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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cosmix

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 24, 2011
17,797
6,434
Ottawa
My take on Dorion thus far:


Dorion's good moves:

Hiring Boucher - passed up the coach with the highest winning percentage in history that wanted to come coach in Ottawa, which I thought was insane, but it is looking like a great move. Full credit to Dorion on this one. Boucher looks like the perfect coach for this hockey team. Other than EK, Boucher's amazing system was the biggest reason for this team making it all the way to game 7 of the ECF.

5th for Condon - good move to replace Andy when he had to leave the team for personal reasons. Not exactly an amazing move, considering Condon was available for free not long before we traded for him, and we obviously needed a better backup than Hammond behind Andy at that time too, but it was a good move nonetheless. Having said this, re-signing him to 2.4M for 3 more years is too long a term for too much money.

7th for Wingels - solid acquisition of a good 4th line winger for next to nothing. Not exactly sure why Dorion followed it up with two more forward acquisitions in Burrows and Stalberg, which pushed Wingels and Dzingel out of the lineup a lot of nights, but that's a whole different thing.

Signing Pyatt - this might be more of a Boucher-acquisition, but signing Pyatt for no assets was a great move. Great bottom 6 winger who provides some much needed speed. Also glad we re-signed him to a fair deal.

Dorion's bad moves

Zibanejad + 2nd for Brassard - a trade which looked bad when it happened and has done nothing but look worse and worse since. Traded a bigger, faster, younger and better center for a smaller, slower, older and worse center, and gave up an extra high pick as a cherry on top. Absolutely awful asset management.

Dahlen for Burrows - one of the single worst instances of asset management I've seen in the NHL in some time. You have a 36YR old 3rd line winger with a NTC who's only willing to go to the Sens, the only team that was apparently willing to give him a multi-year extension, and Dorion gave up a 1st-round quality prospect in the biggest buyers market in decades. And the contract he gave Burrows is just awful. Wouldn't have taken him at 2.5M for 2YRs on July 1st, let alone giving up a good prospect for the privilege of signing him to that contract.

Lazar for 2nd - brings Lazar up from the AHL early, despite him having done nothing in his stint in Bingo to warrant a call-up, kills his waiver wire exemption and his development gets ruined by playing beside Kelly and Neil all season. After destroying his value around the league, then trades him for a mediocre return of a mid-2nd. Sold low on a former 1st round pick that showed promise.

3rd for Stalberg - refuses to do anything on July 1, neglecting to fill the bottom 6 with another body, and then is forced to fix the bottom 6 via trade. Overpays for a 4th line winger in a major buyers market, and now it looks like he's not even going to re-sign with us. I like Stalberg, but we gave up too much for him, and after trading for Burrows, his acquisition wasn't necessary. Just pushed Dzingel/Wingels out of the lineup.

Not replacing Methot in FA - losing Methot instead of paying Vegas's insane ransom was the right move, but not trading for him after expansion was a mistake. Dallas got him for a 2020 2nd, which is worth about a 2017 late 3rd/early 4th in my books. If not Methot by trade, we should have traded for Scandella, who went to a divisional rival in Buffalo for diddly squat. If not by trade, Dorion should have signed a replacement in Kulikov/Alzner/Hainsey. Losing Methot and not replacing him with the money opened up is a big step in the wrong direction for the team.

Signing Kelly - I originally liked this move, more because I thought that it would mean Lazar would go to the AHL where he belonged, rather than because I believed Kelly was a quality center. Still I thought he could perform decent as the 4th line C of this hockey team. Did okay for the first half of the year, but faded massively as the year went on, to the point where he became a liability later in the year and had to be replaced by Smith, who's much better as a winger than as a center. Signing Kelly for 1M when Vermette went for 0.75M more, and the likes of Moore, Sceviour and Marchessault all went for around 1M, is looking like a bad decision right now.

Signing Thompson - 1.65M is too much money for a 4th line center and 2YRs is too long of a term for a guy with major injury issues the past couple years. Would have been happy if Thompson was signed for around 1M for 1YR to be our 5th center/13th forward, but the deal Dorion signed him to is just terrible. Could see Paul and White outperforming him at camp, with no center spot available for them for another 2YRs, as a budget team can't scratch 1.65M. Just another case of Dorion getting taken to the cleaners on a contract for a guy Boucher likes.

