View Single Post
05-05-2005, 11:39 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 41
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
Of course my opinion is biased. An opinion by definition is biased. That's what an opinion is.

My point is I don't trust Sather to evaluate talent. Since he has come to the Rangers what prospect developed? What move that he has made worked (aside from Barnaby for Ciger and who brought Ciger here in the first place). I've been calling for rebuilding since the Rangers lost to the Flyers in the ECF. The fact that it took Sather 4 years to do it is what I have a problem with. And, as TB has said in this thread, why should these moves be viewed as impressive? There isn't a GM in the league who couldn't have made these moves. And these moves will all come down to evaluation of talent. And I don't have faith in this group to do that.
An opinion does not have to be biased. I don't really care to get into semantics about it, so I'll leave it at that.

Regardless though, your argument has changed with every post you write. First, you said that you didn't agree with the Leetch trade because the return wasn't adequate. Then, you said Leetch should have never been traded because he was too important to the team. Then, we found out that you would be against any Sather trade only because of his past trades. Now, we see that you apparantly haven't even considered the prospects that the Rangers got in return - instead, you assume they are no good only because you don't trust Sather's ability to evaluate talent. You're digging yourself a deeper hole with every word you type.

Mike18 is offline