The Expendables - Ottawa Edition

wprager wrote:Is anyone concerned that Cameron has not sighed his extension?  He got the contract from Murray but when asked at his presser he said "It's sitting on my kitchen table".

Not sure what to make of that, other than he hadn't signed it yet.  So, logically, next question is -- why?  Was he just joking or was that a subtle hint that he's thinking it over (and maybe he'd think less if some numbers on the contract were more).

if you bothered to really listen you'd of heard that he never negotiated a contract before and he just takes what is offered because he believes they are being fair.

nothing to worry about.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:When price was given the net he had not proven anything at the NHL level apart from having the pedigree. There were growing pains.

There are important differences. Price was super young, drafted super high (top 5, I believe), and MTL was definitely a team in transition. Lehner is older, a one-time golden boy for the franchise, sure, but not of the NHL like Price, and OTT is a team in a definite upswing with guys just entering their primes. Big differences.

Price won a Calder at a young age, so did Lehner, They had to decide between a goalie that had a stellar season and playoff and Price, who, at the time hadn't done much, Lehner was also touted as being the next big star and is also now being up for a similar decision with Anderson.  The Sens are still transitioning as they are still a very young team.  Not as vastly different as you may think.

Difference is, Lehner completely fell off the radar for nearly 2 calendar years. There was at least competition between Halak and Price, with them playing almost the same number of games (45 vs 41) that year. On top of that, Price had played 40+ game seasons 3 seasons in a row before they traded Halak. Lehner has never played 40+ games in any season, let alone done it for multiple consecutive seasons, and has a total of 86 NHL games (including relief appearances) under his belt

To be clear, I'm NOT advocating for trading Lehner. I'm saying he hasn't made it an easy choice for the organization.

the difference is the non-commitement of the org to playing Lehner. they have not even tried to force him into playing more games. price didn't merit many of the early starts he got.
the more i see it the more i relaized how we screwed up his development for the short term gains when we weren't competitive to begin with.

Flo The Action wrote:the difference is the non-commitement of the org to playing Lehner. they have not even tried to force him into playing more games. price didn't merit many of the early starts he got.
the more i see it the more i relaized how we screwed up his development for the short term gains when we weren't competitive to begin with.

I don't even dispute that 2nd bit. It just would have been much easier to make this choice if Lehner had at any point in the last two years, beyond 1 3-game stretch people are taking as somehow representative, done something to have earned some starts, not just in the eyes of his coach but in the eyes of fans like you and me. Anderson won PM his Jack Adams almost single-handedly and throughout his tenure he (over) relied on the vets, so there's merit to your point. But let's be real, Lehner has never really made it tough on any of his NHL coaches in terms of naming their starter. Not that it's anything to worry about necessarily or to put any stock into, but I would understand if trading Andy cued a similar response among the OTT 'fans' as the Halak trade did for MTL 'fans'. I will honestly be torn if we move either guy, no matter what, because I love Lehner's potential and I also appreciate that Anderson is certainly one of the best goalies this franchise has ever had.

Personally, I think Hammond will be aiming for the sky if he listens to his agent. Ottawa will not offer him more than a 1-2 year deal, I don't think. The guy was 20-3-3, tied a record for wins to start his career, and now has the reputation of 'the hamburglar' who single-handedly got the sens to the playoffs. He will easily get at least a 3 year deal somewhere else, and for more money probably. This reason alone makes me feel hammond will be walking, and I don't blame him. The guy has worked his butt off to get to where he is and if I were him, I would want to stay there as long as possible.

Hammond won't get a 3 year deal from anyone and if by some miracle he does get a 3 year deal worth more than 6 mil than that GM should be let go right away.

I can see MAYBE a team like the Yotes doing to just to get above the cap floor as a backup but that's really about it.

As for Hammond, we'll see how much he really wants to be here if he's offered a 1 way deal.

rooneypoo wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:the difference is the non-commitement of the org to playing Lehner. they have not even tried to force him into playing more games. price didn't merit many of the early starts he got.
the more i see it the more i relaized how we screwed up his development for the short term gains when we weren't competitive to begin with.

I don't even dispute that 2nd bit. It just would have been much easier to make this choice if Lehner had at any point in the last two years, beyond 1 3-game stretch people are taking as somehow representative, done something to have earned some starts, not just in the eyes of his coach but in the eyes of fans like you and me. Anderson won PM his Jack Adams almost single-handedly and throughout his tenure he (over) relied on the vets, so there's merit to your point. But let's be real, Lehner has never really made it tough on any of his NHL coaches in terms of naming their starter. Not that it's anything to worry about necessarily or to put any stock into, but I would understand if trading Andy cued a similar response among the OTT 'fans' as the Halak trade did for MTL 'fans'. I will honestly be torn if we move either guy, no matter what, because I love Lehner's potential and I also appreciate that Anderson is certainly one of the best goalies this franchise has ever had.

This has been the argument all along with Lehner, every time he got going and played great hockey they pulled the rug from under him. Not only that a few of the teams in front of him were defensive disasters.

If they sign O'Connor and then decide to trade Lehner so be it but if they don't Lehner is 100% the guy you roll with next year.

NEELY wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:the difference is the non-commitement of the org to playing Lehner. they have not even tried to force him into playing more games. price didn't merit many of the early starts he got.
the more i see it the more i relaized how we screwed up his development for the short term gains when we weren't competitive to begin with.

