HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

A Thought About Tanking

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-30-2009, 09:50 AM
  #26
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,957
vCash: 500
This "tanking" business is nonsense IMO.

It honestly does not come into play until the last month of the season, and if thats the case, it would come down as a management decision. It doesnt even enter the players and coaches mind. They have self-respect and motivation - its what has got them here. Their focus is solely on winning games and making the playoffs.

I can't for the life of me, see Glen Sather asking this club to pack in in, when one playoff game generates a ton of money for the Garden and widens their profit margin for the season. Its all about numbers, they could give a damn about being in a better position in the draft lottery this early in the season, even in February. If and when they have exhausted all options to try and get this team to the playoffs and its apparent they are out of it, thats when the thought from management arises. By then its passed the deadline and any semblance of a true "tanking" is out the door. The Rangers would have to be where the Hurricanes are right now, maybe worse to even approach the situation.

Besides, the Rangers aren't exactly the model organization in selecting high draft picks. It has changed as of late, but the point is there is no guarantee Taylor Hall or any #1 pick is going to pan out as a surefire franchise player. There sure is a good chance, but I doubt that outweighs the significance of the here and now when you are talking about an original 6 franchise located in the financial capital of the world. It is more business here then anywhere else in the league and the risk reward of tanking in this city isnt really a sound decision when you are trying to attract large companies to buy premium seats and packages.

And when would you actually KNOW when they have decided to TANK? Look at the Knicks. They were DREADFUL the past decade. Did they ever come out and say... **** it, we are tanking it so we can get a high draft pick! No... they kept advertising, they kept their promotions going, they kept trying to win, as futile as an attempt that it was. The driving force around a sports business is money and you arent going to get anywhere if you send the signal to the fanbase that you are giving up to pin your hopes on a CHANCE to select one 18 year old kid from Alberta Canada.

So if it were to happen, it would be towards the end of the year, very end IMO. Like the last few weeks when you can set yourself up to garner a better chance at a top pick. Pld makes some good points, but with this management i doubt its a plan until very late in the year, because the men running the show arent into sacrificing ego for future success when theres a very good chance one of them (sporting a cigar) wont be here to reap the rewards when it happens.


Last edited by HockeyBasedNYC: 12-30-2009 at 09:58 AM.
HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 10:06 AM
  #27
AJ1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,812
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AJ1982
I'm not for willful "tanking", as in players playing to lose, fake injuries and all that.

However, at some point doing the same things over and over (deadline deals to prop up a struggling team, signing free agents to big contracts, etc.) and getting the same results (mediocre team) needs to stop.

I would prefer at this point that we bury Redden and Drury in the minors, trade Roszival and bring up guys like Sangs and Grachev. Then, let the chips fall where they may. And if that results in a worse year than we may have had with Drury, Redden, Rosy and any other mediocre vets with fat contracts we can dispose of, then oh well, we get rewarded for our patience, and faith in youth, with a higher pick than we would have had otherwise.

I see this team as mired in mediocrity and a slow decline, even with Gaborik and Lundqvist. We would make better use of those two guys' talents by entering a quick rebuild mode, that if done properly could get us in a better position than we are now within two years. Both of our elite guys would still be in their prime, and if we accumulated one or two cheap(er) top young players via the draft and maybe one larger contract using dollars we free up from Drury, Redden and Roszival, I think we would be a whole lot better off.

Tank, rebuild... whatever you want to call it, I think that is a whole lot smarter than continuing down the path we are on.

AJ1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 10:13 AM
  #28
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,957
vCash: 500
The question isnt what approach the management of the Rangers should take, its the leadership of the management itself.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 10:24 AM
  #29
Kind of Blue
Registered User
 
Kind of Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 983
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synergy27 View Post
...Wouldn't this then mean that tanking doesn't exist in the way we all assume it does?...
Tanking doesn't exist in the way most or all of the "Tankers" assume it does, but not for the reasons stated in your post.

We have a lot of people around here who have no concept of the reality of the business and management of professional sports and the mentality and character makeup of professional athletes, and for whom fantasy sports leagues and video games are the driving influence in their frame of reference. It seems to me this is the general profile of the overwhelming majority of the "Tankers." I think some who are simply very young and inexperienced make up the group as well.

Here are some of the problems with your post and the Tankers' rationale, and I'll quote a section of your original post...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Synergy27 View Post
...I got to thinking about how (and if) another very important group of people view NHL prospects - current NHL players.

Take Chris Drury for example. Do you think he is even aware of who Taylor Hall is (please refrain from making jokes about how he won't let Hall ruin his weekend). Let's assume he does. Now, take it a step further. Does he look at the kid and say "damn, he could really help the Rangers win" or something more along the lines of "damn, my job could be in jeopardy if that kid ends up as part of this organization."?

How does this relate to tanking? Well, I just find it hard to believe that people involved with the day-to-day operations of a hockey team (think players and coaches) have the time to keep tabs on the next generation of stars. They've probably heard of the potential top end guys, but I doubt they think about how awesome it would be to have them lining up next to them in the future like we all do. And if they did, wouldn't it motivate them to perform better because their livelihood might be at stake? Wouldn't this then mean that tanking doesn't exist in the way we all assume it does?
Now, you're looking at the issue of tanking from the wrong perspective.

First of all, tanking is extremely rare, let's realize that (if the Rangers should be tanking now, that means half the teams in this league, and every league, every year, should be/is actually trying to lose). Without getting too deep into it, not only does tanking go against most people's natural instincts -- especially people in sports -- but there can be serious business consequences to tanking over any significant period of time.

But, if and when it happens, it comes from ownership/management, not the players.

And even if placed in that position, do you realize how difficult it is to get any professional athletes to "tank" it -- let alone a group of them?

I was going to make this point in a similar thread a week or so ago, and I was going to talk about professional athlete's natural pride and competitiveness, and how some people around here seem to have no concept of it, but that this is something the significance of which cannot be overstated...

...Then a few days later the issue of players' pride and competitiveness popped up in a Mike Lupica feature on the Knicks' David Lee. You could argue that if any team in professional sports should have been tanking, it would have been the Knicks -- and I would argue at one particular point, they were. That came from management, not the players. The players are what make it difficult.

Here are some excerpts from the story, and David Lee's comments should give some people some insight into athletes' mentality:

Quote:
Here is David Lee, who has been the best of it for a while with the Knicks, who deserves a better team and better circumstances, talking on Christmas Eve about what it has been like to be a Knick at this time in New York:

"There are times when it's been real bad, nights when you didn't want to go out on the court and play, where you thought if you lost one more game you were going to go crazy. But I would find a reason to play every night, as hard as I can. And the reason isn't complicated. It's just competitiveness. It's wanting to compete and NOT wanting to get embarrassed. Sometimes that would be my only mind-set: I am going to do whatever I can to make sure we don't get embarrassed tonight. Make sure we don't get blown out."

Lee wasn't done there. Knicks fans know by now. The guy keeps coming.

"Competitiveness keeps the game as simple as possible, at least for me," he said. "I know we're going to go up against better teams. I know I'm going to play guys who are bigger and stronger than I am. But I am not going to allow myself to be embarrassed."

[Full story]
I can tell you that while David Lee is in my opinion a special player, his feelings of pride and competitiveness are not special among professional athletes. That's why they don't tank. That's why even if you ask them to, they may not be able to. That and the fact that athletes don't think that far in advance with respect to any particular team's future -- that is, to sacrifice themselves now (their image, statistics, etc., in addition to their pride and competitiveness) so that some prospect, who may or may not come along, may or may not help the team at an unspecified time in the future, at which point the current players may or may not even be around.

EDIT: Nice post HockeyBasedNYC... I hadn't seen it, but your main point is similar to mine and is well put.


Last edited by Kind of Blue: 12-30-2009 at 03:32 PM.
Kind of Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 10:53 AM
  #30
Synergy27
Registered User
 
Synergy27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 4,825
vCash: 500
Again, I thought I made it clear that I didn't want to reopen the "tanking" debate. I'm more interested to see what you guys think/know about current players awareness of upcoming prospects and if/how this knowledge might affect their play.

Synergy27 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 11:05 AM
  #31
Carl Hagelins Flow
Flow Status: AMAZING
 
Carl Hagelins Flow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,233
vCash: 500
Well I think most of us agree that players are probably unaware of upcoming prospects.

Think about it. You are a NHL player and you have hours of commitments to your team through practices, meetings, meals, and games. Then you have a family that takes up the rest of your time. Do you seriously see NHL players having the time to sit on HFBoards or any other site that discusses prospects? Not really.

