View Single Post
10-09-2003, 09:44 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
You probably won't agree with my reasoning but...

Originally Posted by slats432
What exactly is the kid going to learn and from whom at 8 minutes a game?
First, my reasoning of not signing a vet at this time is partly so the young guys can play more than 8 minutes a night.

If Ronning was brought in (for example), he pushes one kid that would otherwise be playing 16 minutes a night down the roster to play 6 minutes a night. The guy that was playing those 6 minutes prior to Ronning being signed is now sitting in the press box. The kid in the press box is now on a plane to Toronto. Isn't that talking a step backwards?

Second it gives the organization a better idea of which kids have the enough character to push themselves. In my opinion veteran influence should be used more in pushing the rest over the last hurdle than grooming them for their careers.

Originally Posted by slats432
One year of sitting beside Adam Oates for Torres, Chimera, etc etc will do more than that. All of that experience passed from the veteran is what is going to get us closer to the cup.
I agree, I just think the team should develop as a cohesive unit and determine their own identity before this step is taken.

Originally Posted by slats432
When you look at the defining moment indicated by Gretzky to the Oilers first cup is when Glen Sather paraded the team past the Isles dressing room after the 1983 loss. The Oilers took their lessons from the Islander veterans. Does anyone on this Oiler team have an idea what it takes to win?
I remember that. But the way I saw this developing is - the team developed on their own with out the veteran pressence, got close to their goal and THEN they experienced that all important lesson.(just want to point out that the lesson learned didn't come from a player in their own dressing room either, which is what you are suggesting we need.)

Remember they also did a great deal of learning on their own, such as the "miracle in manchester" debacle.

Originally Posted by slats432
If they are never taught how to win, they will never push for a cup.
You don't teach winning. It comes from the desire each player has.
That is why I think Adam Oates isn't necessary right now. Let the kids show who has it in them and who doesn't. Let Lowe and MacT weed out the ones that don't (Dan Cleary anyone? here is a player that looked much better than he was when playing with a veteran in Doug Weight)

Granted you have to experience some success to reach the next level but I happen to believe it is most important to develop the chemistry and identity of the unit before winning is emphasised. I think Lowe has done a good job in this. He has rebuilt this team but has also kept enough guys around to allow them to compete and experience a little success in the process.

Originally Posted by slats432
Ultimately seeing the success of other markets is what has to motivate this franchise. Minnesota had Cliff Ronning, Anaheim had Oates and Thomas. They both went further in the playoffs last year than the Oilers have been since 1991-92. There has to be something said about that.
Only to a degree. Do you honestly believe that both of those teams will repeat their success this year? Are they both close enough to contending that next year they will be contending?
In Minnesota's case I think they had a Cinderella season even though they haven't completely built their team. They should develop into a contender in a few years but ultimately I think last year was an anomoly.

Anaheim rode a hot goaltender. It happens but it hardly makes them a contender. They are a half built team and the moves they made in the summer tells me that they will never be anything more.

I am much more happy to sit through a year or two of struggles with the Oilers to get to see just what this team can really do long term, than to look at Anaheim and wish we were in their position.

I don't want a team built for a hail mary run only to sink back where we started the years previous.

Originally Posted by slats432
If Keane was all used up Brandon Reid wouldn't be in Manitoba. If you are Burke and Crawford watching camp, you think that you put a lesser player on your roster than someone you thought could play better? Keane has 3 rings.
If Burke is looking for the exact same thing you are arguing the Oilers need, then isn't it obvious why Keane is there and Reid is in Manitoba?

I am not questioning the move, I am questioning the player they chose to fill the role. I equate the move to Dallas going after Lemieux last year. They brought in a "playoff warrior" to help them get over the hump and in the end he didn't help. He was simply to old, to slow and to unproductive.

All I was saying is, if Burke is looking for the leadership he would have been better off going with Oates because I think Oates has more game left in him.

A move like this suggests that Burke is looking for big things this year. Why bargain shop if that is the case, either you believe in the team or you don't.

copperandblue is offline