The teams that stood pat

Detroit did the only thing it could. I was kinda curious if Ken Holland might decide he was SOL and try to shit someone like Franzen or maybe Hudler/Leino, instead of having to let them go this summer. He stood pat and wants to go for a Cup before his salary problems really get bad this summer and next, and I don’t blame them at all for that.

by IAmJoe on Mar 4, 2009 5:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yes for some teams.

In the case of the Devils and Red Wings, standing pat was a good idea.

The Wings are successful this season because they still have the players from last season, plus Conklin and Hossa. No need for other moves other than one or two call-ups from the farm system.

Favoritism and fandom for this team aside, the Devils are THE hottest squad in the NHL. Outside of nabbing Havelid, why do anything else with that group right now?

Same goes with Washington. Why take a chance with an outsider if they’re gunning for better positioning in the playoffs?

Montreal took care of its issues prior to the deadline, so their standing pat was understandable.

Teams like Vancouver and Nashville could regret it, though, as they are making a serious playoff push.

I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!

by R_Adragna on Mar 4, 2009 5:28 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

If your fanpost is accurate, the St. Louis Blues got Danny Richmond for their stretch drive.

http://www.battleofcali.com/

by Earl Sleek on Mar 4, 2009 5:32 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Heh, I knew someone would fine a hole in my reasoning.

Consider that an AHL deal, Mr. Sleek.

by James Mirtle on Mar 4, 2009 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Calling Wozniewski an NHL player is pretty generous.

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Mar 4, 2009 9:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think it would have made sense for Vancouver to grab a checking center. Moore probably would have been a nice fit, and a 2nd is pretty cheap. Given what Calgary did today, it would have been a good idea.

Nashville, St. Louis and Minnesota aren’t good enough to actually be buyers, but not being sellers probably makes sense for them, so their inaction looks reasonable. On the other hand, maybe selling would have been the best thing for all of them for the future, even if selling when close to the playoffs like they are is tough for a fanbase to swallow.

The Devils got their guy a couple days ago, and the rest of the team looks good, so no worries there.

Montreal also probably needed something, but there are so many UFAs there it’s tough to figure out what would have made the most sense. Jokinen maybe? I’m not really familiar enough with the Habs to say. They got Schneider, so that’s probably all they were going to do.

Washington and Detroit were handcuffed by cap space, so you can’t be too hard on them.

The only clear mistake in the bunch, I think, is Vancouver.

by MattM on Mar 4, 2009 5:32 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Haha, always find it funny with people suggesting Moore for Van, I suspect family dinners in the Moore household might get a bit difficult.

by rsm on Mar 4, 2009 7:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe, but pretty much the only people left on the Canucks (ownership, management, coaching, and player personnel) from the Bertuzzi-Moore incident are the Sedins, Mattias Ohlund and Sami Salo. And they were hardly the protagonists to the incident. I really don’t think it would have been an issue.

by trbr86 on Mar 4, 2009 8:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Montreal.

Don't be afraid to take a few steps back, but you better keep moving forward.

by wlittle on Mar 4, 2009 5:39 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

As mentioned the Devils made their standard depth move the other day. Marty coming back last week IMO moved them ahead of Boston, and Washington as East favorites. None of the east powers did anything dramatic to shift the power in the east. So the Devils look good by just adding Havelid

by jkrdevil on Mar 4, 2009 5:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I disagree that Vancouver made a mistake by not acquiring anyone. Vancouver has been the hottest team in the league the last two weeks. Standing pat is a vote of confidence for the team.

That their conference rivals loaded up is probably motivation for the team. From the sounds of it, they are definitely going to be subjected to the underdog treatment.

by trbr86 on Mar 4, 2009 6:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I agree with the sentiment that the Devils were right to do nothing. They made a deal for depth earlier and other than that Clemmensen will be gone for nothing in the offeseason, the Devils really had nothing to do, really. They should be good to go for the postseason.

I’m surprised that Minnesota wasn’t involved with anything. I think if there’s a team that needs to be shaken up a bit, the Wild would be that team!

Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!

by John Fischer on Mar 4, 2009 6:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I wonder if they don’t bring Clemmensen back. Right now, he got pushed to the minors because (at least to my understanding) making him the regular #2 behind Brodeur after Marty came back would’ve involved exposing him to waivers, as he was only in the NHL as an emergency injury call-up. Once this offseason begins, if the Devils could drop Weekes, and bring back Clemmensen, they would probably like that.

Not sure how Clemmensen would feel about it though. This is probably his only chance for a real payday. But if he can get that and stay with the Devils, maybe he decides thats good enough?

by IAmJoe on Mar 4, 2009 6:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Vancouver needed an extra forward.

