I don't really care if you get involved. It's your choice.
Most, in this forum at least, do not use common sense, facts, stats, or the proper use of opinion. That is what I am trying to remedy.
It is a universal rule in forums that you can't just go posting unsubstantiated nonsense. It is expected that posts are supported by something other than self-delusions.
There are rules here.....and you have broke several tonight....calling people trolls and names as well as insulting them. you expect others to post a thesis paper that supports their opinions.
Opinions are opinions and facts are facts.. Facts can be checked. opinions are based on an individuals thoughts and need not be supported by facts.
There are rules here.....and you have broke several tonight....calling people trolls and names as well as insulting them. you expect others to post a thesis paper that supports their opinions.
Opinions are opinions and facts are facts.. Facts can be checked. opinions are based on an individuals thoughts and need not be supported by facts.
I didn't insult you. I pointed out people trolling the thread, and people who were lying to me.
Facts are facts. Opinions are personal thoughts supported by facts, and the interpretations of them.
I didn't insult you. I pointed out people trolling the thread, and people who were lying to me.
Facts are facts. Opinions are personal thoughts supported by facts, and the interpretations of them.
You have yet to provide a fact. When asked for facts to support blanket statements you respond with requirements and spin. You have also said things which are dead wrong, such as single assists in the KHL and Sather being indirectly the GM of the cup winning Oilers. Your problem is that facts terrorize your spin.
There are rules here.....and you have broke several tonight....calling people trolls and names as well as insulting them. you expect others to post a thesis paper that supports their opinions.
Opinions are opinions and facts are facts.. Facts can be checked. opinions are based on an individuals thoughts and need not be supported by facts.
The problem is he doesn't play by his own self induced rules he wants others to follow here, he has called me troll roughly 3x tonight, a few other posters as well. He has accused me of saying something that I didn't say, and you are correct he expects people to write thesis type posts when most sensible posters can converse and understand each other without having to crib note posts. This kid is a piece of something, can't take him credible.
You have yet to provide a fact. When asked for facts to support blanket statements you respond with requirements and spin. You have also said things which are dead wrong, such as single assists in the KHL and Sather being indirectly the GM of the cup winning Oilers. Your problem is that facts terrorize your spin.
I never said either of those.
I said assists are assigned differently in the KHL, not that they only assign single assists.
And that Sather was indirectly part of the Gretzky situation, not indirectly being a GM.
The problem is he doesn't play by his own self induced rules he wants others to follow here, he has called me troll roughly 3x tonight, a few other posters as well. He has accused me of saying something that I didn't say, and you are correct he expects people to write thesis type posts when most sensible posters can converse and understand each other without having to crib note posts. This kid is a piece of something, can't take him credible.
I didn't accuse you of saying something you didn't say at all. You said it with your own words. I merely re-posted your post.
You have no clue what you are talking about. Sather was working for the Oilers. The owner asked him about Gretzky in 1977. Sather advised him to buy Gretzky for what ever it took.
I said assists are assigned differently in the KHL, not that they only assign single assists.
And that Sather was indirectly part of the Gretzky situation, not indirectly being a GM.
The only one spinning things here is you.
You specifically said single assists.
You said Gretzky came before Sather just a few posts back.
The GMs you named are so ancient that I don't care to look up the specifics, but they had help from previous GMs, of varying amounts, be it direct or indirect.
Oh you mean GMs who didn't benefit from GMs in the past? In that case, Bill Torrey. Torrey was the GM and first employee of the Islanders and was solely (oh right he had assistants ) responsible for Islanders winning 4 consecutive Cups. Burke also names Torrey as his inspiration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whydidijoin
Lol. He said he doesn't respect GMs who say they have a 5-year plan for the sole purpose of buying themselves 5 years of not having to do anything.
That's the problem. It's just Burke opening up his big mouth again and defending his stubborness. It's well accepted that building a competitive hockey team takes time. When Burke got hired Burke talked about time and patience. Nonis' attempt at defending Burke and their work here has been all about that. If you were responsible for hiring a GM back when JFJ got fired, do you hire a guy with a 5 year plan or a guy who didn't have one? The Leafs were a mess when Burke took over and thinking that Burke can somehow turn the Leafs into a competitive winning team in less years than almost everyone believed is just stupidity. But the reality is that Burke was just speaking out of his ass. He never actually put a timeframe on when his team will become competitive. He only said he doesn't believe in 5 year rebuilds for whatever it's worth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whydidijoin
I never said Burke isn't accountable. However, just saying "has he made the playoffs?" is a short-sighted evaluation process.
I don't necessarily disagree with you here but Burke was given 6 years and what appears to have been full autonomy to do his job. If this team doesn't make the playoffs, Burke failed at his job and deserves to be fired and I'm sure Brian Burke will agree with that notion as well. It's life.
But I do think that Burke should be evaluated as a whole with weight given to the direction the team is heading at the end of the contract. But there needs to be results and Burke should not be given a long extension without showing that his blueprint works.
You have no clue what you are talking about. Sather was working for the Oilers. The owner asked him about Gretzky in 1977. Sather advised him to buy Gretzky for what ever it took.
Oh you mean GMs who didn't benefit from GMs in the past? In that case, Bill Torrey. Torrey was the GM and first employee of the Islanders and was solely (oh right he had assistants ) responsible for Islanders winning 4 consecutive Cups. Burke also names Torrey as his inspiration.
If that is true, then alright, I will admit that I was wrong. There was one.
Though this was from an expansion, and doesn't really apply to the original scenario being discussed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by F A N
But I do think that Burke should be evaluated as a whole with weight given to the direction the team is heading at the end of the contract. But there needs to be results and Burke should not be given a long extension without showing that his blueprint works.
I agree, a long one is not needed yet, and further results need to be had within the next few years.
If that is true, then alright, I will admit that I was wrong. There was one.
Though this was from an expansion, and doesn't really apply to the original scenario being discussed.
Then what is the original secnario being discussed and why make the point? Outside of an expansion team, there won't be a GM who didn't receive SOMETHING from past GMs. I mean Burke's trade for Phaneuf was a good one, but do you credit the GMs who acquired/drafted Stajan, White, Hagman? Seems kind of silly.
