hockeytown9321
Registered User
- Jun 18, 2004
- 2,358
- 0
Bring Back Bucky said:That's not the context you used the quote in, and it's pretty cheap to pretend that it was.
Didn't you just yell at me for putting words in your mouth?
Bring Back Bucky said:That's not the context you used the quote in, and it's pretty cheap to pretend that it was.
Bring Back Bucky said:It's great that you can put words in my mouth, please allow me to use my own. I don't hate the Red Wings. I hate and blame the system that allows them to have such a disparity between their payroll and the Oilers. I admire the way they have been built, though I question if another system would allow them as much leeway as they have had. Hockey franchises can't be "bought" - look at the Rangers. I just have a passion for a team that doesn't have much chance under the last cba. It's not much different from how you must have felt when Red Wings fans were held hostage for so many years by mismanagement.
Reilly311 said:How would a cap allow Edmonton to keep their superstars exactly?
hockeytown9321 said:Didn't you just yell at me for putting words in your mouth?
hockeytown9321 said:I can understand that and I understand that changes need to be made. I'd hope that you can understand my frustration when the Red Wings get blamed for everything, when really all they did was draft and trade well.
I too question if a different system, such as a hard cap, would have allowed them to accomplish what they have. I can't envision a scernario where they'd have stayed together after 1995, and I don't think that'd have been fair. The only system I want is one in which teams can keep their own guys toghether long enough to do something special. I don't think a hard cap is the way to do it.
Bring Back Bucky said:The funny thing is, we are on the opposite ends of the spectrum, but our points of view are really not that far apart. And so you will know, I don't hate the Wings at all, and yes I think they get unfairly singled out because they combine a huge payroll with great management and it creates that greatest breeder of hate: SUCCESS. There are lots of other big spenders, none have come close to the Wings for success or player loyalty in my humble ( :lol ) opinion. On my end, we get called whiners because we want change. And that, too, is largely due to success. We got spoiled in the 80's. I want an NHL where Detroit AND Edmonton can succeed. (I just don't care about Dallas or Vancouver).. Just kidding...
hockeytown9321 said:See, two people can have a reasonable disagreement. It is possible.
Bring Back Bucky said:We don't have to start hugging all the time now, do we??
Bring Back Bucky said:On my end, we get called whiners because we want change. And that, too, is largely due to success. We got spoiled in the 80's. I want an NHL where Detroit AND Edmonton can succeed.
Tom_Benjamin said:No. You get called whiners because you whine. To be fair, the team whines instead of taking responsibility, too. But the fans don't have to buy it. How on earth a team - or their fans - can expect to win when they produced one player in a decade is beyond me. Edmonton absolutely cannot succeed doing that. They have zero chance of being any good. None. Nada. Zip.
The only way they can improve the talent if they can't find good hockey players themselves is to trade the good ones they have for two or three prospects. They will have to keep doing that no matter what CBA is employed because if they don't, they eventually end up with zero good hockey players. They have to buy young talent with older players because they don't produce any talent themselves.
Instead of admitting that with every trade, Lowe - and Sather before him - blamed money. "Oh boohoo," they said, "We have to trade these guys because we can't afford them." We could crank the salaries back to the 1960's and Edmonton still makes all those trades because otherwise they don't have any good players at all.
Detroit built a terrific organization top to bottom. Thay built a foundation on a series of dazzling drafts. They had the patience to stay the course even when it looked like they would never win. They finally began a streak that firmly established them as one of history's great teams. As a result they generate awesome revenues and they can pay their legends like legends deserve to be paid. While it is true they are in a better market than Edmonton, it is also true that they compete - and very favourably - with NBA, MLB, and NFL teams.
Why can't Edmonton do exactly the same thing? If you believe they can't because of the CBA, okay, but before you can convince a serious fan outside Edmonton let's see them build that terrific organization, have a series of great drafts and find that young championship core like Detroit did a dozen years ago or Ottawa and Tampa Bay have done recently.
If the Oilers have to break up that young championship core because of money, I'd call it fair to complain about inequity. That's when it is legitimate to pipe up and say, "Hey there is something wrong here. We can't compete even when we manage better than anybody else. We are tearing apart a champion."
Until the Oilers build anything but mediocrity, it's whining to blame the CBA. It's whining when Kevin Lowe does it, and it's whining when his fans do it. All the Oilers have proved is that they can't compete when their management can't find hockey players.
Well, duh.
Tom
Tom_Benjamin said:Detroit built a terrific organization top to bottom. Thay built a foundation on a series of dazzling drafts. They had the patience to stay the course even when it looked like they would never win. They finally began a streak that firmly established them as one of history's great teams.
kn said:Let's use Vancouver instead of Edmonton as the example. Stellar trades have brought in a core of stars like Naslund (31), Morrison (29), Bertuzzi (29) and Jovanovski (28). Other trades and draft picks have augmented the core players. Burke mentioned on OTR that the payroll is already at ~$47-$48 million. The threat of arbitrartion forced his hand in signing Morrison at $3.55 million and Cloutier (28) at $3.05 million.
How will Vancouver fans feel when the core is traded away or signed by the free spenders? Unless I'm mistaken, Edmonton made some good trades also, bringing in Weight, Guerin, and Joseph.
Tom_Benjamin said:Revenues literally double with a good team. Shouldn't payroll also double?
That paragraph about the Oilers making those trades or they wouldn't have any decent players at all??? What does that mean???
They TRADED DECENT PLAYERS and showed savvy in getting young prospects who could HOPEFULLY step into the skates of the departed.
Given that you think Tom Poti is the only "decent player" developed by the Oilers, I might suggest that you spend more time trying to be clever and snide in the cyberworld than you ever have watching hockey. Find an Oilers or even Rangers fan who thinks Tom Poti is a decent player...
thinkwild said:Every player proposal has offered paycuts.
thinkwild said:But the overall system of salaries will be ata lower level.
Orange said:So what ? It's meaningless ! All you do is differ the resolution of the current problem to a later time. A time that we're sure to get to if nothing is done to insure control over the curent salary inflation. Rollbacks do nothing to solve the problem. Salaries increase faster than revenues, that's the problem.
DementedReality said:so in your world, [...]
DementedReality said:[...]management bears no responsibilty to make offers in accordance with their budget ?
DementedReality said:why not just set every player salary at 500k and be done with it ?
DementedReality said:if making millions of dollars was supposed to easy, everyone would be doing it. its difficult and requires superb management planning and forecasting for a reason ! so why do these owners and their fan supporters figure a profit should be so easy ?