Player Discussion Artem Anisimov (C)

[L'Aveuglette]

Not only is that statement utterly false considering 2 of 3 three teams played each other in round 1, but this is pure speculation on your part.

But anyways, yes those teams traded away some of their future for the hope of winning now. Thats fairly obvious but I guess it wasnt clear somehow.

It didnt change the fact that collectively, when charged with carrying a team of their own, that core group was highly inconsistent. And if those teams depended on the players they got from us to make the playoffs, they might have missed altogether while waiting for them to make an impact (they were mostly all non factors after the trades).

One of my best friends is a life long Sharks fan, and losing Pavelski to re sign Karlsson is a very upsetting move to him. He still sees Burns as the superior player, especially now having seen them both closely. Karlsson isnt seen as the top 5 player that he was in Ottawa anymore, fwiw.

Your friend is dumb.

 

[Samsquanch]

Your friend is dumb.

Good one? The truth hurts I suppose. I like EK over Burns myself, but the results speak for themselves over the last few seasons, and I have no problem with someone preffering Burns and his shot over Karl and his pass. Without question they both get their jobs done, despite what some people say about their game away from the puck.

And yeah, I can understand his frustration with allocating that much of the cap to two offensive right handed D men on the same team...but yeah anyways, what a tool...

 

[Boud]

Good one? The truth hurts I suppose. I like EK over Burns myself, but the results speak for themselves over the last few seasons, and I have no problem with someone preffering Burns and his shot over Karl and his pass. Without question they both get their jobs done, despite what some people say about their game away from the puck.

And yeah, I can understand his frustration with allocating that much of the cap to two offensive right handed D men on the same team...but yeah anyways, what a tool...

Pavelski over Karlsson?

I mean... You easily take Karlsson here. You have 60 minutes of puck control from the back end.

 

[JD1]

See, this is where you go off the rails a bit; if the criticisms were valid, people should be happy because the team didn't address them and instead gutted the team of the parts that weren't being criticized?

Most people have said this trade was a good move. You talk about 4 posts in for a negative take, a guy made a error regarding the facts around the trade and commented based on his incorrect understanding, was corrected, and edited his post to admit his mistake. Seems odd to criticize that. Then again, your still criticizing people who had concerns of the team when it was on it's playoff run; one would think given the absolutely catastrophic decline that followed, maybe some of the complaints had merit... but no, you're still dismissive of them because they must have just been negative for the sake of being negative.

You didn't understand my post at all

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Vegas lost in the first round to SJ

D'oh, you're right. I coulda sworn they met in round two. My mistake on that one.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Not only is that statement utterly false considering 2 of 3 three teams played each other in round 1, but this is pure speculation on your part.

But anyways, yes those teams traded away some of their future for the hope of winning now. Thats fairly obvious but I guess it wasnt clear somehow.

It didnt change the fact that collectively, when charged with carrying a team of their own, that core group was highly inconsistent. And if those teams depended on the players they got from us to make the playoffs, they might have missed altogether while waiting for them to make an impact (they were mostly all non factors after the trades).

One of my best friends is a life long Sharks fan, and losing Pavelski to re sign Karlsson is a very upsetting move to him. He still sees Burns as the superior player, especially now having seen them both closely. Karlsson isnt seen as the top 5 player that he was in Ottawa anymore, fwiw.

Yep, I was wrong about the rounds thing. My mistake on that one.

But I daresay the overwhelming majority of fans in those cities would still do the Karlsson, Stone and Duchene trades (definitely not including Dzingel here).

And watching those games, I would say a badly injured Karlsson was pretty well equal (or better) to Burns on 190 feet of the ice surface. Only area where Erik faltered was directly in front of his net, but the damned fool put in a gallant effort to be there for his new team. I'm sure his teammates appreciated the gesture, as he easily could've tapped out and waited for his UFA payday without risking further injury.

 

[Tuna99]

Watched some Hilites on Anisimov, looks heavy footed and doesn’t have a quick game. Don’t think this will be as big of a Homeric as everyone is saying, at best it’s a saw off in year 1 and year 2 we’ll see where Anisimovs game is at.

Look like he’s a player that will slow down very very quickly

 

[Samsquanch]

Pavelski over Karlsson?

I mean... You easily take Karlsson here. You have 60 minutes of puck control from the back end.

When your team already has the leagues other best offensive RHD, yes, spending 11m on Karlsson (and in turn losing Pavelski) does not seem like the best allocation of funds.

It might work, but it's an uncanny way to build a contender (ie two offensive dynamos on the back end who are both equally questionable defensively).

 

[Duncstar]

Watched some Hilites on Anisimov, looks heavy footed and doesn’t have a quick game. Don’t think this will be as big of a Homeric as everyone is saying, at best it’s a saw off in year 1 and year 2 we’ll see where Anisimovs game is at.

