Quote:
Originally Posted by MelBridgeman
Why does it have to be a young guy? We had that, his name was Phanuef in his first year...look what happens when his contract was up, We had Juice, Cammy, Bertuzzi, Bork, Kipper for awhile, lots of players that Sutter has found at a good price to contribute more then they have been paid. So since there was no "young" guys in the system he found other players to fill those spots. So i am not sure you need only a young guy....eventually Chicago, Pittsburgh, LA eta will run into the same problem...too much money in very few...
|
Maybe the problem is we are holding on to these guys too long because there are no young players to fill in? Or holding on to the wrong guys? If we had a system producing players, we wouldn't need to bend over for Bourque and sign him for 6 years? It must be tough to negotiate contracts without leverage...
I understand what you and Jiri are saying, but it's very frustrating nevertheless because you have almost no hope in the cap world without draft success. By definition, if you sign players to market deals, you have an average team, and guess what we are? Our only "draft" gems are Giordano and Wilson (who left for nothing), and once White re-signs or leaves, we will not have a single "bargain" outside of Giordano. And that will be overwhelmed by all the "over-market" contracts.
You say you cannot blame Sutter or Button or an "individual", but in the end somebody is ultimately accountable for the development system and for scouting, no? Is it Duane Sutter? The only way to change is to change individuals, or we might as well just save the money and draft straight off the Central Scouting list.
It could not have been any less successful...