Quote:
Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce
Yes, that's exactly what happened - the players wouldn't lose.
Return for Iginla could not be helped.
Return for JBo was brutal and could have waited.
There were games down the stretch where cammalleri, Hudler, Backlund, etc were all sat down for kids.
I'm not sure what else you call that?
What doesn't look like tanking?
Keeping expiring UFA because you don't like the returns (Cammalleri, Butler).
Icing your best possible lineup every night, like Flames did this year
|
I just explained it but I'll try and be more clear:
Colorado had a very good team with many good young players who (admittedly) had quit on trying according to their goalie. They had terrible personell problems that were purposely not addressed.
That's why they were called out on tanking (and for good reason).
The Flames had an aging roster that should have been torn down to rebuild two seasons prior.
It's really pretty simple when you look at it, especially with how good Colorado was this year and how bad we were. You are clearly caught up in semantics as it pertains to the Flames. They obviously moved out experienced players with the goal of getting younger and committing to a several-year rebuild. This is supported by giving the kids a long long at the end of the year once the trades were made. Colorado, who are already rebuilt, just laid down for a high pick.
Saying Calgary tanked in the lockout season and Colorado didn't is preposterous.
Aside from that (which seems obvious) I think the return for Bouwmeester is going to turn out to be better than you're trying to paint it. I think Porier is going to be a gem.