View Single Post
02-11-2013, 10:53 AM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Originally Posted by
I agree with #1, however I think he is a good GM and I don't agree with #2. I think the things pointed out in #2 show a clear indication that Homer is thinking big picture.
Let's just take the Richards/Carter scenario. He dealt two players who had long term contracts. You may look at that and think he was impatient and lacked big picture future plans. However, to me, these moves show the complete opposite. He dealt two established stars with long-term contracts to allow the team to get (even) younger and allow a guy like Giroux to develop into what he is now. This allowed money to sign a goalie and other peices to the puzzle. It is easy to point to things and claim they were impatient or questionable, but really what would this team look like right now without those deals? I know people hate this argument because I have made it before, but you don't make those deals that means you likely don't Bryz (I know this would make some people happy), no Couts, no Schenn, no Simmonds, no Voracek, maybe no Read, maybe no Talbot. Those are six to seven of the most important players on this team both now and long-term that I would rather have than Richards and Carter. Now, as I said there is no telling who would have filled int he roster, and perhaps it would be better, but it is just as likely that it would be worse. I fail to see his lack of patience and big picture thinking involved in this particular (and most drastic) overhaul which gave the Flyers the ability to develop a young core of players for the foreseeable future.
I wouldn't call signing two players to life long contracts, naming one your captain, and then trading them both within 1-2 years, as exactly being visionary of a long-term future.
View Public Profile
Visit BringBackStevens's homepage!
Find More Posts by BringBackStevens