Confirmed with Link: Coyotes trade Strome and Perlini for Nick Schmaltz - Part Deux

[BUX7PHX]

Oh and tell me what other organizations have displayed the brutality the coyotes have inflicted on their local fans?
IF the team was WINNING LOL. Big IF JAKEY.
But they are not because they give away too many premier players (correction here for Wheeler he didnt even bother signing for this crap place and look at him now!!)
And no matter how you spin it the arena location is awful.
The coyotes have averaged near last every year they've been in Glendale. The year after making the conference finals they averaged 13000 people.
If they win the stanley cup 4 years in a row I'm guessing attendence would be around 14,000.

You're mixing things up - first you wanted to know what players reserved the right to not sign with their teams and/or demand out. Then you talk about "giving away" players, which are two separate elements. In one case, someone has the option to sign a deal, but in the other case, the player already has a deal in place and that must be navigated.

We have Wheeler, but then you are forgetting about players like Kevin Hayes, Justin Schultz, or Connor Bleackley? It does not happen often that these individuals don't sign, but there are a multitude of reasons as to why, same as why a player might be "given away" by a team.

Out of curiosity, what is your definition of being "given away"? Because you could make the case very easily that a player like Dougie Hamilton was "given away," with the reason being a team that is up against the cap has a long-term deal to give out that would cost a lot of money. We don't have to worry about that, but there have been several cases of teams unloading a player without knowing what they had available:

Filip Forsberg, Jonathan Drouin (another situation of player/management disagreement), Ryan Hartman (trended decently for the Blackhawks). Hell, we picked up Crouse in very much the same fashion.

Bottom line is that after 2-3 years, you start to see how the player is trending. Are they Drouin (talent for days, but took issue with management) or Forsberg (a player who Washington clearly thought was not going to be a game-breaker at the moment). The only thing that we could work with on the trending aspect was a talented player who just hadn't shown any of that talent in ways that commanded a top spot in the lineup or crucial moments. Would you have been more or less upset if this trade had occurred at the trade deadline, and the emphasis was to pick up Schmaltz long-term and for the playoff push, assuming the same records, and same inconsistencies from Strome would have been seen through the season?

The fact that we have had a few more scenarios than normal indicates that we haven't quite done the same due diligence in finding out what players are about. Think about all of these players that were traded of recent time: Domi, Perlini, Strome, Martinook, and Murphy. The common-thread is that none of these picks was influenced by Chayka. Strome pick was made when Chayka was an AGM, but that doesn't mean he is linked to Strome for significant time. I think that for the first time, especially given our upgrades to the scouting department, we are getting some better information about players (scouts talk to teams about players and their habits) and we are also probably following up with the proper evaluations. Maybe that is part of the reason why Zadina fell on our lists last year when he was the "obvious" choice. Maybe the obvious choice also had some obvious flaws behind the scenes where we could see this become a Turris 2.0 or Strome 2.0 situation.

I think it is all the same as why some young players are given up on - the team sees a gap in their roster that this current player isn't filling or can't fill properly, and the team makes a move to change that. Strome's first period in the game against us looked like how he played when he was on the team here - there appeared to be very little fire in him and he was taken off of his game as players like Cousins and Archibald would put a body on him. He finally started to look like the player we wanted him to be in about 3 plays: the between the defender's legs PP pass, the screen on a PP shot taken by Kane, and a 3rd period pass from behind the net. That was it, and it was kind of a microcosm of his time here: early it doesn't look like he is engaged, but once the team went on the PP and the situation became "easier" to navigate with the additional player, Strome started to open up a little bit and light some fire under him. It shouldn't take an easy situation to light someone's fire, and if that is how he operates, then I want someone on my team who is willing to stand up to adversity and push back in the face of it, as opposed to waiting to do something when things are a little easier to handle.

 

[cobra427]

You're mixing things up - first you wanted to know what players reserved the right to not sign with their teams and/or demand out. Then you talk about "giving away" players, which are two separate elements. In one case, someone has the option to sign a deal, but in the other case, the player already has a deal in place and that must be navigated.

