Where we went wrong.....

[Minister of Offence]

I will admit it and say I was one of them.

Redden was playing some of the best hockey of his career. There was really no indication he was going to fall off a cliff like he did. Meanwhile, Chara, coming out of the Sabres series, was looking incredibly slow and vulnerable to smaller quicker players who could beat him to the outside. Now maybe we didn't have the right sort of coaching to use him properly, and he did have a hand injury during that series, but he really didn't look like the sort of guy who would last under a more open ice situation.

Obviously things turned out very differently, but at the time it was anything but a clear decision.

I wanted redden, but I'll concede to being young and naive. Much less educated on the league than now.

Charas emergence turned us into a contender.

 

[bert]

Sigh. Muckler assembled the team? He was the turtle neck to all the work the previous regime had done for him. He just had to come in and put the finishing touches on. Wear the sweater.

Tyler Arneson is exactly what our team needed. We could probably use someone like him now.

His piss poor drafting left behind a massive wake.

This exactly..... All Muckler did was downgrade or giveaway all the assets this team had followed by drafting horribly.

 

[jbeck5]

naw 50-60 is an understatement

91-28-33-61 (55 pts pace) #6
102-32-38-70 (56 pts pace) #16

#6 is a star player but #16 isn't? Hmmm.

I'd say they're both good top 6ers but neither are stars.

 

[pepty]

It depends how far back you want to go.

It might be when they let Charelli go when it became clear
he was not going to be the next GM despite being considered
the heir apparent for several years.

 

[Minister of Offence]

There are some fans that think GMs bring swagger with presence. That may happen with the coach but the gm is there to bring more assets in then he loses. Muckler was a black hole, other things out of control happened but we may have survived better if we had prospects there to deal. Dealing a 1st for campoli when we needed a pmd has always been a deal ppl put on murray... Those are desperation deals that happen when a team is expected to make the playoffs but have no unproven but valuable assets to move for real help.

Teams with prospect pools tend to make good trades. Teams with none don't.

The worst kind of gm is one that fails in draft/development, it's a teams foundation. When you manufacture a higher portion of the leagues product (the players) teams have to pay you for it. There's a mark up on young talent.

So Ya, mucks sucked.

 

[Benjamin]

I thought the majority of people on here wanted to trade for Ryan? And I thought the majority here wanted Ryan extended. Anytime I have criticized Ryan for lazy play most didn't like it & most here criticize PM for not playing him more. Not sure why people would think he could even carry the team, he has been & continues to be a compliment player.

I think Puempel is a similar player, a guy who can score a lot of goals & mediocre at everything else. Turris IMO is the better player who can do it all & MacArthur is also a better overall player than Ryan. It will be interesting to see whether Ryan can even out score those two on this team but both those guys are better defensively than Ryan. Ryan is expected to score consistently which he has yet to do any more than some other guys who make a lot less.

Agreed

 

[Magix]

Those were the glory days, think its time to move on from talking about what went wrong then.

 

[Six Assets]

91-28-33-61 (55 pts pace) #6
102-32-38-70 (56 pts pace) #16

#6 is a star player but #16 isn't? Hmmm.

I'd say they're both good top 6ers but neither are stars.

point paces are useless.

 

[Back in Black]

Therein lies the problem. Muckler needed someone else to get him the pieces. He couldn't do it again unless someone stocked the cupboard for him. Great GM.

Gretzky called Muckler a great Hockey mind. Never heard him say that about Murray.

I'm sorry, I'm not a Murray hater, I just hate how we have sucked since 2008, we did a rebuild and we are no better off. This is 7 years later now, budget or no budget.

 

[TonySoprano11]

Despite my best intentions, I did not mean to create a Murray vs Muckler thread.

The discussion I was hoping we could have is why this franchise choose to replace its coach and GM the year after it went to the Stanley Cup Finals.

How was this a good decision, and what was the mindset of ownership to think this was the right move. I mean, wouldnt it have made more sense to keep what was working in place for at least one more season?

Just does not seem logical to make such a major shakeup after the most successful season this franchise ever had.

 

[TonySoprano11]

There are some fans that think GMs bring swagger with presence. That may happen with the coach but the gm is there to bring more assets in then he loses. Muckler was a black hole, other things out of control happened but we may have survived better if we had prospects there to deal. Dealing a 1st for campoli when we needed a pmd has always been a deal ppl put on murray... Those are desperation deals that happen when a team is expected to make the playoffs but have no unproven but valuable assets to move for real help.

Teams with prospect pools tend to make good trades. Teams with none don't.

The worst kind of gm is one that fails in draft/development, it's a teams foundation. When you manufacture a higher portion of the leagues product (the players) teams have to pay you for it. There's a mark up on young talent.

So Ya, mucks sucked.

I disagree with you completely. Drafting is ONE aspect of being a GM. In fact I would say it is one of the least significant part of being a GM. As a GM you are responsible for developing all the relationships for the franchise, as well as business and coaching decisions. There is a reason why you have a scouting staff.

If it crucial to be respected by other GMs, owners, and players if you ever want to "play ball" in this league. Muckler had that respect and other clubs and players were willing to deal with him on a level that Murray has yet to prove.

Murray's coaching carousel is something people seem to forget. It was an absolute failure on his part. John Paddock? Corey Clouston? Craig Hartsburg? Two of those guys were so bad they didn't even last one season.

Both Heatly and Spezza demanded trades under the Murray regime, and the hero of this franchise walked away. I would say that Murray has failed in his role of creating the kind of relationships that make players want to stick around.

Again, I dont want this to be a Muckler v Murray thread - I think they both have their strengths and weaknesses. I know around here nothing is more important than young talent and draft picks so I don't think Muckler will ever get a fair shake against Murray since both approached the jobs differently.

But consider this. Muckler inherited a good team and made them great - at least great enough to get to the finals. Murray took over that same great team the very next season and 7 years later we have never come close to being as good as we were under year one of Muckler. That should tell you something.

 

[BUCKLE UP]

"You have failed this city."
-Oliver Queen

 

[Sensinitis]

Murray is good but he isn't shrewd enough. Isn't willing to make hard decisions.

 

[Micklebot]

Despite my best intentions, I did not mean to create a Murray vs Muckler thread.

The discussion I was hoping we could have is why this franchise choose to replace its coach and GM the year after it went to the Stanley Cup Finals.

How was this a good decision, and what was the mindset of ownership to think this was the right move. I mean, wouldnt it have made more sense to keep what was working in place for at least one more season?

Just does not seem logical to make such a major shakeup after the most successful season this franchise ever had.

This is actually a pretty easy answer; The team realized that Muckler was getting old and nearing retirement. They had B.Murray, who was a very well respected GM before coming to Ottawa as their succession plan, and needing a new contract. They offered Muckler a consultant/special advisor position so that they could lock up Murray before losing him. Muckler refused and walked away from the franchise.

It's also likely that Murray rightly convinced Melnyk that Muckler had made some very serious gaffs, specifically choosing Redden over Chara, Drafting tons of Russians who slide in the draft in the height of the KHL's launch despite the high risk of them never playing in NA, drafting Lee over a bevy of better options, and a bunch of shortsighted trades that didn't really help or address team needs (Arnason, Bondra, Oleg Saprykin, DeVries, the pile of junk for Havlat).

It's not that everything Muckler did was bad; Acquiring Hasek was great, although didn't pan out, the Heatley trade was great cap management, and Smolinski worked out (though it was out of necessity from a botched draft pick that didn't want to play here), but rather that he was handed a perennial contender that underachieved with the goal of winning the cup and sacrificed everything but came up short. He went all in with the big stack and lost. Not really something to celebrate imo.

 

[mcnorth]

I think the coaching during the glory years was a bigger issue than any move the GM's did or did not make. Martin got outcoached, and our best were outplayed by the other team's best in the big moments.

And we got screwed by officiating, too. Not Calgary Flames screwed, or Buffalo Sabres scrwed, but some bad officiating - especially in 02 vs NJ and with obstruction against Anaheim in 07.

 

[Kellogs]

We went wrong when we started to believe that our current administration being better than its predecessor was adequate.

 

[Stylizer1]

Because of Ottawa's success Muckler drafted 16th, 29, 23 , 9 ,28, 29 in the first round(got Spezza at #2 through the trade with NY).

Murray has had the 15th, 9, 0-0(no 1st or 2nd), 6(21,24 thru trades), 15, 17, 0 as GM

They both had 7 drafts behind them.

Murray got Karlsson and Muckler got Spezza.

Muckler had a very deep team. Murray on the other hand did not. Muckler had many late picks where as Murray was picking in the middle of each round or better.

If we were a good team I doubt half of Murray's picks even get a shot to play on the big club. Because we were an average team over the last 5 years many more players got chances to play which make his drafting look good.

Other than that can you really argue one was a lot better than the other?

 

[Icelevel]

The day tim murray left

 

[supsens]

Mukles never missed the playoffs and I don't remember any star players asking to get the hell out town. Under Murray 2 asked to leave and one was slapped in the face and had to walk off insulted.
Something is wrong with what is going on now, very very wrong

 

[Tuna99]

As much as this sucks to say - naming Bryan Murray as GM is the beginning of this era of instability and bad teams. He took a Stanley Cup finalist and turned it into this gong show

This is the worst Senators team since 1994

Short Term:
- Alfie
- Murray not backing Maclean last year and saying the players wanted a nicer coach. Total joke
- Spezza file
- Signing lot's of slow over the hill players - Legwand, Kovalev, J. Smith and trading away young speed - Silferberg, Kelly, Vermette, Fisher, Meszaros
- Every year Murray telling us we are a playoff team - WE SUCK

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

As much as this sucks to say - naming Bryan Murray as GM is the beginning of this era of instability and bad teams. He took a Stanley Cup finalist and turned it into this gong show

This is the worst Senators team since 1994

Short Term:
- Alfie
- Murray not backing Maclean last year and saying the players wanted a nicer coach. Total joke
- Spezza file
- Signing lot's of slow over the hill players - Legwand, Kovalev, J. Smith and trading away young speed - Silferberg, Kelly, Vermette, Fisher, Meszaros
- Every year Murray telling us we are a playoff team - WE SUCK

That's completely ignoring the context. We had no good prospects coming up in the pipeline while we were in the finals - our best guys were Cody Bass, Brian Lee and Josh Hennessey. Murray happened to become the GM right as the team was on its downswing, and the accelerated exit of Heatley sure didn't help things.

Trading away "young speed," i.e. every player you mentioned, led to us getting either scoring skill (Ryan,) good prospects (Prince, Noesen [who turned into Ryan,] Lehner,) or players who could plug in on the then-depleted roster (Kuba before he went downhill.)

Alfie and Kovalev were both Melnyk issues, not Murray issues.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

As much as this sucks to say - naming Bryan Murray as GM is the beginning of this era of instability and bad teams. He took a Stanley Cup finalist and turned it into this gong show

This is the worst Senators team since 1994

Short Term:
- Alfie
- Murray not backing Maclean last year and saying the players wanted a nicer coach. Total joke
- Spezza file
- Signing lot's of slow over the hill players - Legwand, Kovalev, J. Smith and trading away young speed - Silferberg, Kelly, Vermette, Fisher, Meszaros
- Every year Murray telling us we are a playoff team - WE SUCK

i think this current downfall is directly related to our owner... Im sure he was putting big pressure on murray after the cup run to keep trying to get into the playoffs and finals.. when we should have retooled then.

And now that the habs went to the conference finals last year off the back of a hot goalie, melnyk is licking his chops again.

 

[jbeck5]

point paces are useless.

Over a small sample size sure. If it was 6 games...or 12 games...or 25 games.

Not ~100.

That's a big enough sample size.

 

[Suiteness]

Of course, tons of people completely ignored the main point the OP was trying make. How many teams in the history of pro sports completely overhaul their front office after going further than they’ve even been before? Imagine the Patriots making Bill Belichick team President and promoting the offense coordinator to fill in his spot after winning their first SuperBowl? It wouldn’t happen, it doesn’t make sense.

To make matters worse, Murray hired three consecutive duds as coaches that created instability and made the franchise a living joke. If Murray had stayed behind the bench, does the Heatley fiasco actually happen? We’ll never know but it sure as hell didn’t help matters.

The drafting was crap with Muckler, of that there is no doubt and we did lose key pieces for nothing but you also have to keep in mind that this was around the time the salary cap kicked in and it hurt this franchise more than many other teams since the timing couldn’t have been worst.

The reason why this team is mediocre through and through nowadays falls mostly on Murray. This ‘rebuild’ has been so half-assed that we can’t really be surprised that we now have half-assed results. Rebuilding team trades a first round pick for a bottom pairing defenseman from one of the worst team in the league? The biggest one, for me anyways, was not pulling the trigger on deals at the deadline when we could have cashed in big time on assets at their peak value. Neil was the most sought after commodity at the deadline a few years back and he should have been moved. Same with Phillips. What does Murray do? He keeps them on board and they’re now worthless and so embarrassingly bad we don’t even want to see them on the ice anymore. Brutal asset management.

Now look how Tim Murray managed the Ryan Miller situation. If Bryan was in Buffalo he probably would resigned Miller for seven years and traded their first round pick for Garth Murray or whatever.

 

[Micklebot]

Because of Ottawa's success Muckler drafted 16th, 29, 23 , 9 ,28, 29 in the first round(got Spezza at #2 through the trade with NY).

Murray has had the 15th, 9, 0-0(no 1st or 2nd), 6(21,24 thru trades), 15, 17, 0 as GM

They both had 7 drafts behind them.

Murray got Karlsson and Muckler got Spezza.

Muckler had a very deep team. Murray on the other hand did not. Muckler had many late picks where as Murray was picking in the middle of each round or better.

If we were a good team I doubt half of Murray's picks even get a shot to play on the big club. Because we were an average team over the last 5 years many more players got chances to play which make his drafting look good.

Other than that can you really argue one was a lot better than the other?

It's not the 1st rounders that were a problem with Muckler though (well, Klepis, Lee and Gleason, who I don't reall blame on Mucks, were disapointing), it was everything else. Once you get past the first round, you're position in the draft is far less important, and if you see a prospect you like, you can usually trade up at minimal cost.

When the best players you drafted outside the first round is Brooks Laich (who you promptly traded for a redundant piece) and Erik Gryba, there's a problem. From Murray, we already have Lehner, Hoffman, Stone, Silfverberg, Smith, Borowiecki, Wiercioch, and Stone. Guys like Pageau, Claessen, Prince, Grant, Wikstrand, and Wideman look like they may potentially add to that list.

It's also worth noting that Mucklers 7 drafts have all had the time to fully develop; we know that we got nothing much from his regime. Murray has 3 drafts that we have a very good idea of, and 4 that are still in the development cycle. There could still be some surprises out there.

Also, saying Muckler "got" Spezza from the draft while Murray got Karlsson is disingenuous. Marshall Johnston moved his disgruntled all star center to get the #2 pick. Muckler was gifted a can't miss pick, to go along with the acquisition of a future Norris trophy winner. He was with the team for a couple weeks prior to the draft, so likely had little to no input on the draft given that all the legwork was long over. Funny part is that was by far the most successful draft under his guidance.

I'd also like to point out that you're attributing both the 2001 draft (Muckler was there for a couple weeks and likely didn't wiegh in heavilly on many decisions) and the 2007 draft (Murray had taken over a couple weeks prior, but again likely wasn't involved heavilly) to Muckler. You can't have it both ways. IMO, 2001 is a Johnston draft as they did all the leadup, and 2007 is a Muckler draft. If you agree with that, Muckler loses Spezza, Gleason, Laich, Emery, and Shubert for his "successful" draft picks leaving an even more disapointing group.

Defending Muckler's drafting is like defending kicking puppies and kittens. You should feel ashamed.