Jared Crozier: Some Random Thoughts On The Playoffs So Far & The Days Ahead

Jared Crozier: Some Random Thoughts On The Playoffs So Far & The Days Ahead
- JaredCrozier

"* There are two former Senators goalies in the second round...and it looks likely that both should advance to round 3 given the matchups they have."

Has to be a tad frustrating considering the return for Bishop.

There are two former Senators goalies in the second round...and it looks likely that both should advance to round 3 given the matchups they have."

Has to be a tad frustrating considering the return for Bishop.

not really. go back to the time that trade was made and it was still the right move. he was the 3rd best goalie on the team. I think if ottawa had traded anderson or lehner to tampa the results (in terms of how successful the goalie would be with tampa) wouldn't be that different. tampa is clearly a much more complete team than ottawa is.....i think lehner or anderson would have both enjoyed a crap ton of success there, maybe as much as bishop has. on the same token, had bishop stayed in ottawa i find it very unlikely he'd be much better than anderson has been given the team he'd be playing in front of.

i think there are very few goalies who are true "difference makers"....meaning guys who, despite a crappy team in front of them, still lead those teams to lots of success (see price, maybe lundqvist, that's about it). i don't think bishop is that "difference maker" kind of goalie....i think he's a good goalie who benefits from having a very very good team in front of him.

add to that the fact that goalies almost never generate a solid return and i don't really care that conacher didn't work out. the return for lehner was a late 1st rd pick and several people thought that was a steal of a deal for ottawa....so how much more would we have gotten for bishop.

Watching the Hawks and Blues play last night (even that whole series) as a Sens fan just showed me how far behind the Sens actually are in terms of being a legitimate contender. It's not that I already didn't know that, but heck, those teams can play. Watching that series and the Kings/Sharks series also really showed how much the Eastern Conference is behind (excluding Washington) in terms of overall team quality.

I hate Jon Tavares as I think he is a cocky and arrogant person, but certainly had some defining moments in round 1. Nice to see the Iles do some damage after years of mediocrity.

I'm still sticking with my preseason pick of the Ducks and season pick of the Stars to win it all, but the Sharks looked like the most complete team in round 1 considering their opponent.

"* There are two former Senators goalies in the second round...and it looks likely that both should advance to round 3 given the matchups they have."

Has to be a tad frustrating considering the return for Bishop.
- Artyukhin76

St. Louis trades Ben Bishop for a 2nd round pick to Ottawa.

That 2nd round pick becomes Tommy Vannelli. The Sens traded Bishop to Tampa for Conacher and 4th - Lindberg - which was used to get Phanuef.

The Blues should feel worse about their return, rather than the Sens, yet few are smart enough to talk about that

St. Louis trades Ben Bishop for a 2nd round pick to Ottawa.

That 2nd round pick becomes Tommy Vannelli. The Sens traded Bishop to Tampa for Conacher and 4th - Lindberg - which was used to get Phanuef.

The Blues should feel worse about their return, rather than the Sens, yet few are smart enough to talk about that
- AlfieisKing

Fair enough, but in hindsight which of the 3 goalies - Anderson, Lehener and Bishop - would you rather have now? The fact is they rushed Lehner before he was really ready and before they really knew what they had in Bishop.

Still tomato throwing about Bishop.

We lost the Bishop deal. Sens fans have to live with that. You can't rant and rave about winning the Turris trade and argue hindsight and demand over the Bishop trade. They are similar trades in that organizations took a chance of commodities one way or another. You win some and you loose some.

The issue that should be raised from a Sens standpoint is that we traded two legitimate young goalies and now have Andy who is 35 in one month and Hammond who is a perennial backup. We have O'connor, but jury is still out on him. I'm not one to overly worry about your goaltending situation. History shows in the NHL that random guys are usually the ones who become #1 guys. However, the more options you have, the more likely you'll end up with a great piece.

not really. go back to the time that trade was made and it was still the right move. he was the 3rd best goalie on the team. I think if ottawa had traded anderson or lehner to tampa the results (in terms of how successful the goalie would be with tampa) wouldn't be that different.
- sensarmy_11

You seriously think it was the right move? The Senators went from having the best goaltending depth in franchise history, to giving away a Vezina Trophy finalist for peanuts and misplacing their faith in a goaltender that hadn't even played a single consistent season in the AHL. The fact that they gave up a 2nd round pick to get Bishop and got a 1st round pick in a deep draft for Lehner gives you some indication of what the return 'should' have been in that trade. Factor in that Tampa Bay managed to protect their legitimate young talent in the process (eg. Johnson, Killorn, Palat, Kucherov), and it shows just how badly Murray got taken in that deal.

You seriously think it was the right move? The Senators went from having the best goaltending depth in franchise history, to giving away a Vezina Trophy finalist for peanuts and misplacing their faith in a goaltender that hadn't even played a single consistent season in the AHL. The fact that they gave up a 2nd round pick to get Bishop and got a 1st round pick in a deep draft for Lehner gives you some indication of what the return 'should' have been in that trade. Factor in that Tampa Bay managed to protect their legitimate young talent in the process (eg. Johnson, Killorn, Palat, Kucherov), and it shows just how badly Murray got taken in that deal.
- khawk

i love people who armchair GM deals, 3 years after they happened, and act like they knew better the entire time.

at the time the deal was made anderson and lehner were 1st and 3rd in the league in SV% and anderson was getting vezina talk (think he finished 4th that year). bishop was a 26 or 27 year old goalie who had about 10 games of NHL experience.

at the same time, conahcer was one of the better rookies in the year that season, plus add a 3rd rd pick.

yes, with the power of hindsight ottawa lost that deal, but at the time most people felt that ottawa did very well in that deal.

so like i said....AT THE TIME that deal was perfectly fine for ottawa. the return for andy wouldn't have been much better, and the team wasn't willing to move lehner at the time.

there were also other goalies on teh market at the time.....as an example, Steve Mason who's actually had comparable numbers (playing on a worse team which is why the win total is in bishops favour) to bishop was traded for Leighton and a 3rd. goalies are just not worth much.

i love people who armchair GM deals, 3 years after they happened, and act like they knew better the entire time.

at the time the deal was made anderson and lehner were 1st and 3rd in the league in SV% and anderson was getting vezina talk (think he finished 4th that year). bishop was a 26 or 27 year old goalie who had about 10 games of NHL experience.

at the same time, conahcer was one of the better rookies in the year that season, plus add a 3rd rd pick.

yes, with the power of hindsight ottawa lost that deal, but at the time most people felt that ottawa did very well in that deal.

so like i said....AT THE TIME that deal was perfectly fine for ottawa. the return for andy wouldn't have been much better, and the team wasn't willing to move lehner at the time.

there were also other goalies on teh market at the time.....as an example, Steve Mason who's actually had comparable numbers (playing on a worse team which is why the win total is in bishops favour) to bishop was traded for Leighton and a 3rd. goalies are just not worth much.
- sensarmy_11

It's ok to look back in hindsight. It's also ok to admit the Sens lost that trade with the way it worked out. Management failed to see the potential Bishop had. So did St. Louis for that matter. It happens. Decent deal at the time but didn't work in our favour down the road.

It's ok to look back in hindsight. It's also ok to admit the Sens lost that trade with the way it worked out. Management failed to see the potential Bishop had. So did St. Louis for that matter. It happens. Decent deal at the time but didn't work in our favour down the road.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

This is my point......it's easy to look at this deal 3 years later and say murray was dumb for making it, but at the time it was the right deal to make. If there was a do over obviously u don't remake the same deal but that doesnt mean that it was the wrong deal at the time.

This is my point......it's easy to look at this deal 3 years later and say murray was dumb for making it, but at the time it was the right deal to make. If there was a do over obviously u don't remake the same deal but that doesnt mean that it was the wrong deal at the time.
- sensarmy_11

I still don't fully understand why we had to trade both Lehner and Bishop. I was ok with moving one of them, but moving both out and having an older goalie in Andy and a perennial backup in Hammond doesn't really seem like the greatest use of assets. At the time Bishop was moved, Andy would have probably gotten you the best return, but we all know Murray loved Andy.