We have Wheeler, but then you are forgetting about players like Kevin Hayes, Justin Schultz, or Connor Bleackley? It does not happen often that these individuals don't sign, but there are a multitude of reasons as to why, same as why a player might be "given away" by a team.

Out of curiosity, what is your definition of being "given away"? Because you could make the case very easily that a player like Dougie Hamilton was "given away," with the reason being a team that is up against the cap has a long-term deal to give out that would cost a lot of money. We don't have to worry about that, but there have been several cases of teams unloading a player without knowing what they had available:

Filip Forsberg, Jonathan Drouin (another situation of player/management disagreement), Ryan Hartman (trended decently for the Blackhawks). Hell, we picked up Crouse in very much the same fashion.

Bottom line is that after 2-3 years, you start to see how the player is trending. Are they Drouin (talent for days, but took issue with management) or Forsberg (a player who Washington clearly thought was not going to be a game-breaker at the moment). The only thing that we could work with on the trending aspect was a talented player who just hadn't shown any of that talent in ways that commanded a top spot in the lineup or crucial moments. Would you have been more or less upset if this trade had occurred at the trade deadline, and the emphasis was to pick up Schmaltz long-term and for the playoff push, assuming the same records, and same inconsistencies from Strome would have been seen through the season?

The fact that we have had a few more scenarios than normal indicates that we haven't quite done the same due diligence in finding out what players are about. Think about all of these players that were traded of recent time: Domi, Perlini, Strome, Martinook, and Murphy. The common-thread is that none of these picks was influenced by Chayka. Strome pick was made when Chayka was an AGM, but that doesn't mean he is linked to Strome for significant time. I think that for the first time, especially given our upgrades to the scouting department, we are getting some better information about players (scouts talk to teams about players and their habits) and we are also probably following up with the proper evaluations. Maybe that is part of the reason why Zadina fell on our lists last year when he was the "obvious" choice. Maybe the obvious choice also had some obvious flaws behind the scenes where we could see this become a Turris 2.0 or Strome 2.0 situation.

I think it is all the same as why some young players are given up on - the team sees a gap in their roster that this current player isn't filling or can't fill properly, and the team makes a move to change that. Strome's first period in the game against us looked like how he played when he was on the team here - there appeared to be very little fire in him and he was taken off of his game as players like Cousins and Archibald would put a body on him. He finally started to look like the player we wanted him to be in about 3 plays: the between the defender's legs PP pass, the screen on a PP shot taken by Kane, and a 3rd period pass from behind the net. That was it, and it was kind of a microcosm of his time here: early it doesn't look like he is engaged, but once the team went on the PP and the situation became "easier" to navigate with the additional player, Strome started to open up a little bit and light some fire under him. It shouldn't take an easy situation to light someone's fire, and if that is how he operates, then I want someone on my team who is willing to stand up to adversity and push back in the face of it, as opposed to waiting to do something when things are a little easier to handle.

I like your thoughtful analysis because it has some objectivity in it .

 

[Coyotedroppings]

Just when I thought this thread couldn't get any worse.

 

[RemoAZ]

Here's the interesting thing. I spent many years living by Horizon High School and used to ride my ATV in the dirt lots that turned into the Westin Resort and Kierland Commons. In fact, I moved to Peoria right when they broke ground on the Benihana up by Scottsdale and Frank Lloyd Wright - up until then, that area was just a typical moderate-scale strip mall whose biggest claim to fame was the Valley's first In-n-Out Burger franchise. I moved out to Peoria because I could build a brand-new 4,000+ sq ft house for less than it cost to get a run-down POS home where I was living.

Fast forward to today - I just sold that house I built for over a half-mil and moved up to a new development by Calderwood Butte. There is a ****-ton of new upscale housing going in up there, along with a Kierland-style shopping complex being built at 83rd Avenue and Happy Valley. They just finished building a new BMW dealership out by where my old house was, and the P83 shopping and entertainment district by the Peoria Sports Complex is getting more tony by the week. I read somewhere in the Republic that that whole area is the fastest-growing and one of the most attractive investment areas in Metro Phoenix.

Imagine - just imagine! - if some local hockey squadron decided to expend even a small amount of marketing budget to tap into that area.

The people that have run this organization only want a subsidy. They don't want to market the team or win. They have been single minded in their approach to making a profit. How much corporate money have they lost simply because they can't sell anything on more than a one year term because that's all there is to the lease? No corporation is going to place any significant cash in this team. Not only have we had broke or zero ownership in Glendale, the ones we have had were not interested in making an effort to get people in the seats.

Sounds like you played the market perfect. I was the opposite. Did a complete $60k remodel on my home right before the market crash and the company I worked for went BK. Since recovered from losing everything but I can't afford to build a custom home. I would love to buy a new build in one of those beautiful neighborhoods by you. Problem is every one of them have HOAs which I refuse to be a part of. I'm not going to make a payment on a $300k+ house and then fork over another $100 or more for some Nazi to harass me.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Sounds like you played the market perfect. I was the opposite. Did a complete $60k remodel on my home right before the market crash and the company I worked for went BK. Since recovered from losing everything but I can't afford to build a custom home. I would love to buy a new build in one of those beautiful neighborhoods by you. Problem is every one of them have HOAs which I refuse to be a part of. I'm not going to make a payment on a $300k+ house and then fork over another $100 or more for some Nazi to harass me.

Yeah, the HOAs up here are terrible. Just adding a gate to the community inflates the fees by at least $25/month. The development we built in is gateless, has the lowest new build prices in the area, and has the lowest HOA fee to boot. We did six months' worth of research before we even started looking at models. I can PM you the details if you want but time's running out (a year ago, we were one of the first people to build there and now it's nearly sold out).

 

[azcanuck]

You're mixing things up - first you wanted to know what players reserved the right to not sign with their teams and/or demand out. Then you talk about "giving away" players, which are two separate elements. In one case, someone has the option to sign a deal, but in the other case, the player already has a deal in place and that must be navigated.

We have Wheeler, but then you are forgetting about players like Kevin Hayes, Justin Schultz, or Connor Bleackley? It does not happen often that these individuals don't sign, but there are a multitude of reasons as to why, same as why a player might be "given away" by a team.

Out of curiosity, what is your definition of being "given away"? Because you could make the case very easily that a player like Dougie Hamilton was "given away," with the reason being a team that is up against the cap has a long-term deal to give out that would cost a lot of money. We don't have to worry about that, but there have been several cases of teams unloading a player without knowing what they had available:

Filip Forsberg, Jonathan Drouin (another situation of player/management disagreement), Ryan Hartman (trended decently for the Blackhawks). Hell, we picked up Crouse in very much the same fashion.

Bottom line is that after 2-3 years, you start to see how the player is trending. Are they Drouin (talent for days, but took issue with management) or Forsberg (a player who Washington clearly thought was not going to be a game-breaker at the moment). The only thing that we could work with on the trending aspect was a talented player who just hadn't shown any of that talent in ways that commanded a top spot in the lineup or crucial moments. Would you have been more or less upset if this trade had occurred at the trade deadline, and the emphasis was to pick up Schmaltz long-term and for the playoff push, assuming the same records, and same inconsistencies from Strome would have been seen through the season?

The fact that we have had a few more scenarios than normal indicates that we haven't quite done the same due diligence in finding out what players are about. Think about all of these players that were traded of recent time: Domi, Perlini, Strome, Martinook, and Murphy. The common-thread is that none of these picks was influenced by Chayka. Strome pick was made when Chayka was an AGM, but that doesn't mean he is linked to Strome for significant time. I think that for the first time, especially given our upgrades to the scouting department, we are getting some better information about players (scouts talk to teams about players and their habits) and we are also probably following up with the proper evaluations. Maybe that is part of the reason why Zadina fell on our lists last year when he was the "obvious" choice. Maybe the obvious choice also had some obvious flaws behind the scenes where we could see this become a Turris 2.0 or Strome 2.0 situation.

I think it is all the same as why some young players are given up on - the team sees a gap in their roster that this current player isn't filling or can't fill properly, and the team makes a move to change that. Strome's first period in the game against us looked like how he played when he was on the team here - there appeared to be very little fire in him and he was taken off of his game as players like Cousins and Archibald would put a body on him. He finally started to look like the player we wanted him to be in about 3 plays: the between the defender's legs PP pass, the screen on a PP shot taken by Kane, and a 3rd period pass from behind the net. That was it, and it was kind of a microcosm of his time here: early it doesn't look like he is engaged, but once the team went on the PP and the situation became "easier" to navigate with the additional player, Strome started to open up a little bit and light some fire under him. It shouldn't take an easy situation to light someone's fire, and if that is how he operates, then I want someone on my team who is willing to stand up to adversity and push back in the face of it, as opposed to waiting to do something when things are a little easier to handle.

Wheeler is a top 5 player in the draft. you cannot let a guy like that walk. Those other guys are nowhere near him. They should have known before hand if he would sign or not. Regardless you dont recover well from losing out on not signing your top 5 overall pick.
Then playing Turris when he was clearly not ready and him wanting out. Got ZERO in return for him.
That's two very good players and you got nothing back.
Domi was unhappy here for whatever reason (I believe what his dad said about wanting to play in a legit market). We at least got Alex back for him but Domi is younger and better.
Strome is not a grinder . You might not notice him much during stretches of the game but then he'll dazzle you with his passes. Thats just the type of player he is. You have to accept that. He's not an Archibald. He's a skilled guy who has some holes in his game but overall you're just starting to see him blossom. If Perlini (another high draft pick) turns out we got killed in that trade.
BOTTOM LINE: you cannot lose assets like we have and ever have an elite team.
We are back to being that fringe team with little hope in the near future of being a top tier team. That ship has sailed once again.

 

[BUX7PHX]

Wheeler is a top 5 player in the draft. you cannot let a guy like that walk. Those other guys are nowhere near him. They should have known before hand if he would sign or not. Regardless you dont recover well from losing out on not signing your top 5 overall pick.
Then playing Turris when he was clearly not ready and him wanting out. Got ZERO in return for him.
That's two very good players and you got nothing back.
Domi was unhappy here for whatever reason (I believe what his dad said about wanting to play in a legit market). We at least got Alex back for him but Domi is younger and better.
Strome is not a grinder . You might not notice him much during stretches of the game but then he'll dazzle you with his passes. Thats just the type of player he is. You have to accept that. He's not an Archibald. He's a skilled guy who has some holes in his game but overall you're just starting to see him blossom. If Perlini (another high draft pick) turns out we got killed in that trade.
BOTTOM LINE: you cannot lose assets like we have and ever have an elite team.
We are back to being that fringe team with little hope in the near future of being a top tier team. That ship has sailed once again.

1. I agree that we can't let a player like Wheeler go. Sorry - that's on GMDM and Gretzky. But, this goes back to the point - we need to do enough research on players to understand if they are willing to play here and what their mental makeup can be. If we had an indication that Wheeler would never want to play in Phoenix, then choose a different RW if drafting by position of need (whether at #5 OA or trading back) or take BPA.

2. What return do you expect to get from Turris, when as you state, he was clearly not ready and wanted out? If someone doesn't want to play for us AND he is not ready, we are not exactly dealing from a position of power on that end. That's why, in the future, we need to make sure that we don't take the types of players that are out of touch with their abilities and won't be salty about not getting immediate top minutes. Same exact concept - do your due diligence on the players, and some things will come to light.

A team with such a limited number of scouts who relied a lot on the ISS Final Rankings and not true observations and meetings will only focus on the play on the ice, but have no idea what makes the player tick, what kind of competitor they are, etc.

I understand that Strome is not a grinder and that he may be unnoticeable during certain parts of the game. That has been discussed often - you don't notice him on the ice until you look at the box score and see his involvement. That involvement is happening moreso in Chicago than it was here. That's where it just doesn't make a lot of logical sense that he would be so good in Chicago and so bad here.