Carl Hagelins Flow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 11:33 AM
  #32
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synergy27 View Post
Again, I thought I made it clear that I didn't want to reopen the "tanking" debate. I'm more interested to see what you guys think/know about current players awareness of upcoming prospects and if/how this knowledge might affect their play.
I dont think they give a rats ass honestly.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 11:52 AM
  #33
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synergy27 View Post
Again, I thought I made it clear that I didn't want to reopen the "tanking" debate. I'm more interested to see what you guys think/know about current players awareness of upcoming prospects and if/how this knowledge might affect their play.
Players are often aware of up and coming players, specifically if they have "alumni" ties to them. Just the other night, during the US WJC broadcast, the announcers were discussing how a lot of Shattuck alums (Parise, Toews,etc) were often in touch with guys like Stepan, who is also an alum of SSM. We know Drury was aware of Gilroy given the BU connection, and it's pretty widespread around the league. Certainly with NCAA alumni, but with the CHL and European junior leagues too. There's also the hometown connections. A lot of these guys, especially Canadians, come from small towns where they keep tabs on the local teams.

Now, I don't think players are thinking to themselves, "Yeah, maybe we should half-ass it so we can get Taylor Hall." These guys are still professional athletes, and despite what many people seem to think, nobody likes losing and nobody takes a losing season lightly. A losing season often results in personnel changes, so why would a guy get on the "tank train" when a lottery finish might cost him his job? I don't think any player is going to value the addition of Hall, Stamkos, or Tavares to their team more than their own livelihood.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 12:29 PM
  #34
BlueShirts702
Registered User
 
BlueShirts702's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: City of Sin
Country: United States
Posts: 1,256
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynHockey99 View Post
"The argument over whether or not it is better to finish 30th or to just barely squeak into the playoffs"

In my mind, there's no doubt. If we aren't Cup contenders, I prefer to finish dead last to get a player who'll help us become contenders.
In my mind, it's NEVER okay to tank. The playoffs are a must each and every year. You have to be in it to win it and once you get there, anything can happen.

In fact I'm going with a new tagline:

Shank the Tank!

BlueShirts702 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 02:44 PM
  #35
Synergy27
Registered User
 
Synergy27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 4,825
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Players are often aware of up and coming players, specifically if they have "alumni" ties to them. Just the other night, during the US WJC broadcast, the announcers were discussing how a lot of Shattuck alums (Parise, Toews,etc) were often in touch with guys like Stepan, who is also an alum of SSM. We know Drury was aware of Gilroy given the BU connection, and it's pretty widespread around the league. Certainly with NCAA alumni, but with the CHL and European junior leagues too. There's also the hometown connections. A lot of these guys, especially Canadians, come from small towns where they keep tabs on the local teams.

Now, I don't think players are thinking to themselves, "Yeah, maybe we should half-ass it so we can get Taylor Hall." These guys are still professional athletes, and despite what many people seem to think, nobody likes losing and nobody takes a losing season lightly. A losing season often results in personnel changes, so why would a guy get on the "tank train" when a lottery finish might cost him his job? I don't think any player is going to value the addition of Hall, Stamkos, or Tavares to their team more than their own livelihood.
Thank you Trxjw. This is exactly the response I was hoping someone would come up with. I hope more people will realize this and put an end to this tanking nonsense.

Synergy27 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 02:54 PM
  #36
Heat McManus
Registered User
 
Heat McManus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Alexandria, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 10,407
vCash: 500
Good luck finding a group of NHLers who are going to tank at all let alone for just the possibility of a good draft. I'm sure there are a lot of teams who would've benefited from tanking to get Alexandre Daigle, right?

People who suggest players should tank have absolutely no respect for the professionals who play this game. It's ****ing disgusting.

Heat McManus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 03:56 PM
  #37
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,626
vCash: 500
This thread isn't here to debate the merits of the Rangers tanking or not tanking. It's here, at the request of the OP, to debate whether or not players will tank based on their knowledge of, or lack thereof, up and coming prospects.

That means no:

- Hall will fix everything!

- Tank Tank Tank!

- Player X sucks!

- Any variation of "so and so is an idiot"

- I like pancakes!

- etc

Anything else that drags this OT will be deleted without further explanation.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 04:12 PM
  #38
NikC
Registered User
 
NikC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,597
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post

The only condition in which it's acceptable not to finish as high as you could manage in the standings is for your organization's GM & Owner to make the conscious decision to rely on young, inexperienced players to fill out the bulk of their roster, which is for the better of the organization in the not too distant future.... It's accomplished not by organization directives but by roster moves/decisions.

In other words... You don't intend to finish poorly because you want a high draft pick.... You shape your roster around young players and finishing poorly is a byproduct if their lack of experience and the high draft pick is a byproduct of you finishing poorly.... That's the only conditions in which it's justifiable...

This is the best definition of the argument of playing/developing youth
and rebuilding. This is the only way anyone should ever look at the issue. It's not about "tanking", it's about rebuilding the most efficient way, in this NHL.

NikC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 04:32 PM
  #39
Nick00
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,876
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
In other words... You don't intend to finish poorly because you want a high draft pick.... You shape your roster around young players and finishing poorly is a byproduct if their lack of experience and the high draft pick is a byproduct of you finishing poorly.... That's the only conditions in which it's justifiable.
This brings up an interesting point about where you draw the line between so called "tanking" and "rebuilding".
I think that what you described above is often labeled "tanking" in a derogatory manner by people who argue that an organization should ice the most skilled roster possible at all costs.
However you could easily make the case that it's the beginning of an honest rebuilding phase.
That's what I'd like to see. A team rebuilt around youth, from the bottom up.

I think the whole idea of losing on purpose is more of a message board conspiracy theory than anything, and therefore it's merits are not worth debating.

Nick00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 04:36 PM
  #40
In The Flesh
Registered User
 
In The Flesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 9,735
vCash: 500
we were bad for a long time, not basement bad, but bad enough we didn't make the POs for 7 straight seasons. We had our shot at picking high, we picked 7th, 4th, 10th, 12th, 6th, and 12th (M. Staal). We screwed up, that sets you back for a while. Sather has been drafting much better since the lockout, but its going to take at least 4 yrs to see how everything has worked out from what we've got.

this team will never tank, EVER!! We play in MSG, our owner is loaded and single game tix sell out in what, an hour? I'm not suggesting Pitts ever tanked on purpose, but they had an entire different situation, they had no money!

In The Flesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 05:04 PM
  #41
satrabyk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,869
vCash: 500
Every player, coach, manager etc is different, but anwyay i dont think it is really about the players such as Hall etc who most players think about, but it is about the fact that it is a number 1 pick overall who we assume is going to be a very good player. However, there is no such thing as tanking when it comes to players, maybe in a final few games when knowing you could come last, but even than i see teams in last win games. It just doesent really exist, and in the NHL which is played at such a high level this day and age to play half ass is not really possible. The only part of what may refer to tanking is done by the managers and coaches, who assign the players to the ice. Putting in a third string goalie, trading away any goal scorers for future, this is all that tanking implies. It is not based on players taking it easy because they want Hall.

satrabyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 07:32 PM
  #42
RangerFan10
Registered User
 
RangerFan10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Long Island/Plattsbu
Country: United States
Posts: 5,327
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to RangerFan10
No team wants to lose games, regardless of what kind of "reward" there is for it. There's way too much pride involved. Anyone that's for tanking or is angry that we won't tank has either never played a sport or is some grouch that hasn't played one in decades and has forgotten the kind of pride involved in playing a sport, particularly a team sport.

Take in to account that our team is pretty young too, and there's no way there'd be any tanking. So I'm not sure why the people that are for this ridiculous idea of tanking waste their time coming up with why we should tank. Because it's not going to happen.

RangerFan10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 10:03 PM
  #43
BroadwayBlues
oxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxo
 
BroadwayBlues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 8,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerFan10 View Post
No team wants to lose games, regardless of what kind of "reward" there is for it. There's way too much pride involved. Anyone that's for tanking or is angry that we won't tank has either never played a sport or is some grouch that hasn't played one in decades and has forgotten the kind of pride involved in playing a sport, particularly a team sport.

Take in to account that our team is pretty young too, and there's no way there'd be any tanking. So I'm not sure why the people that are for this ridiculous idea of tanking waste their time coming up with why we should tank. Because it's not going to happen.

Who cares if they're young? They are depleted in the talent department.
That's the biggest problem imo with the team.

BroadwayBlues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 10:46 PM
  #44
AJ1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,812
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AJ1982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synergy27 View Post
Again, I thought I made it clear that I didn't want to reopen the "tanking" debate. I'm more interested to see what you guys think/know about current players awareness of upcoming prospects and if/how this knowledge might affect their play.
okay, well, no offense but I guess I don't see the value in debating this. I think it is pretty obvious that players get paid to play. period. They don't think about the long term strategy, they focus on one game to the next, performing well, keeping themselves in shape, etc. The only time they might think otherwise is if they were instructed too by the gm/coach and I think that is really really rare. Otherwise if they play poorly there will be some kind of consequence.

AJ1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 11:18 PM
  #45
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,493
vCash: 500
Tanking isnt necessary. A fire sale is. The by-product of the fire sale is losing, simply because we'll be playing a bunch of kids.

The Pens losing on purpose to get Mario was a blatant example. If we cant win with veterans in the lineup, the only solution (after several punishments) is to play with kids and let them develop.

I dont want this team to purposely lose every night like the Pens did back when. But I would like to see them shed salary, get younger and possibly draft a franchise player.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 11:34 PM
  #46
McDonaghisGod
Oh, the pain!
 
McDonaghisGod's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 6,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scipio Africanus View Post
Tanking isnt necessary. A fire sale is. The by-product of the fire sale is losing, simply because we'll be playing a bunch of kids.

The Pens losing on purpose to get Mario was a blatant example. If we cant win with veterans in the lineup, the only solution (after several punishments) is to play with kids and let them develop.

I dont want this team to purposely lose every night like the Pens did back when. But I would like to see them shed salary, get younger and possibly draft a franchise player.
This. It's called rebuilding...somehing this franchise has refused to do and has never had any sustained success because of it. Retooling only works for franchises with a prolonged history of success.

McDonaghisGod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 11:35 PM
  #47
ReggieDunlop68
Hey Hanrahan!
 
ReggieDunlop68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 1,218
vCash: 500
Without rebuilding/tanking/whatever none of us, I mean none of us will see the Stanley Cup in the Rangers hands in our lifetimes. I would say fire sale and sink at least to have a chance at glory. When we talk of shame it is true that intentionally tanking is not the most honorable way to play. However, it is also shameful to ice year after year max out teams payroll wise and finish middle pack. My family pays a crap load for our season tickets and I am pissed off. I am also sure that I am not the only one shelling out the money for the tickets, apparel, cable bills for MSG HD, train tickets to the game, gas to the city etc. etc. etc. It is time to stop this madness. What happened tonight was disgusting.

ReggieDunlop68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2009, 11:47 PM
  #48
FOXHOUND*
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Woodside, Queens
Country: United States
Posts: 3,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strauss View Post
Without rebuilding/tanking/whatever none of us, I mean none of us will see the Stanley Cup in the Rangers hands in our lifetimes. I would say fire sale and sink at least to have a chance at glory. When we talk of shame it is true that intentionally tanking is not the most honorable way to play. However, it is also shameful to ice year after year max out teams payroll wise and finish middle pack. My family pays a crap load for our season tickets and I am pissed off. I am also sure that I am not the only one shelling out the money for the tickets, apparel, cable bills for MSG HD, train tickets to the game, gas to the city etc. etc. etc. It is time to stop this madness. What happened tonight was disgusting.
not enought of these these and these to agree with this comment

FOXHOUND* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2009, 12:18 AM
  #49
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,493
vCash: 500
Way too much turnover the last few years, and this offseason should be no different.

We are closing in on a very young team and another year or two of losing.


2012 should be the target year where this organization becomes a legit threat.

We are in a soft rebuild right now, but on the verge of a full-blown rebuild.

I personally dont mind.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2009, 07:54 AM
  #50
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scipio Africanus View Post
Way too much turnover the last few years, and this offseason should be no different.

We are closing in on a very young team and another year or two of losing.


2012 should be the target year where this organization becomes a legit threat.

We are in a soft rebuild right now, but on the verge of a full-blown rebuild.

I personally dont mind.
Agreed. RangerBoy posted an interesting comparison in the WJC thread...imagine if Stepan and Kreider become the equivalent of Doug Weight and Tony Amonte...that's two 1st line forwards for a decade. Add that to a top nine of Gaborik, Dubinsky, Callahan and Anisimov...and hopefully Grachev. On D you have Staal, MDZ, most likely McDonagh and probably one of Gilroy or Sanguinetti. That looks like the equivalent of a rebuild to me.

The problem to me is the cap-choking contracts handed to talent not worthy of that kind of money. Two players on this team deserve elite money - Henke and Gaborik. Stop giving elite money to mediocre talent. No more three year deals to the likes of Kotalik. Do not give Girardi the money he's going to ask for this off-season. (We'll just understand the contracts of the big three are dreadful and move from there.) Players like Byers and Wiese would be just as effective as 4th liners as the more expensive Voros and Brashear.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:30 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.