Sportsnet: Pierre Dorion Talks NHL Draft Picks

Status
Not open for further replies.

AchtzehnBaby

Global Matador
Mar 28, 2013
15,022
8,905
Hazeldean Road
1. No he did not deal from a position of weakness in every situation. He traded at the deadline, in the summer etc. etc.
2. Trading away star UFA's is not tanking. It is asset management. What would you have him do ? Trade picks to boost the roster knowing all the UFA's are headed for the US anyway?
3. What you call "patronize" I would call a fair trade analysis. Just because you don't see the value in the EK, MD, or even Stone trade doesn't mean he was patronizing fans celebrating the trades.

Hallelujah!
 

GCK

Registered User
Oct 15, 2018
15,494
9,742
Soooo, just because the Leafs, built primarily by someone who was not Dubas, are not in a playoff spot, you believe that have an analytics team in the front office is a bad thing?

I understand that people don't like analytics, but to counter an argument like the one you quoted is basically you stating that Dorion having less staff is a good thing.

I will post this again, and please explain why having the smallest front office in the league is a good thing during a supposed full rebuild?

Hockey Operations, Coaches, Scouts, Training and Medical Staff
It’s not good but it’s not changing.
 

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,005
4,263
1. No he did not deal from a position of weakness in every situation. He traded at the deadline, in the summer etc. etc.

Just because he dealt players at different times of year doesn't mean he wasn't dealing from a position of weakness. Hoffman was dealt in the spring/summer, Karlsson was dealt in the fall and MS/MD were dealt at the deadline, but in ever single situation he was making the trade from the weaker position for a variety of different reasons.

I'm not gonna argue your other two points since they fall more under the "different strokes for different folks" category, but I can't help but take issue with the fact you think he dealt from a position of strength with any of the major deals he's made the last couple of years.
 

Dingle

summer is gone
Nov 22, 2019
765
208
Can we talk about cars about beer??? Something different

It has only been said a few thousand times now...There is no eraser..No trade or transaction can be undone. Who cares who won or lost.
Dorion is not going anywhere. At least, I do not believe so...Infact, I am way more sure than not. Debates on his skills as a GM, have no impact.
Melnyk is not going anywhere..At least, I don't believe so...I am way more sure than not.
The team has few tradeable assets (NHL players), so trading is limited.
The team is financially strapped, or we assume so, and so RFA signings are not very probable.

The team is claiming to have a good AHL pool. Debate that, but in other threads. Unless you link it to Pierre and his drafting

The team has picks and can trade them or use them. Regardless, the impact will be felt as early as next year and beyond. This can be debated in 2-3 different, otherwise overlapping threads.

V26's line is still best..wait 2-3 years. There is NO choice in this matter by the way, read the first 5 lines. So issues such as: Hockey ops budget/size..good prospect pools this year and moving outwards...Do you trust Pierre to pick? DO not vilify him, or canonize him. He deserves neither.

Please do not argue Melnyk and money, unless in the context of Hockey Op spending. Most of the prospects are on ELC and will graduate to Bridge..TKachuk being the exception.

Can someone start a Beer and Cars thread?
 

GCK

Registered User
Oct 15, 2018
15,494
9,742
Just because he dealt players at different times of year doesn't mean he wasn't dealing from a position of weakness. Hoffman was dealt in the spring/summer, Karlsson was dealt in the fall and MS/MD were dealt at the deadline, but in ever single situation he was making the trade from the weaker position for a variety of different reasons.

I'm not gonna argue your other two points since they fall more under the "different strokes for different folks" category, but I can't help but take issue with the fact you think he dealt from a position of strength with any of the major deals he's made the last couple of years.
Are any trades of pending UFAs dealt from a position of strength. If so please cite some examples.
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
15,991
9,555
Just because he dealt players at different times of year doesn't mean he wasn't dealing from a position of weakness. Hoffman was dealt in the spring/summer, Karlsson was dealt in the fall and MS/MD were dealt at the deadline, but in ever single situation he was making the trade from the weaker position for a variety of different reasons.

I'm not gonna argue your other two points since they fall more under the "different strokes for different folks" category, but I can't help but take issue with the fact you think he dealt from a position of strength with any of the major deals he's made the last couple of years.

