palms and no Silf or Getzlaf does? Give me a break man. You're talking **** now. That line-up matches up very well against the top teams in the league. If you don't think so then I question your judgement (not that I haven't done so already based on the rest of your post).

Beleskey, a bad version of Palms, Perreault and Pirri weren't game changers on this team. They were complimentary pieces to a team backboned by guys like Getzlaf, Perry, Kesler, and Silfverberg... you don't move out the backbone of your team to accommodate the inflated contracts of complimentary pieces. That would be completely foolish.

Qualify him and use the pressure of just how ugly arbitration is to sign him to a reasonable contract. Give him a qualifying offer then flip him for a pick somewhere that could use him. I'm not sure I see the point of even spending the 6th on him if there was never any intention of qualifying him, considering he was injured when the trade was made.

There's nothing remotely like him in the system. The team will be worse again next year in all likelihood, unless our streaky players decide to not be streaky again.

Look, simple fact, if Getzlaf, Perry, Kesler, Rakell and Silf don't score, we aren't winning ****. That rule applies across the board to all teams. In CHI, if Toews, Kane, Panarin, Anisimov and Hossa don't score, they aren't winning ****. In SJ, if Thornton, Marleau, Pavelski, Couture, Ward and Hertl don't score, they aren't winning ****.

Pirri isn't removing a rule that applies across the league, nor is he as good a player as you seem to suggest. He's an inconsistent goal scorer who doesn't provide much else. Sounds like a guy you'd want to avoid given your comments regarding Getzlaf.

 

[Paul4587]

Now that I realize there is a rule where we cant't walk away from him I completely back this move. Makes sense why so many other guys weren't qualified also.

He was given a consistent opportunity on a scoring line, he just didn't do a whole lot with it. It's pretty telling when people just assume he was left off the top two lines, when that actually wasn't the case.

More than anything his jump in production was due to staying healthy and getting more PP time.

He was getting a consistent opportunity for a while besides Kesler and Beleskey and he was producing well there. Then he got hurt again, wasn't the same after that and Silfverberg went on one of his torrid tears and displaced him. He produced at a 20 goal, 40 point pace in 2 of the last 3 seasons he had here despite not having huge amounts of time on ice.

 

[Duck Off]

2012-13 - 42GP - 10G - 21PTS = 2.38 PTS/60
2013-14 - 71GP - 14G - 31PTS = 2.22 PTS/60
2014-15 - 57GP - 14G - 29PTS = 1.51 PTS/60

1. No real progression in terms of production,
2. Wasn't fitting well with is line-mates,
3. Couldn't play LW, but couldn't break the top 6 on the RW,
4. Abysmal playoff showing scoring 1G and 3A in 16GP,
5. Got absolutely smashed to pieces against WPG and CHI,

I could go on...

It's all well and good being captain hindsight here, but Palms was very "meh" during last season and that's exemplified by his reduced PTS/60. You say "he shouldn't have been traded for futures"... what kind of player do you really think we return with Palms, a guy best described as a 3rd line goal scoring winger who cannot defend and will often disappear for long periods... oh, and he got absolutely smashed in the playoffs and was a complete no-show offensively. The return for Palms was slightly cheap, but he wasn't returning an impact player, that's for sure.

IMO, at best, maybe you could criticise BM for moving him a year too early. However, it is totally wishful thinking if you believe that Palms would have been a 30 goal scorer here... totally wishful thinking. He's flourished in the East where speed and skill are king. I don't blame BM for that.

I'm not being "captain hindsight" at all because I said the exact same thing when Palmieri was traded. As I said, I was okay with Palmieri being traded, if it was as part of a package for a better winger. Why was I okay with this? Because of reasons you mentioned. However, Murray should know that our team lacked finishers in general (again, Murray knew that Beleskey could walk). Call Palmieri what you want, but he was one. He wasn't great on the left side, but if Murray had ANY conversations with Bruce in the off-season, he'd know that Bruce wanted 3 scoring lines. This left a vacant spot on Getzlaf's right wing. That would have been the perfect spot for Palmieri.

