View Single Post
02-11-2013, 11:32 AM
Provolone & The Neck
Join Date: Sep 2009
Originally Posted by
See, you always continuously confuse why people are mad about those certain players. Its not that we didn't sign them or keep them, its Homers inability to CONTINUOUSLY not understand the CBA (or I guess old one), and mismanage the cap and run into serious problems. Trading Upshall and a 2nd for Carcillo because he ran into a problem not being able to have Giroux in the lineup with Briere. Giroux didn't cost 3 mil at that time either. Tomas Hyka was not signed because they DID NOT KNOW ABOUT EUROPEAN SIGNING RULES. Like seriously. How can one defend when a corporation doesn't understand rules in place. They could go online and look it up. It's bad when an internet blog has to point it out when the Vice President doesnt even understand it.
You don't think corporations make mistakes like this all the time? They do. But the result is de minimus so no one cares. Just like Homer not getting Hyka. Yes it is a mistake. Someone dropped the ball. But it doesn't matter. There were times when the Cap was an issue but its result was not something that hurt the team. Yes, it would have been nice to have cap space to allow for someone to be called up instead of having some scrub play six minutes, but once again I point out that if there was cap space made in different ways there is no guarnatee the season would have gone down the same way. I don't remember what the roster was at that time but who would you have gotten rid of to make room from the team that went to the finals and who would have been their replacement? Would that team still have made the finals? The playoffs? I don't know and neither do you. And yet you act as if these horrible failures have doomed a franchise that has been pretty successful during his tenure.
But in the end, how do you know that these trades dont effect the team in the future. We went through this many times before (we obviously see this point differently) but just because it SEEMS SMALL, doesnt mean it doesnt change the outcome.
Well, like I pointed out above, I don't know that. But neither do you. What we have is concrete, actual results. These results have been good, better than most teams over Homer's tenure. I suppose they could have been better, but they also could have been a lot worse. You can't rewrite history and assume that these mistakes, if not committed, would have given the team better results than they had, ESPECIALLY when the results during Homer's time has been among the best in the NHL.
Honest question. What GM is better over a 10 yr period. One who assembles a team who makes the playoffs every year, but loses in the 1st or 2nd round most times, makes it to the finals once, and semi-finals once. OR the GM who assembles a team who makes the playoffs 6 out of 10 times, loses in the first round a few times but wins the cup once and goes to semi-finals once. Would you pick the consistent average to above GM who can't get it done, or the GM who has highs and lows but got it done?
I'd take the Cup every day. But that is not what we are talking about. You can't say that any other GM would have won a Cup with this team (or that we would have if Homer made different moves). It is possible, for sure. But it is just as possible that another GM (or Homer making different moves) would have turned out a lost worse.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DrinkFightFlyers