The minutes he got here early on in the season before we started to see more struggles were on par with what he has gotten in Chicago, save for a little more PP1 opportunity in Chicago. His play with DeBrincat has been phenomenal, but without, he is a little more invisible. We have some decent players, but didn't give him the opportunity with those players until he earned it. Chicago didn't make him earn anything yet, and again, I want my young players to earn their place. If they don't earn it, then we have the same country club atmosphere of no accountability and earning your spot that we claim to want to avoid.

That's where it is difficult to say that the coaches did him so wrong here, b/c he is receiving 19.4 shifts in Chicago since the trade, compared to 18.5 shifts per game with Arizona, but the differentiation can be shown in about 3.5 - 4 additional minutes of ice time per game with Chicago. That is due to PP1 time vs a lack of PP time. 1 PP shift usually lasts at least 90 seconds for him. He has received more time as he has produced, which is something that 32 NHL coaches will do - if you are producing and playing the game in a reasonable fashion, you will get additional time. Because he didn't produce here, we can't justify giving more time, can we?

If we were that low on Strome, why didn't we trade him the year prior, or during the draft this past year? I think that there was a continued ray of hope that he would break out, but we would never see it. Then, Strome would get down on himself and we have a player who is searching for answers to fix things, but not asking the right questions to get to those answers.

I think that we somewhat failed ourselves in the past by highlighting talent alone vs some of the other pieces to the puzzle that makes up the complete player. That's part of the culture that Chayka is attempting to fix. That's why we didn't go after the electric Zadina or the pure scorer in Oliver Wahlstrom and instead took the guy who knows how to course correct in Hayton and be the guy that you can assuredly rely on for the future. Could you, with a straight face, say that after 20 games this year, we could rely on Strome to be the future? I sure as hell couldn't and couldn't give a timetable as to when we would be able to. That is what we are trying to change and the biggest change that we face.

 

[azcanuck]

1. I agree that we can't let a player like Wheeler go. Sorry - that's on GMDM and Gretzky. But, this goes back to the point - we need to do enough research on players to understand if they are willing to play here and what their mental makeup can be. If we had an indication that Wheeler would never want to play in Phoenix, then choose a different RW if drafting by position of need (whether at #5 OA or trading back) or take BPA.

2. What return do you expect to get from Turris, when as you state, he was clearly not ready and wanted out? If someone doesn't want to play for us AND he is not ready, we are not exactly dealing from a position of power on that end. That's why, in the future, we need to make sure that we don't take the types of players that are out of touch with their abilities and won't be salty about not getting immediate top minutes. Same exact concept - do your due diligence on the players, and some things will come to light.

A team with such a limited number of scouts who relied a lot on the ISS Final Rankings and not true observations and meetings will only focus on the play on the ice, but have no idea what makes the player tick, what kind of competitor they are, etc.

I understand that Strome is not a grinder and that he may be unnoticeable during certain parts of the game. That has been discussed often - you don't notice him on the ice until you look at the box score and see his involvement. That involvement is happening moreso in Chicago than it was here. That's where it just doesn't make a lot of logical sense that he would be so good in Chicago and so bad here.

The minutes he got here early on in the season before we started to see more struggles were on par with what he has gotten in Chicago, save for a little more PP1 opportunity in Chicago. His play with DeBrincat has been phenomenal, but without, he is a little more invisible. We have some decent players, but didn't give him the opportunity with those players until he earned it. Chicago didn't make him earn anything yet, and again, I want my young players to earn their place. If they don't earn it, then we have the same country club atmosphere of no accountability and earning your spot that we claim to want to avoid.

That's where it is difficult to say that the coaches did him so wrong here, b/c he is receiving 19.4 shifts in Chicago since the trade, compared to 18.5 shifts per game with Arizona, but the differentiation can be shown in about 3.5 - 4 additional minutes of ice time per game with Chicago. That is due to PP1 time vs a lack of PP time. 1 PP shift usually lasts at least 90 seconds for him. He has received more time as he has produced, which is something that 32 NHL coaches will do - if you are producing and playing the game in a reasonable fashion, you will get additional time. Because he didn't produce here, we can't justify giving more time, can we?

