HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

A Brief Look at Next Season's Oilers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-26-2007, 06:46 PM
  #26
PuckNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilbleeder View Post

#6.) Sign Brian Boucher for a $ 800k per yr for 2 yrs??
Why? Put in JDD as a backup.

PuckNut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 06:49 PM
  #27
Oilbleeder
Moderator
Lead us to glory.
 
Oilbleeder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oil Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,829
vCash: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuckNut View Post
Why? Put in JDD as a backup.
Yeah i thought of that, i was assuming he isnt ready and needed maybe one more season in the AHL, if he is ready then by golly lets put him in. So the question is, will he/is he ready??

Oilbleeder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 06:49 PM
  #28
PuckNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilbleeder View Post
Yeah i thought of that, i was assuming he isnt ready and needed maybe one more season in the AHL, if he is ready then by golly lets put him in. So the question is, will he/is he ready??
I think that if he's not ready next season, he won't ever be. At some point you just gotta take that chance. It's not like Boucher would be much of an upgrade.

PuckNut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 07:01 PM
  #29
Oilbleeder
Moderator
Lead us to glory.
 
Oilbleeder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oil Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,829
vCash: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuckNut View Post
I think that if he's not ready next season, he won't ever be. At some point you just gotta take that chance. It's not like Boucher would be much of an upgrade.
Yeah your probably right, hopefully he is ready and doesnt cost us losing games

Oilbleeder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 10:08 PM
  #30
jadeddog
Registered User
 
jadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 11,825
vCash: 500
i cant believe that im about to type this.... but i actually think JDD *might* be ready next year to play as our backup (note: when i say *might*, im still only giving him a 25% chance at best to make the club.... but this is significantly higher than the 0% chance i thought i would be giving him based on his last year in the AHL )

jadeddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 10:29 PM
  #31
21Gator*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,123
vCash: 500
PDO you are completely wrong.

Your position that the Oil can afford to sustain a $44M budget is untenable--I may say ludicrously untenable, without a significant raise in ticket prices.

$44M is not a sustainable figure without supporting revenues. Where is the more revenue going to come from? another 12.4% increase in ticket prices? No thank you!

What they made from a playoff run is irrelevant to the budgeting process. Do you honestly think a team that may have reserves should budget to LOSE money in a following season? Because that is what you are saying and it is ridiculous.

The Oil would have had an OPERATING LOSS of $1.5M before the end of last season (because they took on Samsonov, Spacek and Tjarnstrom). However their gamble paid off and they made some really good money. The took the risk, their money was in the Oil for 8 years, they deserves to reap economic benefit from KEEPING THE TEAM IN EDMONTON.

I imagine the only way we have a significant budget increase is if we can land one of the top three of four UFA dman, otherwise this team will still be short next year, unless we put ourself in an opportunity (like last year) and then KLowe can work some trade magic.

Otherwise $44M is a figure is way too high, and if they go that way their will be some angry tickholders. Although who cares if we're losing, let's sell to the corporations that will dry up when the economy does.

21Gator* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 10:40 PM
  #32
PDO
Registered User
 
PDO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,220
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to PDO
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Gator View Post
PDO you are completely wrong.

Your position that the Oil can afford to sustain a $44M budget is untenable--I may say ludicrously untenable, without a significant raise in ticket prices.

$44M is not a sustainable figure without supporting revenues. Where is the more revenue going to come from? another 12.4% increase in ticket prices? No thank you!

What they made from a playoff run is irrelevant to the budgeting process. Do you honestly think a team that may have reserves should budget to LOSE money in a following season? Because that is what you are saying and it is ridiculous.

The Oil would have had an OPERATING LOSS of $1.5M before the end of last season (because they took on Samsonov, Spacek and Tjarnstrom). However their gamble paid off and they made some really good money. The took the risk, their money was in the Oil for 8 years, they deserves to reap economic benefit from KEEPING THE TEAM IN EDMONTON.

I imagine the only way we have a significant budget increase is if we can land one of the top three of four UFA dman, otherwise this team will still be short next year, unless we put ourself in an opportunity (like last year) and then KLowe can work some trade magic.

Otherwise $44M is a figure is way too high, and if they go that way their will be some angry tickholders. Although who cares if we're losing, let's sell to the corporations that will dry up when the economy does.
How does that kool aid taste? Good? I sure hope so.

The numbers completely disagree with everything that you just said. This team was in the black in 2003-2004 with $33,375,000 USD tied up in payroll. Since then the Canadian dollar was around $.70 over the course of that season and is currently at what, $.85?

Add in a 12% increase in ticket prices AND a what was (truthfully) likely a $20,000,000 surplus last season and you're telling me that the Oilers can't afford to spend to $44,000,000?

********. That's a steaming pile of crap.

The Oilers were in the top 10 for revenue last year. They're NOT a poor team, regardless of the line of **** that Lafroge feeds you and you eat up.

PDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:10 PM
  #33
21Gator*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDO View Post
How does that kool aid taste? Good? I sure hope so.

The numbers completely disagree with everything that you just said. This team was in the black in 2003-2004 with $33,375,000 USD tied up in payroll. Since then the Canadian dollar was around $.70 over the course of that season and is currently at what, $.85?

Add in a 12% increase in ticket prices AND a what was (truthfully) likely a $20,000,000 surplus last season and you're telling me that the Oilers can't afford to spend to $44,000,000?

********. That's a steaming pile of crap.

The Oilers were in the top 10 for revenue last year. They're NOT a poor team, regardless of the line of **** that Lafroge feeds you and you eat up.
Wow, so overwhelming. Not one argument based on anything remotely intellectual.

You are overstating the impact of the dollar. Much of the rise in the dollar came in the first half of '03. The majority of revenues are booked in the summer, in canadian dollars. In the summer of '03 the Canadian dollar was at $0.72 USD (approximately), and currently canadian dollar is worth $0.85 USD, or an 18% increase.

Meanwhile our salary has gone from $33,375,000 USD to $38,966,000 USD, or a 16.75% increase. Factor in raises to renew MacT and the increase is probably the same.

So much for that theory.

Y'know it's the same people who think the EIG shouldn't make a dime that will expect them to pay for a new arena themselves.

Ask yourself if you'd rather put up with an unappreciative media, and fan base, for what is a rather honourable pursuit - trying to make money in a small market hockey town - or sell, taking your profit and letting the Oil go in the hands of some billionaire that can spend to the cap, because he's writing the loss off anyway against profits from his real business. Honestly, it is like many of you talk as if you'd prefer the EIG get the Forbes estimated value of $146 million and sell to make money, than actually allow them to make money at providing Edmontonians with sport and entertainment. Then you'd have new ownership that wouldn't take that BS for a minute and move the team to an empty area somewhere looking for a tenant (which exist btw)!

My position is based on the fact that, they booked revenues last summer and came up with a budget number of $39M. No matter what they make, and you should want them to make money if you want hockey in Edmonton, they are not going to raise that unless we are in a good position to make a playoff run, THE right player comes along, or they raise ticket prices.

Your position is unfounded.


Last edited by 21Gator*: 01-26-2007 at 11:16 PM.
21Gator* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:33 PM
  #34
nameht
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Gator View Post
Wow, so overwhelming. Not one argument based on anything remotely intellectual.

You are overstating the impact of the dollar. Much of the rise in the dollar came in the first half of '03. The majority of revenues are booked in the summer, in canadian dollars. In the summer of '03 the Canadian dollar was at $0.72 USD (approximately), and currently canadian dollar is worth $0.85 USD, or an 18% increase.

Meanwhile our salary has gone from $33,375,000 USD to $38,966,000 USD, or a 16.75% increase. Factor in raises to renew MacT and the increase is probably the same.
Our payroll in 2003-2004 season was $33,375,000 USD ~$46,000,000 CAD

In 2005-2006 our payroll currently sits at $38,966,000 USD ~$46,350,00 CAD

factor in an 11% increase in ticket prices along with a huge windfall during the playoff run means we should have plenty of money to increase our budget to ~$43-44m

and the raise to MacT was surely less then $500,000 which does not affect much of anything

nameht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:40 PM
  #35
21Gator*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nameht View Post
Our payroll in 2003-2004 season was $33,375,000 USD ~$46,000,000 CAD

In 2005-2006 our payroll currently sits at $38,966,000 USD ~$46,350,00 CAD

factor in an 11% increase in ticket prices along with a huge windfall during the playoff run means we should have plenty of money to increase our budget to ~$43-44m

and the raise to MacT was surely less then $500,000 which does not affect much of anything
So you proved my point, we're spending the same on our budget (and we still have the same amount of seats).

Further what anyone thinks we can spend is irrelevant. The EIG determined a sound business model incorporating the ticket price increase, they came to a number of $39M. Unless revenues change again why would they change a model that probably made them a profit in a season where they won't make the playoffs?

21Gator* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:43 PM
  #36
PDO
Registered User
 
PDO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,220
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to PDO
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Gator View Post
So you proved my point, we're spending the same on our budget.

Further what anyone thinks we can spend is irrelevant. The EIG determined a sound business model incorporating the ticket price increase, they came to a number of $39M. Unless revenues change again why would they change a model that probably made them a profit in a season where they won't make the playoffs?
Yeah, we're spending the same and ticket prices went up 12% while we had a $20,000,000 surplus from the playoffs.

We have budget space.

PDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:44 PM
  #37
nameht
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Gator View Post
So you proved my point, we're spending the same on our budget (and we still have the same amount of seats).

Further what anyone thinks we can spend is irrelevant. The EIG determined a sound business model incorporating the ticket price increase, they came to a number of $39M. Unless revenues change again why would they change a model that probably made them a profit in a season where they won't make the playoffs?


Well if we keep on spending $39M a year we are not going to make the playoffs as we have many holes to fill

EIG have to spend money in order to make money

nameht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:48 PM
  #38
Lessy
Registered User
 
Lessy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sudbury
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilbleeder View Post

Priority #2.) Sign a #1 puck moving top notch D-man. Say Brad Stuart wants to play for the Oilers. Sign him to a $6.0 Mil/yr for 4
that is a lot of cash for a #2 guy, or a guy that I think is best suited as a #2, I'm a big Brad Stuart fan but 6 million is a ton to throw around to a guy that IMO isn't considered an elite defencemen. I've read he wants in the neighbourhood of 5 which is probably a bit more reasonable but I'm not sure that's the best option either, Smyth should take priority.

Overall though, I like most of your ideas outside of the Stuart 6 mill. In terms of the UFA market I'd like to see one of Hannan, Phillips or Preissing looked at heavily. I'd assume they'd each be looking for around 4 mill or so. A less heralded guy I've always liked is Tampa's Cory Sarich and he probably wouldn't cost that much. Of course, it depends who really wants to come to Edmonton but Sarich and Hannan I believe are from the prairies as I remember them playing in the WHL and who knows about Preissing and Phillips.

Lessy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:48 PM
  #39
21Gator*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDO View Post
Yeah, we're spending the same and ticket prices went up 12% while we had a $20,000,000 surplus from the playoffs.

We have budget space.
Yeah, but the business model was not very profitable before ticket prices went up. Are you suggesting they shouldn't make money? You think people should invest $20M just because you want to have a team in your small market city?

We may have money in the bank, that is not the same as having budget space.

If we buy a AHL team, where does that meny come from? If we invest in part ownership of a new arena, where is that money going to come from?

And please stop making FALSE claims about Oiler/EIG profit. It is largely irrelevant.

The business model (at $33M) was NOT profitable, so our budget has stayed the same, due to the dollar, and now ticket price increases probably mean the business model is profitable - what any EDMONTON Oiler fan should want.

You honestly don't have a leg to stand on.

21Gator* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:51 PM
  #40
21Gator*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nameht View Post
Well if we keep on spending $39M a year we are not going to make the playoffs as we have many holes to fill

EIG have to spend money in order to make money
And they would have, but the right player wasn't available. They would have spent like last season, if they thought that investment had a high probability of making the playoffs.

The misjudged our D going into the season.

21Gator* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:53 PM
  #41
Cloned
Sexy Genesis
 
Cloned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Gator View Post
Yeah, but the business model was not very profitable before ticket prices went up. Are you suggesting they shouldn't make money? You think people should invest $20M just because you want to have a team in your small market city?

We may have money in the bank, that is not the same as having budget space.

If we buy a AHL team, where does that meny come from? If we invest in part ownership of a new arena, where is that money going to come from?

And please stop making FALSE claims about Oiler/EIG profit. It is largely irrelevant.

The business model (at $33M) was NOT profitable, so our budget has stayed the same, due to the dollar, and now ticket price increases probably mean the business model is profitable - what any EDMONTON Oiler fan should want.

You honestly don't have a leg to stand on.
Profit isn't an all-or-none issue. The EIG is not in a position where it either makes 10M in profit (for example) or 0. The issue is not if they can make a profit -- because both you and PDO agree that this business model is profitable based on a 39M budget -- but how much profit balanced with how much should be put back into the salary structure of the team.

__________________

Sig AND X-mas avatar courtesy of The Nemesis

"Pull yourself together!" - Solid Snake to Otacon, multiple times in the series
Cloned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-26-2007, 11:58 PM
  #42
21Gator*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloned View Post
Profit isn't an all-or-none issue. The EIG is not in a position where it either makes 10M in profit (for example) or 0. The issue is not if they can make a profit -- because both you and PDO agree that this business model is profitable based on a 39M budget -- but how much profit balanced with how much should be put back into the salary structure of the team.
I think profit is all or none, more or less. I think they budget for break even, with a reasonable margin of safety, to field a competative team. That team has to earn the opportunity for increased budget, and the EIG will spend that margin of safety or more to hit the playoffs, which is the profit.

I think $40-41M will be our budget next year, with the possibility of spending more at the deadline to push this up a million, but I think $42M would be high without significant ticket price increases.

21Gator* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2007, 12:00 AM
  #43
Cloned
Sexy Genesis
 
Cloned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Gator View Post
The misjudged our D going into the season.
There's actually two separate issues imo here.

I believe EIG remains mostly hands-off in terms of player evaluation -- they're not Steinbrenner. If anyone misjudged our D, it was Lowe.

The second issue is that if Lowe didn't misjudge our D and knew it needed improvement, then why didn't he address that need before the season started? Danny Markov would clearly have been a better choice than Tjarnqvist -- and although Roli may have recommended Shaggy, I have a hard time believing the pro scouting staff of the Oilers would have recommended Tjarnqvist over Markov. So either Lowe didn't want to sign someone, or he couldn't sign someone due to budgetary restraints at the time.

It is probable (imo) that Lowe went to EIG last season and asked them to give him some breathing space in order to bring in Samsonov et al. In return, he offered them the potential for playoff revenue. It is possible that EIG may have advocated for the same type of gameplan heading into the season. In other words, we'll cap the budget for now but if the team looks like it's heading somewhere by the deadline we'll loosen the purse strings again for you.

Now that that isn't likely to happen, we're probably not going to see any budget expansion this season.

Cloned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2007, 12:06 AM
  #44
Oilbleeder
Moderator
Lead us to glory.
 
Oilbleeder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oil Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,829
vCash: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoll 16 View Post
that is a lot of cash for a #2 guy, or a guy that I think is best suited as a #2, I'm a big Brad Stuart fan but 6 million is a ton to throw around to a guy that IMO isn't considered an elite defencemen. I've read he wants in the neighbourhood of 5 which is probably a bit more reasonable but I'm not sure that's the best option either, Smyth should take priority.

Overall though, I like most of your ideas outside of the Stuart 6 mill. In terms of the UFA market I'd like to see one of Hannan, Phillips or Preissing looked at heavily. I'd assume they'd each be looking for around 4 mill or so. A less heralded guy I've always liked is Tampa's Cory Sarich and he probably wouldn't cost that much. Of course, it depends who really wants to come to Edmonton but Sarich and Hannan I believe are from the prairies as I remember them playing in the WHL and who knows about Preissing and Phillips.
I'm only taking into account that Teams like Pittsburgh (who are gonna go for the playoffs next season if not this season) and Philly (who has a lot of cap next season supposedly) who are gonna throw tons and tons of money at guys who are Top paring guys who would fit here nicely (and there is only three, Markov, Timmonen and Stuart). Add to that the price of D-man this season, and its gonna be a war to get one of those three. If one of those guys dont sign, then i look at a Defence by committe where Lowe goes out and signs guys Sarich and D.Markov to fill the defensive void and make us tougher to score against.

Oilbleeder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2007, 12:07 AM
  #45
Cloned
Sexy Genesis
 
Cloned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Gator View Post
I think profit is all or none, more or less. I think they budget for break even, with a reasonable margin of safety, to field a competative team. That team has to earn the opportunity for increased budget, and the EIG will spend that margin of safety or more to hit the playoffs, which is the profit.

I think $40-41M will be our budget next year, with the possibility of spending more at the deadline to push this up a million, but I think $42M would be high without significant ticket price increases.
Fair enough. I basically agree with your idea that EIG believes the team has to earn the opportunity for increased budget (see my last post).

The issue I have with all of this is I believe EIG can't play it both ways. If they aren't willing to increase the budget in the offseason to give the team the best chance to field a competitive team, they should not use this "potential for playoff revenue" gameplan as an evaluator of whether to give Lowe more budget space to work with. It's like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

And if EIG use the team's poor performance this season as a guide to their budget for next season, then we'll have started on a very slippery slope.

Cloned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2007, 12:07 AM
  #46
21Gator*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloned View Post
There's actually two separate issues imo here.

I believe EIG remains mostly hands-off in terms of player evaluation -- they're not Steinbrenner. If anyone misjudged our D, it was Lowe.

The second issue is that if Lowe didn't misjudge our D and knew it needed improvement, then why didn't he address that need before the season started? Danny Markov would clearly have been a better choice than Tjarnqvist -- and although Roli may have recommended Shaggy, I have a hard time believing the pro scouting staff of the Oilers would have recommended Tjarnqvist over Markov. So either Lowe didn't want to sign someone, or he couldn't sign someone due to budgetary restraints at the time.

It is probable (imo) that Lowe went to EIG last season and asked them to give him some breathing space in order to bring in Samsonov et al. In return, he offered them the potential for playoff revenue. It is possible that EIG may have advocated for the same type of gameplan heading into the season. In other words, we'll cap the budget for now but if the team looks like it's heading somewhere by the deadline we'll loosen the purse strings again for you.

Now that that isn't likely to happen, we're probably not going to see any budget expansion this season.

I agree budgetary restraints probably prevented Lowe form being able to retain his team (Horc, Pisani) AND sign a Dman. He (you are correct) misjudged our D, or his ability to pick up Dmen as the season went on.

21Gator* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2007, 12:10 AM
  #47
21Gator*
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloned View Post
The issue I have with all of this is I believe EIG can't play it both ways. If they aren't willing to increase the budget in the offseason to give the team the best chance to field a competitive team, they should not use this "potential for playoff revenue" gameplan as an evaluator of whether to give Lowe more budget space to work with. It's like a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Yes, but it minimizes any losses (financial) and maximizes the pressure on Lowe to manage within the budget (note: not cap).

And their budget will be based on revenue projections, not performance. Only a portion of the budget would be tactical, or spent based on performance.

21Gator* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2007, 12:19 AM
  #48
Cloned
Sexy Genesis
 
Cloned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Gator View Post
Yes, but it minimizes any losses (financial) and maximizes the pressure on Lowe to manage within the budget (note: not cap).
It's not the reasoning behind their gameplan that I question. Everyone wants to minimize losses. It's their actual gameplan that I question. It handicaps Lowe's abilities before the season and that may translate to further handicapping of his abilities as the season progresses (as we've witnessed this season).

Cloned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2007, 12:25 AM
  #49
Cloned
Sexy Genesis
 
Cloned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21Gator View Post
And their budget will be based on revenue projections, not performance. Only a portion of the budget would be tactical, or spent based on performance.
Revenue projections are not mutually exclusive of performance. Better performance should yield more playoff revenue, increased merchandise sales, etc.

On another note, it wouldn't be fair (imo) of EIG to project strict revenue ranges based on expectations of certain playoff gate revenues if they restrict budget ranges until playoff expectations are out the window because of those restrictions. They're not only misleading the fans, they're also lying to themselves.

Cloned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2007, 01:55 AM
  #50
philthy mcnasty*
 
philthy mcnasty*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The Storm
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,654
vCash: 500
I say the Oilers should do a half-assed cleaning of the house.

Please God, get rid of Horcoff. No more needs to be said about that there, period.

If he seems continuously uninspired and ultimately unhappy (as he so blatently makes it look) to play in Edmonton, then please God, get rid of Lupul.

Please God, get rid of Reasoner.

Please God, make Torres become a more consistent player or trade him for some prospects or draft picks.

Please God, trade Jason Smith, the man is worn out, the end. He would be a great addition on a playoff bound team.

Please God, do not pressure, try to convince or force Ryan Smyth into re-signing here, playing for a terribly mediocre, frustrated team. He deserves better. And if we can get a considerable return for him (which we could) then trade him instead of letting him hit free agency for nothing.

Please God, shake that damn coaching staff up, and Goddammnit get rid of Simpson, MacT or whoever the **** else! MacTavish is horribly overrated as a coach, cannot think outside of the box, drills a horribly generic style of play into his players' heads, has ALL the talent (at least offensively) in the world to work with and can NEVER get it done. NEVER got it done in the regular season. The ol' "keep-it-in-the-family" shtick has been worn out. The fairytale run is over.

This **** just goes on and on and on.

Oh ya and if someone's looking for goaltending, then please God trade Roloson, he'd be a solid trade deadline aquisition for someone. Give Juicy the rest of the starts for the year, guy's only played like 4 or 5 games this year. What in the **** is going on there???!?!?!


Last edited by philthy mcnasty*: 01-27-2007 at 02:11 AM.
philthy mcnasty* 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 05:01 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.