Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDutch
I'm not too sure about this. I know it was a different time, but the young guns era stung the Flames hard, and in some ways I do not blame them for trying to avoid it.
I'm sure some fans will stick around for a few years of bottom feeding, but what if it takes 5 or 7? What happens if they get stuck in the Columbus or Islander forever rebuild? There is risk there too. The Oilers have shown improvement but are probably not going to make the playoffs either this year.
All I am saying is I agree the draft is important, but to blow it up is not without risk, major risk. A balanced approach of FA signings and good drafting will get you there, not one or the other.
I don't agree with the Flames approach right now, but understand and respect it. They are trying to turn this around with minimal pain to fans, and although it probably won't work, I'll wait and see what they do at the deadline.
|
I can't say I am 'pro' rebuild, or 'anti' rebuild - somewhere in the middle for me. I used to really have your fears as well about the rebuild, and ending up like so many teams that are 'wandering the desert' as Feaster so eloquently analogized. However, those teams didn't (and still don't) have what the Flames have - a strong front office and a committed ownership group.
Proof is really in the pudding, and we won't know for sure for a few more years, but it seems like the Flames are indeed drafting better.
Take Edmonton. Can anyone say they are drafting well? Eberle was a real gem for a late round 1st. Luck? Good scouting? Probably both in that case, judging by their lack of meaningful support coming up the pipe so far (unless I am not aware of their prospect base outside their top picks). They should be further ahead than they are now, but they don't have enough support players, have built their team incorrectly (way too soft) and management seems inept at making good moves to get them past that hump - seemingly 'hoping' that their natural skill gets them there.
Islanders - I believe they have the smallest drafting and development program in the league - enough said there.
Colombus is a more interesting case. They have had a long time to accumulate picks. Some of their picks were 'bad luck'. Some were rushed in the opinion of many. Some picks were just not good. They have a history of making poor selections, but also a history of 'bad luck'. In my opinion, you make your own luck. Colombus has a history of bad management.
Take a look at Chicago - they were 'lost in the desert' for a long time - 2 full rebuilds by the looks of it to win the cup, and 7, 8 or 9 years out of the playoffs (too lazy to look it up). What changed? The biggest change was the change in ownership - they had nicknamed Bill Wirtz "Dollar Bill" for being a very 'cheap' owner (and hated by the fans - booing during his moment of silence in the arena?).
Flames do not have that problem with their ownership group. This group can be argued is TOO committed to winning. This is the 'legacy' that Darryl has left on Calgary - not just the higher Canadian dollar. Owners not only realized winning became profitable again (the Calgary Flames turned from a 'hobby' into a real investment) but more importantly - just like the rest of us fans - they really wanted to win. I don't think they would have trouble committing again after a rebuild.
Attracting free agents is tough - but there are enough young(er) assets to hold the fort and provide both depth and leadership.
I think the Flames can turn their fortunes around in 1-2 seasons - though they have to be very shrewd. What I don't think is that the Flames will wander the desert for years. Might take 3 years, but anything more I would say you are failing - at least when you are starting from a position that the Flames are in already (with nice pieces, a solid drafting and development program in place, and assets that could drastically alter the course of this franchise).