Revisiting the Schmidt “Decision”

Status
Not open for further replies.

Corby78

65 - 10 - 20
Jan 14, 2014
11,705
7,875
Ramstein Germany
From an outside the argument perspective: Neither of your arguments can be proven. Until the "tell all" books are written we don't know exactly what happened. Maybe all the pieces were right there and GMBM was lazy and stupid and fumbled everything. Maybe GMGM stonewalled the caps or flat out lied to us. Maybe Oshie and his agent had a deal early, but changed their mind and it caught GMBM unaware.

The bottom line is, unless someone with inside knowledge can shed light on what went on leading up to the draft, we don't know if this was screwed up, or if GMBM mitigated the damage on a no win situation. So lets move on.
 

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,433
14,292
From an outside the argument perspective: Neither of your arguments can be proven. Until the "tell all" books are written we don't know exactly what happened. Maybe all the pieces were right there and GMBM was lazy and stupid and fumbled everything. Maybe GMGM stonewalled the caps or flat out lied to us. Maybe Oshie and his agent had a deal early, but changed their mind and it caught GMBM unaware.

The bottom line is, unless someone with inside knowledge can shed light on what went on leading up to the draft, we don't know if this was screwed up, or if GMBM mitigated the damage on a no win situation. So lets move on.

Generally, yes. A bunch of us looking through contracts and cap hit pages trying to cobble together a fantasy lineup with a pdf of the relevant contract rules in place is totally superficial. We were not in the trenches.

But we do know something from those who were, and that was laid out in Katie's farewell grenade article at the end of GMGM's tenure. He was apparently a hard guy to deal with and had a bad reputation with agents. Does that mean we know for sure he was playing hardball with the Caps? No of course it's not "proof" or "evidence" in HF Court, but it's still an indication that the potential for difficult negotiations existed. The fact that GmBm said they made overtures but the prices were too high is another clue that McPhee was digging in his heels, at least for the Caps. And since some other teams appeared to get decent deals (while others didn't) you can reasonably wonder if there was anything at play beyond mere numbers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CapitalsCupFantasy

Hivemind

We're Touched
Oct 8, 2010
37,009
13,425
Philadelphia
Ok, what was Gmbm supposed to say? That they knew EXACTLY what those players would sign for? Of course they didn't know down to the dollar because nobody did and nobody could've known. Even the player agents didn't know for sure how it was going to end. As I said it depended on the market and that market was unique given the factors involved. They still probably had a good idea, and a better idea than any of us.

There's a pretty stark difference between not knowing the exact amounts, and ending up handcuffed and in a suboptimal expansion draft position because still had huge amounts of cost uncertainty.

When you're playing up against the cap you know a few bucks here and there can swing things wildly. Hive, you were one of the loudest voices complaining about TW being "overpaid" by $500K or whatever it was (still think so?) because of the potential usefulness of that half-million around the roster. Why does that same standard of little wiggle room not apply here? Do you really, honestly think that a GM with two drafts on his hands and massive unknowns around the league with motives/caps/farm systems of other teams should've been able to predict each new contract within a few bucks?

Once again, I never said a few bucks or exact amounts. While every penny is important, when you're talking about the general shape of the team you need to have a broader architecture in place. And when it comes to protecting 7F+3D+1G vs protecting 8 skaters + 1G, we're definitely talking about the overall team architecture. Especially when it comes to guys you already have penciled into important roles (like Nate Schmidt and Top 4 D) for the upcoming season, as GMBM repeatedly laid out in pre-expansion press conferences.

And, yes, I still feel Tom Wilson's contract was over payment given the leverage he had at the time. If anything, the cap disaster of this past off-season has cemented that opinion further.

(oh and fwiw your link to your Kuz breakdown goes to a stats explanation page for chicago)
Yeah, I noticed that last night afterwards. Haven't been able to dig up the specific post I wanted to quote (the search function on the new layout is tedious), but here's a similar (albeit less detailed) post with similar logic:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/evgeny-kuznetsov.1887407/page-13#post-118430385

The later post also cited some more recent contracts (like Drouin's) to establish upper and lower bounds.
 

Ridley Simon

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
18,127
9,067
Marin County — SF Bay Area, CA
Returning to the conversation in this thread regarding the GMBM's handling of the expansion draft and off-season in a whole is moving the goalposts now? Really?

If you want to talk McPhee and nothing but McPhee, go ahead. I'm still waiting for a shred of evidence to support your claim. You have a narrative, but literally zero evidence to support it. Not a single article, quote, blog post, twitter comment, etc. The burden of proof is upon you here.

If anyone is moving the goalposts here, it's you. "It's not about GMBM, it's about McPhee." "It's not about the expansion draft, it's about how the team is in first in the metro." "It's not about the Capitals, it's about the Penguins." Pathetic.

Pathetic? Shrug. Ok dude. We all know your Schtick here. “I’m right, you’re wrong”. I’m not going to get into name calling. Let’s keep it on point.

You are lambasting the Caps GM for his off-season. I have given you multiple reasons that I disagree with your assessment. You don’t like these reasons. Others agree with what I am saying, so it’s not as if I’m coming at this from total left field. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

Let’s simply ask this question then. What is the true measure of an off-season? Let’s see if we can find a common ground. Is it training camp? Is it opening night roster? Is it first Q of season? Half way point? End of season standings? Playoffs?

What?
 

Hivemind

We're Touched
Oct 8, 2010
37,009
13,425
Philadelphia
You are lambasting the Caps GM for his off-season. I have given you multiple reasons that I disagree with your assessment. You don’t like these reasons. Others agree with what I am saying, so it’s not as if I’m coming at this from total left field. Seems pretty straightforward to me.
The "reasons" you gave were entirely speculative and not backed by any evidence (McPhee's supposed vendetta) or were an appeal to the standings.


Let’s simply ask this question then. What is the true measure of an off-season? Let’s see if we can find a common ground. Is it training camp? Is it opening night roster? Is it first Q of season? Half way point? End of season standings? Playoffs?

What?
Honestly, I think subjective measurements would be the best here.

I'm not sure there is an objective measure of an off-season. Using the in-season standings to reflect on an off-season isn't a good metric, given that teams (save Vegas) aren't built in one off-season. Saying that the success of the 2017-18 Capitals rests entirely on the 2017 off-season is obviously not true, as essentially the entire core of the 2017-18 Capitals was around long before this previous off-season (and many were around before this GM even took over).

You could attempt to measure the difference in standings points between the two seasons that surround the off-season, but even that is ignoring a plethora of factors, such as player development, player aging, injuries, changes to other teams, etc.

Having a great off-season doesn't mean you will have a great season, just as having a bad off-season doesn't mean you will have a bad season. That doesn't mean a great season excuses a poor off-season, however. This is doubly true when you compare an off-season against both short and long term objectives for a franchise.
 

Ridley Simon

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
18,127
9,067
Marin County — SF Bay Area, CA
The "reasons" you gave were entirely speculative and not backed by any evidence (McPhee's supposed vendetta) or were an appeal to the standings.



Honestly, I think subjective measurements would be the best here.

I'm not sure there is an objective measure of an off-season. Using the in-season standings to reflect on an off-season isn't a good metric, given that teams (save Vegas) aren't built in one off-season. Saying that the success of the 2017-18 Capitals rests entirely on the 2017 off-season is obviously not true, as essentially the entire core of the 2017-18 Capitals was around long before this previous off-season (and many were around before this GM even took over).

You could attempt to measure the difference in standings points between the two seasons that surround the off-season, but even that is ignoring a plethora of factors, such as player development, player aging, injuries, changes to other teams, etc.

Having a great off-season doesn't mean you will have a great season, just as having a bad off-season doesn't mean you will have a bad season. That doesn't mean a great season excuses a poor off-season, however. This is doubly true when you compare an off-season against both short and long term objectives for a franchise.

So why are you complaining so much?

Look at what last years team would look like today, as far as salary cap. Something stupid like 25m over this years cap. So it’s obvious the team wasn’t going to stay together, and it would get blown up. Stating the simple, yes?

They were going to lose a lot of players. Check
They still were going to have a good team. Check
They have been able to field a team above preseason expectations. Check

Yet people like you to bitch about their off season and in season decisions, and/or the GM and the Coach.

Yet here they are at the halfway point, ahead of expectations, atop the Metro, and top 5 in the entire NHL. All while dealing with a lot more injuries. And trending up.

When does the rubber meet the actual road for guys like you? I would say now. You would say .....”well ackchyually”.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: g00n

Hivemind

We're Touched
Oct 8, 2010
37,009
13,425
Philadelphia
Are you seriously trying to claim because their current roster isn't full-on imploding that they had a good off-season? Really?

I'm not sure what's hard to grasp that they could have handled the off-season better than they did. I'm not sure what's hard to grasp that if they accurately predict their cap situation, they could have avoided losing Schmidt and possibly fetched an even larger return for Johansson. I'm not sure what's hard to grasp that their current standings placement is largely the result of building a nucleus that dates back roughly a decade, well before this most recent off-season.

