Confirmed Signing with Link: [OTT] F Claude Giroux signs with the Senators (3 years, $6.5M AAV)

[Boss Man Hughes]

That's not correct. We had 2 NHL caliber goalies in Forsberg and Talbot (who has since shat himself) and both got injured - one RIGHT after the trade deadline. We've used 7 goalies this year - do you think that was for the f*** of it?

Forsberg and Talbot are not playoff calibre goaltenders.
There was nothing wrong with the signing. When you are a team like Montreal or Ottawa that FA's generally won't sign with you don't pass up a player that wants to. Need to go for it though because he doesn't have many good years left.

 

[EpochLink]

G likes playing at home, close to his family.

 

[SpezDispenser]

Forsberg and Talbot are not playoff calibre goaltenders.
There was nothing wrong with the signing. When you are a team like Montreal or Ottawa that FA's generally won't sign with you don't pass up a player that wants to. Need to go for it though because he doesn't have many good years left.

That's not fair to say about Talbot. He was good until he shat himself this year.

 

[Ovi895]

Given where the Sens were/are in their rebuild, it was a gross overpay in that it didn't result in any meaningful games this spring

That's the part you guys seem to be having difficulty understanding

Giroux scored a lot of points for a team that will play 0 playoff games this season, so how could that be seen a wise investment from the Senators?

Devils and Seattle both finished worse than the Sens last year. Was it wrong for them to acquire veteran players as well?

Did you anticipate the Sens missing a 35 goal top 6 center for the entire season and their best defensive defenseman for half a season when they signed Giroux?

Do you think teams should just avoid getting better and avoid good players willing to sign discounted deals until they magically know that this is their year and then just go all in?

 

[Neutrinos]

Devils and Seattle both finished worse than the Sens last year. Was it wrong for them to acquire veteran players as well?

Did you anticipate the Sens missing a 35 goal top 6 center for the entire season and their best defensive defenseman for half a season when they signed Giroux?

Do you think teams should just avoid getting better and avoid good players willing to sign discounted deals until they magically know that this is their year and then just go all in?

From post #523...

As a general rule, I don't think it's a good idea for a GM of a young team to declare "the rebuild is over" and start committing significant cap space to players on the wrong side of their prime before the team has proven on the ice that they're a veteran player like that away from being a legit contender.


Norris may have scored 35 goals last season, but he had just 2 goals, 1 assist in 8 games before his injury

Matthews scored 60 last year, but just 40 this season, should we keep calling him a "60 goal top line center"?

And Zub played 53 games, so he missed about 1/3 of the season

If a team can't make the playoffs because they lost Norris for the season, and Zub for 29 games, then they likely weren't serious Cup contenders to begin with

Colorado made the playoffs despite missing Landeskog for the entire season, and Makar only playing 60 games


I was very critical of New Jersey's signing of Palat, whose 8 goals and 23 points in 49 games has had little to do with the team's success, and Seattle's roster was built to compete immediately, so they weren't a rebuilding team

 

[Deadpool8812]

I remember before the start of the season there was a GM that commented something along the lines of "Bringing in Claude Giroux's character is the worst thing for the sens locker room."

I feel bad for whoever's GM that is.

That was probably Chuck Fletcher

 

[NyQuil]

I've never accused anyone of being a troll simply for having a different opinion than me, nor do I feel the need to make the discussion about them rather than staying on topic... probably because I'm not emotionally invested in such things

I said I didn't like the signing because the Sens weren't ready to contend, and here they are sitting outside of the playoffs despite a fantastic season from Giroux

If you're happy with the signing, that's great! I'm happy you're happy... but it doesn't change my thoughts on the matter


I'll see myself out...

It’s one thing to say they shouldn’t have signed him - it’s another to say that he was overpriced and that 3 years at $3M a year is a reasonable offer for a guy who ended up scoring 35 goals and 79 points.

That’s beyond opinion into nonsense territory.

 

[3074326]

Matthews scored 60 last year, but just 40 this season, should we keep calling him a "60 goal top line center"?

That's how it works

 

[Neutrinos]

It’s one thing to say they shouldn’t have signed him - it’s another to say that he was overpriced and that 3 years at $3M a year is a reasonable offer for a guy who ended up scoring 35 goals and 79 points.

That’s beyond opinion into nonsense territory.

