See, to me, this sounds very much like "we should have done this because now look at us..." Which is related to COVID; if that wasn't around, this team may have been just fine. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but that's how it reads to me.
There were pros and cons to all of the possibilities at the deadline, even without COVID. Yes, it sucks that we've lost a season and a bit, but this is how life goes right now. Who knows what'll happen when it returns...
To someone who had no clue of the conversations that went on, and wanted to cherry pick part of what was posted it may sound like revisionist history but you were/are fully aware of the conversations and debates that went on here so for you to suggest that myself or anyone else who brought that point throughout most of last season, starting long before the deadline are being revisionist about things would be completely misrepresenting what has been debated here. It almost seems like you're doing what others accuse Windsor7 of doing at times, just starting arguments for the sake of having an argument. You know you'll get the pushback from some on here so you keep pushing out things that'll get people bickering back and forth. No problem, I like to argue and will gladly respond.
Some of these people are hilarious... they automatically think that just because a deal wasn't done that means inaction. Meanwhile, if a deal was done for little return they would be screaming. Deals get talked about, but in the end if it's not the right deal you don't pull the trigger. It's ridiculous to make a trade "just because"
Actually most of the reasons people are getting upset about how deals or lack of them has been handled is simply based on what's been said publicly by Bowler and the organization.
They want to build through the draft, which is fine, become known for being loyal to players instead of maximizing value to build the team which they've shown in down years the last few seasons and add a piece or two if their in a position to contend which so far they haven't been in. In other words they appear to be hoping to get their draft board back to having 15 Spitfire picks, nothing extra, sign 3 players from each draft, it's all they've done for a few seasons now and keep the same basic line up they had the year before only replacing whoever graduates with cheap warm bodies which is all they've done for a few seasons now.
In other words no plan to build a team capable of competing at the top of the league and leaving the on ice product in the hands of a coach who has shown no ability to develop top players and preferring to run with vets who have shown a mid level talent potential.
Two years ago, could have moved on from Boka, Purbo and Stevenson but since they were kept they were put in roles they didn't have the skill level for while their top young players saw their minutes drop.
Last year to believe they couldn't get very good returns for Angle, Douglas, Corcoran and Afanasyev would be extremely hard to believe yet when the team was doing well they gave no indication they were going to add and when the team started playing as expected, a month before the deadline they had no inclination to move pieces to maximize value and continue building towards the future. That also means players who may be graduating would get no opportunity to try to win a championship. And no, moving them for any return was never suggested or condoned by anyone but simply holding onto players for the sake of keeping them around, especially when a couple of them are signed and AHL eligible the following season when you had about a .500 record for the month leading up to the deadline wasn't doing anyone any favours. You don't give them away for free but you don't hold them just for the sake of holding them. I would guess there some decent offers on those four players. They weren't top tier players in the league but they were very good players who could contribute in anyone's top 6/top 4 and would come at a very good price that both sides would be happy with.
Instead we saw potential assets left on the table, with more assets spent in the offseason to acquire a player with local/organization connections who hasn't shown much yet at a fairly high price for what he's shown up until now to fill the holes likely left by at least one of those graduating players.
This of course depletes the draft board even more and with what appears to be an inability to get players to camp the last couple of years, only one American draft pick reporting last year from the previous couple of drafts and not a flyer pick either this looks to be a time, whenever the season starts where remaining assets will be used to fill out the roster.
I'm not sure why you think "canvassing" potential buyers is not a good look? I mean every business everywhere canvasses anyone they can to buy what they are selling. Sports is based on profit from TV sales rights that sell advertising spots. I have a for sale sign on my lawn - I'm canvassing anyone I can to buy my house. Savages are business people, they will do everything they can to sell something they have wanted to sell for a couple of years now. Them trying to sell has been common knowledge for a couple of years. Glad to hear they are trying to sell ( canvas buyers), I mean if they don't want the team, do what you can to find a buyer so everyone can move on from this.
I would think when you have a property that is of limited supply cold calling people to see if they are interested would present a picture of desperation. Limited supply should infer it has a certain value and a certain level of interest from multiple parties. If you need to cold call people to see if they want to buy it as the party being called I would be leery of what's being sold. That doesn't mean they can't let it be known in a general way that they would be willing to sell if the right offer were to come around, of course there's ways to do that. I'm sure most owners get interest regularly, with right now maybe being a bit of an exception. All they would do is hear out any offers and if one is in the range they are looking for they would show some interest and that would get through the grapevine.
Like I said before if there's anything to this, especially with them contacting Rolston I would hope it is based on inquiries made by outside parties and they are simply circling back to gauge how much interest Rolston would have. If they simply contacted him I can't see it going anywhere unless they are willing to come in under what they were looking for. If Rolston was looking for a stake in a team with the option to takeover down the road then this makes sense but any other way where it's the Savages just making calls it doesn't. I hope there's something to this, this group doesn't seem to know what this business requires to be successful so hopefully someone who understands what's involved in owning a sports franchise is going to come i one day and get things straightened out.