As the lines stand now, they need an upgrade on Wellwood on the third line. They needed a gritty shutdown guy who can improve the PK.

Ryan Kesler can do that role but the Canucks needed to bring in an a top 6 forward in that case, so that Sundin can exclusively to center the second line.

Besides, Kesler in a checking role is much more effective with Burrows than slowpokes Pyatt and Bernier.

I definitely see a hole in Vancouver’s roster, and this is while they are almost exclusively healthy.

by Joe Pelletier on Mar 4, 2009 6:29 PM CST reply actions 1 recs

What Joe Said

I came by to say what Joe said. A robust, tough, speedy third-line centre would have been ideal, and probably available for a 2nd round pick. Wellwood doesn’t seem like a real playoff performer, and has had a lousy second half, so I’d have gladly seen him replaced for a Matt Cooke-type player.

by dbarefoot on Mar 4, 2009 7:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Wasn’t available at a price that Gillis would pay. Also, the cupboards in Van, in terms of prospects, are really empty as well. Restocking that has to be a priority if Van wants to compete every year.

So I think Gillis is a) looking at the long haul b) sees the risk as being too high when you have a good locker room.

No deal, good move for the long term. Short term? I really don’t think one bottom six player would have made a difference. If they added a whole or 2/3 of a checking line – Moen, Pahllson, Winnik, Ward etc. to the roster, then maybe. But then you still run the risk of ruining a good environment for short-term gain (although someone like Ward could probably be resigned for another season).

by rsm on Mar 4, 2009 8:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Washington

They have the team, why not add some complimentary pieces that can help them out? Seems to me they could’ve used a “been there, done that” blueliner. Actually, Leopold would’ve been a nice fit, IMO. And they could’ve gotten in on some of Anaheim’s sale.

I don’t like my Habs going forward, but I think this “deadline deal” mantra is a bit absolute… Montreal and New Jersey made some significant moves in the past couple of weeks so berating them for being inactive today seems to miss the point.

Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.

by saskhab on Mar 4, 2009 8:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

The Capitals couldn’t do anything until they traded Nylander. They’re right up against the cap with some guys on LTIR, and Pothier got cleared to play right at the deadline. That, and the price for rentals this year was high in young players and prospects. I think Derek Morris would have been a good fit for the Caps, but after looking what the Rangers gave up for a rental, I’m glad they didn’t.

by Forsch31 on Mar 6, 2009 12:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

In Minnesota...

The torch and pitchfork distribution assembly should be underway soon enough – what a mess. It’s just more continued miserable failure from Risebrough to be a general manager.

Gross Misconduct with yours truly

by HockeyJoe on Mar 4, 2009 10:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I’d also consider the coach a failure as well. Minnesota really needs to clean house.

by Resolute on Mar 5, 2009 9:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I would consider Jacques Lemaire to be arguably the best coach in hockey. The Wild would be well out of the playoff race without him. No coach is as important to his team.

by PuckStopsHere on Mar 5, 2009 9:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Blues did the right thing...

I love my team, but they are marginal, at best, as a playoff contender…I’m more concerned about them finishing strong and getting a jump on next season…let the young players get a taste of a playoff push…there wasn’t much I could see them doing without screwing with the chemistry…Tkachuk wants to stay and seems to be an integral part of the Blues…the Pronger rumors were nonsense…not surprised they stood pat.

by tbell61 on Mar 4, 2009 10:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Vancouver

Has two solid scoring lines since moving up Kesler and Burrows, they have a very good defence and a great goaltender. Unfortunately this leaves them with a mishmash of underachievers in the third and fourth lines (Wellwood, Raymond, Bernier, Pyatt). They could’ve used a player for that third line, someone with grit/playoff experience or another scorer for depth, absolutely. The problem is, Gillis like so many GMs this year seems to realize the importance of draft picks and propsects, and on the latter, Vancouver’s cupboard is fairly bare. So without giving up one of the few top tier Canucks prospects (Hodgson, Schneider, and I’ll be a little generous and say Grabner) or a major player off the roster (Which would upset chemistry on a team that’s won 11 of their last 13), what could Canucks do? Really the only depth guys I could see being trade bait were Shane O’Brien and Raymond, and I don’t know if they could’ve rented a Recchi for that. Maybe they could’ve given a second to rent Antropov? It’s not like there was a major move they could’ve made without hurting their future.

by Hobbes61 on Mar 4, 2009 11:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I hate the Devils

But I can never question anything they do, because it all comes out roses for them

Giants fan from the womb to the tomb

by Jim Schmiedeberg on Mar 5, 2009 7:49 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

