View Single Post
Old
02-21-2014, 07:57 PM
  #333
Up the Irons
Registered User
 
Up the Irons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,404
vCash: 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarus View Post
It's not really understandable. A team that needed to excel at drafting and development to remain competitive; was instead terrible and drafting and tore down players that showed even a hint of promise before losing them to other organizations who struggled to build them back up again(most were lost causes by that point though).

If you put any stock into Tyler's conclusions(which you do since you were quoting and presenting a response regarding those conclusion), then you can already see it happening again. Hall's game is being torn down to a more simplistic approach to conform to how Eakins feels the game should be played as opposed to what Hall is good(if not outright dynamic) at; that's a classic Mactavish coaching move.

It's a script we've all seen before. It's one where the talent heads to greener pasture at the first opportunity they get(if not outright forcing the move), and the team tops out as a contender for scraping into the playoffs on the last day of the season, and nothing more.
If their plan is to change all the players they drafted, one must question why they drafted them in the first place. Yak is a perfect example of this. didn't they scout him? Surely, they knew (or should have) that the kid has the defensive awareness of a 10 year old.

if Mact doesn't like any of the players he's got, it seems strange that he would hold at least 7 of them as untouchable. Will the morphing of Hall into a 200' player hurt him or help him? At this point, I would say it will help him. As you state, there is a risk. I certainly feel they would have been better off going forward with Kruger than with Eakins. We shall see if the Eakins gamble (and it is a huge gamble) will work out.. I would say, at this point, it is more likely to fail than to succeed.

Up the Irons is offline