Look like he’s a player that will slow down very very quickly

He is more skilled then Smith. This is still a good win

 

[Tuna99]

He is more skilled then Smith. This is still a good win

I want to see the fit first. Against the he speed in our division has at C I dont see this being an impact move and my guess is Anisimov is a -20 at the end of the season

 

[BonkTastic]

Watched some Hilites on Anisimov, looks heavy footed and doesn’t have a quick game. Don’t think this will be as big of a Homeric as everyone is saying, at best it’s a saw off in year 1 and year 2 we’ll see where Anisimovs game is at.

Look like he’s a player that will slow down very very quickly

Yeah, he's already slow. The age-decline in footspeed has already happened with him over the past couple of seasons.

 

[BonkTastic]

... my guess is Anisimov is a -20 at the end of the season

My guess is that most players with significant icetime on this team will be at least -10/-15.

We're going to be a bottom-5 team with a bad goal differential. Bad +/- comes with that territory almost regardless of other factors.

 

[Tnuoc Alucard]

I dont disagree that Karlsson was the biggest start we've ever had... I even stated as much in my first post.

Just pointing out the fact that you were being a little dramatic in your OP when you made it seem like we traded the first good player we've ever had. Just because Karlsson was the best of the lot doesnt mean the other 3 were second rate stars. Heatley was a back-to-back 50 goal scorer, the first and only one in the first two years after the lockout. He was a superstar in every definition of the word.

To me, the first good player the Senators ever traded, was Yashin.

At the time I agreed with the trade, as he was all about himself, and it was strictly business. Yashin never fulfilled any NHL contract he ever signed.

 

[Samsquanch]

To me, the first good player the Senators ever traded, was Yashin.

At the time I agreed with the trade, as he was all about himself, and it was strictly business. Yashin never fulfilled any NHL contract he ever signed.

And the second was definitely Hossa. Then Havlat (not a superstar imo but still a loss). We also let Chara walk away into the arms of a division rival. And then Alfie years later.

So between Chara, Alfie and Hossa we have potentially 3 hall of famers that have departed from the team. We survived then, and we will survive this last year as well.

I know it seems like the worlds ending people, but it will get better quickly. Life is full of peaks and valleys. This is coming from someone who's mother passed away 3 weeks ago - you gotta keep moving forward. It's the only way.

 

[LudwigVonKarlsson]

I want to see the fit first. Against the he speed in our division has at C I dont see this being an impact move and my guess is Anisimov is a -20 at the end of the season

Good chance that the entire team will be -20 or worse next year.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Yep, I was wrong about the rounds thing. My mistake on that one.

But I daresay the overwhelming majority of fans in those cities would still do the Karlsson, Stone and Duchene trades (definitely not including Dzingel here).

And watching those games, I would say a badly injured Karlsson was pretty well equal (or better) to Burns on 190 feet of the ice surface. Only area where Erik faltered was directly in front of his net, but the damned fool put in a gallant effort to be there for his new team. I'm sure his teammates appreciated the gesture, as he easily could've tapped out and waited for his UFA payday without risking further injury.

Your original post while slightly incorrect was still correct in nature. The "core" we jettisoned has gone on to some success already in year one and will continue to do so because they are still stars in this league.

Why did it fall apart here? I know which of the following groups I would throw my weight behind going forward and which one I would not.

Karlsson
Stone
Duchene
Hoffman
Methot
Dzingel

or

Ryan
Ceci
Smith
Anderson/Condon
Brassard
Phaneuf

That second group costs close to the same as the first and brought little of value, if not negative value over an ELC or cheap vet. Beyond those two groups, there was no money left with the limited budget of ~65 mil being spent. I really fail to see how that original core got a fair shake, especially after crippling the ECF roster immediately. It fell apart because of a poor support core and lack of finances to add anything else or clean up the messes.

Maybe rebuilding was still necessary because of bad money and contracts needed, but lets at least point fingers at the right group here.

 

[Ice-Tray]

A pro POHO would cost a lot. Getting another incompetent management person as POHO is not going to help. Hiring an experienced and successful GM and getting rid of the incompetent one we have now would be much better than hiring a POHO. However, a new owner with deeper pockets who will invest in the team and on-ice product is even more important.

I am happy to see a new coaching staff in place, but that is a lower level issue that is not as important as the two above: new owner and competent GM,

Where we differ in this area is that I don’t think PD is incompetent and you do, which is fine.

I think a President of hockey operations, and at least one other AGM to run Belleville and do minor contracts would be fantastic for the team.

Of course an owner who properly funded an operation, even if we had to ebb and flow through rebuilds instead of staying perpetually at the cap, is most important.

It seems clear that we can’t have a full top notch staff until the ownership situation is sorted out.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

Your original post while slightly incorrect was still correct in nature. The "core" we jettisoned has gone on to some success already in year one and will continue to do so because they are still stars in this league.

Why did it fall apart here? I know which of the following groups I would throw my weight behind going forward and which one I would not.

Karlsson
Stone
Duchene
Hoffman
Methot
Dzingel

or

Ryan
Ceci
Smith
Anderson/Condon
Brassard
Phaneuf

That second group costs close to the same as the first and brought little of value, if not negative value over an ELC or cheap vet. Beyond those two groups, there was no money left with the limited budget of ~65 mil being spent. I really fail to see how that original core got a fair shake, especially after crippling the ECF roster immediately. It fell apart because of a poor support core and lack of finances to add anything else or clean up the messes.

Maybe rebuilding was still necessary because of bad money and contracts needed, but lets at least point fingers at the right group here.

In rebuild year one, we're already adding guys who belong in that 2nd group in Zaitsev! Yay. History will repeat itself but we won't get that sweet 3rd round run. Lose all the stars without and miss the playoffs anyways. Maybe the height of it will be us getting swept by the Leafs in round 1 in a few years.

We picked the same guy who engineered it the first time to try again so why expect anything else?

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

In rebuild year one, we're already adding guys who belong in that 2nd group in Zaitsev! Yay. History will repeat itself but we won't get that sweet 3rd round run. Lose all the stars without and miss the playoffs anyways. Maybe the height of it will be us getting swept by the Leafs in round 1 in a few years.

We picked the same guy who engineered it the first time to try again so why expect anything else?

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills reading some of the comments about that broken core being the problem. LOOK AT THE CRAP THEY WERE SURROUNDED WITH, and even that was considered a low budget support core by nhl standards with obvious holes elsewhere due to said budget.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Your original post while slightly incorrect was still correct in nature. The "core" we jettisoned has gone on to some success already in year one and will continue to do so because they are still stars in this league.

Why did it fall apart here? I know which of the following groups I would throw my weight behind going forward and which one I would not.

Karlsson
Stone
Duchene
Hoffman
Methot
Dzingel

or

Ryan
Ceci
Smith
Anderson/Condon
Brassard
Phaneuf

That second group costs close to the same as the first and brought little of value, if not negative value over an ELC or cheap vet. Beyond those two groups, there was no money left with the limited budget of ~65 mil being spent. I really fail to see how that original core got a fair shake, especially after crippling the ECF roster immediately. It fell apart because of a poor support core and lack of finances to add anything else or clean up the messes.

Maybe rebuilding was still necessary because of bad money and contracts needed, but lets at least point fingers at the right group here.

Well put. Said way better than I ever could.

 

[supsens]

Your original post while slightly incorrect was still correct in nature. The "core" we jettisoned has gone on to some success already in year one and will continue to do so because they are still stars in this league.

Why did it fall apart here? I know which of the following groups I would throw my weight behind going forward and which one I would not.

Karlsson
Stone
Duchene
Hoffman
Methot
Dzingel

or

Ryan
Ceci
Smith
Anderson/Condon
Brassard
Phaneuf

That second group costs close to the same as the first and brought little of value, if not negative value over an ELC or cheap vet. Beyond those two groups, there was no money left with the limited budget of ~65 mil being spent. I really fail to see how that original core got a fair shake, especially after crippling the ECF roster immediately. It fell apart because of a poor support core and lack of finances to add anything else or clean up the messes.

Maybe rebuilding was still necessary because of bad money and contracts needed, but lets at least point fingers at the right group here.

The first group was terrible half the time and meh the other half. if results matter, the second is not a core group the sens built around.

 

[JD1]

Your original post while slightly incorrect was still correct in nature. The "core" we jettisoned has gone on to some success already in year one and will continue to do so because they are still stars in this league.

Why did it fall apart here? I know which of the following groups I would throw my weight behind going forward and which one I would not.

Karlsson
Stone
Duchene
Hoffman
Methot
Dzingel

or

Ryan
Ceci
Smith
Anderson/Condon
Brassard
Phaneuf

That second group costs close to the same as the first and brought little of value, if not negative value over an ELC or cheap vet. Beyond those two groups, there was no money left with the limited budget of ~65 mil being spent. I really fail to see how that original core got a fair shake, especially after crippling the ECF roster immediately. It fell apart because of a poor support core and lack of finances to add anything else or clean up the messes.

Maybe rebuilding was still necessary because of bad money and contracts needed, but lets at least point fingers at the right group here.

Gone on to some success. No. Not at all. Not yet

Florida missed the playoffs

The Sharks and the Knights both made cup moves. Neither won. Both are now in pretty significant cap management situations

Arguably the Jackets did well. They won a round which is their best showing ever

This team won't get spending to the cap. If you look at the deals that those guys signed

Karlsson 11.5
Stone 9.5
Duchene 8
Hoffman 5
Methot 5
Dzingle 2.5

That's over 40 with 6 guys....methot is going to retire so replace him with another 5 m guy....we can't pay 40 out of 68 to 6 guys ... the leafs have that kind of trouble with RFA players and a bigger budget...but at least they'll get the best years out of those RFAs

I understand what you are saying.....but it's becoming pretty evident in this league that you cannot have a whack of guys on top dollar ufa deals. Toronto is in trouble from signing JT.

ELCs and cheap vets. That is easy to say. It's a lot harder to do. A lot of ELCs bounce back and forth between the NHL and AHL and cannot be relied upon for full time NHL service. Colin White as an example is a mid 1st rounder. There are lots of examples. Very few ELCs give you 200+ games on their ELC deals.

Cheap vets. What are we talking? 1.5m tupe deals? Pyatt. Nate Thompson. You can go around the league with hindsight and point out cheap vet deals where the vet outperformed the deal but it takes hindsight. It us easier to go around the league and point out cheap vet deals where the cheap vet didn't out perform

The numbers above are off the top of my head so don't shoot me if I am off by .5 on some of them

 

[slamigo]

I can’t count how many times I yelled at the TV last season “OMG, Smith kills plays! That’s all he does!!! He kills plays!!”
It became like a meme in my household. So, I’m okay with this trade.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Gone on to some success. No. Not at all. Not yet

Florida missed the playoffs

The Sharks and the Knights both made cup moves. Neither won. Both are now in pretty significant cap management situations

Arguably the Jackets did well. They won a round which is their best showing ever

This team won't get spending to the cap. If you look at the deals that those guys signed

Karlsson 11.5
Stone 9.5
Duchene 8
Hoffman 5
Methot 5
Dzingle 2.5

That's over 40 with 6 guys....methot is going to retire so replace him with another 5 m guy....we can't pay 40 out of 68 to 6 guys ... the leafs have that kind of trouble with RFA players and a bigger budget...but at least they'll get the best years out of those RFAs

I understand what you are saying.....but it's becoming pretty evident in this league that you cannot have a whack of guys on top dollar ufa deals. Toronto is in trouble from signing JT.

ELCs and cheap vets. That is easy to say. It's a lot harder to do. A lot of ELCs bounce back and forth between the NHL and AHL and cannot be relied upon for full time NHL service. Colin White as an example is a mid 1st rounder. There are lots of examples. Very few ELCs give you 200+ games on their ELC deals.

Cheap vets. What are we talking? 1.5m tupe deals? Pyatt. Nate Thompson. You can go around the league with hindsight and point out cheap vet deals where the vet outperformed the deal but it takes hindsight. It us easier to go around the league and point out cheap vet deals where the cheap vet didn't out perform

The numbers above are off the top of my head so don't shoot me if I am off by .5 on some of them

You make some fair points JD1 but the core of the matter is still that you had two groups making almost the same and one contributed significantly, one very much did not. Now maybe these stars didnt take their teams to the finals, but they almost all had solid seasons individually and some playoff success, while the other group is basically entirely done in the NHL doing anything but filling a roster spot.

The other point was that even with those two groups, we were still well below the cap, so that bad support group was all the core really got for help. I maintain that the core was not the problem, they were just surrounded poorly with what little money was available and with the low budget that was all they got and their was no room to clean up any of those bad deals. What was available was spent poorly, and they were already working with a peg leg.

I'm not delving in to whether or not everyone should have been kept or whos fault it was that the bad ones were signed, but there is no doubt in my mind which group is just a collection of cap casualties that couldnt get it done and which group is still playing well in the league.

 

[JD1]

You make some fair points JD1 but the core of the matter is still that you had two groups making almost the same and one contributed significantly, one very much did not. Now maybe these stars didnt take their teams to the finals, but they almost all had solid seasons individually and some playoff success, while the other group is basically entirely done in the NHL doing anything but filling a roster spot.

The other point was that even with those two groups, we were still well below the cap, so that bad support group was all the core really got for help. I maintain that the core was not the problem, they were just surrounded poorly with what little money was available and with the low budget that was all they got and their was no room to clean up any of those bad deals. What was available was spent poorly, and they were already working with a peg leg.

I'm not delving in to whether or not everyone should have been kept or whos fault it was that the bad ones were signed, but there is no doubt in my mind which group is just a collection of cap casualties that couldnt get it done and which group is still playing well in the league.

For sure you are right about the stronger group.

The second group though, at that time, did contribute in the playoffs. Phaneuf played a solid role. Ryan was our best forward, certainly highest scoring forward, during that run. Brassard was very effective until he injured his shoulder.

There's no question which group you'd rather have right now though. But I will point out that some of those guys in the group you wouldn't want is age related ineffectiveness.

I'm not so sure a couple years from now you don't see the same thing with Karlsson and Stone