Instead of having an all-situations D that can play 20+ minutes a night, they have a paper thin defense that is one injury away from completely unraveling (see what happened when Niskanen got hurt). it's a blessing that they're still among the healthier half of the league this season.

You would say .....”well ackchyually”.....

I thought you were above the name calling and were going to keep it on point?
 

Ridley Simon

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
18,127
9,067
Marin County — SF Bay Area, CA
Are you seriously trying to claim because their current roster isn't full-on imploding that they had a good off-season? Really?

I'm not sure what's hard to grasp that they could have handled the off-season better than they did. I'm not sure what's hard to grasp that if they accurately predict their cap situation, they could have avoided losing Schmidt and possibly fetched an even larger return for Johansson. I'm not sure what's hard to grasp that their current standings placement is largely the result of building a nucleus that dates back roughly a decade, well before this most recent off-season.

Instead of having an all-situations D that can play 20+ minutes a night, they have a paper thin defense that is one injury away from completely unraveling (see what happened when Niskanen got hurt). it's a blessing that they're still among the healthier half of the league this season.



I thought you were above the name calling and were going to keep it on point?

What’s so hard to grasp is your inane stance that they blew it. They could win the Cup this year, and you could still sit and argue that they screwed up by losing Schmidt. Good Lord man. Your assumptions on all these issues are just that....assumptions.

You wanted them to “accurately predict their cap situation”. The simple fact that your sit here, MONTHS afterwards and claim you saw it more clearly is hilarious. (have you ever recruited or hired people, Hive? Not just one here or there, but like 10 at a time in a few months period? Do you have ANY idea what that’s like? All the balls in the air??)

You wanted them to somehow make a deal w George. Like it was an obvious move, and the boobs that run the show totally blew it (you would’ve traded Grubs and our first to make it work, well...because)

You wanted them to trade Johansson before the expansion draft, as it was obvious they couldn’t keep him, and teams were not only desperate for him (due to the aforementioned full grasp of all 10 of their FA’s salary demands!), but definitely would have paid a lot more than just a 2nd and a 3rd. As already stated, the management team should have easily seen the costs of the free agents they wanted to keep. OBVIOUSLY.

Your stance here is.....well, people can read.

I’m happy with the team, their choices, and where they are. It could be a lot worse. They did well with who is still here, and what replacements they chose. I think they hit on about 90% of where they should be. That’s an A in my book. Maybe A-.

You seem to think a lot lower, and that the blew it. Peanut gallery’s have that right. So keep at it brother.
 
Last edited:

Hivemind

We're Touched
Oct 8, 2010
37,009
13,425
Philadelphia
What’s so hard to grasp is your inane stance that they blew it. They could win the Cup this year, and you could still sit and argue that they screwed up by losing Schmidt. Good Lord man. Your assumptions on all these issues are just that....assumptions.
Says the guy who ASSUMES McPhee wants to screw the Capitals. The difference is my assumptions have been backed up with additional evidence (quotations from management, numbers for contract comparables, etc).

You don't seem to understand the difference between process-oriented thinking and result-oriented thinking. You don't know the result in the off-season, you have to be process-oriented.

You wanted them to “accurately predict their cap situation”. The simple fact that your sit here, MONTHS afterwards and claim you saw it more clearly is hilarious. (have you ever recruited or hired people, Hive? Not just one here or there, but like 10 at a time in a few months period? Do you have ANY idea what that’s like? All the balls in the air??)
I never once claimed I saw it more clearly. In fact, I said quite the opposite in a previous post. GMBM should be held to a higher standard than myself or any message board poster. It's literally his job to see this in advance. He makes a 7-figure salary for a reason. Other GMs around the league were able to see their cap and expansion situations in advance, even those who were in a worse expansion position than Washington. Hell, Shero was able to read Washington's cap situation better than GMBM was, and got a cheap deal on Johansson as a result. GMBM needs to be held to the same standard of excellence.


You wanted them to somehow make a deal w George. Like it was an obvious move, and the boobs that run the show totally blew it (you would’ve traded Grubs and our first to make it work, well...because)
Where have I argued they should have made a deal with GMGM? Nowhere? Okay, moving on. Nice try at a complete straw man. Saying that those who think GMGM was trying to screw the Capitals have no evidence is not the same as saying that they should have been making a trade with Vegas. And your "Grubs and first" offer is a 100% a fabrication.

You wanted them to trade Johansson before the expansion draft, as it was obvious they couldn’t keep him, and teams were not only desperate for him (due to the aforementioned full grasp of all 10 of their FA’s salary demands!), but definitely would have paid a lot more than just a 2nd and a 3rd. As already stated, the management team should have easily seen the costs of the free agents they wanted to keep. OBVIOUSLY.
First off, stop misquoting me. I said "possibly" not "definitely." That's a VERY different meaning.

And, yes, management should have been able to foresee the ballpark costs of their free agents. Obviously. That's their job.
 

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,433
14,292
It's entirely possible they DID foresee the high prices as part of many possible scenarios that could play out, but did not have the ability to do anything about one or more eventualities, which created a string of moves. After the fact they are not going to say "we knew the prices could go as high as they did and we just refused to act". They are going to say the prices and market can change and dictate what happens. Isn't that part of the "process", while focusing on the net-net is "result oriented" thinking?

And isn't making moves based off of worst case scenarios potentially ruinous? The fallback from such plans is not always something better.

You seem upset because Mojo was sent packing and you think it could've been prevented. Added in is the fact Wilson was kept and protected as part of the deal while being "overpaid". You can say it's all about value and being held to a "higher standard" but on some level it may be bugging you that they valued Wilson over Mojo and may have goofed in the process. Warm?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CapitalsCupFantasy

traparatus

Registered User
Oct 19, 2012
2,845
3,049
I don't presume to know what someone else is thinking but the thing that bugs me about Johansson is that we traded 26 year old player under a sweetheart contract, coming of a 24g/58p season for the kind of return that teams get for a 3rd pair depth UFA d-man at the trade deadline.

The whole off-season was approached from a completely wrong angle. We had to get our cap situation under control long term. Pick one $5m+ long term contract and sacrifice him to the Cap gods. Who do we lose instead? Our cheapest d-man and our best value forward contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandyHolt

Hivemind

We're Touched
Oct 8, 2010
37,009
13,425
Philadelphia
You seem upset because Mojo was sent packing and you think it could've been prevented. Added in is the fact Wilson was kept and protected as part of the deal while being "overpaid". You can say it's all about value and being held to a "higher standard" but on some level it may be bugging you that they valued Wilson over Mojo and may have goofed in the process. Warm?

My analysis in this literally includes trading Johansson. You couldn't be more off-base. I'm upset that they lost more/better assets than they had to. If there's anyone I'm upset they over-valued this previous off-season, it would be Orpik. But after losing Schmidt, they really painted themself into a corner regarding Orpik.

Holding this team, including management, to a high standard is a line of thinking I've been persuing since last season. You can find several posts of mine along those lines over the course of the off-season. Including posts about holding their player/prospect development to a higher standard (I believe your referred to that post as a "mic drop"), holding their coaching and tactical decision to a higher standard, and holding all players on the roster to the same high standard (we've seen this recently in the Oshie discussions, for instance). I don't believe this franchise has a culture of excellence instilled, and making excuses for anything under the best level of execution should not be accepted. In the words of Vince Lombardi, "Gentlemen, we will chase perfection, and we will chase it relentlessly, knowing all the while we can never attain it. But along the way, we shall catch excellence." I believe far too many in this franchise (players, coaches, and management alike) are willing to accept "good enough" instead of "perfection," and that's playing a major factor as to why they're in their fifth decade without a Stanley Cup.

Also, nothing in their action suggest they valued Wilson over Johansson. Both were protected, but only one gave them the cap space they required after they spent $7.8M/season on Kuznetsov. So, given that I don't believe they valued Wilson over Johansson , naturally I'm not upset over it.
 

Ridley Simon

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
18,127
9,067
Marin County — SF Bay Area, CA
My analysis in this literally includes trading Johansson. You couldn't be more off-base. I'm upset that they lost more/better assets than they had to. If there's anyone I'm upset they over-valued this previous off-season, it would be Orpik. But after losing Schmidt, they really painted themself into a corner regarding Orpik.

Holding this team, including management, to a high standard is a line of thinking I've been persuing since last season. You can find several posts of mine along those lines over the course of the off-season. Including posts about holding their player/prospect development to a higher standard (I believe your referred to that post as a "mic drop"), holding their coaching and tactical decision to a higher standard, and holding all players on the roster to the same high standard (we've seen this recently in the Oshie discussions, for instance). I don't believe this franchise has a culture of excellence instilled, and making excuses for anything under the best level of execution should not be accepted. In the words of Vince Lombardi, "Gentlemen, we will chase perfection, and we will chase it relentlessly, knowing all the while we can never attain it. But along the way, we shall catch excellence." I believe far too many in this franchise (players, coaches, and management alike) are willing to accept "good enough" instead of "perfection," and that's playing a major factor as to why they're in their fifth decade without a Stanley Cup.