I didn't say I thought/think he'd be a 30 goal scorer here. What I will say is that he'd have been a hell of a lot better option that the worthless POS known as Stewart.

There's no defending this trade.

He was moved too early.
He was moved for pieces we didn't need.
There was a spot on the roster we could have used him. Trading him made us have to use guys like Stewart, Garbutt, and Santo in places they don't belong.
He wasn't expensive.

I could go on, but the point is clear.

I don't blame Murray for Palmieri's success. What I blame him for is listed above. Absolutely zero reason to trade Palmieri for future pieces last off-season.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

I'm not being "captain hindsight" at all because I said the exact same thing when Palmieri was traded. As I said, I was okay with Palmieri being traded, if it was as part of a package for a better winger. Why was I okay with this? Because of reasons you mentioned. However, Murray should know that our team lacked finishers in general (again, Murray knew that Beleskey could walk). Call Palmieri what you want, but he was one. He wasn't great on the left side, but if Murray had ANY conversations with Bruce in the off-season, he'd know that Bruce wanted 3 scoring lines. This left a vacant spot on Getzlaf's right wing. That would have been the perfect spot for Palmieri.

I didn't say I thought/think he'd be a 30 goal scorer here. What I will say is that he'd have been a hell of a lot better option that the worthless POS known as Stewart.

There's no defending this trade.

He was moved too early.
He was moved for pieces we didn't need.
There was a spot on the roster we could have used him. Trading him made us have to use guys like Stewart, Garbutt, and Santo in places they don't belong.
He wasn't expensive.

I could go on, but the point is clear.

I don't blame Murray for Palmieri's success. What I blame him for is listed above. Absolutely zero reason to trade Palmieri for future pieces last off-season.

Last summer was probably Murray's worst. He made a lot of mistakes. Although it's very early, at least so far it doesn't appear that he's learned from him. In some ways, Murray is fortunate that the team started so horrendously, so that the blame could more easily be shifted to the players.

 

[70sSanO]

I'm not sure Pirri is really that much better than just brining up a prospect. Pirri is a career 50 goal scorer so let's not make him out to be a player that will be a true goal scorer. He is probably a decent forward, but if Brandon Pirri is the answer, we are in more trouble than anyone can imagine.

BM has done a good job based on how much his hands were tied. He has made some really good moves and not so good like any other GM. The Ducks are in this situation because he probably overpaid a bit for Perry and Getzlaf and is saddled with Bieksa's NMC contract (probably the worst signing BM has ever done). I was never a big Patrick Maroon fan, but he was a serviceable forward and would fit into Carlyle's style. Letting him go for nothing was a big mistake.

The main problem with BM is that he doesn't have any set direction of how to build the team. He is truly a human weather vane. One minute we need size and the next we need speed and the next ???. And don't forget he was mentored by Brian Burke who wrote the book on the revolving door roster. I think in 2007/2008 the team used velcro to attach players names so they could recycle jerseys easier.

The Ducks need to stop just signing players to see if they will stick and really assess what type of team they have and what they need to support their core. Their core isn't going anywhere. When it comes to Pirri, I'm not sure where he fits on this team beyond how he looks on paper.

John

 

[mytduxfan*]

I'm not being "captain hindsight" at all because I said the exact same thing when Palmieri was traded. As I said, I was okay with Palmieri being traded, if it was as part of a package for a better winger. Why was I okay with this? Because of reasons you mentioned. However, Murray should know that our team lacked finishers in general (again, Murray knew that Beleskey could walk). Call Palmieri what you want, but he was one. He wasn't great on the left side, but if Murray had ANY conversations with Bruce in the off-season, he'd know that Bruce wanted 3 scoring lines. This left a vacant spot on Getzlaf's right wing. That would have been the perfect spot for Palmieri.

I didn't say I thought/think he'd be a 30 goal scorer here. What I will say is that he'd have been a hell of a lot better option that the worthless POS known as Stewart.