Losing Puempel on waivers - now don't get me wrong, I don't think Puempel is a future top 6 sniper or anything like that, but he's a young forward that was on pace for 30+ goals and close to a PPG in the AHL last season, and he didn't get any kind of a shot with this hockey team. He played almost every minute of his 13 game stint beside Kelly and Neil. That's not a place where a finisher can succeed. On the Rangers Puempel continued to play on the 4th line, but he played beside Lindberg and Pirri mostly - two guys who are much more skilled than Kelly and Neil. In his time with the Rangers he put up 6G and 9P in 27 games, which put him on pace for 18G and 27P over 82 games. That's not nothing - it's close to the production Burrows had this year, and is better than the production Stalberg had this year. I still think he could carve out a decent career as an Eaves-type player - a grinder who can pot the odd goal due to a good shot, goal scoring instincts and a willigness to go to the net. Wasted asset.


The bad far outweighs the good.

I agree with virtually all you say here.

I was against the Kelly signing when it was made.

The Stalberg signing for a third was OK to fix the problem Dorion made by having a crappy third line from the start of the year.
 

Sens Rule

Registered User
Sep 22, 2005
21,251
73
I disagree with about half of what Hale posted (and think he/she is far too critical of Dorion) but this post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy is pandemic on this board at the moment.

We cannot unequivocally state "Dorion's moves were clearly justified because we made the third round and were a goal from the SCF;" we don't know how we would have done without those moves. Moreover, there is a host of other factors involved in any playoff run.

Just because a result occurred after some event does not mean the event perforce caused the result.

Actually you can give the GM credit for going deep in the playoffs. It is literally what he is being paid to do.
 

Hale The Villain

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2008
25,658
13,242
Actually you can give the GM credit for going deep in the playoffs. It is literally what he is being paid to do.

Ya except our GM's acquisitions didn't do all that much to help the team go deep in the playoffs.

Dorion's acquisitions of Burrows, Stalberg, Pyatt, Wingels and Kelly had a grand total of 2 goals and 9 points in a combined 57 games played, which puts them on pace for 3 goals and 13 points over a full 82 game season. They pretty much just went out there and didn't get scored on.

This is not counting Brassard, who had 4 goals and 11 points in 19 games, but when you consider we gave up Zibanejad, who led the Rangers with 2 goals and 9 points in 12 games, it's pretty much a wash.

The only Dorion move that had any kind of significant impact in getting this team to game 7 of the ECF was Boucher, who's system was probably the 2nd biggest reason for our post-season run behind EK's Conn Smythe worthy performance.

Dorion deserves credit for hiring Boucher, but that doesn't change the fact that if we fired Dorion today, Boucher would still be with the team. If an incompetent CEO hires an excellent COO, he deserves credit for that hiring, but nonetheless the organization would be much better off if it fired the CEO and found a competent replacement.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,120
30,340
So Boucher's system was the 2nd biggest reason we went deep;

-Boucher's system sacrificed offense to be much better defensively.

-Lists guys that didn't put up much offense, and states they were only there to not get scored on.

-Deems guys that are out there to not get scored on as inconsequential to a deep run.

Ok then....
 

YouGotAStuGoing

Registered User
Mar 26, 2010
19,339
4,913
Ottawa, Ontario
So Boucher's system was the 2nd biggest reason we went deep;

-Boucher's system sacrificed offense to be much better defensively.

-Lists guys that didn't put up much offense, and states they were only there to not get scored on.

-Deems guys that are out there to not get scored on as inconsequential to a deep run.

Ok then....

Yup. Exactly why it's hard to take any argument based on points seriously, and that seems to be the go-to for most overt pessimists.
 

Sens of Anarchy

Registered User
Jul 9, 2013
64,993
49,514
Yup. Exactly why it's hard to take any argument based on points seriously, and that seems to be the go-to for most overt pessimists.

