Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
They most cetainly not great but they are miles ahead of a first year team after blowing it up.
Who? Ownership? Pretty obvious answer...no?
Who has that worked for recently?
Buffalo? Detroit? Other than the Rangers (who have advantages other teams do not) it takes time to rebuild teams...and even with them they are still a ways away.
Re-tool on the fly? Sure I agree. However in that case you need someone locked into what is going on in the league right now. Someone who has been in on discussions with other GM's and knows what the thinking on the other end is. Literally, some of the bigger deals take a year to get to fruition. Im assuming BT lets his assistants know what is going on, but I certainly do not want one of them over what sits in that chair now.
Top minute F, top line C and top minute D...and it wont crater the team if gone?
Come on.
That is the very definition of blowing this thing up unless you are bringing back existing NHL players in return. In which case you have to get equal production from the returnees. Unlikely to happen.
And then advocating using the cap space "properly"? Like how? UFA? Cause that is an even worse idea where you end up getting good players more often than not, but you always over pay them.
|
Maybe it could be better expressed as how much lower can you go. Tied for 5th/6th in a seven team division. I guess you could be last but how much worse is that?
To me it comes down to what is the quickest path to becoming a contender.
But yeah I agree that trading those guys for picks won't ever make you better in the short term.