Player Discussion: Kieffer Bellows *Waived - Claimed by Philadelphia Flyers*

[PK Cronin]

Are we allowed to have dissenting view points or not? Any dissenting view point is condescending but every other condescending posts here leveled against me are fine just because they agree with you. Right? And we shouldn't be so foolish to think that business owners don't care about money? Of course they do. What's to say I was wrong. Should we ask the owners? It's just absurd to suggest otherwise. It's not far fetched also to say Lou put Bellows on waivers also partly due to the fact that he can't justify paying a player 1.2 million dollars just to sit in the press box in addition to giving him an opportunity to have a career. I don't know what there is to correct in that opinion.

You mentioned they cared about saving money and used not wanting to pay Trotz as evidence for that. You're objectively wrong because that money is guaranteed and Trotz is being paid right now by Ledecky and Malkin. So yes, the evidence you provided is terrible.

 

[Rehabguy]

You mentioned they cared about saving money and used not wanting to pay Trotz as evidence for that. You're objectively wrong because that money is guaranteed and Trotz is being paid right now by Ledecky and Malkin. So yes, the evidence you provided is terrible.

No, that is not what I said. I never said anything about saving money. I said he was being paid 4 million dollars as this article explained and that I referred to in that post and that implied that it was not only the fact that they were not meeting expectations but he was also being paid a lot and not getting the job done in their eyes. That is what that article by Alan Gross suggested the way he wrote about Trotz salary.

If we recall the reason how Trotz ended up on Long Island was because he had a clause in his contract that said if he won the Stanley Cup he would get a bump of $300,000 added to his 1.5 million dollar salary which means he would have made 1.8 million dollars a year. He tried to re-negotiate that contract and the Caps owners (once again another example about owners being concerned about money) balked at his asking price and the Islanders management agreed to more than double his salary at 4 million a year to repeat the success ie. win the Cup with the Islanders. Well 4 years later and no cup and a "new voice" was needed.

My point is, if owners of teams will squabble over 1 or 2 million dollars to sign a world class hockey coach, why would they be happy to know your GM just signed a player to a 1.2 million dollar contract who will just sit in the press box from day one. Read my posts that's what I said. Money matters to both the people receiving it and those paying it. Let's not be naive.

 

[KnishOfTheCrease]

What’s the argument? Bellows sucked. Didn’t do shit to warrant a roster spot. Move on.

Trotz didn’t didn’t want to coach anymore. He gets his money. We move on.

 

[Rehabguy]

What’s the argument? Bellows sucked. Didn’t do shit to warrant a roster spot. Move on.

Shit makes great fertilizer. It's a great asset as well.

 

[KnishOfTheCrease]

Shit makes great fertilizer. It's a great asset as well.

Asset to who? The worst roster in the East? He’s not worth a bag of used picks for Christ sake

 

[PK Cronin]

No, that is not what I said. I never said anything about saving money. I said he was being paid 4 million dollars as this article explained and that I referred to in that post reported and that implied that it was not only the fact that they were not meeting expectations but he was also being paid a lot and not getting the job done in their eyes. That is what that article by Alan Gross suggested the way he wrote about Trotz salary.

If we recall the reason how Trotz ended up on Long Island was because he had a clause in his contract that said if he won the Stanley Cup he would get a bump of $300,000 added to his 1.5 million dollar salary which means he would have made 1.8 million dollars a year. He tried to negotiate that contract and the Caps owners (once again another example about owners being concerned about money) balked at his asking price and the Islanders management agreed to more than double his salary at 4 million a year to repeat the success ie. win the Cup with the Islanders. Well 4 years later and no cup and a "new voice" was needed.

My point is, if owners of teams will squabble over 1 or 2 million dollars to sign a world class hockey coach, why would they be happy to know your GM just signed a player to a 1.2 million dollar contract who will just sit in the press box from day one. Read my posts that's what I said. Money matters to both the people receiving it and those paying it. Let's not be naive.

If that's what you meant it wasn't clear to me, so my bad.

You have to ice a full roster. The difference between Bellows making $1.2M and a different player making league minimum sitting in the press box doesn't really move the needle much for anyone. Johnston sits in the press box all the time, that's part of the business.

 

[Rehabguy]

If that's what you meant it wasn't clear to me, so my bad.

You have to ice a full roster. The difference between Bellows making $1.2M and a different player making league minimum sitting in the press box doesn't really move the needle much for anyone. Johnston sits in the press box all the time, that's part of the business.

The bad accepted. Johnston has a role to play, Bellows had none.

 

[Seph]

No, that is not what I said. I never said anything about saving money. I said he was being paid 4 million dollars as this article explained and that I referred to in that post reported and that implied that it was not only the fact that they were not meeting expectations but he was also being paid a lot and not getting the job done in their eyes. That is what that article by Alan Gross suggested the way he wrote about Trotz salary.

If we recall the reason how Trotz ended up on Long Island was because he had a clause in his contract that said if he won the Stanley Cup he would get a bump of $300,000 added to his 1.5 million dollar salary which means he would have made 1.8 million dollars a year. He tried to negotiate that contract and the Caps owners (once again another example about owners being concerned about money) balked at his asking price and the Islanders management agreed to more than double his salary at 4 million a year to repeat the success ie. win the Cup with the Islanders. Well 4 years later and no cup and a "new voice" was needed.

My point is, if owners of teams will squabble over 1 or 2 million dollars to sign a world class hockey coach, why would they be happy to know your GM just signed a player to a 1.2 million dollar contract who will just sit in the press box from day one. Read my posts that's what I said. Money matters to both the people receiving it and those paying it. Let's not be naive.

Why would it matter that Trotz has a high salary? If anything that's just more evidence that the difference between 1.2m and a league minimum contract is small potatoes to the owners, and not that they are looking to pinch every penny they can.

But nice work moving the goalposts yet again. I do see you finally admitted that Bellows was an asset to the team, so, good work there.

 

[Chapin Landvogt]

Good. I think Chapin's wrong here too. You guys are both holding on too tight to "prospects."

Considering I haven't been involved in this particular conversation to which this post is a response, or really any posts here or on this topic for the past few days, this post above doesn't have too classy a feel to it.

But while we're at it, I'm not sure how I'm being seen as holding on to prospects too tightly?

About the biggest part of my gripe with how Lou makes use of the few prospects we have is that they're held onto until they become irrelevant and fizzle away, falling off the map.

It's a fast-paced industry and some teams are very active in (and good at) accumulating picks and prospects, figuring out which ones they have a spot for or want to go with, and then moving out the abundance in order to address other line-up concerns.

This isn't a path Lou has taken in his 5 years as the Islanders' GM.

IMPORTANT:
Not once have I said a GM has to be doing this, or even particularly good as an asset manager, in order to be successful. You can take other paths to winning, which I spent time with this summer while many fans were going absolutely nuts at the lack of signings or hockey trades Lou himself said he was going to have to make. At least, you can shoot for that winning over the short-term in a variety of ways. I do think the use of one's assets is of serious importance if you're looking to build long-term success. And I'm pretty certain I read correctly that you're really into that as well, like, as an organizational goal, if not THE organizational goal.

I wouldn't have spent so much time in recent weeks touching on Lou's lack of lateral moves, rehashing of picks, making something out of prospects and players he's not really planning with, and attempting to answer your team's clear needs from the outside if it weren't for the steadily growing worry that what Lou is building here is not engineered for long-term success.

Hopefully, time will prove my worry to have been unfounded and a waste of my fan-related time.

A bunch of other posters spending their time writing "Dude, you're so wrong" without showing me why Lou's modus operandi shouldn't be of concern in these matters doesn't speak for the astute hockey knowledge that I had often come to know from these parts.

 

[Rehabguy]

Why would it matter that Trotz has a high salary? If anything that's just more evidence that the difference between 1.2m and a league minimum contract is small potatoes to the owners, and not that they are looking to pinch every penny they can.

But nice work moving the goalposts yet again. I do see you finally admitted that Bellows was an asset to the team, so, good work there.

You keep using that word. I don't think that it means what you think it means. Per chance are you related to this gentleman?

 

[Mike C]

D

You keep using that word. I don't think that it means what you think it means. Per chance are you related to this gentleman?

Dad?

Where'd you get that hideous looking jacket?

 

[Seph]

You keep using that word. I don't think that it means what you think it means. Per chance are you related to this gentleman?

You were the one that stated what you were doing was moving the goalposts. But I do love seeing a self burn in the wild, they're rare, but always good for a laugh. So, thanks for that.

 

[islandersbob]

Considering I haven't been involved in this particular conversation to which this post is a response, or really any posts here or on this topic for the past few days, this post above doesn't have too classy a feel to it.

But while we're at it, I'm not sure how I'm being seen as holding on to prospects too tightly?

About the biggest part of my gripe with how Lou makes use of the few prospects we have is that they're held onto until they become irrelevant and fizzle away, falling off the map.

It's a fast-paced industry and some teams are very active in (and good at) accumulating picks and prospects, figuring out which ones they have a spot for or want to go with, and then moving out the abundance in order to address other line-up concerns.

This isn't a path Lou has taken in his 5 years as the Islanders' GM.

IMPORTANT:
Not once have I said a GM has to be doing this, or even particularly good as an asset manager, in order to be successful. You can take other paths to winning, which I spent time with this summer while many fans were going absolutely nuts at the lack of signings or hockey trades Lou himself said he was going to have to make. At least, you can shoot for that winning over the short-term in a variety of ways. I do think the use of one's assets is of serious importance if you're looking to build long-term success. And I'm pretty certain I read correctly that you're really into that as well, like, as an organizational goal, if not THE organizational goal.

I wouldn't have spent so much time in recent weeks touching on Lou's lack of lateral moves, rehashing of picks, making something out of prospects and players he's not really planning with, and attempting to answer your team's clear needs from the outside if it weren't for the steadily growing worry that what Lou is building here is not engineered for long-term success.

Hopefully, time will prove my worry to have been unfounded and a waste of my fan-related time.

A bunch of other posters spending their time writing "Dude, you're so wrong" without showing me why Lou's modus operandi shouldn't be of concern in these matters doesn't speak for the astute hockey knowledge that I had often come to know from these parts.

Re bolded above. Which prospect has Lou held onto too long while watching their value tank?

Lou inherited a team with ONE prospect of value (Bellows), and normally teams hang onto those guys for at least one year to see how good they actually are. By the end of his first AHL season, which also happened to coincide with Lou's first year, Bellow's value completely tanked. When exactly did you want Lou to trade Bellows? 1 month into Bellow's AHL career, 2 months? When? IF Lou's first act as GM would have been to trade Bellow's, a lot of fans would have been outraged as Bellows was coming off a fairly strong WHL season.

The rest of the 2016 draft nothing of significant value. What do you think Koivula's value topped out as? 3rd round pick? Prospect swap? Would anyone have been happy giving up on a 6'5" forward who put up 21-25-46 in 69 games (his first season in NA BTW) for a 3rd round pick? Koivula's value tanked over the pandemic seasons. Kind of a difficult time to trade prosects who had stalled because every team had some and no one knew how much the lost playing time contributed to the stalled growth.

2015 draft, Barzal and Beuvillier were both NHL players when Lou arrived. The rest of the draft was a bunch of career AHLers, i.e. players with no trade value.

2014. Dal Colle and Ho-Sang had no value when Lou arrived. Smartly, Lou hung onto Sorokin and Toews. Rest of the draft never had any value.

More recent drafts:
2017. Salo and Aho are the only players who had fringe value. They both are battling for a spot on the Isles. Value probably max out as prospect swap or prospect sweetener to a bigger deal. Would the Isles be better off if they had unloaded Salo or Aho for a 2019 or 2020 3rd round pick? They'd like have a league minimum terrible vet manning the 3rd pair this year.

2018. Wahlstrom and Dobson, both on Isles. How much value does an undersized Ishkakov have? Probably best to see what you have than trade for scraps. Wilde, the pandemic sank him. I'm assuming Lou tried trading him, but got underwhelming offers or no offers at all.

2019. Holmstrom and Bolduc. Both are among Isles top prospects. Teams need to develop guys like this to remain competitive with salary cap. Neither were can't miss prospect who flamed out, but instead projects who need time to develop. Currently, both are on a decent development curve. Neither are withering on the vine and become a lost asset (similar to Salo and Aho). Additionally, I highly doubt either had much value around the league because most teams have similar players and teams like to keep what they have instead of shuffling their prospect deck chairs.

2020-2022. Too early too tell.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Being honest here. Only have seem him play once in a Flyers uniform. Barely noticed him. Got the tools but same story needs to be more involved.

 

[MJF]

Being honest here. Only have seem him play once in a Flyers uniform. Barely noticed him. Got the tools but same story needs to be more involved.

