View Single Post
Old
10-24-2003, 01:08 PM
  #17
Davisian
Registered User
 
Davisian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Broomfield, CO
Posts: 6,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
It was a gamble by Sather, and considering the only cost was the $40K waiver fee (which is pennies for the Rangers anyways), what's the big deal?? IMO it's better to take these risks when it has no negative impact on the team, since 40K means nothing to the Rangers, then to not take such risks... worst case you've lost nothing - but there was a chance you'd still have Keefe right now.
The big deal is that this was not the only option.. They could have friggin' played the kid, then see if they cared about losing him or not.. They could have NOT called up an out of shape Rheaume, and let Keefe get a shot to prove if he can handle it, and inject some younger legs into the lineup.. They could have dropped Mike Siklenka, who's role is more than adequetely covered by the likes of Barnaby, Simon, LaCouture and Purinton..

The big deal is that it was yet another completely befuddling move and poor management of the roster by a guy who thinks he knows better than all...

Davisian is offline