Speculation: What move does GMBM make next?
- Thread starter alcolol
- Start date
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Is it too early for him to give Carlyle a vote of confidence and subsequently fire him? Then hire Patrick Roy?
dracom
Registered User
Nah, we'll never get those kind of free agents. Too much completion with teams like Toronto and Chicago.
la patineuse
Registered User
- Aug 21, 2010
- 7,128
- 3,485
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
darkwingduck
Registered User
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
I think the answer was "1000 hours of meditation and personal reflection" followed by "sign Vermette".
Dr Johnny Fever
Eggplant and Teal
Stupid joke. The Ducks have won 4 consecutive division titles and hold a top-10 prospect pool in the NHL. I literally don't know what more you can reasonably ask from a GM.
He has some bad signings/moves, yes, but a lot of them he was forced into making because of the internal cap. Regardless, nevertheless, good or bad, the net result of BM's work is this: the Ducks have 4 consecutive division titles and a top-10 prospect pool. This cannot be stated enough times.
Short of lacing up his skates and winning playoff series on his own, there really isn't much more BM can do. He has put the team in fantastic position to succeed in both short and long term. The coaches and the players haven't executed, and oh, they were up 3-2 in a conference final 1 season ago. They deserved a cup with that roster, but the players and coaching staff didn't execute. Not the General Manager.
Lord Flashheart
Squadron Commander
The Midnight Burrito
True Fan
KelVarnsen
Registered User
Agree with some but BM wasn't "forced" into signing Bieksa and Stoner. Those two moves were bad then and are even worse now and because of his mismanagement of the money he has, he has not been able to use his internal cap efficiently. Those signings have hamstrung his ability to sign a scoring winger and his own RFA'S.
The Bieksa extension was troubling since he hadn't played for us and got a NMC. I don't really get that part and what makes it a really bad contact. All things considered, both players are able to contribute positively, just over priced for what they are. Stoner's contact isn't nearly as bad as Bieksa's. Bieksa is a 4/5 Dman right now and is getting paid like a 2/3 Dman. The signings cost us Perron, which is the worst part of it. The Stoner signing wasn't bad when it happened. Bieksa's contact extension was a bit of a head scratcher when it happened, but got progressively worse when they announced the parameters of the expansion draft. To blame BM for signing these guys and losing out on Perron is not completely fare, since he wasn't even on the team when they were acquired. We'd be in a lot worse shape if we had kept Hagelin. BM has done a great job with our roster and kept our prospect pool near the top of the leagues annually. He'll make it work out. To BMs credit, many other GMs are more stubborn when they make a bad trade or move, BM is quick to act and usually rectifies himself in a positive manner. Think we're a bit spoiled as Ducks fans.
Everything about Bieksa's transactions with us should be unacceptable.
Murray didn't want to commit that much money and term to Beauch. So he gives identical term, and nearly identical money to a worse player.
The NMC is a ****ing joke. I'm not sure if more than one or two FA's that year got NMC.
Bieksa is not being paid like a 2/3. He's being paid like a 3/4. He is most certainly not a 4/5 IMO. He hasn't been top 4 material for years. He's a 5/6, and had been playing like a 5/6 for 2 years prior to his contract. We either have the worst ****ing pro scouts in the league, or Murray's infatuation with players blinds his evaluation process. We hear the same thing from Murray all the time "he's a player I've liked for a while now". It's a ****ing joke that he, or our pro scouts, couldn't see that he hadn't been top 4 material for some time. It's obvious to the casual fan. A joke that they didn't see that.
I also think it is fair to blame him. If Bieksa was a steady force in the top 4, no one is saying anything. Since he's not, and hadn't been before he was acquired, Murray deserves every bit of criticism.
It's been no secret that eventually we were going to have a log jam on the back end. That's why I didn't mind that Murray only wanted to give Beauch 2 years. I understood. His play had dropped a bit, he was getting older, and we had several young guys coming up. However, he turns around and gives nearly identical money and term to a worse player, who's the same age. That's a joke, and 100% on Murray.
I agree that he's done a good job overall. We do have a great prospect pool. However, I also think we were in a better position than most to win at least 1 cup by now, and he's managed to piss that away. Our window isn't closed, but it doesn't appear any more open than it's been the last 2 years. If close enough wasn't good enough for Bruce, I don't see how it's good enough for Murray. Hopefully he's on the hot seat.
That pathetic excuse of an off-season isn't doing him any favors either.
snarktacular
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 20,525
- 182
I've said it before, the past couple years makes it look like Murray was scouting from 2009 or 2010.
I think Murray didn't want to give Beauch a 3 year contract, so not wanting to give Beauch a 3 year contract and him having Bieksa 3 years aren't related. BM was still having nightmares of Saad skating circles around Beauch. Bieksa gets too much hate on the boards, which is definitely related to his contract. He was horrible when he first got here, but he improved greatly the second half of the season. I'm not saying he's a second pairing guy, he's more than likely going to be running the 3rd pairing this season, but he's definitely a guy that can fill in on the second pairing should someone go out with injury. I love Beauch and would have preferred keeping him, but to blame Bieksa for that is pretty insane. I get it if you wanna blame GMBM for that. Our defense wasn't the issue last year, which is what I really find funny. Our play on the back end was fine, it was our forwards inability to produce points which killed us.
Yah it's almost as bad as when Burke brought in Doug Weight. I agree with you. Just absolutely horrible smh
He brought in Kesler two years ago. Chris Stewart was turning it on before he broke his jaw. Hagelin appeared to be hurt and was turning it on just before being traded to Pitt. Perron played really well for us. McGinn played well in his limited time with us. Lovejoy for Despres was a big win for us, minus the injury issues he had most of last year. I definitely think we won the Ryan trade, especially if/when Ritchie puts up 20 goals consistently. It sucks losing Anderson, but most felt we got really good value in the trade. We also got Bernier for nothing, so it's impossible to say that's a bad trade.
Stoner has been a neutral move. Letting Beauch go was hard to swallow, but our D was not an issue last year, so considering that a lateral move.
Bieksa's contract is bad. Don't mind the player, but there's no denying the contract is bad. Trading Palmieiri for a 2nd round pick was horrible. In a roundabout way, we turned that pick into Perron and Nattinen, so there was a positive to it. Moving Etem out was a good move. Everyone thought we wont the DSP trade, but Sekac ended up being all looks and no substance. That should be considered a neutral move, since DSP was having motivational issues in our organization. Bringing in Bryz had pretty horrific results as well. As with all GMs, he's made bad moves for sure, but I'm happy with him as our GM.
How are they not related? Murray deserves every bit of criticism he gets for that Bieksa contract. Just think about it; why would he not want to re-sign Beauch for 3 years? Most likely due to the following:
Getting up there in age.
Declining play.
Up and coming young defenseman.
So... He signs a same aged defenseman, for identical term, who had been on the decline for much longer than Beauchemin. That's pathetically stupid on Murray's part.
I'm not blaming Bieksa. I knew we'd be having this conversation the moment that transaction happened. For a veteran, it's simply stunning how often he loses his guy. You're right, he'd be okay in a bottom pairing role, but he's being paid like a top 4, so that's a huge issue. That's on Murray though.
Our defense wasn't the biggest issue last year, but maybe if Murray didn't 7+ million on two bottom pairing defenseman, we'd get to use some of that money to upgrade the forwards.
He's made some mistakes recently that have put the ducks in a bad situation. Extending bieksa prior to expansion announcement could hurt the team needs unless he can convince bieksa to waive the NMC, since there is little chance LV would claim him since they would have young defenseman that LV could claim instead.
I look at him not moving stoner yet. Either package him off with Anderson and take less from Toronto or work the phones now and try to get nj to take him for a price. Draft picks or a prospect.
Picking up Bernier prior to getting Lindholm and Rackell signed. Montoya signed for $1 million in Montreal. No reason to carry $4 million in cap room for the backup.
I blame ownership for not ponying up when they have a legit cup contender. They should be spending to the max during these years.
We have 9 million in cap space to sign those two, which should be more than enough.
