View Single Post
Old
01-17-2004, 10:27 AM
  #46
dedalus
Registered User
 
dedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jar jar links
His views on Sather carry zero weight with me. I know some of you may counter with
"The writers you mentioned have all slammed Sather." My answer to that is just because they write it doesn't mean i have to agree with it. But i damn sure respect what they have to say.
Well that simply defies logic. If Brooks offers the same argument and analysis that those other writers offer, you should hold his assessment equally valid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jar jar links
What do Jeff Brown Lee Sorachan Peter Ferraro all have in common? They were all Neil Smith draft picks that sucked. What did Sather have to work with when he got here? Honestly what was here? Malhotra (Gave up on by two organizations) Lundmark (An utter failure who has done nothing with the time he has been given) Brendl (A risk/reward Kid)
Yes and what do Jason Bonsignor, Steve Kelly, and Michael Riesen have in common? I think we both know, don't we?

And what Sather had to work with when he arrived is in no way relevant to his ability to rebuild. It may reflect his ability to ice a quality NHL team, but it doesn't relate to the rebuilding of the organization. That has to do with the acquisition and drafting of young talent. How well has he done with that? I mean, other than the prospects that you think are going to be impact NHLers?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jar jar links
If we make the playoffs this season is a success. But this team can do some damage when they get there. What will everybody say then?
I will say "damn!" Unlike you I don't see merely making the playoffs this year as any sign of success at all. (Because, you see, I actually take the long view of this team, whereas you ...) This team has problems that go to its core. Making the playoffs may in fact be more damaging than anything else could be.

dedalus is offline