Fair enough, but in hindsight which of the 3 goalies - Anderson, Lehener and Bishop - would you rather have now? The fact is they rushed Lehner before he was really ready and before they really knew what they had in Bishop.
- JaredCrozier

Hindsight is a b*** lol.... but seriously.... I don't disagree with that deal I just am more disappointed about the Spezza deal tbh. He's one of the best players to come through Ottawa and we have Paul and Gagne to show for it. Bishop will cost a lot of $ too. Aside from age, I can still live with Anderson in nets. Only this year I'll give the edge to Bishop, but consider the teams they played in front of

I still don't fully understand why we had to trade both Lehner and Bishop. I was ok with moving one of them, but moving both out and having an older goalie in Andy and a perennial backup in Hammond doesn't really seem like the greatest use of assets. At the time Bishop was moved, Andy would have probably gotten you the best return, but we all know Murray loved Andy.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

I think moving lehner and keeping Hammond was a FAR worse decision than trading bishop. I never wanted to re-sign Hammond. ....always felt he was a fluke

I think moving lehner and keeping Hammond was a FAR worse decision than trading bishop. I never wanted to re-sign Hammond. ....always felt he was a fluke
- sensarmy_11

I can't believe management felt Hammond had more potential than Lehner, did they? There must have been more to the situation. Sure Hammond had a hot run, but you could tell it wasn't going to last for a fulfilling career. I just found that whole thing odd. Especially so shortly after seeing what happened with Bishop.

I can't believe management felt Hammond had more potential than Lehner, did they? There must have been more to the situation. Sure Hammond had a hot run, but you could tell it wasn't going to last for a fulfilling career. I just found that whole thing odd. Especially so shortly after seeing what happened with Bishop.

I think calling a 20-1-2, .941 SV% & 1.79 GAA a 'fluke' (-sensarmy_11) and a 'hot run' is significantly downplaying the amazing accomplishment Hammond achieved (with the same guys Anderson & Lehner had). As noted previously, people often rise to the level of their competition and grow. Hammond did just that and more and Ottawa management couldn't ignore that. He was not going to continue that pace this season, but he more than showed his potential in the 24 games he played. Unfortunately, he never got the opportunity to show us what he could do this season as injuries and lack of playing time saw to that. When he finally played a bit and the end of the season, he played great! I hope he gets more opportunity next season...then we'll know for certain.

This is my point......it's easy to look at this deal 3 years later and say murray was dumb for making it, but at the time it was the right deal to make. If there was a do over obviously u don't remake the same deal but that doesnt mean that it was the wrong deal at the time.
- sensarmy_11

Repeating that you think it was a good deal at the time doesn't make it any closer to being objectively true. Personally, I don't agree that Lehner was ready for that level of NHL responsibility, particularly for a team that was heading into the playoffs. He had demonstrable problems with consistency since being drafted, and was 1/2 a year removed from splitting time in the AHL with Mike McKenna (who outplayed him). Lehner also had a full year left on a two-way contract, which means they could have kept all 3 goaltenders for another full season before making this kind of a trade, and had a much better opportunity to assess what they had in all of Anderson, Bishop, and Lehner.

I also don't agree that Conacher was some kind of great prospect just because he had a couple of weeks of hot scoring to start a strike-shortened season where there weren't even real training camps before the season started. If you go back and check, it was clear as day that his production was in serious decline once he stopped getting 1st unit PP and regular ice time with Stamkos and St. Louis, which he only got because he was more game-ready to start the year than many of the other players. It was also noted at the time that Tampa Bay balked when Murray tried to have Killorn included in the deal, which suggests they knew they weren't trading anything close to their best forward prospects in the deal.

You really don't have to be a genius to have seen those things, and they were all evident before the trade happened - as was the fact that Bishop was regarded as one of the best goaltending prospects in the world not playing in the NHL when the Senators traded to acquire him. Think what you like about the trade, but don't try to pretend that it was impossible for anyone to regard that trade as a bad one at the time. Even trading Babe Ruth can look like a decent deal if you work hard enough at trying to justify it in context... $100,000 was a lot of money in 1919, and who doesn't like a good Broadway show?

Repeating that you think it was a good deal at the time doesn't make it any closer to being objectively true. Personally, I don't agree that Lehner was ready for that level of NHL responsibility, particularly for a team that was heading into the playoffs. He had demonstrable problems with consistency since being drafted, and was 1/2 a year removed from splitting time in the AHL with Mike McKenna (who outplayed him). Lehner also had a full year left on a two-way contract, which means they could have kept all 3 goaltenders for another full season before making this kind of a trade, and had a much better opportunity to assess what they had in all of Anderson, Bishop, and Lehner.

I also don't agree that Conacher was some kind of great prospect just because he had a couple of weeks of hot scoring to start a strike-shortened season where there weren't even real training camps before the season started. If you go back and check, it was clear as day that his production was in serious decline once he stopped getting 1st unit PP and regular ice time with Stamkos and St. Louis, which he only got because he was more game-ready to start the year than many of the other players. It was also noted at the time that Tampa Bay balked when Murray tried to have Killorn included in the deal, which suggests they knew they weren't trading anything close to their best forward prospects in the deal.

You really don't have to be a genius to have seen those things, and they were all evident before the trade happened - as was the fact that Bishop was regarded as one of the best goaltending prospects in the world not playing in the NHL when the Senators traded to acquire him. Think what you like about the trade, but don't try to pretend that it was impossible for anyone to regard that trade as a bad one at the time. Even trading Babe Ruth can look like a decent deal if you work hard enough at trying to justify it in context... $100,000 was a lot of money in 1919, and who doesn't like a good Broadway show?
- khawk

I love that you say lehner was t ready due to being inconsistent at the NHL level and o ly being a year removed from the AHL......and your answer to that is to keep bishop who had significantly less NHL expwrience at the time and was basically a career AHLer.

That's fine though, I bow down......you obviously are a hockey genius and cleary knew at the time this was a terrible trade. Even though every expert said it was actually a pretty good trade for ottawa, and Bishop was clearly the guy they had to trade, you obviously know better then them.

When bishop was traded he was 25 or 26, had 20 games of NHL experience with a career GAA of about 3.00 and sv% under .910

I feel like people think murray should have gotten a top 10 pick and 2 top prospects for him. He was a 26 year old 3rd string goalie for (frank) sakes..........but all these geniuses clearly knew the he was going to be a superstar.

I still don't fully understand why we had to trade both Lehner and Bishop. I was ok with moving one of them, but moving both out and having an older goalie in Andy and a perennial backup in Hammond doesn't really seem like the greatest use of assets. At the time Bishop was moved, Andy would have probably gotten you the best return, but we all know Murray loved Andy.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

Ottawa Senators Rebuild Plan

Step 1 - trade away assets aside from a core that can compete for a playoff spot
Step 2 - hope your team overachieves and makes playoffs
Step 3 - Let your captain walk for nothing (no assets) and blame it on miscommunication
Step 4 - Trade for a mediocre #1 forward who will be resigned higher than his worth using 3 young assets
Step 5 - Give star players less than they deserve; bad players more than they do
Step 6 - trade away young goalies
Step 7 - Don't draft in the top 10, Keep the team mediocre... aim for playoffs
Step 8 - repeat step 7

I can't believe management felt Hammond had more potential than Lehner, did they? There must have been more to the situation. Sure Hammond had a hot run, but you could tell it wasn't going to last for a fulfilling career. I just found that whole thing odd. Especially so shortly after seeing what happened with Bishop.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

I don't know that they felt that Hammond had more "potential" - just that he was capable of being a steady and reliable back-up goaltender, which is more than could be said of Lehner and his back-to-back 3.00GAA+ seasons. It's hard not to think that Lehner's volatility began to exceed the organization's faith in him realizing his potential. Plus, I think you could easily argue that it was the combination of Hammond's performance and the signing of O'Connor that made the trade possible.