Also, nothing in their action suggest they valued Wilson over Johansson. Both were protected, but only one gave them the cap space they required after they spent $7.8M/season on Kuznetsov. So, given that I don't believe they valued Wilson over Johansson , naturally I'm not upset over it.

Well, we can all breath a massive sigh of relief.

Poster Hivemind is holding the franchise to a higher standard. If that’s not the warning shot that they needed, I don’t know what is. You’ve really got their attention now bud. Bravo!!
 

OVrocks

Registered User
Dec 9, 2009
2,292
591
LA
I guess we’ll just have to watch Schmidt win multiple cups, Norris and conn smythe trophies. Such is the life of a Caps fan.
 

maacoshark

Registered User
Jul 22, 2017
9,629
3,723
My analysis in this literally includes trading Johansson. You couldn't be more off-base. I'm upset that they lost more/better assets than they had to. If there's anyone I'm upset they over-valued this previous off-season, it would be Orpik. But after losing Schmidt, they really painted themself into a corner regarding Orpik.

Holding this team, including management, to a high standard is a line of thinking I've been persuing since last season. You can find several posts of mine along those lines over the course of the off-season. Including posts about holding their player/prospect development to a higher standard (I believe your referred to that post as a "mic drop"), holding their coaching and tactical decision to a higher standard, and holding all players on the roster to the same high standard (we've seen this recently in the Oshie discussions, for instance). I don't believe this franchise has a culture of excellence instilled, and making excuses for anything under the best level of execution should not be accepted. In the words of Vince Lombardi, "Gentlemen, we will chase perfection, and we will chase it relentlessly, knowing all the while we can never attain it. But along the way, we shall catch excellence." I believe far too many in this franchise (players, coaches, and management alike) are willing to accept "good enough" instead of "perfection," and that's playing a major factor as to why they're in their fifth decade without a Stanley Cup.

Also, nothing in their action suggest they valued Wilson over Johansson. Both were protected, but only one gave them the cap space they required after they spent $7.8M/season on Kuznetsov. So, given that I don't believe they valued Wilson over Johansson , naturally I'm not upset over it.
How did the Caps over value Orpik in the preseason? We over valued him at the time we signed him but I doubt we do now.
 

Roughing

Registered User
Oct 11, 2010
1,942
303
Frederick, MD
Wait, people miss MoJo?

Schmidt and Williams were the only guys I didn't want to lose. Williams is showing his age and we have some nice young Dmen. What's the problem?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ridley Simon

Ridley Simon

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
18,127
9,067
Marin County — SF Bay Area, CA
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threa...and-grubauer-in-exchange-for-schmidt.2497393/

Link to discussion on the main playoff board.

Wilson and Gruby for Schmidt? There's your asking price. Who still thinks Gmbm ****ed it up?

Hi @Hivemind !! Looking good, feeling good. Anyway—

George McPhee “we overreached on the ask”.

Well huh. Guess there was something to all that “guessing” that he wanted to stick it to his old team. There was also that Post article this week about how mad George was at his dismissal. Brian speaks directly to it. It hurt their life long friendship quite a bit.

But it was all conjecture on our parts. We had no “proof”. Well, looks like that proof walked in the door in spades.

I’m as content now as I was back in January on this topic. I can’t imagine anyone can really feel otherwise now, either. Perhaps I am wrong? :dunno:
 
  • Like
Reactions: g00n

Bieronymus Trotz

Registered User
Sep 4, 2017
547
424
Wait, so you think a better deal was available??
That "deal" was nonsense. Protecting Schmidt would've meant he could only lose one of those two players. Maybe it was McPhee's way of showing he wouldn't deal, but the proposal doesn't make any sense. MacLellan's response should've been, OK, I'll just protect Schmidt then and you can take one of those guys.
 

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,433
14,292
That "deal" was nonsense. Protecting Schmidt would've meant he could only lose one of those two players. Maybe it was McPhee's way of showing he wouldn't deal, but the proposal doesn't make any sense. MacLellan's response should've been, OK, I'll just protect Schmidt then and you can take one of those guys.

You're missing the point. They did not want to lose Wilson. That has been proven to be the 100% correct move.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ovikovy817
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->