Tighthead
Registered User
- Nov 9, 2016
- 3,612
- 3,832
Any hockey team that is not built on the Playstation needs strong leadership, or you end up with teams like Oilers who stagnate for while because they have a bunch of young skilled players, but no guidance.
Leadership isn't a magic card that will make everyone +10 on skills and the trade wasn't made in a vaccum... So really you're fishing for a fight that doesn't make any sense.
There's no denying that leadership is a pillar on which a team is based and that Montreal needed some change in that department, with young leaders as Pacioretty and Subban that were ME first and not TEAM first players.
I didn't mention Playstation. Why are you talking about video games instead of backing up your assertion with actual facts. That isn't a good sign.
Guidance is the issue with the Oilers? How do you know and what is the evidence? Seems like defence and depth are the issues to me. Explain with concrete examples why you are right and I am wrong.
How do you know this about Pacioretty and Subban? Sources and examples beyond rumours please.
Funny how you avoiding simple questions means I am fishing for a fight. Nice try but you are completely wrong. You seem to be avoiding an actual discussion though.
I will repeat the questions because I think you lost track of what I wrote.
What are some examples of ways that Weber's leadership has had a positive impact?
Secondly, absent this leadership, what accomplishments that the team has achieved since his acquisition would not have happened? Use as much detail and fact as possible.
Why did Nashville have their best playoff ever after jettisoning Weber? Was that Playstation? Shouldn't the team have cratered?
Last edited: