Quote:
Originally Posted by kehatch
I did not set a timeline that excluded the 7 veterans. In the post you responded to it was clearly stated and commented on.
This is a club with a long history of avoiding rebuilds and persuing mediocrity. It is a club that says they are not rebuilding. It is a club whose rebuild actions have been nearly exclusively limited to expiring contracts, many of which they tried to extend. This is a club that told its players they were not rebuilding when several requested trades. This is a club that has taken no rebuild action for 16 months, almost certainly influenced by a "successful" season of missing the playoffs again. This is a club that has been mediocre since the 80s and yet marches out their president to publically say they like their team and are pursuing a "winning culture" not a rebuild.
Nearly the entire hockey community acknowledges the above as both fact and a problem.
How can anyone look at the facts and history and not acknowledge even the possibility this club is reluctant to commit to a rebuild?
|
Who the hell is that?
There are numerous people on this site that think it's a rebuild. Imagine their shock and dismay to find out they're not part of the hockey community.
I don't deny some of your facts.
I just don't come to the same conclusion as you. Guessing many in the hockey community agree with me.