All-Encompassing Tortorella/Sather Thread
View Single Post
03-13-2013, 03:34 PM
Below: Nash's Heart
Join Date: Sep 2009
Originally Posted by
No more bizarre than your attempt to try and use the chance, incredibly lucky turn of events that saw Gainey succumb to some absurd pressure to get a center as justifying a complete and utter failure on the part of Sather to evaluate talent, conceive lineup combinations, and mishandle his team's budget.
Unless you're Gainey's therapist you're entirely out of your element trying to claim some traumatic event caused him to make a hockey trade. He was a NHL GM who made a deal that bit him in the ass while helping us a ton. Stop playing doctor, and ***** credit and blame where they clearly go. You make the rest of your arguments look bad by trying so hard to discredit an obvious good.
No, actually, because if Gomez isn't traded for McDonagh, then the team would have had a major cap problem, and the defense would be a lot more suspect.
And we would have won every game had we won every game and had the first perfect season in NHL history. Lets get out of hypothetical land, shall we?
I'm almost positive that it was, and when I have the time, I'll prove that. Regardless, that wasn't really the point. The point that you aren't responding to, which is that Drury was a disaster. The point that post-lockout Sather again displayed a total failure in evaluating talent and as a budget manager. That this man somehow confused a third line center who picked up garbage goals on a talent-studded power play unit for a second line center that deserved to be paid like a first line center.
Dude, are you saying you know me better than I know myself? Because honestly that would be a little creepy. I still say I've never said that, but if you can prove you know me better than I do then do it already.
Talk about strawman arguments, LOL. Of course, we shouldn't apologize for using our resources. There is nothing real about how you are looking at this, though; if there was, you wouldn't be trying to play it off like Sather has been using his MASSIVE advantage in resources over more than two-thirds of the teams in the league to garner success (there'd be no problem if that was the case). The reality, which you so conveniently fail to acknowledge, is that Sather has used said advantage just to keep pace with all of those teams. As already established, Sather has achieved NO success. He needs these numerous advantages just to keep the team from going under, since Sather has achieved no more success than any GM, and certainly less than some.
And this is the crux of the issue: despite having every advantage available, the best Sather has done since the lockout is mediocrity. He has used this advantage to achieve nothing but a crutch to keep himself from tripping over his own litany of mistakes. Yet you posit that he is an elite post-lockout GM?
If Sather had used these resources to accomplish something of note, then Sather would have done his job in a meritorious fashion. Instead, Sather has used these resources just to keep himself from being a total failure in every regard.
You look at results, I'll look at process. In the long run I'll have more success than you because while not all the time, but most of the time good process leads to good results. Good results in and of themselves, without good process, is usually short-lived and unsustainable. Not only that, but it usually leads to significant failures. You chase good results, you'll be chasing the past. You have good process and you'll have a good future.
Your entire position is a strawman. You haven't answered or refuted a single point I made. I ask you, once again, to name ONE GM other than Mike Milbury that has failed as often as Sather with as many advantages as Sather has. Keeping in mind, of course, that Sather has achieved NO success to date. None.
Brian Burke in Toronto? I think this is a silly game anyway. First of all once again you're going back to pre-lockout which I don't ****ing want to do. I don't know how many times I have to say that before you accept it. I will not defend pre-lockout sather. Again, post-lockout sather has had great process.
I already have. That's why you haven't refuted any point I've made (the drafting, for example, and how that forces Sather to attach himself to bad contracts like Richards and Nash). The last word I'd use to describe your stance on this topic (or really, any topic concerning this team) is discerning. Savvy trading, you said. Like Tyutin for Zherdev, right? Or Lisin for Korpikoski? Rozsival for Wolski? Dupuis for Bourret? The Matt Cullen contract and subsequent trade of him for scraps? He's made some good moves, he's also made a number of bad/terrible ones. If you're going to try and give him credit for someone else making the dumbest move EVER in taking Gomez off of his hands, then you need to look at the moves Sather made where incredible good fortune didn't play a role in helping him out of a jam.
Sather should have been fired not just after the lockout. He should have been fired in 2007. He should have been fired in 2008. He should have been fired in 2009, 2010, and 2011. That's the reality of it: he has one season of notable success. One. And if the playoffs started today, the Rangers would be on the outside looking in. Do I think that will be the case at the end of the season? No, but if the Rangers don't get out of the second round this year, then this will be yet another season of mediocrity.
Drafting has been good, and 95% of the board agrees so I'm not going to waste my time giving you all the arguments that have been all over the place already. Same thing with trading.
And how was last season "mediocrity"? First in the east, tied for second in the league. What, is there only 1 elite team per year? What a joke. And we made the conference finals, only 3 other teams in the league did that. Winning championships is hard. New Yorkers have been spoiled by the yankees.
View Public Profile
Kel Varnsen's albums
Find More Posts by Kel Varnsen