Not sure what you're arguing, but I thought I'd point out that the post that basically started the discussion was:
That's not just a statement that he thinks we're going to be bad. It's a statement that the team is going to inevitably be bad, and that we're not allowed to even consider any other possibilities. I'm perfectly ok with people saying they think the team will do poorly, but that just isn't what this was.
Matter of connotation I suppose. If the teams accepts they'll do poorly, they're far more likely to make the moves necessary in a rebuild, which is to say, trading away UFA's for picks/prospects/young players.
But if the team believes anything is truly possible, that they can actully be competitive no matter what the standings say, then they're more likely to hold on to their UFA's, and either re-sign them furthering the likelihood of stagnation or at best, slowing the decline, or watch them walk with nothing to show for it.
So if the Flames believe the playoffs are not only a legitimate possibility, but a goal that necessitates a fight to the bitter end, they'll hold on to Cammalleri and Stempniak and the other UFA's, regardless of whether they want to stay or not past the deadline. On the otherhand, if the know the playoffs are a longshot, and the cup an unrealistic vision, they'll look to sell off players to gain future assets, even if they're still playing competitively and maybe close to a playoff spot.
You're right that it doesn't have to be one or the other, but there does exist a need to recognize when to fold them. Personally, I think the team has the right mentality; from the beginning of the season to December, they're going to assess the players heading to free agency and then decide who should be offered a contract and who should be moved. Players who dont want to stay or have no future qith the team are traded for assets, as too I would suspect, signed players. They're not only keeping they're options open but they're not closing their eyes to the future.
That it is.
