View Single Post
01-11-2013, 08:46 PM
Registered User
DAChampion's Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,731
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
But with all due respect, this argument makes no sense. DaChampion explains Gainey's philosophy change because we went from bad team in need of great picks, to a contender able to win it all. Why the heck would it only count for that 1 year? Why the need to blow it up immediately in the summer of that "contending" year? How's a bunch of contracts ending a reason? Why weren't we able to re-sign them? And a team isn't stacked to win it all if everything imploded and there were problems in the dressing room. To be winning team, you need to be great on and off the ice. If there are cliques everywhere, the team was stacked on paper....not on reality. Yeah, we had the points we had, yet, didn't show anything in the playoffs. I love how people keeps dissing everybody in the league because they don't show up when it count the most but we don't do it for our own team?

The team was stacked but then the team was awful. If Gainey decided to let go everybody, it had to be because it was not so great to begin with....unless he's dumb. I vote for a little bit of both....
Gainey's foolishness was in:

1) Placing Carbonneau as coach, which made it harder for the team to succeed as he lacked knowledge of the game.

2) His failure to respond to the 2008-09 collapse. He made the right move in building the 2008-09 team, which was good on paper, and he made the right move in dismantling it, as it was bade in the locker room. But he should have seen the writing on the wall and sold the players at the deadline.

DAChampion is online now