Jdes91
Registered User
- May 23, 2020
- 22
- 0
Why did they miss the playoffs in 2004 after making the conference finals in 2003? Did their offense run stale? Did them getting eliminated by the Avalanche in 2008 begin their decline?
As previously mentioned, 2003 was special. A team that played WAY over its head. A team FAR better than the some of its parts because of a genius behind the bench.Why did they miss the playoffs in 2004 after making the conference finals in 2003? Did their offense run stale? Did them getting eliminated by the Avalanche in 2008 begin their decline?
Literally only GM Doug Risebrough was shocked when the team fell back to earth the following season. There were a lot of angry fans going into the season based on lack of offseason moves.
Only interrupted by his own inaction after the playoffs.That's false. Risebrough had a 5 year plan that got interrupted by the playoffs. His intentions was more or less becoming competitive by 05-06. They weren't that bad either as they had a record of 30-29-20-3. They also had 83 points, which was good for 10th in the conference. You could tell Riser had a plan, because at the end of 03-04, he sold ff a good chunk of the team.
Brad Brown, Brad Bombardir, Sergei Zholtk, Jim Dowd, Jason Marshall, Darby Hendrickson - a lot of veterans were traded at the end of the season. That was Risebrough's plan all along.
Only interrupted by his own inaction after the playoffs.
His goal wasn't to be "competitive" in 5 years, but to be a contender in 5 years.The goal was to be competitive in 5 years. The 2002-2003 season threw a lot of the plan out the door. But he stuck by it. It would have been idiotic for him to build around a team that overachieved with a bunch of older players. Most of the team was back in 03-04 (don't know who he re-signed in the off-season. You can criticize him for some inaction in 05-06 (the lockout kind of interrupted his plans as well), but this was the question of 04, not 06 and he continued to trade and move off older players in 05-06.
His goal wasn't to be "competitive" in 5 years, but to be a contender in 5 years.
The only reason his plan was thrown out the door was because he CHOSE not to continue building.
Not at all.Competitive is being a contender. You're just splitting hair.
Your timeline is off. I said AFTER 2003 playoffs, he did nothing, he should've done a LOT more... Resigning Darby Hendrickson in the offseason was moronic. The guy was clearly done as a player. Instead, DR said he made so few changes because "the players earned it"? Come on... complete copout.Huh? Are you actually saying that he should have traded Walz in 2002-2003 for a first round draft pick? Like should he have traded guys in 2002-2003 for draft picks to continue building the team? He did continue building by trading guys that weren't in the future, for draft picks. You can fault him for having a bad scouting department or bad development teams, but he actually did something that only Fenton has actually done - and that is to take guys that aren't in the future and trading them for future.
Not at all.
The Wild were clearly not a contender this year, but they played competitive hockey.
Your timeline is off. I said AFTER 2003 playoffs, he did nothing, he should've done a LOT more... Resigning Darby Hendrickson in the offseason was moronic. The guy was clearly done as a player. Instead, DR said he made so few changes because "the players earned it"? Come on... complete copout.
That's what you're defending GMDR for doing in the 2003-2004 season. NOT TRYING.So, should they have just not tried to make it to the Stanley Cup playoffs, because they aren't contenders?
Absolutely, if he was EVER offered a 1st round pick for Walz, he should've taken it. Walz was never worth a 1st in his career.I asked, are you actually saying that Risebrough should have traded Walz in 2002-2003 when he was offered a 1st round pick?
That's what you're defending GMDR for doing in the 2003-2004 season. NOT TRYING.
Absolutely, if he was EVER offered a 1st round pick for Walz, he should've taken it. Walz was never worth a 1st in his career.
Every offseason, he should've been moving out old useless crap for either prospects or at least more viable low end NHL talent.
You and I don't see eye to eye on this and NEVER will.Except GMDR did something that Fletcher didn't (and Fenton nor Guerin had the chance too) and knew that he was rebuilding a team and actually traded UFA off for future picks.
Except in the past, when I said the Wild should have traded Walz for a 1st, you defended not trading him. Russo (I believe) confirmed the rumor that in 2002-2003, Minnesota was offered a 1st for Walz and didn't take it.
Riser moved useless crap at the deadline when prices were pretty high, especially during that time. He knew the value of guys like Brown, who had little value during the offseason but had much higher price at the deadline.
Are you going to defend Fletcher for not moving useless crap or Guerin. At least Fenton tried to move the needle a bit.
You and I don't see eye to eye on this and NEVER will.
I never argued against it. You may have argued with SOMEONE about it, never me.Because you keep changing it around. I have argued in the past that Minnesota should have traded Walz in 02-03, even if it scuttled their playoff plans and you have argued against it.
I never argued against it. You may have argued with SOMEONE about it, never me.
Sorry, you're misremembering.I remember arguing against you in the past about trading Walz and scuttling the playoffs in 02-03 so that they could have another 1st round. I remember quite a few arguments with you that you have changed your mind on. You have done a huge 180 on Riser.