And I think it's nonsense for a non-contending team to be signing a 34 year old to a 6.5 million cap hit

There's no right or wrong here, it's simply a matter of differing philosophies when it comes to how a team should be constructed

Just accept someone sees things differently, and agree to disagree

 

[dirtydanglez]

wish he went to colorado and got his cup.

 

[BondraTime]

And I think it's nonsense for a non-contending team to be signing a 34 year old to a 6.5 million cap hit

There's no right or wrong here, it's simply a matter of differing philosophies when it comes to how a team should be constructed

Just accept someone sees things differently, and agree to disagree

Theres absolutely a right and a wrong here, it’s extremely, extremely evident.

 

[Neutrinos]

Theres absolutely a right and a wrong here, it’s extremely, extremely evident.

There's

 

[Ovi895]

From post #523...

As a general rule, I don't think it's a good idea for a GM of a young team to declare "the rebuild is over" and start committing significant cap space to players on the wrong side of their prime before the team has proven on the ice that they're a veteran player like that away from being a legit contender.


Norris may have scored 35 goals last season, but he had just 2 goals, 1 assist in 8 games before his injury

Matthews scored 60 last year, but just 40 this season, should we keep calling him a "60 goal top line center"?

And Zub played 53 games, so he missed about 1/3 of the season

If a team can't make the playoffs because they lost Norris for the season, and Zub for 29 games, then they likely weren't serious Cup contenders to begin with

Colorado made the playoffs despite missing Landeskog for the entire season, and Makar only playing 60 games


I was very critical of New Jersey's signing of Palat, whose 8 goals and 23 points in 49 games has had little to do with the team's success, and Seattle's roster was built to compete immediately, so they weren't a rebuilding team

So a GM has to have prophetic knowledge about which players will get injured, slump or regress before signing any vet to a deal? Which players can be injured for how long for it to be wise vs not wise? Does Colorado still make the playoffs if they lose MacKinnon for the season instead of Landeskog? If not, then they shouldn't be acquiring anybody since a single injury may turn them into playoff missing fools, correct?

Seattle finished bottom 5 last year, but sure, they were built to be more competitive than Ottawa. Never mind that Ottawa had better top end talent on both offense and defense as of the end of last year

 

[Rebels57]

102 points in 100 regular season games, at 34-35 years old, since leaving the shitshow Flyers.

Hopefully next season is the one this Ottawa team gets into the Playoffs. They took a step forward this season for sure.

 

[captainpaxil]

102 points in 100 regular season games, at 34-35 years old, since leaving the shitshow Flyers.

Hopefully next season is the one this Ottawa team gets into the Playoffs. They took a step forward this season for sure.

Giroux has a habit of hard carrying teams to the playoffs. He'd have been disastrous for Philly's rebuild. Hopefully g is in the playoffs and the flyers are in the lottery next year

102 points in 100 regular season games, at 34-35 years old, since leaving the shitshow Flyers.

Hopefully next season is the one this Ottawa team gets into the Playoffs. They took a step forward this season for sure.

Giroux has a habit of hard carrying teams to the playoffs. He'd have been disastrous for Philly's rebuild. Hopefully g is in the playoffs and the flyers are in the lottery next year

 

[PlayersLtd]

From post #523...

As a general rule, I don't think it's a good idea for a GM of a young team to declare "the rebuild is over" and start committing significant cap space to players on the wrong side of their prime before the team has proven on the ice that they're a veteran player like that away from being a legit contender.


Norris may have scored 35 goals last season, but he had just 2 goals, 1 assist in 8 games before his injury

Matthews scored 60 last year, but just 40 this season, should we keep calling him a "60 goal top line center"?

And Zub played 53 games, so he missed about 1/3 of the season

If a team can't make the playoffs because they lost Norris for the season, and Zub for 29 games, then they likely weren't serious Cup contenders to begin with

Colorado made the playoffs despite missing Landeskog for the entire season, and Makar only playing 60 games


I was very critical of New Jersey's signing of Palat, whose 8 goals and 23 points in 49 games has had little to do with the team's success, and Seattle's roster was built to compete immediately, so they weren't a rebuilding team

Who in their right mind claimed we were serious contenders? WIth Norris and one of our goalies staying healthy this team likely squeaks into the playoffs and that would have been exceeding most expectations, particularly those set out by our GM.

Since we are playing the long game and building experience has been a stated goal having a veteran around for that, and there to grow with for two more years, absolutely made sense.

