View Single Post
09-13-2011, 09:57 PM
Kriss E
HFB Partner
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 27,340
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
I was quite certain that this board's minister of propaganda was going to respond so thank you for not disappointing me.

Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
So, we are to take your story that the team's second in command (who it has been suggested may have actually been making team decisions for some time) was in an entire disconnect with Gainey and that they were acting as though Gainey's files were passed over on the day Gainey stepped aside. That's pretty much an admission you have no knowledge of how organizations are compartmentalized or work.
It's not a story, it's fact.
GM, Bob Gainey.
Ass. GM Pierre Gauthier.

You think they were on par on every decision? Do you agree with every single work related decision with your boss?

But hey, you seem to think you have this inside knowledge of how GMs and Ass. GMs work in the NHL, so please, spread the wealth of info.

I said Gainey was in charge, for all we know, maybe Gauthier told him about Moore, maybe he didn't. Maybe Moore was holding out for a bigger salary than what he got. You think Tanguay held out for that spectacular deal out of TB?..

Bottom line is, you don't freaking know. So don't pass judgment on it.
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
Your assertions fit your role/schtick on this board, that second rounders outbound are valueless and inbound plugs like Bournival are brilliance even when proven otherwise. You practice these lines so completely that even in the face of nearly immediate information that shows an incorrect assessment you cling to your management story like you are testifying before congress.
I never said 2nd rounders aren't valuable, I said they are worth an ECF appearance.
Maybe if you didn't have this ''gnagnagna management gnagnagna'' idiotic assessment, you'd understand better and stop using childish remarks.

I said we exchanged assets with Colorado. Is that true? Yes.
You said PG could have forethought it better, despite the FACT, O'Byrne was the 7-8th on our depth chart, had not shown great signs of improvement, and was unhappy. Still, we got a prospect in return, and really, tell me what you dislike of Bournival, I'm very curious to read this.
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
Other peoples concerns about the unsustainability of PG's approach and the loose spending of assets is valid, you need to get over yourself and join a discussion of these things. If you can't do that then hit the ignore button this isn't your board Mr. Minister.
PG has given up assets, yes. Your examples were extremely weak however.
He exchanged asset in the O'Byrne trade (that's right genius, EXCHANGED). You might be against the trade, you might not like Bournival (for reasons that you will obviously tell me), but he still got a return, so he didn't give him up for nothing.
As for Moore, your critic is that he could have signed him in the summer. First of all, he wasn't GM (how you try to spin this as ''bahhh, they work together!! DuH!! Of course he could have made Gainey signed him, he's his assistant!! Duh!!'' is so idiotic, it's beyond belief). Second, you just don't know whether management or even Moore, were interested. All this is, is a pure speculation on your part. But hey, I'm the one spreading propaganda right...

Not sure why I'm responding to your pathetic post, it doesn't even warrant a response.

Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
I'm confining my argument to these examples however there are others that prove that PG's mindset is operational and less forward thinking than the job requires. Others should be able to join in without your adle minded and childish attacks. Your emotional retorts to the defence of the GM is what I would expect from one of his family members which I assume you are not.
Not sure quite to say here, this has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand, and is simply you trying to insult me in some way.

Talk about wasting picks on guys like Mara, or Sopel, when it is clear that our PO run will not be a long one. Sure. Talk about Lappy being moved, and then moved by another team for a better return, sure. Don't talk about a move that happened when he WASN'T GM, and don't talk about a trade when we got a good prospect in return. That just makes you look foolish.
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
As long as people choose to be fooled by unspectacular management that fails to bolster the lineup in September in favour of acquiring shiny new objects in February this team will gravitate to the 6th-10th position in the conference and stay there.
Sure we will buddy, 6th-10th is all we're destined to be under Gauthier and Martin. There is no room for improvement and our asset management is weak. Awesome job.
We finished 6th last year, so I take it you don't think we improved this summer even though we have Markov-PK coming back, Cole signed, and interesting youngsters/prospects coming in with White, Weber and Emelin.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote