Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 51,426
- 45,314
Black and white fallacy. The only two options aren't the to do nothing or to spend on older players.
Speculation: The Next GM
- Thread starter jkrdevil
- Start date
Emperoreddy
Show Me What You Got!
In no way was this a team where you make “aggressive moves” 6 games into a season. We are not a cup team with a rapidly closing cup window. We are a building team that hoped to be on the bubble.
Ownership suddenly running out of patience and getting heavily involved is not a good look. It just isn’t.
If they step back and let the new hockey ops group do their job it could still be ok, but if they are going to stay heavily involved with mandates and demands for moves then the last 5 years are going to end up looking like a picnic.
Ownership suddenly running out of patience and getting heavily involved is not a good look. It just isn’t.
If they step back and let the new hockey ops group do their job it could still be ok, but if they are going to stay heavily involved with mandates and demands for moves then the last 5 years are going to end up looking like a picnic.
Emperoreddy
Show Me What You Got!
So we should have traded our first or a high end prospect for a desperate goalie trade?
What are the other options then? Trade assets for players, give up the farm to aquire players? I mean it’s fairly obvious that ownership is going to put somewhat pressure on the next gm to be competitive.
That GM in return is going to make stupid decisions not just free agency but trades. No way in hell the next GM sits on his hands like ray because they will have the same fate as ray
Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 51,426
- 45,314
Absolutely not. Did I say that?
Shero needed to make a move to stop our terrible slide at the start of the year. It should have been to fire the coach, but he sat on that for months and let our season disappear to the point where there was zero chance Hall was going to re-sign (whether we should even have signed him is debatable though). If Shero didn't think the coach was the issue, then it was a roster issue and he needed to make a move. Instead he did nothing.
Emperoreddy
Show Me What You Got!
What move? People ask for phantom moves without and consideration for what that would actually look like or cost.
Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 51,426
- 45,314
I just said he should have fired Hynes. He waited too long to do that, and that we started winning a few games after Nas took over probably sealed his fate.
I don't know what players are or are not available and don't care to engage in tradeboard fantasy. If you think there are roster issues, identify a player or two you think is a problem and ship them out for a reasonable return. There are 30 other teams in the league, and small trades happen all the time.
Realistically, Hynes should have never still been the coach here. His record was embarrassing. Shero clearly learned nothing from his failures in Pittsburgh, and just repeated them here. Any decent GM is an improvement on someone who refuses to learn from failure.
Emperoreddy
Show Me What You Got!
A deck chair move was not changing anything. Firing Hynes hasn’t really changed anything. Team is marginally better and that is more to do with Blackwood then anything.
Trading Hayden for someone else’s trash would change nothing.
Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 51,426
- 45,314
Either way Shero deserved to be fired, that's my point. He's responsible for this situation, and if he's built the team with such severe issues that tanking our season with an early losing streak is an unfixable problem, he had no business being kept on anyways.
We're playing Columbus tonight who got off to a horrendous start as well, and lost a bunch of players in the offseason. They have managed to actually turn their season around because they aren't a poorly built mess like the Devils are.
No one here is debating the firing you can make the case for either or, we are debating ownership getting involved in the daily hockey operations which in return is going to add unnecessary pressure onto the next gm
Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 51,426
- 45,314
Except there is no evidence that they actually are involved in daily hockey operations. All that story says is that they ran out of patience with our constant failure, went to Shero and asked him what he was going to do to fix it, and he responded with some kind of "trust the process" type stuff, and they punted him for continuing with a failing process.
Why are you assuming they are now sitting there running the hockey department through Fitz or something? Is there any evidence to support that this is true?
Emperoreddy
Show Me What You Got!
Nothing was saving the season. Hynes got what he deserved but not panic button move was changing the fact the team was too young and had too many holes.
Fair point but as of the mid second the only reason I see CLB winning is the goaltending. That’s it. I don’t see anything else working better for CLB. Switch volumes and NJ may be winning by six. Maybe you see it differently.
Is there evidence they aren’t? Sorry there’s no MSJ on this issue right now to me. Hopefully they don’t panic and if they do interview a bunch of GM candidates they hear a consistent voice during that process that says don’t make panic moves.
Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 51,426
- 45,314
That isn't how this works. I didn't claim that they are meddling in the daily hockey decisions, others did. The burden is on them to prove that, and speculation doesn't cut it.
Meh. You don’t get to dictate the burden of proof. It’s a message board there is no central authority.
Right now it is up for debate and I don’t think either side can say definitively they have evidence of anything. This reminds me of the debate over the owners being cheap. They aren’t apparently but it wasn’t until this past offseason that the question may have been answered. Maybe we get an answer this offseason.
Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 51,426
- 45,314
I'm not dictating the burden of proof, that is literally how logic and reasoning work. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
We don't know that the owners are meddling in hockey operations, so it's not reasonable to make assumptions that they are and base your entire opinion of the direction of this team around that assumption.
It depends upon the local Code of Civil Procedure and the judicial gloss. There are presumptions and situations where the burden shifts depending upon your litigation status. It’s still very early in the post Shero era and people will react emotionally. We will see. I hope the owners don’t demand short term moves to compete for a wild card spot over building a team that can aim higher but right now it’s all just speculation.
Emperoreddy
Show Me What You Got!
Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 51,426
- 45,314
This has nothing to do with laws or court proceedings. This is a debate on an internet hockey forum, shifting the burden of proof after making a claim is a logical fallacy, and opinions from people that argue that way don't deserve to be taken seriously.
We don't know what the situation in the Devils front office is, and assuming the worst case scenario, that our owner is making hockey decisions, is nothing but some doom and gloom speculation.
But the counter isn’t true either. I agree with you that it’s all speculation right now.
Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 51,426
- 45,314
I never said that they for sure weren't meddling, I said that there was no evidence to suggest that they were. I generally try not to just assume things are true without anything to support it, especially something with such a drastic impact like our owner who knows nothing about hockey meddling in day-today hockey decisions.
Emperoreddy
Show Me What You Got!
They need to sell so they can horde some 1sts to draft actual high end defense prospects.
They are not building a proper blueline from scratch with 3rd and 4th round prayers only.
They are not building a proper blueline from scratch with 3rd and 4th round prayers only.
I think the speculation stemmed from the reports that Vats and Palms were on the block and Shero had not even asked Vats what he’d want on a new deal when Shero was fired. Maybe those reports were inaccurate but given how this season has unfolded you probably have a number of fans that want anything not nailed down sent out for a draft pick. I know I’ve seen folks suggesting that the team sell high on Vats Palms and tonight even Coleman. To folks with that sort of outlook the idea that they try to sign Vats might suggest meddlesome or at least short sighted ownership. Again I agree with you that we don’t know yet what the owners will impress on the next GM.