Then he doesn’t have the tools.

 

[Mr Misunderstood]

Why are we talking about this dude when we should be talking about Joshua Ho-Sang?!?

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Then he doesn’t have the tools.

He should have the size, shot, skills to play a top 9 role in the NHL. Let’s put it this way, If he had matt martin’s heart and desire. He would be a big asset. I will agree that’s the intangible skill missing from his game. This is why his game is so vanilla and really I think we were patient enough with him.

 

[MJF]

He should have the size, shot, skills to play a top 9 role in the NHL. Let’s put it this way, If he had matt martin’s heart and desire. He would be a big asset. I will agree that’s the intangible skill missing from his game. This is why his game is so vanilla and really I think we were patient enough with him.

He doesn’t skate well enough to get to spots to use his shot.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

He doesn’t skate well enough to get to spots to use his shot.

Yeah, I think this is it right here. Not in the NHL anyway...

 

[The Winter Soldier]

He doesn’t skate well enough to get to spots to use his shot.

i know this may sound funny, but he skates as well if not better than Tavares. To me it is becoming clear it is between the ears issue rather than a skating problem. The will is not there with the kid. i don’t see that extra to overcome a weakness say a Hyman overcame.

 

[MJF]

i know this may sound funny, but he skates as well if not better than Tavares. To me it is becoming clear it is between the ears issue rather than a skating problem. The will is not there with the kid. i don’t see that extra to overcome a weakness say a Hyman overcame.

Tavares has enough strength that he can drag opponents along while he’s skating. That’s where Tavares is effective. Bellows doesn’t have that low center of gravity to do what Tavares did for us here.

 

[The Real JT]

I won’t quote anyone in particular so as to avoid any hurt feelings.

Cutting bait on young prospects should be a rarity and not a commonplace occurrence. With that being said, Lou never does it. His defenders will make excuses for the lack of movement but at some point getting 50 cents on the dollar is far better than hoping for a resurgence on a prospect that you know doesn’t have the tools to succeed in the NHL.

Third round picks are not throw aways. Sure they’re a bit of a long shot but we have several key players on this team picked in the third round or later as evidence of their value.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Tavares has enough strength that he can drag opponents along while he’s skating. That’s where Tavares is effective. Bellows doesn’t have that low center of gravity to do what Tavares did for us here.

We will disagree here. The point really is not dissecting who is a weaker skater in Tavares or Bellows. My point is there are many players who were considered to be weak skaters and overcame this to become valuable players in the NHL I can think of anothwr 2 players off the top of my head. Marchment and Hyman. To me Bellows lack of success is more between the ears than just pointing to his skating.

Tavares has enough strength that he can drag opponents along while he’s skating. That’s where Tavares is effective. Bellows doesn’t have that low center of gravity to do what Tavares did for us here.

We will disagree here. The point really is not dissecting who is a weaker skater in Tavares or Bellows. My point is there are many players who were considered to be weak skaters and overcame this to become valuable players in the NHL I can think of anothwr 2 players off the top of my head. Marchment and Hyman. To me Bellows lack of success is more between the ears than just pointing to his skating.

 

[Mike C]

I won’t quote anyone in particular so as to avoid any hurt feelings.

Cutting bait on young prospects should be a rarity and not a commonplace occurrence. With that being said, Lou never does it. His defenders will make excuses for the lack of movement but at some point getting 50 cents on the dollar is far better than hoping for a resurgence on a prospect that you know doesn’t have the tools to succeed in the NHL.

Third round picks are not throw aways. Sure they’re a bit of a long shot but we have several key players on this team picked in the third round or later as evidence of their value.

mucho appreciation for your respect shown in the first sentence.

i also try my best to not be hurtful or make anything personal. even if i disagree with something and it's someone i have a good rapport with, i usually will stay mum. i try never to be inflamatory intentionally on the NYI board. it's a fun place and i've met some cool fellas out here!

excellent work by you!

 

[The Real JT]

mucho appreciation for your respect shown in the first sentence.

i also try my best to not be hurtful or make anything personal. even if i disagree with something and it's someone i have a good rapport with, i usually will stay mum. i try never to be inflamatory intentionally on the NYI board. it's a fun place and i've met some cool fellas out here!

excellent work by you!

Hey, some of my best friends are HFBoard members.

Well, not really but you get the idea.