Maclean's coaching

[BankStreetParade]

I don't agree with this. I only have one question for you: if commitment to winning was not a factor in the discussion, why did Murray tell Alfie that he was going to trade for Bobby Ryan? To me, that sounds like "but Alfie, we are committed to winning. Look at what we are about to do!"

He left a team scraping against the cap floor that just got pummeled in the playoffs by a real contender to go to a team that historically spends near the cap ceiling and is competitive in the playoffs. That is not a coincidence.

How does telling someone that you're trying to trade for a star winger show a lack of commitment to winning? You couldn't even spin that in to a negative. Literally makes no sense at all.

Also, despite the fact that Detroit spends, they haven't been to a conference final in 4 years. And actually have their lowest regular season winning percentage in 23 years. Maybe a few years ago when Datsyuk was at his peak and Lidstrom was still playing this move would have made sense. But today? It stinks.

The Sens have been the epitome of inconsistency. Yet we're 3 points back of the almighty Red Wings. And I'm pretty sure we'll be ahead of them by the end of the season and they will most likely miss the playoffs.

 

[StefanW]

You forgot to add: "...in an Olympic year where he was not initially selected for the pre-games camp so he needed to develop chemistry with his fellow countrymen who would be on his line."

I'm not sure why we're pining for Alfredsson right now. He's an on-ice leader and he's barely on the ice these days.

Yeah, this is true. It is not pining for Alfie so much as debating whether our owner is committed to winning. BSP argued that we lost no one due to our internal budget, and the counter argument is that we have actually lost a great deal. We are not privy to what real NHL GMs have offered up, so the only real tangible proof is Alife.

Maybe I should have just stuck to a "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" type of argument instead and just let it drop.

 

[StefanW]

How does telling someone that you're trying to trade for a star winger show a lack of commitment to winning? You couldn't even spin that in to a negative. Literally makes no sense at all.

Also, despite the fact that Detroit spends, they haven't been to a conference final in 4 years. And actually have their lowest regular season winning percentage in 23 years. Maybe a few years ago when Datsyuk was at his peak and Lidstrom was still playing this move would have made sense. But today? It stinks.

The Sens have been the epitome of inconsistency. Yet we're 3 points back of the almighty Red Wings. And I'm pretty sure we'll be ahead of them by the end of the season and they will most likely miss the playoffs.

Read my post. My point was to ask why the conversation even went to a place where BM was trying to show Alfie that he can make a move to bring in a good piece that the team needed.

 

[The Fuhr*]

Like I said, the "bad negotiations" excuse is pretty convenient. He didn't walk away because of "an extra million". He signed for $5.5 million - a raise of $0.625 million. Like I said, if he had really wanted to be here that gap could have been bridged. He didn't. So he left. All the excuses are just convenience.

Cause we don't have the cap space to pay him what he wants?

Alfie is a guy who did everything for this franchise... He gave up his own money when we are in bankruptcy so the team could afford to make a trade deadline move.

5.5 is not unreasonable and the team has the space... No reason he could not have been resigned and Ryan acquired...

Shows no commitment to win from ownership

 

[operasen]

I have the feeling there was something more - we do not know about kind of thing. As you indicate, Alfie was Mr Sen. For him to turn away, something hard had to go down.

 

[BankStreetParade]

Yeah, this is true. It is not pining for Alfie so much as debating whether our owner is committed to winning. BSP argued that we lost no one due to our internal budget, and the counter argument is that we have actually lost a great deal. We are not privy to what real NHL GMs have offered up, so the only real tangible proof is Alife.

Maybe I should have just stuck to a "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" type of argument instead and just let it drop.

So we walked away from Alfredsson if that's what you want to believe yet turned around and traded for a guy who makes $5.1 million/yr, signed a guy for $3.25 million/yr and another for $0.9 million/yr, gave raises to Turris, Cowen, Weircioch, Smith and Greening. Yet somehow, all that shows a lack of commitment to winning.

If it was either Ryan or Alfredsson and Ryan makes $5.1 million/yr then is it not fair to say that we would have offered Alfredsson at least that much money? How much more obvious could this get?

 

[BankStreetParade]

Read my post. My point was to ask why the conversation even went to a place where BM was trying to show Alfie that he can make a move to bring in a good piece that the team needed.

Alfredsson, as the captain, asked what the short and long term plans were for the team. Is it that difficult?

 

[Tundraman]

A while back, Ryan said that Turris and MacArthur had good chemistry and he had to find a way to fit in. He almost sounded like a 3rd wheel when he said that. You'd think a good coach would catch on to that especially when the star isn't scoring much over a long period of time.

Here's an idea MacLean: Instead of just flipping a 3rd/4th line player over to Spezza's wing why not be a bit more innovative. If you don't think that Spezza / Ryan is a good combo then why not try Da Costa with Ryan when making these in-game adjustments. SDC is a very good puck handler / passer and Ryan could use a centre who looks to him as the go-to guy. Besides SDC deserves a bit more playing time lately. Put Greening or almost anyone on the left and you might have a pretty good line. I don't think it would hurt the Turris/ MacArthur combo if they had a guy like Conacher or Condra on their right wing for some shifts. Heck if you really want to experiment and push Z-Bad to the rw (not my preference) why not try him with the Turris/Mac combo too. Spezza/Michalek are playing like 4th liners anyway so should get limited minutes.

What I'm saying is you'd think a Jack Adams winner would show some imagination when making adjustments during the games instead of just flipping the same guys. Maclean what have you got to lose?

btw) To the few guys who say don't mess with the only scoring line: This is just to switch things out. If it works you go with it if not you always have the old standby lines. It's just tiring to see the same old samo samo line changes. Nothing ventured-nothing gained.

 

[BankStreetParade]

So we walked away from Alfredsson if that's what you want to believe yet turned around and traded for a guy who makes $5.1 million/yr, signed a guy for $3.25 million/yr and another for $0.9 million/yr, gave raises to Turris, Cowen, Weircioch, Smith and Greening. Yet somehow, all that shows a lack of commitment to winning.

If it was either Ryan or Alfredsson and Ryan makes $5.1 million/yr then is it not fair to say that we would have offered Alfredsson at least that much money? How much more obvious could this get?

Cause we don't have the cap space to pay him what he wants?

Alfie is a guy who did everything for this franchise... He gave up his own money when we are in bankruptcy so the team could afford to make a trade deadline move.

5.5 is not unreasonable and the team has the space... No reason he could not have been resigned and Ryan acquired...

Shows no commitment to win from ownership

Oh, right.

 

[StefanW]

So we walked away from Alfredsson if that's what you want to believe yet turned around and traded for a guy who makes $5.1 million/yr, signed a guy for $3.25 million/yr and another for $0.9 million/yr, gave raises to Turris, Cowen, Weircioch, Smith and Greening. Yet somehow, all that shows a lack of commitment to winning.

If it was either Ryan or Alfredsson and Ryan makes $5.1 million/yr then is it not fair to say that we would have offered Alfredsson at least that much money? How much more obvious could this get?

*sigh*

The story that is most convincing is that if Alfie had stayed then we would not have picked up MacArthur, because our actual offer for Alfie was in that dollar range. Paying 5 MM+ for Ryan does not equal offering to pay 5 MM for Alfie.

I'm pretty done with rehashing all of this stuff. All of these debates are already in the archives here, so there is no value added. Believe what you want to believe.

 

[BankStreetParade]

And through it all Murray has been actively trying to make trades to improve the team. YET THERE IS NO COMMITMENT FROM OWNERSHIP TO WIN!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Wow. This forum. Holyyyyyyyyyy.

 

[operasen]

A while back, Ryan said that Turris and MacArthur had good chemistry and he had to find a way to fit in. He almost sounded like a 3rd wheel when he said that. You'd think a good coach would catch on to that especially when the star isn't scoring much over a long period of time.

Here's an idea MacLean: Instead of just flipping a 3rd/4th line player over to Spezza's wing why not be a bit more innovative. If you don't think that Spezza / Ryan is a good combo then why not try Da Costa with Ryan when making these in-game adjustments. SDC is a very good puck handler / passer and Ryan could use a centre who looks to him as the go-to guy. Besides SDC deserves a bit more playing time lately. Put Greening or almost anyone on the left and you might have a pretty good line. I don't think it would hurt the Turris/ MacArthur combo if they had a guy like Conacher or Condra on their right wing for some shifts. Heck if you really want to experiment and push Z-Bad to the rw (not my preference) why not try him with the Turris/Mac combo too. Spezza/Michalek are playing like 4th liners anyway so should get limited minutes.

What I'm saying is you'd think a Jack Adams winner would show some imagination when making adjustments during the games instead of just flipping the same guys. Maclean what have you got to lose?

btw) To the few guys who say don't mess with the only scoring line: This is just to switch things out. If it works you go with it if not you always have the old standby lines. It's just tiring to see the same old samo samo line changes. Nothing ventured-nothing gained.

There is a lot of toast for the breakfast table in there. Giving Ryan someone who would look to him as the go to guy is a good thought. I wonder if that could be Zibanejad as the Centre for Ryan and let Stone play with Turris

 

[BankStreetParade]

Not according to Melnyk
“To come up with the kind of money they were talking about and being fiscally responsible and ensuring the ongoing success of the organization, we knew we needed to add a Bobby Ryan-type player,†Melnyk explained. “And at the end, when I said blank cheque, that would have meant we would not have gotten the (Bobby Ryan-type player). Couldn’t afford it. Just couldn’t do it.â€

According to Melnyk it was either Alfie or Ryan... Not both

*sigh*

The story that is most convincing is that if Alfie had stayed then we would not have picked up MacArthur, because our actual offer for Alfie was in that dollar range. Paying 5 MM+ for Ryan does not equal offering to pay 5 MM for Alfie.

I'm pretty done with rehashing all of this stuff. All of these debates are already in the archives here, so there is no value added. Believe what you want to believe.

So here you have Melnyk telling us we had the money to commit to either Ryan or Alfredsson. But here you are telling me that it was either Alfredsson or MacArthur???

 

[The Fuhr*]

And through it all Murray has been actively trying to make trades to improve the team. YET THERE IS NO COMMITMENT FROM OWNERSHIP TO WIN!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Wow. This forum. Holyyyyyyyyyy.

Teams spending less then us
Florida, Colorado, Islanders and Flames

22/30 NHL clubs within 2.6 of cap
Ottawa 7.8 away

So 2/3 of the NHL is spending 6.0-7.0 more then ottawa... That's two mcarthurs of talent 2/3 of the nhl get advantage on ottawa

 

[StefanW]

So here you have Melnyk telling us we had the money to commit to either Ryan or Alfredsson. But here you are telling me that it was either Alfredsson or MacArthur???

You do realize you quoted two different posters, right?

 

[Tundraman]

There is a lot of toast for the breakfast table in there. Giving Ryan someone who would look to him as the go to guy is a good thought. I wonder if that could be Zibanejad as the Centre for Ryan and let Stone play with Turris

Excellent suggestions there too. You'd think these would come from our coach. Even if they didn't start the games that way you'd think it would cross his mind to try something different when things aren't going well. Maybe even let them have some practices to see how they might look in game situations in case he needs to adjust to the opponent. This group of coaches don't appear to be great strategists nor do they seem to think outside the box. As the head coach that falls on MacLean.

 

[BankStreetParade]

Teams spending less then us
Florida, Colorado, Islanders and Flames

22/30 NHL clubs within 2.6 of cap
Ottawa 7.8 away

So 2/3 of the NHL is spending 6.0-7.0 more then ottawa... That's two mcarthurs of talent 2/3 of the nhl get advantage on ottawa

Teams within 4 points of Ottawa but spending more:

Washington
Detroit
New York Rangers
Columbus
Philadelphia
Washington
New Jersey
Dallas
Nashville
Winnipeg
Vancouver
Phoenix
Edmonton

You have a range of teams spending $1 million to $10 million more than Ottawa. And we're actually tied with the majority of those teams. So what does that say about spending? Also your conclusion is ridiculously fallacious. Once again it will be said as if it needs to be said 700,000,000 times a day for people to understand it: spending and spending wisely are 2 completely different things.

 

[BankStreetParade]

You do realize you quoted two different posters, right?

Yeah, I quoted someone who had posted a Melnyk quote that directly contradicted what you said.

 

[maclean]

And through it all Murray has been actively trying to make trades to improve the team. YET THERE IS NO COMMITMENT FROM OWNERSHIP TO WIN!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Wow. This forum. Holyyyyyyyyyy.

From where I'm standing the proof of "Actively trying to make trades" is an actual trade.

 

[The Fuhr*]

Teams within 4 points of Ottawa but spending more:

Washington
Detroit
New York Rangers
Columbus
Philadelphia
Washington
New Jersey
Dallas
Nashville
Winnipeg
Vancouver
Phoenix
Edmonton

You have a range of teams spending $1 million to $10 million more than Ottawa. And we're actually tied with the majority of those teams. So what does that say about spending? Also your conclusion is ridiculously fallacious. Once again it will be said as if it needs to be said 700,000,000 times a day for people to understand it: spending and spending wisely are 2 completely different things.

All that says to me is if the Sens had more money for more talent then they would be much higher in the standings.

Instead of fighting for a playoff spot the team would be fighting for the division.

Your making my point, thx for the leg work.

 

[BankStreetParade]

From where I'm standing the proof of "Actively trying to make trades" is an actual trade.

Wow. I don't even know what to say. This forum is mindblowing today.

 

[BankStreetParade]

All that says to me is if the Sens had more money for more talent then they would be much higher in the standings.

Instead of fighting for a playoff spot the team would be fighting for the division.

Your making my point, thx for the leg work.

Or, I don't know, maybe it says that even teams that spend more than us aren't doing much better??? If they are spending more, that means they have more talent, right? Yet they aren't "much higher in the standings". You're not even making any point. Just regurgitating words with no meaning or cohesion.

 

[pepty]

Well, for starters anyone who, at the start of the year, thought this was anything more than a bubble team was completely delusional. Many people here predicted that we would be in a fight for a wildcard spot. So now that we are in a fight for a wildcard spot, what exactly is the big surprise?

Your points do remind me of exactly why this fan base can piss me off from time to time. We rode Andy because he is our number 1 guy, and we were only ever going to get as far as he would carry us. Andy started poorly, but since Dec 1st he has completely turned it around. We would not have even had a point from the game if it was not for Andy stealing it for us. Yet the same tired argument about riding Andy gets repeated. It is as though portions of the fan base have their heads lodged so far up their own ***** they can't see the games anymore. MacLean was right to continue to play Andy. Get over it.

I agree that he plays Greening/Smith/Neil too much. But the thing is that a coach only has the players on the bench to pick from. The Turris line comes off, and when he looks down the bench he has the Smith line, a struggling line, and then a line centered by a guy who was in Bingo a week or two ago. Assuming Turris has to rest once in a while, who does he play? The coach does not pick the players on the team, he only gets to pick out of the ones he has. I would say at least half of our forwards have been through brutal slumps this year, and a portion of those have never even had a stretch of three games in a row where they played up to expectations. And don't even get me started on the D and where they sit, player by player, compared to where the team expected them to be this season. Add in a "impact of being a small budget team" reference here.

But lets leave any sort of detailed discussion aside because we are too ****ing lazy to give this any thought. It is much easier to blame the coach, so lets just do that instead.

Well said, Maclean can only use the players he's given.
Coaching is not a problem here.

 

[The Fuhr*]

Or, I don't know, maybe it says that even teams that spend more than us aren't doing much better??? If they are spending more, that means they have more talent, right? Yet they aren't "much higher in the standings". You're not even making any point. Just regurgitating words with no meaning or cohesion.

I want Ottawa to be a top five team and win the cup.

Good for Otrawa for being 25th in spending and 16-20 overall and doing better then teams that spend a lot poorly.

I'm sorry I want to see Ottawa at the top of the standings like Boston, Tampa, Chicago, San Jose...

More money = more talent

You don't think if the Sens had two more Mcarthurs they would not be at the top of the standings... That's an extra 35G

 

[Magix]

Well, for starters anyone who, at the start of the year, thought this was anything more than a bubble team was completely delusional. Many people here predicted that we would be in a fight for a wildcard spot. So now that we are in a fight for a wildcard spot, what exactly is the big surprise?

Your points do remind me of exactly why this fan base can piss me off from time to time. We rode Andy because he is our number 1 guy, and we were only ever going to get as far as he would carry us. Andy started poorly, but since Dec 1st he has completely turned it around. We would not have even had a point from the game if it was not for Andy stealing it for us. Yet the same tired argument about riding Andy gets repeated. It is as though portions of the fan base have their heads lodged so far up their own ***** they can't see the games anymore. MacLean was right to continue to play Andy. Get over it.

I agree that he plays Greening/Smith/Neil too much. But the thing is that a coach only has the players on the bench to pick from. The Turris line comes off, and when he looks down the bench he has the Smith line, a struggling line, and then a line centered by a guy who was in Bingo a week or two ago. Assuming Turris has to rest once in a while, who does he play? The coach does not pick the players on the team, he only gets to pick out of the ones he has. I would say at least half of our forwards have been through brutal slumps this year, and a portion of those have never even had a stretch of three games in a row where they played up to expectations. And don't even get me started on the D and where they sit, player by player, compared to where the team expected them to be this season. Add in a "impact of being a small budget team" reference here.

But lets leave any sort of detailed discussion aside because we are too ****ing lazy to give this any thought. It is much easier to blame the coach, so lets just do that instead.

Andy has turned it around, but it still doesn't erase the fact that him playing so much when he was struggling has cost us in the standings. Also let me get this straight he can't hold our vets accountable because the general manager put this team together. (??????)