View Single Post
Old
02-25-2012, 03:28 PM
  #83
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Of course they chose to try to make the playoffs, duh. That's my point. It's very important for them.
Right... 8th place is very important. Championships aren't. That's my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
The fans reaction would be even worst if the team rebuilt. That you belief the contrary is your own little narrative. In practice all the fans are interested is the "right now", and they will spend accordingly.

Again, that's your little analysis, with no ground on reality. In practice, no ownsership will accept to see the value of its company go down - even just for a year - just on the remote possibility that it could go up latter. This is pure wishful thinking.
Tell that to Detroit. Go and actually read what their owners said and did when they took over the Detroit 'Dead Things' they are now the class of the league and we're a joke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
All these things can happen without the team sucking for a while and risking massive lost in value. That it would be easier to get these kinds of players by tanking is beside the point.
Who the hell is saying we have to lose for a long time? Nobody. Not me, not anyone else. What we've said is that we have to rebuild. That can come via investing in picks and prospects. It can also come by not making stupid moves like picking up Thomas Kaberle and trading away McD for Gomez.

Those are moves designed for short term gains and no long term thinking.

Yes rebuilding may result in losing for a while or it may not. Bottom line though is that you invest in younger players and don't go for quick fixes like we did when we replaced our entire core three years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
'cause most of the time (including the last few years, and exceptionally not this year), this strategy has allow the team to make the playoffs and be very popular in Montreal - and when you make the playoffs, you don't know what will happen next. No franchise is going to risk its core value just for the possible chance of doing better latter. You problem is simple: you vastly understestimate how much a franchise value can fluctuate over the years if the team isn't competitive. You're doing this because it's the only way your tanking theory makes sense. If you remove this assumption, suddenly it's not workable anymore.
Not at all. I don't think a franchise value fluctuates much on a year by year basis at all. We've sucked for almost 20 years and we're still packing it in. What I will say though is that over time you don't have the same branding that you used to. The club is still going to be worth tons of cash though.. look at the Leafs.

Bottom line is though that it's in your best intersest to build contending teams and maintain that branding of excellence. Otherwise you may lose some of that intersest to soccer or some other sport down the line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
LOL.
Yeah, that's what I figured. You've had no exposure to C-level people at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Leonsis "tried" because that was the only thing he could do! The Capitals were a joke of a franchise back in their Jagr days. The value of the team couldn't be lower. So in these circumstances, yes, it makes sense to take some risk. Had Leonsis managed a rich team, he would never had go this route.

This is what happen to every team that goes the tanking route. They never starts as a rich bubble team - they start at the bottom, and then decide to stay there for a few years in order to try to draft super stars.
Leonsis had freakin' Jaromir Jagr and his huge contract. WTH are you talking about man? The guy decided that he'd had enough of bubble teams and wanted to win so he tried a different strategy. You can agree with that strategy or not but at least he tried to win.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
LG, I don't want to sound harsh, but nobody care if you find this acceptable or not. Especially not management. You're not a stakeholder here. I'm not trying to have a conversation here, I'm trying to explain to you something that is actually pretty obvious if you have any kind of business experience. Managers don't let the value of their company go down - period. The Molsons don't want to learn that their baby lost hundreds of millions because their manager believed it made sense to ran the team to the ground on the vague hope of getting better on the long term. That's why your stuff about "ROI" and "you never worked with CEO" is LOL worthy: you so obviously don't know what you are talking about, and you're trying to cover it with theoretical crap. And you're entire argumentation is built on this. You've devoted so much time making your point, it's just too late for you do admit your assumption was pure speculation and walk back a little. No, instead, every single manager of the Montreal Canadiens franchise must sucks because they don't do what you think they should do.
This is BS. Sorry but it is.

First, there's no doubt that ownership doesn't care. That's been my point all alone dude. It's shocking that you're actually using this as an argument when you've sat there blaming the fans for where we are. This alone is contradiction enough to blow your position right out of the water so thanks for that.

Secondly, in the arguments above you just finished saying that a teams' value doesn't change much from year to year but now you sit here and say "management won't let it's company value go down?" So if that's the case how the hell does rebuilding harm anything? Seriously dude.

Third the "we can't do it" argument is the last bastion of the apologist. We absolutely can and SHOULD rebuild. It makes no sense not to build a club that will improve your corporate branding and have a much better chance at having longer runs in the playoffs. Not rebuilding is a choice. We aren't Columbus or Carolina. We actually have fans paying top dollar, corporate sponsorship, TV deals and tons of other revenue streams that other clubs can only dream of. Look at the Leafs, they're rolling in cash and haven't made the playoffs in almost a decade so this argument is just chalk full of BS.

Bottom line is that we need an owner who cares about winning. It's not about 'spoiled' fans who feel their 'entitled' to cups. It's about having an ownership that actually cares about winning cups.

As for rebuilding itself... the reason I've argued is:

1. Superstars genereally don't become free agents
2. We've shown little ability to atttract them
3. We haven't had superstars since Roy left
4. We haven't had a cup since Roy left
5. Superstars are a main ingredient to cup winning teams

If we could go out and sign Sid Crosby, I'd be all for it. But we can't. So managment has to find ways around this. But we don't. We go out and get TK and deal for Scott Gomez. There is absolutely no vision from management at all.

You're okay with us icing losers. Good for you. Some of us aren't okay with this. That doesn't make us spoiled or bad fans. If you want to blame somebody for where we are at and how badly we've sucked for 15+ years point the finger elsewhere and stop coming up with this apologist crap.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote