The Official Pierre "high five" Dorion Thread | Part II

[Engineer]

He knew he made a mistake, and wanted to mend fences.

If he was truly treated as bad as some "fans" here are suggesting, he would have simply had nothing more to do with the Sens, and either stay in the Detroit area, or return to Sweden.

His return is basically an admission he was wrong to leave, as you clearly point out.

Actions speak louder than words.

And not a single sentence here can be verified or backed up.
Why don't you take your own suggestion and stop posting fake news.

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

Wait what? People are arguing that Alfredsson left because he felt wronged in the process. It does not intuitively follow that is returning means he felt he was wrong for having left or that he now feels that he wasn't treated poorly. It could mean any number of things. Perhaps the team said they wanted to make it up to him, and were the ones looking to make amends. Perhaps Alfredsson loves the team and the community so much that he was willing to look past what happened and put the past behind him, but is still happy with his decision to play in Detroit.

Yes, I agree, his return "could mean any number of things" including what JDI suggested, and I commented on. (go back a read)

He left for Detroit, leaving the "team and community" he loved so much, for less money. He claimed he did so for a better shot at the Cup.

Just because there is a narrative (that you seem to support) that Melnyk didn't want to pay him, and therefore your unsupported version has to be correct, right?




Every time a Player leaves Ottawa automatically its "the Cheap lying Owner"......... it's never the player who wanted to move on.

 

[Tuna99]

Yes, I agree, his return "could mean any number of things" including what JDI suggested, and I commented on. (go back a read)

He left for Detroit, leaving the "team and community" he loved so much, for less money. He claimed he did so for a better shot at the Cup.

Just because there is a narrative (that you seem to support) that Melnyk didn't want to pay him, and therefore your unsupported version has to be correct, right?

Every time a Player leaves Ottawa automatically its "the Cheap lying Owner"......... it's never the player who wanted to move on.

Technically they are correct, players may want to move on but it doesn’t change the fact that we have a cheap lying owner.

 

[HSF]

One of the stupidest theories as to why Alfie left is that he took a pay cut and was supposed to make it on his next contract but was denied it. This same theory was wrongfully also applied to turris negotiations early this season.

Some people really don't understand the business side of the game.

 

[Pancakes Pancakes]

He knew he made a mistake, and wanted to mend fences.

If he was truly treated as bad as some "fans" here are suggesting, he would have simply had nothing more to do with the Sens, and either stay in the Detroit area, or return to Sweden.

His return is basically an admission he was wrong to leave, as you clearly point out.

Actions speak louder than words.

I know you. You're that guy that if Dorion or Melnyk or some other organization mouth piece was quoted by Bruce Garrioch saying that 1+1 = 3, you'd believe it and would try and sell it to everyone on this board.

So in other words, you believe everything that is ever reported as truth. No one has EVER provided a false truth in order to cover the real truth, that's unpossible!!

 

[Pancakes Pancakes]

Why Alfie left is so obvious, people have said it, I've even heard it from a buddy who had a revealing chat with Alfie (who was drunk, lol), but I won't bother talking about that because it can't be true since it wasn't confirmed in an interview or in the papers.

 

[BondraTime]

One of the stupidest theories as to why Alfie left is that he took a pay cut and was supposed to make it on his next contract but was denied it. This same theory was wrongfully also applied to turris negotiations early this season.

Some people really don't understand the business side of the game.

Theory?

"When I did my last contract for four years ending in the [2012-13] season, I was asked to help the team manage the salary cap by adding on an extra year to my contract," he said. "I agreed. Each side fully expected I would retire and not play the 2012-13 season. However, after the 2012 season, I told the Sens I wanted to play another season. I also asked that we look at a possible extension for this upcoming season, at a fair amount, to balance out the two years for both of us. [The Senators] agreed.
"Sadly, the contract negotiations went nowhere, but I played out the season as I had promised. In late June, I decided I had it in me to play at least one more season. I told management that I was willing to return, and I reminded them of our agreement from the year before. But, to my disappointment, negotiations again quickly stalled."

Alfredsson: Contract impasse led to Ottawa departure

Literally stated by Alfie right there

Also, when was that ever said about Turris? He signed a long-term deal 5 years ago before he was solidified as a top 6 guy, pretty sure that's completely made up; no one said he was owed money.....signed to a discount deal, sure, but that is completely irrelevant.

 

[Micklebot]

Yes, I agree, his return "could mean any number of things" including what JDI suggested, and I commented on. (go back a read)

He left for Detroit, leaving the "team and community" he loved so much, for less money. He claimed he did so for a better shot at the Cup.

Just because there is a narrative (that you seem to support) that Melnyk didn't want to pay him, and therefore your unsupported version has to be correct, right?




Every time a Player leaves Ottawa automatically its "the Cheap lying Owner"......... it's never the player who wanted to move on.

Your words:

His return is basically an admission he was wrong to leave, as you clearly point out.

You also called somebody else out for starting fake news because they said:

Something went wrong in the negotiations and Alfie probably got mad at Melnyk not wanting to pay money that he thought was due.

In one case, a claim is framed as fact. In the other, as a suspicion, but it's the one framed as a suspicion that you target as fake news, all the while using incorrect claims to "correct" him.

Btw, when did he take less money from Detroit? Murray was quoted as saying they offered 4.5 to counter Alfredsson's request for 7 to compensate for the 1 mil final year of his previous deal.

The problem is your version seems to keep changing and often doesn't align with public statements made by the parties involved. First it was he had talks with Detroit before talking to Ottawa, now it's that he was offered more by Ottawa than Detroit gave him?

You're quick to throw the quotes around the word fans again I see, I guess you can't fathom that somebodies whose opinion differs from your own could possibly be passionate about this team?

 

[danielpalfredsson]

@HSF

It's not a theory. It's Alfredsson's version of events. Whether or not you think Alfredsson is lying is a different story.

Saying that people thought Turris was in the same situation makes no sense. I'm not sure where you got that idea. They aren't at all comparable.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

Gaslighting is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or in members of a targeted group, hoping to make them question their own memory, perception, and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction, and lying, it attempts to destabilize the target and delegitimize the target's belief.[1][2]
Instances may range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim. The term owes its origin to a 1938 play Gas Light and its 1944 film adaptation. The term has been used in clinical and research literature,[3][4] as well as in political commentary.[5][6]

 

[JD1]

@HSF

It's not a theory. It's Alfredsson's version of events. Whether or not you think Alfredsson is lying is a different story.

Saying that people thought Turris was in the same situation makes no sense. I'm not sure where you got that idea. They aren't at all comparable.

I like this. Alfie's version of events. Very well put. There are always multiple version of events when multiple parties are involved in discussions

I'v seen Alfie's words quoted here over and over. NOT ALL OF THEM though. There was more that he said that doesn't get posted. I NEVER see Murray's words posted. Google it up....Murray had a few things to say also.

Regardless of one's opinion of Murray as a GM, he was universally regarded as a man of integrity within hockey circles. I didn't know the man but I do know how he was regarded

I've read Alfie's words and Murray's words. I regard them both as men of integrity. Their opinions of his initial departure are different. Their opinions on his final Ottawa contract are different.

I've posted that I think on reflection that Alfie believed he owned some of the responsibility on his departure which is why he came back.

it's the only thing that makes sense to me. if you work for the man to a certain extent your integrity is for sale because you need to earn a living and provide for your family. Alfie didn't need to provide so to me coming back he either lacks integrity or he saw some partial culpability on his end that led to his departure

all just my opinion though

 

[danielpalfredsson]

@JD1

Murray had incentive to lie, or at least fudge the truth.

Admitting to Alfie's side of the story would mean that he would

1) have to admit to attempting to circumvent the salary cap. While the NHL's official stance on the matter was that they believed that the Senators circumvented the cap with the Alfredsson contract, Bill Daly claimed that it wasn't something they were going to investigate because cap circumvention was rampant under the previous CBA. That's all fine, but does Bryan Murray, a GM, openly admitting to it change things? Would it have forced the NHL to do something in order to save face?

2) If Murray admitted to it, there would be no way to do so without throwing his owner under the bus which is something that isn't wise. If Alfredsson's side of the story is true, Alfredsson is in the right, and Melnyk never made good on Alfredsson playing for far less than his worth which ultimately lead to Alfredsson leaving. The Senators had opportunities to extend Alfredsson well before July 2013 so long as they made Alfredsson whole for playing the season at 1M per.

Alfredsson's side of the story is more plausible, but we'll never know the full truth. But, I think the general point of bringing all this up is that Alfredsson's primary reasons for leaving are public, and for whatever reason some people in this thread are disputing them in spite of that.

 

[JD1]

so Marley signs a 3 / 18 deal in his late 30s in a cap world at 75 and rising. They are players of similar stature. That deal has been debated and discussed to death as an overpayment

Take away Alfie's last year and his deal is 3 / 18 in a 57m cap world and rising.

So let's say Alfie's version is correct.

If Alfie gets a 6 AAV deal in a 57m cap world in his late 30s how can the narrative also be that he was underpaid ?

A 4 year 4.75 AAV deal in the time relative to the cap actually makes more sense to me than a 6 AAV deal. And it was front loaded too. 7/7/4.

 

[Wondercarrot]

I think considering he came back ONCE that he himself feels a degree of responsibility for his first departure

Hahahahahaha that's awesome.

 

[BondraTime]

so Marley signs a 3 / 18 deal in his late 30s in a cap world at 75 and rising. They are players of similar stature. That deal has been debated and discussed to death as an overpayment

Take away Alfie's last year and his deal is 3 / 18 in a 57m cap world and rising.

So let's say Alfie's version is correct.

If Alfie gets a 6 AAV deal in a 57m cap world in his late 30s how can the narrative also be that he was underpaid ?

A 4 year 4.75 AAV deal in the time relative to the cap actually makes more sense to me than a 6 AAV deal. And it was front loaded too. 7/7/4.

Because it was intended to be a 3 year deal, made to circumvent the cap with a very cheap 1 million dollar tag; not meant to be played. He then played it, at a very high level, and "apparently" reached an agreement where he would play that and be compensated in his next contract.

 

[Wondercarrot]

He knew he made a mistake, and wanted to mend fences.

If he was truly treated as bad as some "fans" here are suggesting, he would have simply had nothing more to do with the Sens, and either stay in the Detroit area, or return to Sweden.

His return is basically an admission he was wrong to leave, as you clearly point out.

Actions speak louder than words.

this is without a doubt the dumbest post on the subject I've seen. Congratulations.
Feel free to respond, I'm 100% out of this - you either really do know nothing, or are being a purposefully obtuse troll.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

so Marley signs a 3 / 18 deal in his late 30s in a cap world at 75 and rising. They are players of similar stature. That deal has been debated and discussed to death as an overpayment

Take away Alfie's last year and his deal is 3 / 18 in a 57m cap world and rising.

So let's say Alfie's version is correct.

If Alfie gets a 6 AAV deal in a 57m cap world in his late 30s how can the narrative also be that he was underpaid ?

A 4 year 4.75 AAV deal in the time relative to the cap actually makes more sense to me than a 6 AAV deal. And it was front loaded too. 7/7/4.

That narrative people are discussing in this thread has nothing to do with whether or not people feel Alfredsson is subjectively over or underpaid. Go back and read Bondra's link as well as the link I posted on the previous page, they all explain Alfredsson's side of the situation very clearly.

 

[Micklebot]

I think the discussion regarding Alfredsson's departure has gotten enough play here, it's well off topic in a thread about Dorion, so if you do feel like continuing to discuss, feel free to do so in the extremely old thread linked below that's at least tangentially relevant;

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threa...n-fiasco-done-to-the-sens-reputation.1485109/

 

[JD1]

That narrative people are discussing in this thread has nothing to do with whether or not people feel Alfredsson is subjectively over or underpaid. Go back and read Bondra's link as well as the link I posted on the previous page, they all explain Alfredsson's side of the situation very clearly.

I've read all that

the only way that Alfie's side of the story is true is if a man held in very high esteem within hockey circles is lying. think about that.

balance of probabilities I'd say neither side willfully lied to the other.

I know it has nothing to do with overpaid or underpaid

but when I look at that deal at 4 years for 19 or 3 for 18. ... 3 for 18 was a huge overpayment and even more so considering it was front loaded

I don't bring it up to argue the over under thing...the two men have a difference of opinion....for Alfie's "version of events" to be accurate the Sens effectively signed him to a 3 /18 front loaded deal. Does that sound like Melnyk?

I don' think either side is lying....it's an issue of different versions of events

 

[Micklebot]

Perhaps bigger font, colours, Bold, and Underline was needed

TAKE ANY ALFREDSSON CONVERSATIONS TO ANOTHER THREAD (I SUGGESTED ONE ABOVE). ANY FURTHER OFF-TOPIC DISCUSSION WILL RESULT IN INFRACTIONS

 

[BonkTastic]

Nice smug sarcasm.

You say that as if your post wasn’t also smugly sarcastic.

I just skipped the next 20 or so steps and took it to it’s logical extreme.

 

[branch]

You say that as if your post wasn’t also smugly sarcastic.

I just skipped the next 20 or so steps and took it to it’s logical extreme.

You broke my heart

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

One of the stupidest theories as to why Alfie left is that he took a pay cut and was supposed to make it on his next contract but was denied it. This same theory was wrongfully also applied to turris negotiations early this season.

Some people really don't understand the business side of the game.

Not exactly.

People said that Turris' last deal was a really good one for the Sens, and Turris likely wouldn't take a discount this time around. And it's the truth. He was a bargain for us for the last few years. No one said he'd be asking for "extra" money to make up for the last contract...just that he would definitely want his true market value going forward.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

 

[Agent Zub]

odd that all the dorion defenders over the summer suddenly vanished