He was definitely in a position of weakness on the Hoffman trade.

On Stone or Duchene in hindsight he probably should have set a deadline of say two weeks in advance of the TDL. Sign or you're gone. But i think both players seemed to waffle right up to the deadline creating hope that they would sign.

Karlsson. Was there ever a position of strength? I'm not sure a GM is ever in a position of strength when other GMs know that a star player is not going to sign.
 

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,005
4,263
Are any trades of pending UFAs dealt from a position of strength. If so please cite some examples.

Fair enough, that being said there are plenty of examples of teams dealing from less of a position of weakness (i.e Hall being dealt before Xmas when it was clear he wouldn't be re-signed, as opposed to Dorion holding onto Duchene and Stone until the last possible second).
 

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,005
4,263
He was definitely in a position of weakness on the Hoffman trade.

On Stone or Duchene in hindsight he probably should have set a deadline of say two weeks in advance of the TDL. Sign or you're gone. But i think both players seemed to waffle right up to the deadline creating hope that they would sign.

Karlsson. Was there ever a position of strength? I'm not sure a GM is ever in a position of strength when other GMs know that a star player is not going to sign.

I would have set the deadline much (MUCH) earlier in the Stone/Duchene situations, personally. He put himself into the position of (extreme) weakness by allowing the players (or agents) to dictate the timelines on that one, and I think he actually learned from that situation, which is semi nice.

Same idea with Karlsson, the longer he waited the worse the return got, imo. Waiting until after July 1st and allowing teams to negotiate with him was a misstep, imo. Tough to determine whether that's all on PD or if EM played a part in all of that as well, but I think it's safe to say that regardless of who is to blame that the organization dealt the best player in their history from a position of weakness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BatherSeason

AchtzehnBaby

Global Matador
Mar 28, 2013
15,022
8,905
Hazeldean Road
Fair enough, that being said there are plenty of examples of teams dealing from less of a position of weakness (i.e Hall being dealt before Xmas when it was clear he wouldn't be re-signed, as opposed to Dorion holding onto Duchene and Stone until the last possible second).

Stone and Duchene may not have been him waiting til the last second. It may have been Stones agent not responding until the last second or even more plausible; Dorion waiting for the best offer.
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
15,991
9,555
I would have set the deadline much (MUCH) earlier in the Stone/Duchene situations, personally. He put himself into the position of (extreme) weakness by allowing the players (or agents) to dictate the timelines on that one, and I think he actually learned from that situation, which is semi nice.

Same idea with Karlsson, the longer he waited the worse the return got, imo. Waiting until after July 1st and allowing teams to negotiate with him was a misstep, imo. Tough to determine whether that's all on PD or if EM played a part in all of that as well, but I think it's safe to say that regardless of who is to blame that the organization dealt the best player in their history from a position of weakness.

Im curious why you think waiting until after July 1 was a misstep

Given the fanbase's attachment to Karlsson he didn't really have much choice but to offer him a contract. We'll never know the specifics but some big money rumours floated about.
 

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,005
4,263
Im curious why you think waiting until after July 1 was a misstep

Given the fanbase's attachment to Karlsson he didn't really have much choice but to offer him a contract. We'll never know the specifics but some big money rumours floated about.

We probably disagree on the validity of the offer to EK, personally I'm of the belief it was a sham from the beginning on account of the lack of trade protection and signing bonuses. IF the organization knew they were going to move on from EK in February (as it's been reported/speculated) then they would have been better off dealing him at the deadline or at the draft. The decision to hold on to EK past July 1st was two-fold, imo. The first reason was PR/passing the bucks to EK's camp ("we made an offer but Erik turned it down") and the second was that PD and company thought EK's value would go up if/when he could negotiate an extension. That (seemingly) backfired when EK's camp refused to negotiate an extension and teams got nervous about being able to re-sign him.

By nature I'm pretty risk averse, so going into camp with EK on the team and keeping MS/MD/RD until the last possible second just seem like unnecessary risks if the organization had already decided to move on (or in MS/MD's case if the players are dragging their feet).
 

