Optimism Unabated

Status
Not open for further replies.

abracanada

Registered User
Aug 29, 2004
5,574
0
Everyone is going to build a Stanley Cup champion out of the new CBA and its cap.

Boston says they are in the best position.
http://bruins.bostonherald.com/bruins/view.bg?articleid=91082

Steve Simmons from the Toronto Sun has been quoted blabbing about how all of this is an opportunity for the Leafs to dump a lot of salary, and build a real contender.

Now between the Bruins saying they can build a contender by buying castoffs (like those from the Mapleleafs), and the Leafs saying they will be able to build a contender by casting off dead weight (who the Bruins intend to use to build a contender) and pursue other castoffs from other teams, aren't we being a little optimistic here?

I don't see any teams being instantly catapulted into the Cup finals here as a consequence of buying a cup (wait a minute, isn't that how we got into all of this trouble?). I believe, it will still take good management and scouting, and a real desire on the part of the entire organization to win the cup. I don't really see this as a quick fix for incompetent managers.
 

incawg

Registered User
Mar 7, 2003
4,009
0
Canuckland
Visit site
For an entire year we've had nothing to cheer for. I think we're all entitled to a little optimism regarding our franchises, as misguided as it may be.


ps. After signing forsberg, the bulin wall, and scott niedermayer, the canucks are going to win the cup in 2006.
 

MarkZackKarl

Registered User
Jun 29, 2002
2,978
12
Ottawa
Visit site
You couldn't buy a winner in the old CBA either. You needed money to keep a team together that has already won, but you couldn't 'buy' anything. Since the UFA age was 31, the readily available players were all passed their prime, and thus they would not help an average or bad team improve to the level (or improve at all) required to become a contender.

You win, then you pay to keep your players. Thats how it should be.

You can't pay then win, the players prove themselves and get rewarded for it. Before the simpletons go off crying foul: Good teams should cost more, and usually do. The teams that win have the best players, on average. As the team improves and grows the payroll goes up as well. There are also several cases of teams cutting payroll and improving.

Money couldn't buy you **** in the old CBA. Thats a good thing.
 

Timmy

Registered User
Feb 2, 2005
10,691
26
abracanada said:
Everyone is going to build a Stanley Cup champion out of the new CBA and its cap.

Steve Simmons from the Toronto Sun has been quoted blabbing about how all of this is an opportunity for the Leafs to dump a lot of salary, and build a real contender.

.

:biglaugh:

Brains over bucks?
 

futurcorerock

Registered User
Nov 15, 2003
6,831
0
Columbus, OH
incawg said:
For an entire year we've had nothing to cheer for. I think we're all entitled to a little optimism regarding our franchises, as misguided as it may be.


ps. After signing forsberg, the bulin wall, and scott niedermayer, the canucks are going to win the cup in 2006.
...and subsequently dump the Sedins, Mattias Ohlund to Atlanta, sending Vancouver to the scrap heap after Naslund and Forsberg collectively join forces with Modo.

Atlanta wins the cup in 2007-2011
 

Spungo*

Guest
scaredsensfan said:
You couldn't buy a winner in the old CBA either. You needed money to keep a team together that has already won, but you couldn't 'buy' anything. Since the UFA age was 31, the readily available players were all passed their prime, and thus they would not help an average or bad team improve to the level (or improve at all) required to become a contender.

You win, then you pay to keep your players. Thats how it should be.

You can't pay then win, the players prove themselves and get rewarded for it. Before the simpletons go off crying foul: Good teams should cost more, and usually do. The teams that win have the best players, on average. As the team improves and grows the payroll goes up as well. There are also several cases of teams cutting payroll and improving.

Money couldn't buy you **** in the old CBA. Thats a good thing.

You are literally insane.
 

