View Single Post
10-10-2011, 02:46 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Wrong Town
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
This all comes down to a simple thing...

Would you, right now and a few years into the future, rather be in the position of the Flyers or the position of Insert Any NHL Team?

There are very few if any teams I pick over the Flyers, and should those teams exist they're teams like Edmonton, teams built on the backs of sucking for so long. LA, though partially built on sucking, puts up a good argument though, and guess what; they're built on the same Flyers that you're discussing.

Pittsburgh Penguins? No.
New York Rangers? No.
New York Islanders? No.
New Jersey Devils? Maybe...

Buffalo Sabres? Possible but doubtful.
Boston Bruins? Maybe...
Toronto Maple Leafs? No.
Montreal Canadiens? No.
Ottawa Senators? **** no.

Washington Capitals? Maybe...
Tampa Bay Lightning? Maybe...
Carolina Hurricanes? No.
Florida Panthers? No.
Winnipeg Jets? No.

Columbus Blue Jackets? No.
Chicago Blackhawks? No.
Detroit Red Wings? No.
St. Louis Blues? No.
Nashville Predators? No.

Vancouver Canucks? Possible but doubtful.
Calgary Flames? No.
Edmonton Oilers? Probably...
Colorado Avalanche? No.
Minnesota Wild? No.

San Jose Sharks? Maybe...
Los Angeles Kings? Maybe...
Anaheim Ducks? No.
Phoenix Coytoes? No.
Dallas Stars? No.

The truth is that our defense is one future top pairing guy away from being solid long-term, and we're going into a really defense-heavy first round draft next year with a pick that Holmgren has yet to trade away. Our offense is ridiculously young and ridiculously talented. It's almost not fair that we have vanRiemsdyk, Giroux, Couturier, Schenn, Simmonds, Voracek, and possibly Read, Akeson, and Ranford among others making a future all under the age of 25, most under the age of 23.
I wouldn't mind being the reigning Stanley Cup champions with some pretty solid players in the system and a guy like Seguin entering his second season.

It's also a bit unfair to a lot of the "no's", because they can't spend as much as we can. I kind of like Homer's aggressive style, to be completely honest. He makes things interesting, if nothing else... but if he'd been the GM of Phoenix or Nashville and handled things in the same manner, there's no way he'd gotten those teams to the playoffs.

This doesn't mean that Poile and Maloney necessarily are that much better GM's. They might fail terribly if they're given the money to spend.

mirimon is offline   Reply With Quote