Agreed... too much hockey is ignored if all you focus on is points... IMO it's just people trying to use a fact to support an argument and conveniently ignoring other important aspects.... Stopping a goal is pretty close to equal with scoring a goal when it comes to winning a game. Guys system was about everybody being in the right position and reacting to loose pucks and turnovers. You need someone to score 1. I have no issues with the adds made at the TDL, or adding Condon .. a really reliable backup or Wingels... Pyatt's work ethic, smarts, and effort level were very consistent. Good little player that helped the team, I am glad he's a Sen. Everybody we added fit the team, the system and the type of hockey Boucher wanted. The team improved and was really competitive and gelled together. Dorion should get some credit for that... was it perfect ... probably not .. does Dorion sling it while patting himself on the back? probably...
 

Deku

I'm off the planet
Nov 5, 2011
19,828
4,474
Ottawa
Dorion's acquisitions of Burrows, Stalberg, Pyatt, Wingels and Kelly had a grand total of 2 goals and 9 points in a combined 57 games played, which puts them on pace for 3 goals and 13 points over a full 82 game season. They pretty much just went out there and didn't get scored on.

By this logic you should be happy to have Thompson, who has 14 points in his last 36 playoff games, very good for his icetime & role. Especially when 6 of those points were in this year's playoffs - he had almost as many points as all those guys combined.
But I'm sure you're mad because he's "500k overpaid"
 

God Says No

Registered User
Mar 16, 2012
8,526
1,899
By this logic you should be happy to have Thompson, who has 14 points in his last 36 playoff games, very good for his icetime & role. Especially when 6 of those points were in this year's playoffs - he had almost as many points as all those guys combined.
But I'm sure you're mad because he's "500k overpaid"

Thompson has a number of good qualities, but not sure you should be propping his scoring. He had 2 points last year during the regular season.
 

Deku

I'm off the planet
Nov 5, 2011
19,828
4,474
Ottawa
Thompson has a number of good qualities, but not sure you should be propping his scoring. He had 2 points last year during the regular season.

My point is that he shouldn't be complaining about the scoring of defensive grinders, and if he's going to do that, then Thompson's playoff numbers are impressive
Regardless, Thompson's offense has been lower recently in the regular season due to injuries, and it seems that he steps his game up in the playoffs
 

PoutineSp00nZ

Electricity is really just organized lightning.
Jul 21, 2009
20,046
5,653
Ottawa
Ya except our GM's acquisitions didn't do all that much to help the team go deep in the playoffs.

Dorion's acquisitions of Burrows, Stalberg, Pyatt, Wingels and Kelly had a grand total of 2 goals and 9 points in a combined 57 games played, which puts them on pace for 3 goals and 13 points over a full 82 game season. They pretty much just went out there and didn't get scored on.

This is not counting Brassard, who had 4 goals and 11 points in 19 games, but when you consider we gave up Zibanejad, who led the Rangers with 2 goals and 9 points in 12 games, it's pretty much a wash.

The only Dorion move that had any kind of significant impact in getting this team to game 7 of the ECF was Boucher, who's system was probably the 2nd biggest reason for our post-season run behind EK's Conn Smythe worthy performance.

Dorion deserves credit for hiring Boucher, but that doesn't change the fact that if we fired Dorion today, Boucher would still be with the team. If an incompetent CEO hires an excellent COO, he deserves credit for that hiring, but nonetheless the organization would be much better off if it fired the CEO and found a competent replacement.

This is comedy gold right here.
 

God Says No

Registered User
Mar 16, 2012
8,526
1,899
My point is that he shouldn't be complaining about the scoring of defensive grinders, and if he's going to do that, then Thompson's playoff numbers are impressive
Regardless, Thompson's offense has been lower recently in the regular season due to injuries, and it seems that he steps his game up in the playoffs

Well, we have to get to the playoffs first. In any case, I don't think Burrows was acquired to be a 4th line grinder. That's not how Dorion presented it, and not how he was deployed last year.
 

Tuna99

Registered User
Sep 26, 2009
14,713
6,800
Yes I think we will regret the lazar deal. Really bad handling of him.

What? We are blaming Dorion for Lazar, how about Lazar makes the NHL full time for a coach who doesn't expect offense and just wants you to play Defense, something Lazar was supposed to be an expert at.

Dorion moves Lazar before he is forced to extend him, gets a 2nd, and we are still mad at him.

At some point Lazar has to be an NHL player himself.

And did ANYONE listen to the NYR post season press conference (or watch the Sens-NYR series for that matter) - even the Rangers think Brass is better then Zibby - don't just look at their eight and height and assume one is better.

I don't understand the hate for Dorion. I think if he sucked like Murray sucked but sold us hope through drafting we'd these angry fans would be happy because the team would never do anything to improve and would always be looking to next year, or firing coaches to blame someone.

We are better, we did make the SCF and almost beat the Champs because Dorion made the moves he did, like not forcing Lazar into the lineup, by trading an inconsisten 2nd line centre for a better 2nd line centre, by getting depth players and trading for a 4th line.

I'm happy we didn't win the Cup because this fan base would say it wasn't shinny enough or it would of been sweeter is Zibby had his name on it.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,120
30,340
Well, we have to get to the playoffs first. In any case, I don't think Burrows was acquired to be a 4th line grinder. That's not how Dorion presented it, and not how he was deployed last year.

He also produced more than a 4th line grinder but everybody complains about him being overpaid for a 4th line grinder despite not being acquired for that role not playing that role and far outproducing what would be expected in that role.
 

maclean

Registered User
Jan 4, 2014
8,380
2,546
Listen the only way we're going to get to the bottom of this is this year we need to play every game twice, once with the normal team and the other with the team not making any trades, only with a control can we achieve usable data
 

Do Make Say Think

& Yet & Yet
Jun 26, 2007
51,157
9,904
He also produced more than a 4th line grinder but everybody complains about him being overpaid for a 4th line grinder despite not being acquired for that role not playing that role and far outproducing what would be expected in that role.

I think that poster meant Thompson or else their reply made no sense.
 

Deku

I'm off the planet
Nov 5, 2011
19,828
4,474
Ottawa
Well, we have to get to the playoffs first. In any case, I don't think Burrows was acquired to be a 4th line grinder. That's not how Dorion presented it, and not how he was deployed last year.

I agree about Burrows, he will be a top 9 forward for us unless he greatly struggles, he was very good down the stretch but just OK in the playoffs. Still had some clutch plays
 

AchtzehnBaby

Global Matador
Mar 28, 2013
15,017
8,898
Hazeldean Road
This is getting ridiculous. Going deep is what Dorion needed the team to do, and we did it. He did it by building a team that played as a team and had a some serious brotherly love happening. It is a lot harder to get a team to play well together then selecting a bunch of guys who can get points. This was a good team and it may be getting better. We were one goal away from the final. It was a team effort with some excellent leadership and coaching. That is the package ownership wants... the one we want.
 

Punchbowl

Registered User
Apr 4, 2010
2,803
248
Actually you can give the GM credit for going deep in the playoffs. It is literally what he is being paid to do.

I don't think it's that easy and direct a line of causality, though.

There are numerous reasons why "X preceded Y, therefore X caused Y" is faulty reasoning, but to give an example from this season; "The team went to the third round with Karlsson on a broken foot; therefore, Karlsson breaking his foot was a good thing."

The team actually made the third round despite Karlsson's injury. I think that, by the same reasoning, Hale is saying that despite what he considers negligible additions on the part of Dorion, we made the third round.

***


For the sake of transparency, let me just make clear that I think Dorion's moves this year were a net positive and I have no problem with him continuing as GM for next season. His restraint in spending this off-season I attribute much more to Melnyk and the realities of being a small-market team.

I'm only quibbling with the "X before Y, therefore X caused Y" argument, which is used to justify all sorts of frustrating points on this board (e.g. Ceci causes goals against).
 

Deku

I'm off the planet
Nov 5, 2011
19,828
4,474
Ottawa
This is getting ridiculous. Going deep is what Dorion needed the team to do, and we did it. He did it by building a team that played as a team and had a some serious brotherly love happening. It is a lot harder to get a team to play well together then selecting a bunch of guys who can get points. This was a good team and it may be getting better. We were one goal away from the final. It was a team effort with some excellent leadership and coaching. That is the package ownership wants... the one we want.