I don't even dispute that 2nd bit. It just would have been much easier to make this choice if Lehner had at any point in the last two years, beyond 1 3-game stretch people are taking as somehow representative, done something to have earned some starts, not just in the eyes of his coach but in the eyes of fans like you and me. Anderson won PM his Jack Adams almost single-handedly and throughout his tenure he (over) relied on the vets, so there's merit to your point. But let's be real, Lehner has never really made it tough on any of his NHL coaches in terms of naming their starter. Not that it's anything to worry about necessarily or to put any stock into, but I would understand if trading Andy cued a similar response among the OTT 'fans' as the Halak trade did for MTL 'fans'. I will honestly be torn if we move either guy, no matter what, because I love Lehner's potential and I also appreciate that Anderson is certainly one of the best goalies this franchise has ever had.

This has been the argument all along with Lehner, every time he got going and played great hockey they pulled the rug from under him.  Not only that a few of the teams in front of him were defensive disasters.

If they sign O'Connor and then decide to trade Lehner so be it but if they don't Lehner is 100% the guy you roll with next year.

I don't see any 100% any where, just a bunch of 50/50s and a lot of shades of grey. Lehner AND the organization let this become a coin flip -- Lehner because he never stepped up, the org because they didn't give him enough chances or so the argument goes -- and it shouldn't have to come to this. 4 years in, we should have had a better sense of what we have in Lehner.

Definitely. I was a major Lehner supporter, but it's far from 100%. The only reason I think they might go with Lehner is because Anderson is more valuable.

Oh please. The reason you can't go with Anderson us because A he is getting old, B he can't play with injuries and C he can be such a head case. I'd take a gamble on lehner. Tops he takes a year to acclimatize.

I don't think Murray will gamble on that unless he has to dump salary.

I don't think he wil gamble on a #1 after Leclaire.

Flo The Action wrote:Oh please. The reason you can't go with Anderson us because A he is getting old, B he can't play with injuries and C he can be such a head case. I'd take a gamble on lehner. Tops he takes a year to acclimatize.

Let's not forget that he's also easily the best goalie we've had since at least Hasek, and easily one of the best goalies in the modern history of the franchise.

Hoags wrote:I don't think Murray will gamble on that unless he has to dump salary.

I don't think he wil gamble on a #1 after Leclaire.

That's assuming Lehner is a gamble. Some of you say yes some of us say no. The point is, what do the people making the decisions think? They've said, if Hammond signs, then they're moving a goalie and I doubt they sign and trade Hammond but, you never know I guess?

I am not sure if Anderson is ever a guy that is going to lead a great team to the ship. He thrives on facing lots of shots, and he thrives in a underdog role. What happens in tight games when he doesn't face a lot of action, which should happen as the Sens improve? He doesn't strike me as having a championship goalie mentality.

Ev wrote:I am not sure if Anderson is ever a guy that is going to lead a great team to the ship. He thrives on facing lots of shots, and he thrives in a underdog role. What happens in tight games when he doesn't face a lot of action, which should happen as the Sens improve? He doesn't strike me as having a championship goalie mentality.

All I ask is that a goalie lead us to the ship.

rooneypoo wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:What I want to happen - Trade Anderson and run with Lehner and Hammond and then bring up O'Connor (I'm assuming he signs here as it's what I want to happen ) if Hammond faulters or after O'Connor has had a season or 2 in Bingo.

What most likely will happen - They'll keep Anderson out of fear of what might happen to Lehner as they've shown a propensity to do that and Hammond will walk for ZIP and IF we're lucky we'll have O'Connor.  We'll go into next season with Anderson and Lehner and if we have O'Connor then they'll trade Lehner as soon as O'Connor feels he's ready for the NHL.

I don't know about any one else, but I'm about this concerned about Hammond walking.

He's 27 and this might be the only contract he gets if he flops. I wouldn't blame Hammond one bit if he went where he could find the most money. If Ottawa were to trade Anderson then Ottawa would be able to match any potential offer elsewhere.

NEELY wrote:Hammond won't get a 3 year deal from anyone and if by some miracle he does get a 3 year deal worth more than 6 mil than that GM should be let go right away.

I can see MAYBE a team like the Yotes doing to just to get above the cap floor as a backup but that's really about it.

As for Hammond, we'll see how much he really wants to be here if he's offered a 1 way deal.

GMs do some pretty stupid things on July 1st.  He's got a masterton nomination, and likely wins it.  Just adding to his appeal as a feel-good locker room guy who also went an insane 20-1-3.  

Phoenix, Florida, Buffalo, Edmonton, I could see any of these teams offering hammond a 2-3 year contract.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:What I want to happen - Trade Anderson and run with Lehner and Hammond and then bring up O'Connor (I'm assuming he signs here as it's what I want to happen ) if Hammond faulters or after O'Connor has had a season or 2 in Bingo.

What most likely will happen - They'll keep Anderson out of fear of what might happen to Lehner as they've shown a propensity to do that and Hammond will walk for ZIP and IF we're lucky we'll have O'Connor.  We'll go into next season with Anderson and Lehner and if we have O'Connor then they'll trade Lehner as soon as O'Connor feels he's ready for the NHL.

I don't know about any one else, but I'm about this concerned about Hammond walking.

He's 27 and this might be the only contract he gets if he flops.  I wouldn't blame Hammond one bit if he went where he could find the most money.  If Ottawa were to trade Anderson then Ottawa would be able to match any potential offer elsewhere.

I just mean that keeping Anderson and Lehner are higher priorities for me. Hammond was amazing and I totally understand if he needs to cash in here... but short term, Andy is a better goalie, and long term, Lehner has the higher ceiling. I'm not ungrateful for the work he did, but those are the realities.