View Single Post
Old
10-26-2012, 11:36 AM
  #64
RayzorIsDull
Registered User
 
RayzorIsDull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4 Bobby ORR View Post
Don't know what's going on in the dressing room but with what we paid for Bateman he should be on the ice instead of the stands. I think he is being mismanaged as they are tearing down his confidence instead of building it up. Still think he could be an integral part for next year but needs ice time.

I mentioned before that I was not in favour of going for it 2 years ago but many posters disagreed. Now we are seeing these lean years by not getting a younger skilled player for Kassian or Ellis when we had a chance. London is a prime example where they were always a good competitive but could never repeat that glory year. Finally they decide to rebuild and look where they are now. Last year they made it to the big show and on paper could very well be there again this. I know many posters want a competitive every year but I still think the best way is to work the junior hockey cycle. Rebuild every 4 to 5 years. To me it just makes sense to work the cycle to your advantage.
I disagreed because by all accounts they weren't getting what they deemed fair value for either of the two. What hurt Windsor was Kassian all but checking out for long stretches of that season. If Windsor wasn't getting good offers who's to say they would have players currently helping this team?

Personally looking at the product right now it isn't very interesting there isn't much that can get the people going. I would take the product in the early 00's with the likes of Ott, Spezza, Wellwood(when they got him), Leighton, Kennedy, Hildenbrand, Mather, Hennigar, Gleason, Bowman, Helbling, James, Dickson over the group they have now. Those teams had better talent on the blueline, better goaltending and a more exciting group of forwards.

RayzorIsDull is offline