On the assumption that Brook's sources are accurate
View Single Post
06-06-2005, 11:33 AM
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Is it wrong to point out facts?
Originally Posted by
We'll let Lou know your thoughts.
What a friggin' bizarro world being a hockey fan in Hooterville must be. Constant criticism of a President/GM/franchise that only wins...wins and wins...while simultaneously making delusional pronouncements of success for a perennial non-playoff team.
Amazing that a poster old enough to cite players from the 1960s possesses the blind-homer mentality of a 10 year old. Entertaining though.
Is it wrong to point out how inopportune his timing was to sign players during the off season when everyone knew a salary cap was coming? How is that delusional?
Is what I posted in any way inaccurate? Would it not have been wiser to restructure some contracts prior to a cap? Would that not be what a smart GM would have done? Now, we all know Milbury was working that angle right? That and trying to figure out where and how he could find some fans. at least our stupid GM was able to figure out a way to acquire a quality player and not foot the whole build like your team did for a stiff like Yashin.
But I digress from you point of contention that I belittled Lou for pointing out his largess of signing people, 26 in total, to or under NHL contracts this summer. Please feel free to name some other organizations that followed that same path and had such a large number of players under contract. Now maybe Lou thought that there would be a season, however, that would have placed him in a very small minority. In fact he may have been the sole NHL GM to under take such a course of action. Now you may say that he had many of those contracts before the lockout and while that maybe be true, but wouldn't a really smart GM have made sure that those contracts would have expired before the lockout like many other NHL GM's apparently did? So how is it that I posted so wrong? I mean even stupid Sather figured that one out! Or is it that he miscalculated the fact that the NHL never had any intention of playing this year? Stop for a moment and ask yourslef why would a GM who is very connected to Bettman go out and do the opposite of what Bettman's plans are? Many of these guys he signed are fillers. Why was there such a need to sign them? It was stupid and it made no sense. Why sign people under the old market conditions? What was not realized is that in any labor conflict it is always negotiated that contracts are reset back to the point in time when the strike/lockout occured. So all these players are and will be under contract. Now, what are you going to do with a minimum of 26 players under contract? Sure, Parise could be sent to Albany, but he will be paid an NHL salary and it will still go against the team cap, unless his agent was stupid enough to sign a two way deal. So the question then is what happens to those players? If you waive them and drop them you still have their salary added to your cap and now you don't have them. You still end up with a lux tax issue. It made no sense considering the environment. So for me to question that issue is not so stupid after all, is it? Watch it Barney, you might shoot yourself! Opps, I forgot, Andy doesn't allow you to have a loaded gun!
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by ATLANTARANGER*