If we were that low on Strome, why didn't we trade him the year prior, or during the draft this past year? I think that there was a continued ray of hope that he would break out, but we would never see it. Then, Strome would get down on himself and we have a player who is searching for answers to fix things, but not asking the right questions to get to those answers.

I think that we somewhat failed ourselves in the past by highlighting talent alone vs some of the other pieces to the puzzle that makes up the complete player. That's part of the culture that Chayka is attempting to fix. That's why we didn't go after the electric Zadina or the pure scorer in Oliver Wahlstrom and instead took the guy who knows how to course correct in Hayton and be the guy that you can assuredly rely on for the future. Could you, with a straight face, say that after 20 games this year, we could rely on Strome to be the future? I sure as hell couldn't and couldn't give a timetable as to when we would be able to. That is what we are trying to change and the biggest change that we face.

I think the Coyotes franchise has been such a pile of crap for so long it explains why young good players just want to bail. Losing Wheeler and Turris for essentially NOTHING just kills your franchise.

Strome I admit I didnt think had what it takes. But I'm not at the level of engagement where i could make that evaluation fairly.Clearly the kid can play and he has started since leaving here. So maybe we still are a pile of crap franchise .

I have mixed feelings on Chyka. The jury is still out on him. Of course good owners and a new arena in the E Valley would go a long way I feel.

 

[Jamieh]

I think the Coyotes franchise has been such a pile of crap for so long it explains why young good players just want to bail. Losing Wheeler and Turris for essentially NOTHING just kills your franchise.

Strome I admit I didnt think had what it takes. But I'm not at the level of engagement where i could make that evaluation fairly.Clearly the kid can play and he has started since leaving here. So maybe we still are a pile of crap franchise .

I have mixed feelings on Chyka. The jury is still out on him. Of course good owners and a new arena in the E Valley would go a long way I feel.

Dramatic much??? Every team in the League has comparable. The Bruins traded Sequin and Thornton for peanuts as an example.

 

[azcanuck]

Dramatic much??? Every team in the League has comparable. The Bruins traded Sequin and Thornton for peanuts as an example.

Haha. Well they have an abundance of talent and have decisions to make.
chara, marchand, Bergevon, Pastrnak, Mclvoy. Should I go on?
To compare the Yotes to the Bruins is Laughable.
Keep trying!!

 

[Jamieh]

Haha. Well they have an abundance of talent and have decisions to make.
chara, marchand, Bergevon, Pastrnak, Mclvoy. Should I go on?
To compare the Yotes to the Bruins is Laughable.
Keep trying!!

It's the loss of two good prospects that is being compared, not surprised you missed that.

 

[azcanuck]

It's the loss of two good prospects that is being compared, not surprised you missed that.

Do you realize why they might have lost "prospects" (they were not prospects)
Rich in talent organizations have decisions to make monetary wise.
Bruins blew it with the trades of these guys but they had an abundance that the Coyotes can only dream of.
The coyotes cupboard is bare yet they still give away their assets.
Now do you finally get it?

 

[cobra427]

Do you realize why they might have lost "prospects" (they were not prospects)
Rich in talent organizations have decisions to make monetary wise.
Bruins blew it with the trades of these guys but they had an abundance that the Coyotes can only dream of.
The coyotes cupboard is bare yet they still give away their assets.
Now do you finally get it?

I get that your completely negative on the team. You should root for a good team, there are 20+ to choose from

 

[Jamieh]

Do you realize why they might have lost "prospects" (they were not prospects)
Rich in talent organizations have decisions to make monetary wise.
Bruins blew it with the trades of these guys but they had an abundance that the Coyotes can only dream of.
The coyotes cupboard is bare yet they still give away their assets.
Now do you finally get it?

Yes the Bruins were just loaded with centers when they traded Thornton???

Boston Bruins 2005-06 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

Thornton had 96 points that year.

 

[hbk]

I think in the end on Turris didn’t Doan meet with Maloney and ask him to get Turris out of the dressing room.

 

[azcanuck]

Yes the Bruins were just loaded with centers when they traded Thornton???

Boston Bruins 2005-06 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

Thornton had 96 points that year.

You clearly know little about hockey and have to look everything uup.

