Goodenow: It's Over
View Single Post
01-20-2005, 04:21 PM
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ranger fan in Philly
Originally Posted by
No I'm not mixing points, and yes they is demonstrative of a poor CBA.
For starters I know that you're not so lightly dismissing the loss of Paul Kariya from Anaheim's roster the following year, and we both know why Paul Kariya left Anaheim.
Anaheim lost Kariya because they did not think he was worth the money, not because they could not afford to pay him. That's a huge difference, and the only ones Anaheim has to blame are themselves for offering him that ungodly contract in the first place. It was not an arbitration decision that gave Kariya $10 mil, nor was it an offer sheet from another team. It was entirely a business decision made by Anaheim.
What are you going to blame Carolina's fall on? The loss of Martin Gelinas?
Secondly and more important you're right. They played over their heads for a stretch. They were not teams that could compete for a Cup over any length of time. They were not built to do so, nor if they were built to do so, could they have afforded to remain so. That's exactly my point. All cities like Carolina and Calgary can hope for is to get lucky once a decade. They cannot realistically hope to build a Detroit-like dynasty of success. Their economic situations preclude that.
So now you're saying that these teams were built for a short run because they cannot compete financially? That theory only holds water if the teams were later dismantled or had a large number of players retire shortly thereafter. But that didn't happen. Why not just call a spade a spade? These were teams that just weren't very good--not because of finances or the evil CBA, but because of poor management decisions and many players still developing their talents. Not everything that happened in the NHL in the past 10 years was caused by the CBA.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Kodiak