If you know anything you know that there isn't one blueprint for a rebuild or building a winner. PD chose to add a specific veteran to the lineup before we were ready to go on a run because:

A/ He was available and maybe wouldn't have been had we not jumped on it
B/ He wanted to come here, a very rare feeling for an organization that desperately needed to sell hope
C/ Leadership. Brady broke out this year but there was risk of not having much a rudder to the squad during a very important season.
D/ We had cap space.

This isn't the NBA where you build a winner in a season. I very much think that the teams that are able to grow together over an extended period are the best positioned to contend. I think its ideal that CG was here this season and has been able to build a connection with the team and city before the penultimate years, not sure how you argue against that (if in fact you are).

 

[PALE PWNR]

i was told he was on the decline?

so were Flyers fans

 

[MoneyManny]

Given where the Sens were/are in their rebuild, it was a gross overpay in that it didn't result in any meaningful games this spring

That's the part you guys seem to be having difficulty understanding

Giroux scored a lot of points for a team that will play 0 playoff games this season, so how could that be seen a wise investment from the Senators?

Cheap, short term contract that came for free... I fail to see where's the overpay? There's litterally only upside to Giroux's signing.

He's a big name hometown boy for Ottawa fans to enjoy and he just had a good season, weird stance you have on this.

 

[mja]

Given where the Sens were/are in their rebuild, it was a gross overpay in that it didn't result in any meaningful games this spring

That's the part you guys seem to be having difficulty understanding

Giroux scored a lot of points for a team that will play 0 playoff games this season, so how could that be seen a wise investment from the Senators?

You're straining yourself awfully hard to make any of this sound even remotely coherent.

First of all, playoff games this season is not the be all end all of this. I mean, if Giroux plays at a comparable level for the next two years and the Sens make a couple of promising playoff runs, that somehow doesn't matter?

I don't even know if playoff games is the ultimate measure of whether or not this was a good investment. If Giroux helps Stüztle & Tkachuk, etc. become better pros longterm, and if his signing helps establish Ottawa as a destination of choice for higher end free agents, all of which helps them win playoff games down the line, then it will have been a wise investment regardless of what they do during the contract. And Giroux might not be finished for a while yet, he could well be a useful player on a contender into his 40's, because his brains and hands (his two elite tools, along with competitiveness) aren't leaving him absent a major injury.

You're entitled to your perspective on this but you're just wrong, and I wish people in general were more ok with being wrong rather than needing to double and triple down to try to save some face.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

There's

did you seriously correct him for that?

 

[Dr Beinfest]

Devils and Seattle both finished worse than the Sens last year. Was it wrong for them to acquire veteran players as well?

Did you anticipate the Sens missing a 35 goal top 6 center for the entire season and their best defensive defenseman for half a season when they signed Giroux?

Do you think teams should just avoid getting better and avoid good players willing to sign discounted deals until they magically know that this is their year and then just go all in?

This x100. And I’d go further and say any net positive contract for any team rebuilding is a positive. Giroux is worth that value. It’s a short contract, it might not be great for the last year. It might also be that he’s doing fine and he accepts a trade in the last year for a contender and nets Ottawa a 1st round pick. It might also be that Ottawa is a contender by then, and Ottawa doesn’t need to acquire a high end face-off specialist for a playoff run.

Im failing to see what negative there is in this… what, Ottawa doesn’t suck enough to get a better pick, I guess.

 

[Laus723]

And I think it's nonsense for a non-contending team to be signing a 34 year old to a 6.5 million cap hit

There's no right or wrong here, it's simply a matter of differing philosophies when it comes to how a team should be constructed

Just accept someone sees things differently, and agree to disagree

Imo you’re taking away what Giroux can teach the young players, it’s an investment in the future as much as it is the now. Jagr helped Huberdeau and Barkov in ways that’s still paying off for the Panthers, he helped how they play and how they prepare and got them to the next level. In Huby’s case it added to his trade value.

 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

so were Flyers fans

Nah, that was Flyers management.

 

[KevinRedkey]

Great signing thus far. 1 random HF memberwith a history of bad takes saying otherwise doesn't change that.

 

[BKarchitect]

Giroux has been stellar. He performed well above his cap hit this year…still in every sense a true line driving all around star.

As he ages into his 36 and 37 seasons he can easily sustain a natural aging in his performance and still be well worth that contract - especially as a leader on a young team on the verge of making some noise.

I suspect Giroux will age really well though, much like Pavelski who is still a star at a 38. This one of other no-brainer “win” signings of the summer.