MarkZackKarl

Registered User
Jun 29, 2002
2,978
12
Ottawa
Visit site
You mean smart, right? Oh wait, you can't use basic reasoning or logic skills, or even have the gall to look at, gasp, actual results? Gee, well I guess you can continue to have the same misguided opinion if you ignore facts, rationality and reasoning... :yo:
 

Blue_and_White

Registered User
Jul 20, 2004
540
0
scaredsensfan said:
You couldn't buy a winner in the old CBA either. You needed money to keep a team together that has already won, but you couldn't 'buy' anything. Since the UFA age was 31, the readily available players were all passed their prime, and thus they would not help an average or bad team improve to the level (or improve at all) required to become a contender.

You win, then you pay to keep your players. Thats how it should be.

You can't pay then win, the players prove themselves and get rewarded for it. Before the simpletons go off crying foul: Good teams should cost more, and usually do. The teams that win have the best players, on average. As the team improves and grows the payroll goes up as well. There are also several cases of teams cutting payroll and improving.

Money couldn't buy you **** in the old CBA. Thats a good thing.
And what do you call it that Detroit did to win their last cup? They bought many of those players.
 

incawg

Registered User
Mar 7, 2003
4,009
0
Canuckland
Visit site
futurcorerock said:
...and subsequently dump the Sedins, Mattias Ohlund to Atlanta, sending Vancouver to the scrap heap after Naslund and Forsberg collectively join forces with Modo.

Atlanta wins the cup in 2007-2011

That's fine, as long as we got our cup in 2006 :yo:
 

futurcorerock

Registered User
Nov 15, 2003
6,831
0
Columbus, OH
Spungo said:
You are literally insane.
He's right. New York Rangers bought their team for years and couldn't build a winner.

On the other hand, the Red Wings used their money as well, though it turned into a couple of cups.
 

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
15,392
1,189
Chicago, IL
Visit site
scaredsensfan said:
You couldn't buy a winner in the old CBA either. You needed money to keep a team together that has already won, but you couldn't 'buy' anything. Since the UFA age was 31, the readily available players were all passed their prime, and thus they would not help an average or bad team improve to the level (or improve at all) required to become a contender.

Money couldn't buy you **** in the old CBA. Thats a good thing.

So adding Scott Niedermeyer wouldn't help a team make the next step and win the Stanley Cup? How about Naslund next year? Can you tell us how old you are, because FYI, many players are in their prime into the mid-30's.

Can you successfuly build a team ENTIRELY around UFA's? Hell no! Can they be very integral parts of Cup winning teams? Hell yes!

I think that every GM should be looking at this as an opportunity to sell the fans that they have a chance to compete. This is a time for optimism regarding the future. Teams like BOS or CHI that have very few players under contract can point to the space available for prospects and for FA's.
 

Timmy

Registered User
Feb 2, 2005
10,691
26
scaredsensfan said:
You mean smart, right? Oh wait, you can't use basic reasoning or logic skills, or even have the gall to look at, gasp, actual results? Gee, well I guess you can continue to have the same misguided opinion if you ignore facts, rationality and reasoning... :yo:

For the love of all that is good and holy, could you please change your avatar to at least say 2006?

I get a headache everytime I see it.
 

Cawz

Registered User
Sep 18, 2003
14,372
3
Oiler fan in Calgary
Visit site
Spungo said:
You are literally insane.
No, he's just a kid with a very narrow point of view. Some people are here to learn, some are here to rant. I think its unfortunate that some people are so closed minded that they think they know better then everyone else and refuse to listen a differing opinion.

Of course there are going to be problems with any CBA. But there will be a hell of a lot more optimism throughout the league, compared to the obsolete system. Optimism = happy fans. Any fan disappointed with the NHL finally catching up to cousin sports leagues is truely misguided.
 

timlap

Registered User
Jun 19, 2002
9,218
41
abracanada said:
. . .
I don't see any teams being instantly catapulted into the Cup finals here as a consequence of buying a cup (wait a minute, isn't that how we got into all of this trouble?). I believe, it will still take good management and scouting, and a real desire on the part of the entire organization to win the cup. I don't really see this as a quick fix for incompetent managers.
The "quick fix for incompetent managers" qualifies as a prejudicial statement, I think. As you mentioned Boston and Toronto, specifically, I gues that's who you're talking about. Well, in different ways, both of those teams have been well managed, but that's not my main point.

My main point is that the new CBA is a time to be optimistic. After all, GMs have the opportunity to rebuild teams under a brand new system. It's a challenge that any hockey person would relish. Not everyone will be equally successful, obviously, but at the beginning of the process everyone is hopeful. It's an exciting time to be a GM or fan.

You are right about the importance of scouting and drafting, but the intelligent use of the free agent market will also be a key determinant of success in the future (as it has been in the past). Part of what should hopefully improve the league is the fact that more teams may now be able to access top free agents. That's a good thing.

But fans who use to mock the signing of free agents, as if it were somehow embarrassing, may now be cheering for their team to enter the fray.
 

Timmy

Registered User
Feb 2, 2005
10,691
26
TexSen said:
Dude, Timmy is sooooooooooo last Tuesday. ;)

The handle reflects my ordinary state of consciousness.

And last Tuesday was a great day. :jump:

Doesn't change the fact that the sens avatar makes absolutely no sense and gives me a headache every time I see it.
 

blitzkriegs

Registered User
May 26, 2003
13,150
1
Beach & Mtn & Island
Visit site
some teams could sign up to 15 NEW players. That's a crapshoot to think there will be chemistry there.

IMO, you will probably see players having a team/location list, but most players will probably resign with their current clubs @ reduced rates.

I don't think players are gonna be playing offseason hold out. Under the cap, there's a fixed amount of funds available. In each passing day, the amount gets consumed. There WILL be players squeezed out of the league or taking monster paycuts as teams get closer to the cap. Not everyone is gonna be at the ceiling, but once you make the floor, that's it.

Finally, this offseason is could be the equivalent of filling up expansion teams. Major exception, this time the league is not giving you list to choose from & your only other competition is one team. The pool will be vast & with a lot of fishermen dropping lines. Whomever grabs, gets paid.
 

Weary

Registered User
Jul 1, 2003
1,068
0
Cawz said:
No, he's just a kid with a very narrow point of view. Some people are here to learn, some are here to rant. I think its unfortunate that some people are so closed minded that they think they know better then everyone else and refuse to listen a differing opinion.

Of course there are going to be problems with any CBA. But there will be a hell of a lot more optimism throughout the league, compared to the obsolete system. Optimism = happy fans. Any fan disappointed with the NHL finally catching up to cousin sports leagues is truely misguided.
Just a bit self-contradictory, wouldn't you say?
 

Crazy_Ike

Cookin' with fire.
Mar 29, 2005
9,081
0
Cawz said:
No, he's just a kid with a very narrow point of view.

Doh! He is? I thought he was the comic relief. I mean, I thought you had to be deliberately trying to be as wrong as he consistently is...

:biglaugh:

The fact bothe Toronto and Boston think they have the key to winning the Cup through diametrically opposite means shows that we're finally getting a CBA that gives realistic hope to *every* team, not just the ones who can afford to pay the big bucks to the big players. Much different than just desperate hope for a fluke run.
 

Cawz

Registered User
Sep 18, 2003
14,372
3
Oiler fan in Calgary
Visit site
Crazy_Ike said:
I thought he was the comic relief.
I couldnt agree more. I actually like it when he posts. He's so easy to disagree with. There are very valid points being made on both sides of the arguments, just not by him.

Hell, we're all going to be CBA experts by the time this is all said and done.
 

Tiki

Registered User
Mar 1, 2002
4,502
0
Goo Lagoon
Visit site
scaredsensfan said:
Gee, well I guess you can continue to have the same misguided opinion if you ignore facts, rationality and reasoning... :yo:

Funny, The majority of the posters here have the same feelings about you. Your myopic views of the NHL are truley skewed and very far off to say the least.
 

Timmy

Registered User
Feb 2, 2005
10,691
26
Tiki said:
Funny, The majority of the posters here have the same feelings about you. Your myopic views of the NHL are truley skewed and very far off to say the least.

I think that is patently unfair, and I think he makes excellent, unbiased, and valid points. He is neither myopic nor skewed in his views.

In fact, I think --

Crap, the orderlies are coming.

Later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->