Fair enough, but in hindsight which of the 3 goalies - Anderson, Lehener and Bishop - would you rather have now? The fact is they rushed Lehner before he was really ready and before they really knew what they had in Bishop.
- JaredCrozier

Correct answer - Bishop.
There are some consistent failings with the Murray regime...
overvaluing veterans
rushing young talent
stubbornness in admitting and bailing on mistakes - Cowen, Greening
moves made to pander to the fan base - trading most second round picks, the Ryann trade, Kovalev signing

Some very good drafting but there are stubborness or talent evaluation issues after that.

Ottawa Senators Rebuild Plan

Step 1 - trade away assets aside from a core that can compete for a playoff spot
Step 2 - hope your team overachieves and makes playoffs
Step 3 - Let your captain walk for nothing (no assets) and blame it on miscommunication
Step 4 - Trade for a mediocre #1 forward who will be resigned higher than his worth using 3 young assets
Step 5 - Give star players less than they deserve; bad players more than they do
Step 6 - trade away young goalies
Step 7 - Don't draft in the top 10, Keep the team mediocre... aim for playoffs
Step 8 - repeat step 7
- AlfieisKing

Hopefully Dorion will do better. The fact that he came in with a ruthless streak is a good sign that there will be change, for better or worse. Unfortunately, 9th or 10th place seems to be where we are these days.

I love that you say lehner was t ready due to being inconsistent at the NHL level and o ly being a year removed from the AHL......and your answer to that is to keep bishop who had significantly less NHL expwrience at the time and was basically a career AHLer.
- sensarmy_11

This is where "looking things up" really helps before you try to make things sound like facts.
1) Bishop had more NHL games played than Lehner before and after the 2012/13 season.
2) The reason Bishop was 26 at the time is that he played at the University of Maine for 3 years after being drafted, not because he was "basically a career AHLer".

Plus, absolutely none of that has anything to do with the fact that Lehner had, and continues to have significant issues with consistency. I don't think it's controversial to suggest that his actual play in the years since have demonstrated this pretty clearly.

That's fine though, I bow down......you obviously are a hockey genius and cleary knew at the time this was a terrible trade. Even though every expert said it was actually a pretty good trade for ottawa, and Bishop was clearly the guy they had to trade, you obviously know better then them.
- sensarmy_11

Why would you even try to pretend that "every expert" was united in their opinion about anything, let alone a hockey trade? If it was so obvious, why was Murray having to publicly defend this trade just months after it happened? Is it really so hard to believe that some people didn't have the same blind faith in Robin Lehner that others had? It really is okay to step out of the groupthink once in a while.

This is where "looking things up" really helps before you try to make things sound like facts.
1) Bishop had more NHL games played than Lehner before and after the 2012/13 season.
2) The reason Bishop was 26 at the time is that he played at the University of Maine for 3 years after being drafted, not because he was "basically a career AHLer".

Plus, absolutely none of that has anything to do with the fact that Lehner had, and continues to have significant issues with consistency. I don't think it's controversial to suggest that his actual play in the years since have demonstrated this pretty clearly.


Why would you even try to pretend that "every expert" was united in their opinion about anything, let alone a hockey trade? If it was so obvious, why was Murray having to publicly defend this trade just months after it happened? Is it really so hard to believe that some people didn't have the same blind faith in Robin Lehner that others had? It really is okay to step out of the groupthink once in a while.
- khawk

To be fair, it was really a toss up at the time. Bishop and Lehner played to pretty much the same level while in Ottawa/Bingo. Ottawa probably leaned towards Lehner due to having invested more time with him and seeing him win a Calder Cup.

I do feel it's unfortunate how it all played out. Hopefully Colin White can turn into a real good player and make everyone get over this stuff. You win some trades and you loose some. It happens. If you knew how trades would turn out, you'd likely see very few of them.