18/19 MGMT thread VIIII

[TruGr1t]

The Nilsson move and McKenna situation was blunt stupid, and at least management didn't get away with it. Now everyone's like: "Where are all the goalies??" Well, we traded one for basically nothing and lost another one on waivers due to a complete failure to understand the market and/or CBA. We also failed to address the depth issue because ... hey, who needs strategic planning and foresight? Not these guys!

 

[valkynax]

The Nilsson move and McKenna situation was blunt stupid, and at least management didn't get away with it. Now everyone's like: "Where are all the goalies??" Well, we traded one for basically nothing and lost another one on waivers due to a complete failure to understand the market and/or CBA. We also failed to address the depth issue because ... hey, who needs strategic planning and foresight? Not these guys!

i STILL think flyers took McKenna just to f*** with us haha

 

[Fire Benning]

Demko having an MRI. No one is gonna throw them a life line in the form of a cheap goalie in a tough situation like this. Bush league, Canucks just got caught with their pants down big time.

 

[timw33]

Demko having an MRI. No one is gonna throw them a life line in the form of a cheap goalie in a tough situation like this. Bush league, Canucks just got caught with their pants down big time.

So we move our backup with the express purpose of getting our 23 year old top goalie prospect onto the team, then we don't start that top prospect, Markstrom plays the bulk of the games, Demko tweaks something, and now Markstrom has to keep playing the bulk of the games. Why did we bother calling up Demko in the first place if we weren't going to even play him? And now we've lost our backup option as a result.

Meanwhile Philly is figuring out they might just have their franchise goalie by letting their 20 year old prospect play a bunch of games, thus allowing them to plan around his emergence. And they're now a playoff team as a result lol.

 

[Melvin]

The Nilsson move and McKenna situation was blunt stupid, and at least management didn't get away with it. Now everyone's like: "Where are all the goalies??" Well, we traded one for basically nothing and lost another one on waivers due to a complete failure to understand the market and/or CBA. We also failed to address the depth issue because ... hey, who needs strategic planning and foresight? Not these guys!

You know what's funny is that everyone always says I hate everything management does but I called the Nilsson trade a good one and damn it I do try to like some moves these dingbats make but I was 100% wrong and I think it's correct to just assume when they make a move thst it's f***ing stupid even if it's not immediately obvious why.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Why did we bother calling up Demko in the first place if we weren't going to even play him?

They called up Demko because he was ready for it. They wanted him to get some games in this season to see where he was at and practice full time with Ian Clark. Everything was going according to plan and he was going to play today. Then he got hurt. It's unfortunate, but they absolutely should have got him up when they did.

 

[4Twenty]

They called up Demko because he was ready for it. They wanted him to get some games in this season to see where he was at and practice full time with Ian Clark. Everything was going according to plan and he was going to play today. Then he got hurt. It's unfortunate, but they absolutely should have got him up when they did.

Not if they couldn't secure a replacement on the farm. They rushed it.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Not if they couldn't secure a replacement on the farm. They rushed it.

Or maybe they sat on that deal for weeks, then eventually pulled the trigger because the clock was ticking on getting Demko up?

If the alternatives were leaving Demko on the farm all season because there was no interest in Nilsson, or waive Nilsson in hopes of swapping places with Demko, those aren't great options either. Nilsson gets claimed and you're in the same position, with one less draft pick. You can't just assume if we waited the offers would improve.

The priority here was getting Demko up to the NHL and alongside Ian Clark. And time was running out. Getting him up when they did was the correct decision. It just sucks that he got hurt.

 

[Melvin]

Or maybe they sat on that deal for weeks, then eventually pulled the trigger because the clock was ticking on getting Demko up?

If the alternatives were leaving Demko on the farm all season because there was no interest in Nilsson, or waive Nilsson in hopes of swapping places with Demko, those aren't great options either. Nilsson gets claimed and you're in the same position, with one less draft pick. You can't just assume if we waited the offers would improve.

The priority here was getting Demko up to the NHL and alongside Ian Clark. And time was running out. Getting him up when they did was the correct decision. It just sucks that he got hurt.

Why on earth was "time running out?" what was the ticking clock?

 

[TruGr1t]

You know what's funny is that everyone always says I hate everything management does but I called the Nilsson trade a good one and damn it I do try to like some moves these dingbats make but I was 100% wrong and I think it's correct to just assume when they make a move thst it's ****ing stupid even if it's not immediately obvious why.

To be fair, the Nilsson move in a vacuum is actually totally reasonable (if somewhat average) in terms of pure return. The issue of course, as it's apt to do, emerges for Benning & Co. when it comes to understanding the finer details, and broader repercussions, of any move. There was no "time crunch" on getting Demko involved. In fact, there was no pressure whatsoever. They likely jumped on what they thought was a great return for Nilsson (and a defensible trade to mollify the fan base) and simply assumed McKenna would clear waivers (or they actually didn't check if McKenna required waivers, which is obviously worse). We've seen this management group make multiple contractual and CBA-related gaffs so any explanation is probably viable.

It was a very dumb move regardless and the situation they now find themselves in was completely avoidable.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Why on earth was "time running out?" what was the ticking clock?

The fact they were in the back half of the season and losing valuable time to get a look at Demko, get him reps with Clark and some NHL experience.

There was a reason people were calling for a move to get Demko up to the NHL in the weeks leading up to the deal... and rightly so. Nilsson's struggles also factored in.

 

[4Twenty]

Or maybe they sat on that deal for weeks, then eventually pulled the trigger because the clock was ticking on getting Demko up?

If the alternatives were leaving Demko on the farm all season because there was no interest in Nilsson, or waive Nilsson in hopes of swapping places with Demko, those aren't great options either. Nilsson gets claimed and you're in the same position, with one less draft pick. You can't just assume if we waited the offers would improve.

The priority here was getting Demko up to the NHL and alongside Ian Clark. And time was running out. Getting him up when they did was the correct decision. It just sucks that he got hurt.

Why would the clock be ticking? I don't get that statement.

The alternatives you're suggesting are not reality.

Why was time running out? What makes the time they brought him up the correct time?

He's been here a month and played one game, I get thinking people are just using this as being negative, but it isn't. These things were said when they pushed through both this trade and the MDZ trade through. This isn't hindsight.

 

[timw33]

Uhhhh less than ideal.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Why was time running out? What makes the time they brought him up the correct time?

This move was about what was best for Demko. He was ready to start his NHL career and they made the move to open up a roster spot for him, as they should have. The fact Nilsson wasn't getting the job done and they acquired a draft pick were also factors.

What if I told you a better offer was never coming. How would you have handled the goaltending situation?

 

[Melvin]

The fact they were in the back half of the season and losing valuable time to get a look at Demko, get him reps with Clark and some NHL experience.

There was a reason people were calling for a move to get Demko up to the NHL in the weeks leading up to the deal... and rightly so. Nilsson's struggles also factored in.

I don't remember you saying that a "clock was ticking" and that they needed to get him up soon until after the trade was made, and then of course now that it the trade is done, it had to be done then and no time could be paid to making sure that they had another goalie in case they lost McKenna. This is classic motivated reasoning.

Especially considering there was an extended break coming up, I really don't see why the trade needed to be done then and not, say, now. What difference would it have made?

 

[Drop the Sopel]

I don't remember you saying that a "clock was ticking" and that they needed to get him up soon until after the trade was made, and then of course now that it the trade is done, it had to be done then and no time could be paid to making sure that they had another goalie in case they lost McKenna. This is classic motivated reasoning.

No, this was the correct logical move and that's why so many people wanted it to happen, myself included.

If no better deal was coming for Nilsson how would you have handled the goaltending situation? Would you have left Demko on the farm all season?

 

[xtra]

The issue is not having Ottawa put mcehenny on waivers to clear first the trade and logic was fine the finer details is the issue

 

[Melvin]

No, this was the correct logical move and that's why so many people wanted it to happen, myself included.

If no better deal was coming for Nilsson how would you have handled the goaltending situation? Would you have left Demko on the farm all season?

This is a false dichotomy. How long would it have taken to find another goalie to make sure they were covered? That IS why McKenna was included in the deal, is it not? Because they knew they needed one. But they also should have known he'd have to clear waivers and that was no guarantee. Demko has played ONE game. There was a 10-day break where no games were being played. It should have been trivial to secure the services of a goalie first before pulling the trigger.

I was wrong about the trade because I didn't realize Bachman was out.

 

[TruGr1t]

The ideal time to address the Nilsson/Demko situation was probably in the summer. Putting it off until there was any urgency (which is debatable) was the first mistake. The general management of the goaltending depth was the second mistake. I fail to see how there was some sort of urgency in getting Demko up so he could play one game, sit on the bench, and then get injured.

 

[4Twenty]

This move was about what was best for Demko. He was ready to start his NHL career and they made the move to open up a roster spot for him, as they should have. The fact Nilsson wasn't getting the job done and they acquired a draft pick were also factors.

What if I told you a better offer was never coming. How would you have handled the goaltending situation?

I don't want to play answer a question with a question game.

The offer was a 6th round pick....not getting one isn't a big deal. They knew Bachman was injured, they needed to make sure they had a capable goalie in the system.

Please answer my previous questions.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

The issue is not having Ottawa put mcehenny on waivers to clear first the trade and logic was fine the finer details is the issue

Would they risk losing McKenna if they didn't have Nilsson under contract?

 

[Melvin]

The ideal time to address the Nilsson/Demko situation was probably in the summer. Putting it off until there was any urgency (which is debatable) was the first mistake. The general management of the goaltending depth was the second mistake. I fail to see how there was some sort of urgency in getting Demko up so he could play one game, sit on the bench, and then get injured.

Oh, 100%. Nilsson should have been traded in the off-season and many people said so at the time.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

I don't want to play answer a question with a question game.

Please answer my previous questions.

I answered your question. They wanted Demko to have more time in the NHL, alongside Clark. Waiting weeks or months took that developmental time away.

So if no better trade was coming for Nilsson, what would you have done?

 

[xtra]

Would they risk losing McKenna if they didn't have Nilsson under contract?

Do you think we got a premium on Nilsson a value for assuming that risk? If not then it’s a mistake

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Oh, 100%. Nilsson should have been traded in the off-season and many people said so at the time.

Traded? What if there were no takers? Then what?