It's was a complicated situation. They didnt like Joe's leadership and didnt think they could win with him. They had Bergeron and Kreji coming up and you cant argue with the results. They continue to win. San Jose got a good player but they rarely did anything in the playoffs.

 

[azcanuck]

I get that your completely negative on the team. You should root for a good team, there are 20+ to choose from

Nah it's fun critiquing the team.

 

[Jamieh]

You clearly know little about hockey and have to look everything uup.

It's was a complicated situation. They didnt like Joe's leadership and didnt think they could win with him. They had Bergeron and Kreji coming up and you cant argue with the results. They continue to win. San Jose got a good player but they rarely did anything in the playoffs.

They got rid of Thornton because tgey had Krejci, who they just drafted in the 2nd round and woukdn't play meaningfully for tgem for 3 more seasons?? Oh I guess we traded Strome because we had Hayton.

 

[azcanuck]

They got rid of Thornton because tgey had Krejci, who they just drafted in the 2nd round and woukdn't play meaningfully for tgem for 3 more seasons?? Oh I guess we traded Strome because we had Hayton.

Like I said the bruins reported many reasons why they traded Joe. Including good prospects coming up. Plus what I stated.
Comprehension or lack of goes along well with your clear lack of any hockey knowledge.

 

[Jamieh]

Like I said the bruins reported many reasons why they traded Joe. Including good prospects coming up. Plus what I stated.
Comprehension or lack of goes along well with your clear lack of any hockey knowledge.

Kinda like how Strome and Turris left AZ , or does it only be ok for other teams to decide direction?? I'll match you in either or both of reading comprehension or hockey knowledge any day. Your major accomplishment here is making the few beaten down pessimists look like Captain Optimism.

 

[azcanuck]

Kinda like how Strome and Turris left AZ , or does it only be ok for other teams to decide direction?? I'll match you in either or both of reading comprehension or hockey knowledge any day. Your major accomplishment here is making the few beaten down pessimists look like Captain Optimism.

Right back to square one.
The Bruins and the Coyotes from an organizational perspective are universes apart. The Bruins are rich in players and must make decisions a lot of times based on the salary cap or moving a guy they dont consider having the leadership to win the Cup.
I wonder how many times i'll have to explain the difference to you.

 

[Jamieh]

Right back to square one.
The Bruins and the Coyotes from an organizational perspective are universes apart. The Bruins are rich in players and must make decisions a lot of times based on the salary cap or moving a guy they dont consider having the leadership to win the Cup.
I wonder how many times i'll have to explain the difference to you.

When the Bruins traded Thornton they were not rich as I have shown. They finished last in their division and did not make playoffs. Same as next season. Now try again.

 

[SniperHF]

To be clear this thread is basically lamentations and random shit not related to the Schmaltz trade at this point so when it hits 1000 I'm closing it and not opening a new one. Only reason I'm leaving it open now is because people need to get it out of their systems apparently. I'm sure we'll have another one in the offseason.

I think in the end on Turris didn’t Doan meet with Maloney and ask him to get Turris out of the dressing room.

I don't remember that specifically but it wouldn't surprise me if you're talking about that time between when Turris finally signed an RFA deal and when he was eventually dealt. Turris was 100% dogging it those few games he played. But we know the situation was well deteriorated before that would have happened anyway.

 

[azcanuck]

When the Bruins traded Thornton they were not rich as I have shown. They finished last in their division and did not make playoffs. Same as next season. Now try again.

They made the playoffs the three previous season and traded Joe in the beginning of the season they missed the playoffs. But clearly they know what they are doing as an organization they had multiple good players coming on board and didnt trust Joe's leadership. You cant argue they were wrong.

 

[Jamieh]

They made the playoffs the three previous season and traded Joe in the beginning of the season they missed the playoffs. But clearly they know what they are doing as an organization they had multiple good players coming on board and didnt trust Joe's leadership. You cant argue they were wrong.

They won a Cup in the last 15 years, I have no idea if keeping Thornton would have them at zero Cups or more than one. But I can tell you Thornton would have been arguably their best center for those almost 15 years.