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,005
4,263
Stone and Duchene may not have been him waiting til the last second. It may have been Stones agent not responding until the last second or even more plausible; Dorion waiting for the best offer.

I'm just not of the opinion that Brannstrom and a 2nd is a better offer than what was/could have been on in the table in the summer. I would have never signed Stone to a deal that takes him straight to UFA status and would have either signed him to term in the summer or moved him. Dorion obviously thought he was making the best move for the future of the franchise, but given that Stone didn't stick around and was dealt less than hour before the deadline in a rushed move I think there's an (easy) argument that he made the wrong decision.
 

BonHoonLayneCornell

Registered User
Oct 16, 2006
15,229
10,452
Yukon
1. No he did not deal from a position of weakness in every situation. He traded at the deadline, in the summer etc. etc.
2. Trading away star UFA's is not tanking. It is asset management. What would you have him do ? Trade picks to boost the roster knowing all the UFA's are headed for the US anyway?
3. What you call "patronize" I would call a fair trade analysis. Just because you don't see the value in the EK, MD, or even Stone trade doesn't mean he was patronizing fans celebrating the trades.
Your perception of the events is respectable, but off base imo.

A position of weakness, maybe not in the way it's described, but at their lowest value with an impending date forcing every move, yes. Just look at what was given up for Duchene vs. what was received... clearly his value had dropped for various reasons. Stone and Duchene were sold as rentals and their returns reflected that. Karlsson coming off surgery he didn't appear recovered from, his worst season in Ottawa and a pending UFA obviously on the market. Hoffman dealt after the controversy became public. Restricting yourself from trading within the division is also weakening your position, unnecessarily so imo.

Point two is fair since at that point, with the owner he works for, there was no choice but to trade everyone, but then he did have a heavy hand in the need to rebuild in the first place, so there's at least an argument to be made that he contributed significantly to the situation he found himself in.

If there's one thing I feel strongly about, it's that this organization has deserved the vitriol thrown their way for their egregious pr. I could have written them a better pr strategy in one afternoon. I think their performance in that regard was as damaging, if not more, as the moves themselves. Unfortunately it was people like Nick R. that performed so poorly in pr they were gone within a year.
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
15,991
9,555
We probably disagree on the validity of the offer to EK, personally I'm of the belief it was a sham from the beginning on account of the lack of trade protection and signing bonuses. IF the organization knew they were going to move on from EK in February (as it's been reported/speculated) then they would have been better off dealing him at the deadline or at the draft. The decision to hold on to EK past July 1st was two-fold, imo. The first reason was PR/passing the bucks to EK's camp ("we made an offer but Erik turned it down") and the second was that PD and company thought EK's value would go up if/when he could negotiate an extension. That (seemingly) backfired when EK's camp refused to negotiate an extension and teams got nervous about being able to re-sign him.

By nature I'm pretty risk averse, so going into camp with EK on the team and keeping MS/MD/RD until the last possible second just seem like unnecessary risks if the organization had already decided to move on (or in MS/MD's case if the players are dragging their feet).
Fair enough
 

GCK

Registered User
Oct 15, 2018
15,494
9,742
Fair enough, that being said there are plenty of examples of teams dealing from less of a position of weakness (i.e Hall being dealt before Xmas when it was clear he wouldn't be re-signed, as opposed to Dorion holding onto Duchene and Stone until the last possible second).
We’ve covered the Hall trade, the return was similar to Dorions returns.
 

Sweatred

Erase me
Jan 28, 2019
13,408
3,324
Your perception of the events is respectable, but off base imo.

A position of weakness, maybe not in the way it's described, but at their lowest value with an impending date forcing every move, yes. Just look at what was given up for Duchene vs. what was received... clearly his value had dropped for various reasons. Stone and Duchene were sold as rentals and their returns reflected that. Karlsson coming off surgery he didn't appear recovered from, his worst season in Ottawa and a pending UFA obviously on the market. Hoffman dealt after the controversy became public. Restricting yourself from trading within the division is also weakening your position, unnecessarily so imo.

Point two is fair since at that point, with the owner he works for, there was no choice but to trade everyone, but then he did have a heavy hand in the need to rebuild in the first place, so there's at least an argument to be made that he contributed significantly to the situation he found himself in.

