Thread: Cammy
View Single Post
Old
11-02-2011, 05:43 PM
  #68
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Dude, those moves that you argued against would've made us a better team by now. For some reason though, you continue to cling to the idea that our mediocre free agents will lead us somewhere.
I never argued AGAINST those moves. Unlike you, I am a realist and a pragmatist, and understand that an organization as the Habs, who have had financial trouble in the past, needs its revenue stream more than anything else, and that means they can't trade away the core and miss the playoffs. Again, you put words into my mouth, and false intent. You decided what my intent was. You're not even able to understand the basic necessities of the organization (financial stability) and like a teen who only sees his own grand opinion as the solution, you disregard anything that doesn't fit your perception. I'm all for trading players to get top-end prospects. The difference is, I understand WHY they can't do it. You can't even make the difference between those two things, and rather stick a false intent on me.

Quote:
That is the conventional way of doing things. This is the method that the Leafs used for years and it got them nowhere. It would be one thing if we managed to get star players via free agency but that hasn't been the case.
Yes it has. Cammalleri is a star player, but you'll deny this so you can keep spouting your demagogy. Conventional way is anything that you see regularly. It's as if you're saying signing UFAs is common, but trading prospects and star players is not. That's entirely false. They are all common, they are all conventional. When you say "thinking out of the box", what you don't realize is that it's actually "let's not consider basic neccesities (yearly financial stability). Didn't the Habs trade Halak for Eller? They did because in that case they had the luxury of not having to meet the basic necessities. Trading one of the two wasn't as high a risk vs getting playoff money, then trading guys like Koivu or Kovalev at the other time you mentioned, who were essential for present playoff contention.

Quote:
We would've been better off years ago if we'd traded away our core.
See, that's unrealistic. It's all fine and dandy in theory, and is a concept that anyone who has played GM in hockey video games can grasp. That's most people here, so stop thinking you're a genius and you have the ultimate solution. Everybody knows that strategy. Only the astute understand that it can't work here, in the mandates that Habs management have, which is yearly playoff viability to ensure financial stability. They can do it, but only when depth at the given position is ensured for yearly playoff viability (like with Halak, like with what will happen with Gomer as we now have bigger depth at center).

Quote:
And we'd probably be better off in the future if we did the same thing now. But, instead of doing this we stubbornly cling to the lottery slogan of "anyone can play, anyone can win" once we reach the playoffs.
Like a child you refure to see reality and instead impose unrealistic intentions on the organization. It's not stubborness, it's realistic management, based on their own immediate necessities.

Quote:
Maybe it will happen. Maybe Price can lead us to glory. He's certainly good enough to lead a team to a cup. But we should work towards getting a team that has a better chance of doing something and can be an annual contender. And if dealing away Cammy nets us a great prospect that we can build around we should definitely do it.
You're whole point here is only based on your weak vision of what it takes to win. You need playoff performers to win, and Cammy is one, and like any simplistic juvenile poster, you still think it's all about the goalie. If they win you'll give that excuse, since it will not destroy your pet theories about tanking and needing top 5 picks and such.

Quote:
You talked about how we shouldn't do this years ago.
Never said that. You twist my words and intent, but what should I expect, you have an attention span of a fraction of a second, and instead of actually reading what people say, and taking in their POV, you decide their underlying logic for them.


Quote:
You were wrong then and I suspect you're probably wrong now.
No, I'm still right. A team like the Habs can't have the luxury of tanking or missing the playoffs, because of financial stability. A team like the Leafs could do it because missing the playoffs has never hurt their financial stability, but they didn't do it anyway.

I would be wrong if I actually had the false intent and false POV you put on me, but that's not reality.

Quote:
And unfortunately, I don't see any indications that we're going to do anything differently in the future so all we can do is hope that Price (our only top 5 in 25 years) can lead us somewhere because Lord knows that without him we have no chance at all.
You have tunnel vision that's why you don't see 'it'. You only see one way, your way. You're still clinging to the trite and archaic "the goalie is everything" logic.

Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote