Confirmed with Link: Viktor Stalberg to OTT for 2017 3rd round pick

[PoutineSp00nZ]

Result-oriented thinking? As opposed to what, hope-oriented thinking?

Evaluate based on results, not based on intentions.



If the role players had helped this team score goals, I'd agree with you, but Burrows, Stalberg, Smith, Dzingel, Pyatt, Wingels, White, Kelly and Neil had 5 goals, 13 points in a combined 94 games played. The offensive production from our role players was basically non-existent. They basically just went out there and didn't get scored on.

We made it to the ECF because Karlsson put up a Conn Smythe-type performance, Ryan and Pageau were clutch, the rest of our D was solid, and Boucher implemented a terrific defensive system that stifled the opposition. Our role players had little to do with it.

I do agree with re-signing Stalberg though. He's an excellent 4th line winger that I'd love to see in a Sens jersey next season.

They didn't get scored on, and impacted momentum and the flow of the game. Killed penalties etc.

There is a lot more to hockey than scoring, and not being scored on.

 

[Masked]

They didn't get scored on, and impacted momentum and the flow of the game. Killed penalties etc.

There is a lot more to hockey than scoring, and not being scored on.

Plus their salaries are a fraction of what the salaries for Vanek & Stafford would have been.

 

[guyzeur]

Excellent post Bonk, as always. Also, Dorion did sign a depth guy for under $1M in the offseason: Tom Pyatt. He got 23 points with us this year, a career high. He also fits the Guy Boucher's system perfectly hence why Boucher wanted to bring him in.

And they were probably thinking that Nick Paul would make the team.

 

[JungleBeat]

They didn't get scored on, and impacted momentum and the flow of the game. Killed penalties etc.

There is a lot more to hockey than scoring, and not being scored on.

Hemmed in their zone a ton also. They all did pretty well on the penalty kill but on 5v5 they sucked.

 

[Langdon Alger]

Hemmed in their zone a ton also. They all did pretty well on the penalty kill but on 5v5 they sucked.

Stalberg was a team worst -8 in the playoffs. I like the guy, but he was on the ice for a lot of goals against to be fair.

Hale makes some good points, but I think he's forgetting something, which is how many players we go into camp with. He talks about signing guys as free agents, but how many open spots did we really have coming into camp? We still had Lazar and MacArthur got injured in camp. Plus we have a budget, so that plays into it as well. Now, if you want to criticize them for signing Kelly and argue they could have picked someone else up in free agency, that's more than fair.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Dorion pencilled in Lazar into the lineup when it was painfully obvious he should have been sent to the AHL. He also signed Kelly to be the 4th line center, despite having missed the previous season with injury. Should have been signed to be our 5th line center that stepped in if there was an injury.

Even with MacArthur assumed to be fully healthy and not a high injury risk that needs to be accounted for with additional depth, the starting lineup looked as follows:

Hoffman - Brassard - Stone
MacArthur - Turris - Ryan
Smith - Pageau - Dzingel
????? - ????? - Pyatt
Puempel, Kelly

*with Paul and Lazar sent down to the AHL to develop their offensive games against lower competition.

Should have signed AT LEAST one more NHL forward. Would have made a Burrows/Stalberg acquisition redundant and we'd still have a good prospect/pick.

You can pretend this stuff doesn't matter, but it will impact this team's future in the long-run. If you look at how this current Sens team was acquired, almost all of them were drafted and developed by the organization. The scouting staff and development team is almost entirely behind this team's success. We keep trading their picks and the prospects they drafted and our future will suffer as a result.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Plus their salaries are a fraction of what the salaries for Vanek & Stafford would have been.

They were both on 1-way contracts and their salaries were mostly paid by the deadline.

It's not a legitimate reason for not trading for those two guys.

 

[Langdon Alger]

Dorion pencilled in Lazar into the lineup when it was painfully obvious he should have been sent to the AHL. He also signed Kelly to be the 4th line center, despite having missed the previous season with injury. Should have been signed to be our 5th line center that stepped in if there was an injury.

Even with MacArthur assumed to be fully healthy and not a high injury risk that needs to be accounted for with additional depth, the starting lineup looked as follows:

Hoffman - Brassard - Stone
MacArthur - Turris - Ryan
Smith - Pageau - Dzingel
????? - ????? - Pyatt
Puempel, Kelly

*with Paul and Lazar sent down to the AHL to develop their offensive games against lower competition.

Should have signed AT LEAST one more NHL forward. Would have made a Burrows/Stalberg acquisition redundant and we'd still have a good prospect/pick.

You can pretend this stuff doesn't matter, but it will impact this team's future in the long-run. If you look at how this current Sens team was acquired, almost all of them were drafted and developed by the organization. The scouting staff and development team is almost entirely behind this team's success. We keep trading their picks and the prospects they drafted and our future will suffer as a result.

You forgot Neil.

I agree with you to a point on asset management. It seems like some people get upset everytime we trade a draft pick. I don't like moving picks, but it's fine in some cases, and it's not like we're the only team that trades picks.

I think part of our problem is we are too loyal to our veterans players. Michalek getting a three year deal at four million per was ridiculous. Phillips getting a two year extension at the same time was idiotic. Sometimes you need to move on from players even if they've done a lot for the team over the years. Ottawa isn't good at that.

The Burrows trade and extension was puzzling. He's 36 and we extend him two years? We could have used that money elsewhere.

 

[JungleBeat]

I think part of our problem is we are too loyal to our veterans players. Michalek getting a three year deal at four million per was ridiculous. Phillips getting a two year extension at the same time was idiotic. Sometimes you need to move on from players even if they've done a lot for the team over the years. Ottawa isn't good at that.

Exactly! We hold onto players for way too long and watch them deteriorate with the Sens. Sometimes you just have to cut your losses quick.

 

[Langdon Alger]

Exactly! We hold onto players for way too long and watch them deteriorate with the Sens. Sometimes you just have to cut your losses quick.

And that doesn't mean I don't appreciate a guy like Phillips. He was great for many years, but when he got that two year extension he was done. Heck, even if they gave him one year that would have been better. Why two years?

I always go back to Brian Burke in Vancouver when Trent Klatt was a free agent. They wanted him back, but he asked for too much money and Burke said if he can get it elsewhere good for him. He's not getting it here. He even said he'd drive him to the airport himself. Might seem harsh, but sometimes that's what you have to do.

 

[Masked]

They were both on 1-way contracts and their salaries were mostly paid by the deadline.

It's not a legitimate reason for not trading for those two guys.

Approximately 3/4 paid. That is still almost $2M in cash being paid to them.

 

[50 in 07]

The Burrows trade and extension was puzzling. He's 36 and we extend him two years? We could have used that money elsewhere.

Apparently, IIRC, the extension was part of the reason he even agreed to come here in the first place. We were offering the multi year extension, and other teams were not willing. (wonder why, lol)

To me, that's ridiculous when you already consider we over paid value wise. I would think it would be one or the other. (ie, either the overpayment or the extension). Not both.

 

[Langdon Alger]

Apparently, IIRC, the extension was part of the reason he even agreed to come here in the first place. We were offering the multi year extension, and other teams were not willing. (wonder why, lol)

To me, that's ridiculous when you already consider we over paid value wise. I would think it would be one or the other. (ie, either the overpayment or the extension). Not both.

Correct. Burrows agreed to the trade only if there was an extension in place. Maybe that's when you decide not to do it, keep Dahlen and go after another guy instead like Stafford as Hale mentioned.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Approximately 3/4 paid. That is still almost $2M in cash being paid to them.

Yeah but if that is the case then Burrows and Stalberg were paid approximately 1.25M for the final 1/4 of the season

So the difference is 0.75M. That's hardly anything at all.

 

[Masked]

Yeah but if that is the case then Burrows and Stalberg were paid approximately 1.25M for the final 1/4 of the season

So the difference is 0.75M. That's hardly anything at all.

I meant the difference was almost $2M.

 

[BonkTastic]

You call me Captain Hindsight, but I praised the signings of Marchessault, Sceviour, Eaves and Connolly when they happened, not after they proved themselves good signings. How is that hindsight?

1) Easy to say this now, when it's almost impossible to prove.

2) Still ignores the fact that most of these players landed in ideal spots that lined up perfectly to give them the best chance to perform, vs if they had went elsewhere to play further down depth charts and/or used differently and/or skills didn't match goals of the system. Do you think the Eaves signing would still be a good signing if he missed 40 games during the regular season, as is tradition for him? If Marchessault had signed with the Bolts instead and put up 25 points because he was buried behind other players in that stacked lineup and didn't get nearly as much ice time as he did in Florida? You think the Versteeg signing would have been good if his nagging injury dogged him all year and he was basically an extra part in Calgary?

 

[JD1]

You can pretend this stuff doesn't matter

All you're doing here is analyzing history and identifying an alternative path that may have done what? worked out better?

it's not even strong analysis. Lazar got mono last summer. wasn't ready for camp. didn't compete in camp. opened the season in bingo. eventually got concussed. But to criticize Dorion for penciling him into the lineup in the summer? Sorry dude....you either need to sharpen your analytical skills or gain a better understanding of how pro hockey works.

 

[JungleBeat]

You think the Versteeg signing would have been good if his nagging injury dogged him all year and he was basically an extra part in Calgary?

The Versteeg signing was good then and now. He's a consistent 35+ point player - that's much better than the production Pyatt/Kelly bring.

 

[Masked]

The Versteeg signing was good then and now. He's a consistent 35+ point player - that's much better than the production Pyatt/Kelly bring.

And last season's Senators put up much better offensive production than this season's but which was the better team?

 

[JungleBeat]

And last season's Senators put up much better offensive production than this season's but which was the better team?

What's the point you're trying to make?

 

[Masked]

What's the point you're trying to make?

If you can't figure that out, there's no point in telling you.

 

[JungleBeat]

If you can't figure that out, there's no point in telling you.

Probably a stupid point because we both know who the better player is (Versteeg).

 

[Real Smart Sens Fan]

The Versteeg signing was good then and now. He's a consistent 35+ point player - that's much better than the production Pyatt/Kelly bring.

Why does that matter a lick? He specifically chose Calgary over other teams that openly showed interest in him.

 

[Micklebot]

Lets get back onto the topic of Stalberg. If you want to take about whether the versteeg signing was better than Pyatt or Kelly, there are better places to do so.

I for one hope we re-sign Stalberg, he shouldn't cost much and is an excellent 4th liner that can move up in the lineup when needed.

 

[Cosmix]

Lets get back onto the topic of Stalberg. If you want to take about whether the versteeg signing was better than Pyatt or Kelly, there are better places to do so.

I for one hope we re-sign Stalberg, he shouldn't cost much and is an excellent 4th liner that can move up in the lineup when needed.

Stalberg at $1M would be fine by me.