If there's one thing I feel strongly about, it's that this organization has deserved the vitriol thrown their way for their egregious pr. I could have written them a better pr strategy in one afternoon. I think their performance in that regard was as damaging, if not more, as the moves themselves. Unfortunately it was people like Nick R. that performed so poorly in pr they were gone within a year.

When would you have traded EK? When would have been the obvious position of strength ?
 

BonHoonLayneCornell

Registered User
Oct 16, 2006
15,229
10,452
Yukon
When would you have traded EK? When would have been the obvious position of strength ?
If I knew I wasn't going to have the financial backing of ownership? The summer after the run. The roster had taken a hit anyways and at minimum a reset was needed.

I was more splitting hairs that he was selling all of Stone, Karlsson, Duchene & Hoffman at realistically their lowest values at any point of their careers, after they'd established themselves, because of the various circumstances. Is that all Dorion's fault? No, but I would say he still had the gun to his head for all of them and technically had to sell low.
 

Dingle

summer is gone
Nov 22, 2019
765
208
If I knew I wasn't going to have the financial backing of ownership? The summer after the run.

I was more splitting hairs that he was selling all of Stone, Karlsson, Duchene & Hoffman at realistically their lowest values at any point of their careers, after they'd established themselves, because of the various circumstances. Is that all Dorion's fault? No, but I would say he still had the gun to his head for all of them and technically had to sell low.

It will be argued by others. But GCK had a great post on here of the time line. The way this unfolded...The only good time to trade him was between the series with Boston and the series with the Rangers. After that all things unfolded in a bad way for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matsens15

DaveMatthew

Bring in Peter
Apr 13, 2005
14,507
13,180
Ott
When would you have traded EK? When would have been the obvious position of strength ?

December 2017 or January 2018, when signs already pointed to Karlsson looking forward towards UFA, before the team went into a complete tailspin, and before the locker room conflict surfaced.

You would have gotten a lot more value for a (at the time) top-10 player who was signed at 6.5 million per season for the next 1.5 years.

Would it have been a difficult decision to make? Yes, but it's the type of proactive decision that should have been made.

It's not like Karlsson turning down the Senators offer in July was a surprise that caught them off guard. Everyone in the world knew he wasn't re-signing.
 

Sweatred

Erase me
Jan 28, 2019
13,408
3,324
December 2017 or January 2018, when signs already pointed to Karlsson looking forward towards UFA, before the team went into a complete tailspin, and before the locker room conflict surfaced.

You would have gotten a lot more value for a (at the time) top-10 player who was signed at 6.5 million per season for the next 1.5 years.

Would it have been a difficult decision to make? Yes, but it's the type of proactive decision that should have been made.

It's not like Karlsson turning down the Senators offer in July was a surprise that caught them off guard. Everyone in the world knew he wasn't re-signing.

Any evidence of anyone thinking a 17 EK trade was a good idea ?
 

BonHoonLayneCornell

Registered User
Oct 16, 2006
15,229
10,452
Yukon
It will be argued by others. But GCK had a great post on here of the time line. The way this unfolded...The only good time to trade him was between the series with Boston and the series with the Rangers. After that all things unfolded in a bad way for them.
There was never a "good" time to trade Karl, but the summer after the run or the following season were probably it.

I think in more ruthless terms if I were a GM. If I know I can't afford you, or you won't commit when I feel the time is right, you're traded full stop and I would be doing it proactively so as not to have to sell you for pennies on the dollar because you're a pending UFA.

This is taking me away from my original point though, it was merely to note that we did sell all these guys at arguably the lowest values of their careers, because of the variables forcing the trades, even if you consider it unavoidable circumstances.
 

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,288
8,100
Victoria
He dealt from a position of weakness in every single scenario. He tanked without the teams first round pick based on a trade he made, then he patronized the fan base after dealing said players. The team is poised for a bottom 2 finish for the third year in a row. If you dont understand why that is not a good thing or why people are unhappy about it then I am not sure what to tell you. The attendance alone should help you understand why there are Dorion talebearers. Obviously its not easy working for Melnyk but that doesnt excuse everything he has done.

Lol.... Such a tired take.

HE TANKED WITHOUT A FIRST!!!!! He took R Jobs!!!!!

Yes, he should have simply extended all our star UFAs who were all dying to stay after EK decided to walk.

Why didn’t PD just avoid this solid looking ground up rebuild (that many think this team sorely needed) and just sign these guys to massive NMC contract for the next 8 years so that we could continue to finish at the bottom of the standings????

But hey! At least we could toil with to same sucking squad forever instead of having to give Colorado that 4th pick!

Sorry Bert but you deserve the sarcasm. This is possibly the dumbest and most ill conceived opinion that is floated out there these days. It just served to reaffirm that smarter people are running the team currently, which I am eternally thankful for, at least for the next 8 years of those contracts.
 

Dingle

summer is gone
Nov 22, 2019
765
208
There was never a "good" time to trade Karl, but the summer after the run or the following season were probably it.

I think in more ruthless terms if I were a GM. If I know I can't afford you, or you won't commit when I feel the time is right, you're traded full stop and I would be doing it proactively so as not to have to sell you for pennies on the dollar because you're a pending UFA.

This is taking me away from my original point though, it was merely to note that we did sell all these guys at arguably the lowest values of their careers, because of the variables forcing the trades, even if you consider it unavoidable circumstances.


DO a search; GCK had a fantastic time line. Factor in injuries, etc. There was no good time..Once word got out of his injury...it was over..Remember, he had suffered the stomp 3 years earlier.

Sadly, and I do not say this in nasty way..he was partly damaged goods. Given what he wanted for a contract and his injuries and his age...The time to trade him, really was the playoffs. Which is not realistic. In fact, his max value was the deadline 2016.
 

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,288
8,100
Victoria
Just because he dealt players at different times of year doesn't mean he wasn't dealing from a position of weakness. Hoffman was dealt in the spring/summer, Karlsson was dealt in the fall and MS/MD were dealt at the deadline, but in ever single situation he was making the trade from the weaker position for a variety of different reasons.

I'm not gonna argue your other two points since they fall more under the "different strokes for different folks" category, but I can't help but take issue with the fact you think he dealt from a position of strength with any of the major deals he's made the last couple of years.

Lol, no.

I mean, every team that has to trade a pending UFA trades from a very similar position. It is what it is. It’s not a weakness, it’s just the realities of the contract position. We traded all three stars at the time where they garnered the most interest.

Given EKs injury history, and the way he starts slow, I think PD would have been making a massive mistake to start the season with him on the roster.

Anyways, we have opposing opinions, and both think that we hold common sense.

I think Dingle nailed it earlier on a different subject. Every team thinks their GM did it wrong when they don’t like the trade. Heck, SJ fans aren’t far from hating the EK trade, and wishing Wilson had not traded from a position of weakness when seemingly having no serious competition, yet selling off the farm anyways.

Just wait, we’re soon to come to the conclusion from both fan bases that the EK trade was a mutually bad trade made by two teams both in a position of weakness.... Haha!
 
  • Like
Reactions: coladin

DaveMatthew

Bring in Peter
Apr 13, 2005
14,507
13,180
Ott
Any evidence of anyone thinking a 17 EK trade was a good idea ?

It doesn't matter what everyone (fans) thought. The GMs job is to make the right decision for the franchise. On December 1st, this was the situation:

• Erik Karlsson was still considered a top 5 defenseman in the NHL
• He had 1.5 years left on his contract, at $6.5 million per season (a steal)
• Ottawa was in the midst of a 7 game losing streak, comfortably out of the playoffs
• In a media scrum before a game against the Islanders, Karlsson said “When I go to market, I’m going to get what I’m worth, and it’s going to be no less, no matter where I’m going”
• Dorion knew the financial realities of this franchise under Melnyk and their inability to pay any player 10+ million per season

At that point, the best decision would have been to quietly shop Karlsson and trade him before the media circus started. Would fans have been pissed? Yes. But they were pissed when he was traded in August, so that should have had no bearing on the situation.

Instead, Dorion spent the rest of the year grand-standing in the media, presented an "offer" to Karlsson that everyone knew would be turned down, and traded him on the first day of training camp after other teams had already filled out their rosters and used most of their cap space.

Genius!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->