BUT WE GAVE UP A 3RD FOR STAAALBERRRRRRRGGGGGggggg :scared:
 

God Says No

Registered User
Mar 16, 2012
8,526
1,899
He also produced more than a 4th line grinder but everybody complains about him being overpaid for a 4th line grinder despite not being acquired for that role not playing that role and far outproducing what would be expected in that role.

To be fair, a good chunk of his points was just 3 three games.
Let's see how he does this year, and more importantly next. There were stretches where Burrows was completely invisible.

He could end up being a severely overpaid 4th liner.

BUT WE GAVE UP A 3RD FOR STAAALBERRRRRRRGGGGGggggg :scared:

I don't see anyone complaining about that trade. That was a good one. The Burrows one was an over payment. The Thompson signing was an over payment as well.
 

PoutineSp00nZ

Electricity is really just organized lightning.
Jul 21, 2009
20,046
5,653
Ottawa
I don't think it's that easy and direct a line of causality, though.

There are numerous reasons why "X preceded Y, therefore X caused Y" is faulty reasoning, but to give an example from this season; "The team went to the third round with Karlsson on a broken foot; therefore, Karlsson breaking his foot was a good thing."

The team actually made the third round despite Karlsson's injury. I think that, by the same reasoning, Hale is saying that despite what he considers negligible additions on the part of Dorion, we made the third round.

***


For the sake of transparency, let me just make clear that I think Dorion's moves this year were a net positive and I have no problem with him continuing as GM for next season. His restraint in spending this off-season I attribute much more to Melnyk and the realities of being a small-market team.

I'm only quibbling with the "X before Y, therefore X caused Y" argument, which is used to justify all sorts of frustrating points on this board (e.g. Ceci causes goals against).

I just dont think there were any forwards out there that would radically impact Ottawa's offense. THe Sens are deep, and talented up front. Unless you're bringing in a legit number 1 center, or star left wing . . . I don't know how you're going to upgrade. They're fine up front.

The issue is on defense. I'm not the biggest Shattenkirk fan, and he was probably going to the Rangers no matter what anyway. Alzner might have been ok, Markov would be an upgrade . . . but I think Dorien is in "lets see what we have" mode.

He has two young defensemen who impressed last year in Harper and Claesson, who are going to be pushing for icetime. And then there is Chabot, who is a bit of a wildcard but could very well prove himself a top 4 defenseman in his rookie year if things go well. So out of those three, maybe they find a way to replace Methot.

If it doesn't work out, and things look dire on defense . . . it will be a lot easier to swing a deal after Christmas.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,120
30,340
To be fair, a good chunk of his points was just 3 three games.
Let's see how he does this year, and more importantly next. There were stretches where Burrows was completely invisible.

He could end up being a severely overpaid 4th liner.



I don't see anyone complaining about that trade. That was a good one. The Burrows one was an over payment. The Thompson signing was an over payment as well.

Why do we exclude Burrows top 3 games to fit the narrative though? Do we take away Stones top 3 games and the 11 pts he scored in them and label him based on that level of production?

I always find it funny to read 'to be fair' followed by something you would likely not consider fair if done to another player.
 

God Says No

Registered User
Mar 16, 2012
8,526
1,899
Why do we exclude Burrows top 3 games to fit the narrative though? Do we take away Stones top 3 games and the 11 pts he scored in them and label him based on that level of production?

I always find it funny to read 'to be fair' followed by something you would likely not consider fair if done to another player.

Well, you can aim that at other posters because I considered Stone to be also lacking in production after his injury. The key word there is injury, so Stone gets a pass more so than Burrows. Burrows was invisible (and I mean that literally, since there were games I didn't even notice he played and thought he was scratched) for a good chunk of games. You can say what you want, but the reality is that in that small chunk of games where Burrows was playing with us, he produced some points, but more than half came in 3 games. While the other 5 pts came in 15 games. So the worry is that he will be a 2.5M fourth liner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->