Hockeybird.com: duh ... Vries?

He has a record with free agency that dwells somewhere
between disastrous and disappointing.

Igor Ulanov. Zdeno Ciger. Dave Karpa. Vladimir Malakhov.
Mark Messier. Bobby Holik. Darius Kasparaitis.
Steve McKenna. Bryan Berard.

But though his arrogance would never let him admit this,
Sather had a New York learning curve.

Thankfully, during that curve, he found out quickly that
Dolan's dollars could erase those mistakes. The Bure deal
is the classic example.

But with the cap on the horizon, that recourse is gone. Kaput.
His free agent mistakes from here on in stay on the books.

Which makes the recent signing of Greg de Vries, if legitimate,
woefully disappointing because it means that Sather has not
learned from his past mistakes.

There are four primary problems with the signing of Greg de Vries
to a four year, $14 million contract.

Only Derian Hatcher and Eric Desjardins had received long-term
deals so far. Hatcher is a physical stud and, despite his critics,
Eric Desjardins was a +30 this season and has had seasons of
50+ points.

Those guys are legitimate leaders of a defense. de Vries is a
secondary guy - a solid one - but definitely secondary.

And with the new cba likely to see the age for unrestricted free
agency drop, there will likely be a wealth of talent up for grabs
when the new market opens up.

There were so many options for defensive defenseman to play for
one year deals, the de Vries contract is maddening. Especially
when you consider Sather's best defenseman pickup was Cory Cross.

(For those that will ask for examples - there were/are Sweeney.
Marchment. Yushkevich. Moran. Boughner via trade. etc.)

If we were a Cup-contending team, then perhaps an expensive
complementary move seems worthwhile. But ... we're not.

Sather's inability to make his acquisitions fit together are
almost legendary now. Lindros with Holik. Kaspar with Poti.
Messier with anyone.

de Vries is a two-way defensemen who likes to pinch in the
offensive zone. I have a hunch that we have a few defensemen
on the roster who play the same way.

I'd like to hear how Slats thinks this works. Is he a replacement
for Leetch (ugh). Is he Leetch's partner? Is he meant as a the
defensive safety valve, or are we trying to recreate the defensive
comedy that was Leetch and Poti?

And isn't it a bit peculiar that de Vries is a left-handed defensemen
on a team whose lefties already include Leetch, Poti, Kasparaitis,
Malakhov and Purinton?

Leetch paired with Beukeboom, a stay-at-home, right-handed defenseman,
for years. I guess that equation is simply too easy to figure out.

Isn't it also odd that our "lion" of a GM feels the need to acquire
people predominantly from his time at the Edmonton helm? It appears
a tactic from someone insecure and ... mousey.

In addition to the number of former Edmonton "yes" men who are now
coaches and executives, in three years, Sather has brought in
the following players with Edmonton connections.

Anson Carter. Boris Mironov. Tom Poti. Zdeno Ciger. Igor Ulanov.
Dan LaCouture. Mark Messier. Martin Rucinsky. Rem Murray. And now
Greg de Vries. (btw, I guess we can't discard the Cujo rumor anymore.)

This strikes me as symptomatic of a GM who does not do his homework to
stay on top of the game and its players, and one who is more concerned
about his need to have players loyal to him.

As Brooks aptly put it - loyalty is only a good thing if it's directed
toward the team logo, not Glen Sather.

I suggest that if Greg de Vries was on any other team besides the Avs,
there would be no four-year, $14 million contract on his table.

Even in Colorado, he's never scored more than 20 points in a season
prior to this past year.

Put anyone in front of Patrick Roy, next to defensive stalwart
Adam Foote, and behind Forsberg, Sakic and Hedjuk and he'll rack up
32 points and a +15, too.

You'd think the Rangers would have learned to stop picking up players
who Colorado GM Lacroix thinks is overpriced. Kamensky. Kasparaitis.
Fleury. Lefevbre.

Sure, they're good players. But they're never worth the price that they
receive as unrestricted free agents.

Think I'm overacting on $3.5 million dollars? Well, what if the cap is
set at $35 million? de Vries would be taking 10% of it on his own.

And while astute GM's like Lacroix are using their dollars on stars
that attract other players to their team for less money, Sather is again
throwing money to a player who will merely take it to the bank.

Greg de Vries is a good player. But he's on par with Vladimir Malakhov and
Sylvain Lefevbre. And now he's got a New York contract to match them.

Gabe,

Many years no talk. you to Bird and the res tof old 407. RFC is funny. Jess and Dubi are ridiculous. I can't even stand to read anything they write because they are so insanely slanted towards an anti Sather stance that you would swear that they are firmly convinced that they think that they could do a much better job. Whatever.

Posted by: Ebase on July 17, 2003 01:39 PM