The Official Pierre "high five" Dorion Thread | Part II

[DrunkUncleDenis]

Have at it.

Old thread: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2363559

Click to read more...

 

[Zorf]

Dorion said the Stalberg decision will be today or tomorrow.

I have no other details.

 

[2CHAINZ]

Don't let the dor ion hit you on your way out.

 

[DrunkUncleDenis]

Don't let the dor ion hit you on your way out.

You gotta be careful with those door irons. They can jump out at you.

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

You gotta be careful with those door irons. They can jump out at you.

And those D'or ions are also tricky.

 

[DrunkUncleDenis]

^

 

[BonkTastic]

Pierre "Canyon Country" Dorion.

 

[DrEasy]

Would you have traded Dahlen knowing you'd end up at the ECF and be saddled with two years of a bad 2-yr $2.5M contract instead of potentially missing the playoffs altogether? I don't like the deal at all, but I look at it this way and it helps me sleep at night. I'm not saying Burrows was the difference between missing the playoffs and going to the ECF, but just replace his name with X and look at the result instead. The process stunk IMO, but the result is there.

I said at the time the only way I'd be happy with the deal is if we manage to get past round 2 of the playoffs, and we did.

 

[Micklebot]

Would you have traded Dahlen knowing you'd end up at the ECF and be saddled with two years of a bad 2-yr $2.5M contract instead of potentially missing the playoffs altogether? I don't like the deal at all, but I look at it this way and it helps me sleep at night. I'm not saying Burrows was the difference between missing the playoffs and going to the ECF, but just replace his name with X and look at the result instead. The process stunk IMO, but the result is there.

I said at the time the only way I'd be happy with the deal is if we manage to get past round 2 of the playoffs, and we did.

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I really don't see Burrow's contract as a bad contract. I think it's a very reasonable deal for what he provides/will provide. Time will tell if I'm right on that, mind you.

I do think that if a contract extension was a requirement of his willingness to waive his NTC, that should have lowered his value, but from the outside looking it, it seems to have done the opposite.

The trade wasn't good value, that much is agreed on by most, but at least to me, it feels like people are letting that colour their perception of Burrows as a player, and then letting the coloured perception further influence their perception of the trade.

I suspect Burrows will play in our top 9, score ~35 pts, kill some penalties, and provide a decent two wag game. That's an asset to the team at 2.5 mil imo. We gave Smith 4 years at 3.25 to fill a similar role...

 

[Stylizer1]

D'or I on?

 

[maclean]

This thread is already a milldorion times better than the first one

 

[DrunkUncleDenis]

Celine Dorion

 

[Micklebot]

Celine Dorion

Dear god... that's gonna give me nightmares. Thanks a lot......

 

[2CHAINZ]

Celine Dorion

A+ wish I wasn't on my phone so I could help keep this thread on point this time.

 

[2CHAINZ]

Would you have traded Dahlen knowing you'd end up at the ECF and be saddled with two years of a bad 2-yr $2.5M contract instead of potentially missing the playoffs altogether? I don't like the deal at all, but I look at it this way and it helps me sleep at night. I'm not saying Burrows was the difference between missing the playoffs and going to the ECF, but just replace his name with X and look at the result instead. The process stunk IMO, but the result is there.

I said at the time the only way I'd be happy with the deal is if we manage to get past round 2 of the playoffs, and we did.

Bro that was months ago we've moved on to Dorion jokes /puns now.

 

[delchief]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I really don't see Burrow's contract as a bad contract. I think it's a very reasonable deal for what he provides/will provide. Time will tell if I'm right on that, mind you.

I do think that if a contract extension was a requirement of his willingness to waive his NTC, that should have lowered his value, but from the outside looking it, it seems to have done the opposite.

The trade wasn't good value, that much is agreed on by most, but at least to me, it feels like people are letting that colour their perception of Burrows as a player, and then letting the coloured perception further influence their perception of the trade.

I suspect Burrows will play in our top 9, score ~35 pts, kill some penalties, and provide a decent two wag game. That's an asset to the team at 2.5 mil imo. We gave Smith 4 years at 3.25 to fill a similar role...

They made the Burrows deal when they weren't sure if they were ever getting MacArthur back. So it was at least partly a hedge against losing Mac as a potential top-9 winger. That part is understandable.

The part that bothers me is that they seem to have believed they were getting 2011 Alex Burrows or some near facsimile. The Burrows we got might score 35 points but I think that is at the high-end of the estimate scale. He's more likely to be in the 25 - 30 point range. And his infamous agitator reputation was nowhere to be seen when he came over from Vancouver this past season. I don't recall a single incident where I felt like Burrows got under an opponent's skin or clearly put them off their game. So I'm not sure our pro scouts did a terrific job there. He could presumably have been had for less than a top-5 prospect. Perhaps a 2nd round pick or a lower pick plus a Gabriel Gagne type prospect? And the topper was we had to sign him for another 2 years. At 36 years of age.

It just wasn't a good deal. Too much wishful thinking and quick trigger-pulling went into that deal. Even if the Sens didn't love Dahlen as a prospect, he still likely had some cache outside the organization and could have been used to net a better return.

Anyway, it's all speculation. They were not wrong in trying to replace Mac's production in the forward group. And the Stalberg pick-up was excellent. But the Burrows deal was not Pierre Dorion's finest hour to be sure.

 

[Polansky]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I really don't see Burrow's contract as a bad contract. I think it's a very reasonable deal for what he provides/will provide. Time will tell if I'm right on that, mind you.

I do think that if a contract extension was a requirement of his willingness to waive his NTC, that should have lowered his value, but from the outside looking it, it seems to have done the opposite.

The trade wasn't good value, that much is agreed on by most, but at least to me, it feels like people are letting that colour their perception of Burrows as a player, and then letting the coloured perception further influence their perception of the trade.

I suspect Burrows will play in our top 9, score ~35 pts, kill some penalties, and provide a decent two wag game. That's an asset to the team at 2.5 mil imo. We gave Smith 4 years at 3.25 to fill a similar role...

He provides the same 5 on 5 value as Patrick Marleau.

 

[Agent Zub]

Will the next one be the group hugs edition?

 

[Micklebot]

They made the Burrows deal when they weren't sure if they were ever getting MacArthur back. So it was at least partly a hedge against losing Mac as a potential top-9 winger. That part is understandable.

The part that bothers me is that they seem to have believed they were getting 2011 Alex Burrows or some near facsimile. The Burrows we got might score 35 points but I think that is at the high-end of the estimate scale. He's more likely to be in the 25 - 30 point range. And his infamous agitator reputation was nowhere to be seen when he came over from Vancouver this past season. I don't recall a single incident where I felt like Burrows got under an opponent's skin or clearly put them off their game. So I'm not sure our pro scouts did a terrific job there. He could presumably have been had for less than a top-5 prospect. Perhaps a 2nd round pick or a lower pick plus a Gabriel Gagne type prospect? And the topper was we had to sign him for another 2 years. At 36 years of age.

It just wasn't a good deal. Too much wishful thinking and quick trigger-pulling went into that deal. Even if the Sens didn't love Dahlen as a prospect, he still likely had some cache outside the organization and could have been used to net a better return.

Anyway, it's all speculation. They were not wrong in trying to replace Mac's production in the forward group. And the Stalberg pick-up was excellent. But the Burrows deal was not Pierre Dorion's finest hour to be sure.

He had been scoring at a 30 pts pace with Vancouver before the trade, and scored at a 45 pts pace with us after the trade (~37 pts pace with us if you include playoffs.) I agree he was a disappointing return for Dahlen, but I really feel like people are underestimating the player. His last three seasons paced at 39 pts, 23 pts and 34 pts. That one down year was the same one where his teammate, Vrbata, scored 27 pts, a sharp change from the 63 the year before and 55 the year after. If you look at Burrow's linemates that down year, Vey, Etem, McCann, Dorsett; not exactly put in a position to succeed.

Maybe I'm being optimistic, but I have him in the 30-40 pts range, based on my expectation of his role. He should get top 9 mins, playing on all three lines, and probably some 2nd unit PP and PK time. He'll be a bit of a utility knife for the team, used in all situations

 

[Agent Zub]

Dorion is getting waay too much credit for Ottawa going far. It's getting tiring that it's used as an out. Oh you can't criticize Dorion we just went the farthest we've gone in 20 years!!!11!

Karlsson willed the team in the finals with Boucher doing the most out of an average group. (it's his speciality) and and it also involved a whole lot of luck facing a depleted Bruins squad, a rangers squad that had no gamebreakers and a penguins squad that was missing its top two d-men.

Dorion is getting way too much credit for pure luck.

 

[Agent Zub]

I mean do people really think Muckler was good? He was a terrible gm for us yet the only one to get the team in the finals.

People should stop plugging their years because of the run.

 

[BatherSeason]

Dorion is getting waay too much credit for Ottawa going far. It's getting tiring that it's used as an out. Oh you can't criticize Dorion we just went the farthest we've gone in 20 years!!!11!

Karlsson willed the team in the finals with Boucher doing the most out of an average group. (it's his speciality) and and it also involved a whole lot of luck facing a depleted Bruins squad, a rangers squad that had no gamebreakers and a penguins squad that was missing its top two d-men.

Dorion is getting way too much credit for pure luck.

Completely agree with this statement. Karlsson and Boucher don't get near the amount of credit Dorion does.

Dorion's acquisitions aside from Brassard (Burrows, Pyatt, Stalberg, Wingels, Condon) were all basically non-factors other than providing us with enough depth to make Chris Neil stay in his suit. Yes, I know that Burrows had 2 primary assists on OT goals, but the pesty Alex Burrows we were expecting was nowhere to be found and was invisible otherwise.

Dorion's best move was hiring Boucher and yes, he should get credit for that, but, other than this run was all on Karlsson's back, not Dorion's.

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

Dorion is getting waay too much credit for Ottawa going far. It's getting tiring that it's used as an out. Oh you can't criticize Dorion we just went the farthest we've gone in 20 years!!!11!

Karlsson willed the team in the finals with Boucher doing the most out of an average group. (it's his speciality) and and it also involved a whole lot of luck facing a depleted Bruins squad, a rangers squad that had no gamebreakers and a penguins squad that was missing its top two d-men.

Dorion is getting way too much credit for pure luck.

You can't credit Boucher without also crediting Dorion for hiring him, though.

 

[delchief]

Dorion's good moves as GM:

- Hiring Guy Boucher and Marc Crawford
- 4-year contract extension for Hoffman
- Stalberg for a 3rd round pick
- Acquisition of and then new 3-year contract for Mike Condon
- Bringing Tom Pyatt over from Europe
- Tommy Wingels for two AHL scrubs and a 7th round pick
- Signing Chris Kelly (played all 82 games and was a reasonable stop-gap as a 4th line center)

Dorion's still-to-be-determined moves as GM:

- Zibanejad plus a 2nd round pick for Brassard plus a 5th round pick
- Trading up to draft Logan Brown in 2016
- 4-year contract extension for Zach Smith
- Trading Lazar for a scrub and a 2nd round pick (used on Alex Formenton)
- Burning year one of ELC for Colin White with late season call-up and one playoff game

Dorion's bad moves as GM:

- Dahlen for Burrows
- Loss of Methot in the expansion draft for nothing

 

[HSF]

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I really don't see Burrow's contract as a bad contract. I think it's a very reasonable deal for what he provides/will provide. Time will tell if I'm right on that, mind you.

I do think that if a contract extension was a requirement of his willingness to waive his NTC, that should have lowered his value, but from the outside looking it, it seems to have done the opposite.

The trade wasn't good value, that much is agreed on by most, but at least to me, it feels like people are letting that colour their perception of Burrows as a player, and then letting the coloured perception further influence their perception of the trade.

I suspect Burrows will play in our top 9, score ~35 pts, kill some penalties, and provide a decent two wag game. That's an asset to the team at 2.5 mil imo. We gave Smith 4 years at 3.25 to fill a similar role...

I see it this way aswell. He is a top 9 forward not a 4th liner