View Single Post
Old
12-17-2013, 03:50 PM
  #66
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
How are those not mutually exclusive? If you don't think the team has the potential to be successful, by definition, wouldn't you want management to explore all possible options? I just don't understand how one who has no faith in the team's construction can be upset by Snider's remarks
This team needs changes and improvements, but that starts with patience in letting what looks like bad contracts (Lecavalier and Streit) develop or at least get farther into them, letting the younger talent have a shot at performing on a quality team (Couturier, Voracek, Schenn, Schenn for instance) and letting our D prospects develop. Nobody is happy with this team, but sometimes the best change isn't immediate or rash. It's something you wait for and assess as things develop.

At the moment our top six and a number one D are our biggest problems. We don't have the expendable assets to acquire a number one D without destroying what we have and moving any of our top six players further hurts our situation there considering we have zero prospect talent at the forward position aside from Laughton. The players we would rather move are the older players with risky contracts like Lecavalier and Hartnell that teams will be reluctant to take on (beyond the fact that guys like Hartnell have NMC/NTC contracts).

The point of building a core and utilizing draft picks (like the one we have that looks like it will be relatively high) is to be patient.

Being discontent with the team and wanting it to be different is only mutually exclusive if change has to be immediate. Which it doesn't have to be.

Garbage Goal is offline   Reply With Quote