There's no defending this trade.

He was moved too early.
He was moved for pieces we didn't need.
There was a spot on the roster we could have used him. Trading him made us have to use guys like Stewart, Garbutt, and Santo in places they don't belong.
He wasn't expensive.

I could go on, but the point is clear.

I don't blame Murray for Palmieri's success. What I blame him for is listed above. Absolutely zero reason to trade Palmieri for future pieces last off-season.

True, trading Palms and then replacing him with Stewart was a bad move. I think the trade can be justified (Palms playoff showing alone is enough for me - I've got no time for guys looking to getting carried), but I guess you're right that BM didn't exactly replace him with anything better and probably made the team worse in picking up Stewart. Ok, you've convinced me, BM ****ed up big on the Palms trade.

Pleasure doing business with you.

 

[Ducks DVM]

You have that pretty much backwards. The team isn't going to be able to use arbitration as pressure to sign a better deal, that's ridiculous. Their camp would use it to sign a greatly inflated one, it's probably why quite a few names didn't get a QO. In Pirri's case, who knows what he would've gotten, but it almost certainly would've been well more than his worth. Now they don't have that leverage, and even UFA brings less.

If they're moving on, it probably would've been better to get something, but I doubt he has much value. He had little value in March and didn't really do anything to boost it.

No, quite a few players sign before the actual arbitration occurs, with a contract less than what arbitration would give them. Sometimes they get traded the next day. From Anaheim.

Arbitration is ugly.

 

[Ducks DVM]

So you don't consider Getzlaf, Silfverberg, Rakell or Kesler to be consistent goal scorers, but you're insistent on having Pirri back and you feel moving Palms, arguably our most inconsistent scoring forward, was mistake? Again, I think you have a selective memory. None of the guys you listed were "consistent" scorers apart from maybe Perron and McGinn who were here for what 30 and 20 games respectively and were in contract years i.e. small sample size from guys trying to impress before their next contract.

I think your idea of what this team should have been is significantly worse then the team we currently have today.



Why are you criticising a guy who is being forced to move players because of cap/salary? You know the situation, so why use it as a negative towards BM? Moving out Andersen was totally justified. I mean, you seriously seem to be suggesting that BM should be able to add without substracting and that his inability to do so makes him a bad GM.

When you write stuff this this, I don't know what you're expecting tbh. Go and tot up the contracts of all the guys you listed and see how much they come to. I'm sure it comes out being far more then we could afford moving forward. So what's the problem? BM moved out guys who we couldn't afford and the kept guys he wanted - guys with better 2-way games. I don't have a problem with it at all. I mean, are you seriously suggesting that BM should have moved Getzlaf and Silf, two inconsistent scorers in your eyes, to keep Beleskey, Perreault and Bones on the books? That would have been a completely foolish decision by BM and I'm glad he's GM and not you.



So that line-up "does not compare favourably with San Jose or any of the top teams in the Central", but a line-up with Beleskey, Perreault, Palms and no Silf or Getzlaf does? Give me a break man. You're talking **** now. That line-up matches up very well against the top teams in the league. If you don't think so then I question your judgement (not that I haven't done so already based on the rest of your post).

Beleskey, a bad version of Palms, Perreault and Pirri weren't game changers on this team. They were complimentary pieces to a team backboned by guys like Getzlaf, Perry, Kesler, and Silfverberg... you don't move out the backbone of your team to accommodate the inflated contracts of complimentary pieces. That would be completely foolish.



Look, simple fact, if Getzlaf, Perry, Kesler, Rakell and Silf don't score, we aren't winning ****. That rule applies across the board to all teams. In CHI, if Toews, Kane, Panarin, Anisimov and Hossa don't score, they aren't winning ****. In SJ, if Thornton, Marleau, Pavelski, Couture, Ward and Hertl don't score, they aren't winning ****.

Pirri isn't removing a rule that applies across the league, nor is he as good a player as you seem to suggest. He's an inconsistent goal scorer who doesn't provide much else. Sounds like a guy you'd want to avoid given your comments regarding Getzlaf.

I don't have the time or inclination to address all of this, but it boils down to this - the bolded is correct. If we had a few more goal scorers, it wouldn't be. Against Dallas a couple years ago, it wasn't. You've created a bunch of nonsense I never suggested about who else to move.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

No, quite a few players sign before the actual arbitration occurs, with a contract less than what arbitration would give them. Sometimes they get traded the next day. From Anaheim.

Arbitration is ugly.

OK none of that addresses how the team would ever be able to pressure Pirri using arbitration. He elects for it, and gains a ton of leverage in doing so. Of course it's ugly, and players want to avoid it, but it's to their benefit, not the team's(except when they elect for it, which isn't common).

 

[Ducks DVM]

OK none of that addresses how the team would ever be able to pressure Pirri using arbitration. He elects for it, and gains a ton of leverage in doing so. Of course it's ugly, and players want to avoid it, but it's to their benefit, not the team's(except when they elect for it, which isn't common).

I never said or implied the team would force him to arbitration. I was pretty obviously referring to what the team should tell him about what he was getting into if HE elects for it. Will he get more than the 900K BM wants to pay him? Yes. Will he take less than an arbitration award? Most likely. (And some of the numbers getting used here are beyond straw man levels. 4M?)

 

[mytduxfan*]

I don't have the time or inclination to address all of this, but it boils down to this - the bolded is correct. If we had a few more goal scorers, it wouldn't be. Against Dallas a couple years ago, it wasn't. You've created a bunch of nonsense I never suggested about who else to move.

That's just not true. If multiple core guys don't perform, you're onto a stinker of a season regardless of what depth scoring you have.

I didn't create anything. I just don't buy your doom and gloom attitude that Getzlaf, Kesler, Silfverberg and Rakell aren't "reliable" goal scorers (or as comparably unreliable as everyone else in the league aside from Ovechkin) and that it would have been better to keep depth scoring guys like Pirri, Perreault, Beleseky and Palms (at the time) likely at the expense of some of those former players. We can only have so many contracts, we can only have so much salary, we can only have so many players in the same role. BM has made some tough decisions. He's not been correct on all of them, but he also hasn't released every single goal scorer we every had and created a team full of unreliable goal scorers bar Perry. That, my friend, is pure nonsense.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

That's just not true. If multiple core guys don't perform, you're onto a stinker of a season regardless of what depth scoring you have.

I didn't create anything. I just don't buy your doom and gloom attitude that Getzlaf, Kesler, Silfverberg and Rakell aren't "reliable" goal scorers (or as comparably unreliable as everyone else in the league aside from Ovechkin) and that it would have been better to keep depth scoring guys like Pirri, Perreault, Beleseky and Palms (at the time) likely at the expense of some of those former players. We can only have so many contracts, we can only have so much salary, we can only have so many players in the same role. BM has made some tough decisions. He's not been correct on all of them, but he also hasn't released every single goal scorer we every had and created a team full of unreliable goal scorers bar Perry. That, my friend, is pure nonsense.

You're TJMing hard. I guess we need one every summer. "If our core fails we won't win anyway, so who needs depth!" That's what you're reduced to arguing now.

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

I never said or implied the team would force him to arbitration. I was pretty obviously referring to what the team should tell him about what he was getting into if HE elects for it. Will he get more than the 900K BM wants to pay him? Yes. Will he take less than an arbitration award? Most likely. (And some of the numbers getting used here are beyond straw man levels. 4M?)

Considering his scoring rates and comparable, 4 might be much but probably not much issue scoring 3, and that's due to his lack of experience. So while he might settle for less than that, to avoid the mess and be safe, how much less? Still probably won't be all that reasonable. Doubt he'd settle for a number starting with a 1, and anything else IMO is unreasonable.

You never implied they'd force him, but a team using the hearing as leverage is quite ridiculous, and in this case, wouldn't work at all.

 

[Ducks DVM]

Considering his scoring rates and comparable, 4 might be much but probably not much issue scoring 3, and that's due to his lack of experience. So while he might settle for less than that, to avoid the mess and be safe, how much less? Still probably won't be all that reasonable. Doubt he'd settle for a number starting with a 1, and anything else IMO is unreasonable.

You never implied they'd force him, but a team using the hearing as leverage is quite ridiculous, and in this case, wouldn't work at all.

I honestly don't think he'd get to 3, but I haven't looked. My whole point with my post was to point out the trend of letting goal scorers go every summer and then try to find them on the cheap somewhere, just to let them go again when you do find another gem.

Has anyone actually looked for comparables or is everyone just staying in a hardened position and supporting/not supporting the move?

 

[mytduxfan*]

You're TJMing hard. I guess we need one every summer. "If our core fails we won't win anyway, so who needs depth!" That's what you're reduced to arguing now.

I never said this.

"if the core guys don't perform, we won't win anything" ≠ "we don't need depth guys" - that's a leap in the argument you made, but I never said it.

Sauce was right, you're trying too hard. The attention seeking is starting to show.

 

[Ducks DVM]

That's just not true. If multiple core guys don't perform, you're onto a stinker of a season regardless of what depth scoring you have.

I didn't create anything. I just don't buy your doom and gloom attitude that Getzlaf, Kesler, Silfverberg and Rakell aren't "reliable" goal scorers (or as comparably unreliable as everyone else in the league aside from Ovechkin) and that it would have been better to keep depth scoring guys like Pirri, Perreault, Beleseky and Palms (at the time) likely at the expense of some of those former players. We can only have so many contracts, we can only have so much salary, we can only have so many players in the same role. BM has made some tough decisions. He's not been correct on all of them, but he also hasn't released every single goal scorer we every had and created a team full of unreliable goal scorers bar Perry. That, my friend, is pure nonsense.

"A lineup with no Getzlaf". Yeah, that's something I was clearly advocating.

Rakell has more season not being a goal scorer than being one, and has been ineffective without Perry or Getzlaf (and there's signs they see him as the 3C, and no commitment to RC running 3 lines), and which shooting % is his real one?

Silfverberg is the definition of streaky.

Kesler didn't manage squat until the second half of the season.

Getzlaf is about as far as you can get from a reliable goal scorer. He's still a pass-first guy, even when he states before the game he's looking to shoot more.

I really don't understand the aversion to depth scoring around here.

 

[mytduxfan*]

"A lineup with no Getzlaf". Yeah, that's something I was clearly advocating.

Rakell has more season not being a goal scorer than being one, and has been ineffective without Perry or Getzlaf (and there's signs they see him as the 3C, and no commitment to RC running 3 lines), and which shooting % is his real one?

Silfverberg is the definition of streaky.

Kesler didn't manage squat until the second half of the season.

Getzlaf is about as far as you can get from a reliable goal scorer. He's still a pass-first guy, even when he states before the game he's looking to shoot more.

I really don't understand the aversion to depth scoring around here.

I never said I didn't want depth scoring. My question is, how do you plan to pay for it though?

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

I honestly don't think he'd get to 3, but I haven't looked. My whole point with my post was to point out the trend of letting goal scorers go every summer and then try to find them on the cheap somewhere, just to let them go again when you do find another gem.

Has anyone actually looked for comparables or is everyone just staying in a hardened position and supporting/not supporting the move?

Pirri is no gem. For the right price I'd give him a shot again, but also realize it's likely you're bringing in someone later on to replace him. He has an amazing shot and not much else. Don't think he's all that comparable to Perreault or Palmieri.

He's also a tough guy to find a comparable for, due to his lack of games, but I'm guessing his team would show off his goal scoring rates, which are tremendous. ES G/60 over the last two years put's him in the same company as guys like Gallagher, Galchenyuk, Tatar, T.Johnson, Nelson and Jenner. PP G/60 and he's one of the leagues elite. Obviously more to a player than that, but tough numbers to ignore.