The Canadiens should have moved, they need passion, grit and toughness. Gainey will lose him job if they don’t make the playoffs, which is more than likely!

by Fred Poulin on Mar 5, 2009 7:58 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Come on. You might wish for Gainey to lose his job is they don’t make the playoffs, but you have to realize it’s not gonna happen.
The Habs did well not to move. There weren’t that many players available that could really help the team and the prices paid were nearly universally too high.
Gainey made good moves over the last 2 weeks – Schneider, Metropolit, Begin (replaced by Stewart). If these are not enough to bring us in the playoffs, I certainly don’t want him mortgaging more of the future for some quick fix. This is not how you build a perennial contender, and this is not how Gainey works.

by Habs on Mar 5, 2009 8:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Mortgaging the future? Really?

Yeah, the Habs can never ever part with their surplus of third and fourth line forwards and depth defensemen coming up through the system.
Holy cow, we wouldn’t want to give up PK Subban for Vinny, nope not at all. Hell, why get rid of our favourite six goal scorer Chris Higgins, he gives a great interview to the press.
This season was lost when Lucic destroyed Komisarek.
Nothing of significance is going to happen in Montreal during Gainey’s watch.
He’s got a job for life as long as the 21273 keep filing into the Bell Centre and RDS keeps paying $$$ for the TV rights.
Think of Uncle George as a sane version of Harold Ballard.
No interest in winning, but big interest in making money.
This team will never finish higher than 6th in the east going forward for the next five to seven years. No elite talent at all.

by Exit716 on Mar 5, 2009 8:47 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Somewhat bitter are we?
Did the team have ‘elite talent’ last year? How come they finished first? Weird… I thought Markov was ‘elite talent’ but obviously I’m wrong, Gainey would never have kept him on the team if he was right?

Do you seriously think the Habs are 1 or 2 players away from contention? What’s the point of parting with third of fourth line forwards, if you’re getting players that won’t change anything? Tell me, what brilliant move was there to be made yesterday by Bob Gainey that he failed to do? What difference would ANY of the players that were traded yesterday make on this squad?

I can understand that you’re frustrated, but please take off your ‘this is the centennial we gotta win right away’ glasses and look at this team. There was nothing productive to be done yesterday. Second round exit instead of first round exit? No thank you.

by Habs on Mar 5, 2009 9:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

As long as you're happy

I don’t see this team being anywhere near contention for a good long time.
Judging by Bob’s incredible ability to always come in second in the free agent sweepstakes, I expect another five years of middling results.
You seem happy to make the playoffs and then lose.
Good on ya.

by Exit716 on Mar 5, 2009 1:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I’m not sure you read my post. Where did I say I was happy to just make the playoffs and then lose? On the contrary – what I want is this team to become a true elite team.

You didn’t answer the question the first time but please tell me, what could Bob have done yesterday towards this objective? Or are you just complaining out of thin air about inaction when there was really no intelligent action to do?

So let’s assume Bob moves yesterday and goes out to rent a few ‘big names’ to make a push. Do you truly believe this team makes it further than the 1st or 2nd round?

by Habs on Mar 5, 2009 1:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

With MTL and MIN trending down in the standings over their past 10 games as compared with their 62 game season pace, it’s surprising they didn’t bolster their rosters at the deadline to stop the bleeding. With the playoffs on the line, they would appear to have the most to gain by making an addition.

http://puckreport.blogspot.com/2009/03/playoff-projections-20-games-to-play.html

MG

by puckreport on Mar 5, 2009 2:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

To an extent. But bolstering the roster just to make the playoffs and have a 1st round exit, is not that desirable.
Personally I think Gainey has quit on this season (at least I have!) and that the only reason he wasn’t a seller is the fact that it’s the centennial season and we’re still technically speaking in the playoffs. The right thing to do, would have been to trade Kovalev, Dandenault, Bouillon (though injured), Brisebois (if there’s interest), Kostopoulos, and even Komisarek (if you’re not planning on re-signing him) for assets/picks.
Of course that’s atrocious PR so he couldn’t do it. But still, that’s what needed to be done.
But being a buyer certainly was not an intelligent option for the Habs, in my opinion.

by Habs on Mar 5, 2009 3:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think people are having a too narrow view of the trade deadline. The Habs made their main move with Schneider, which patched a big hole for them. They might not have made a move on the deadline, but that is partly due to them already having patched a hole in the lineup as best they could early, and that prices (selling too low, buying too high) were not where they were willing to make the trade offs – I suspect the reasoning was the same for Minny.

by rsm on Mar 5, 2009 6:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs