[News] Buffalo to compliance buyout Ehrhoff

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

I think Poirier is outstanding, but, among other things, the return for the Bouwmeester trade cost Feaster his job.

But you're missing the point:
I find it amusingly hypocritical for posters around here to talk about anyone tanking that season when Flames management clearly tried to tank as well.
I am very happy that Burke had none of that stupidity this season, and most likely never will.

Anyway - I guess I've derailed another thread - so I'll stop now.

I think you're missing the point:

A good team (Colorado) purposely doing poorly is the definition of tanking.

A poor team (Calgary) trading away their good players to accept a multi year re-build isn't tanking. It's re-building.

There's a glaring difference between the two that seems quite obvious.

[nik-]

Calgary traded away players, but they still have a bunch of legit guys. I'm pretty sure the Sabres would ice a CHL team next year if they could. I'll be curious to see what they do in FA, because as of right now, this is just blatant.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Go PM guys. Stop derailing the thread please.

[bubbsy]

sorry to derail discussion

With the flames, who need to improve on D, but also need to get to the cap floor, could this be a guy they may show some $ to?

[saXon]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

sorry to derail discussion

With the flames, who need to improve on D, but also need to get to the cap floor, could this be a guy they may show some $ to?

I would rather see Ehrhoff in Flames threads than Gilbert.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by saXon

I would rather see Ehrhoff in Flames threads than Gilbert.

Yeah, except it would probably require a contract that I would not want to commit to.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by saXon

I would rather see Ehrhoff in Flames threads than Gilbert.

If Ehrhoff does not want to play for one rebuilding team, I doubt he wants to play for another.

[Red John]

Bet Ehrhoff signs with Vancouver.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by GoJetsGo

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.

They had personnel problems yet the personnel is basically the same minus the coach and they won their division. So was it the coaching change that turned them into a division winner this year? Maybe that's why they wanted Roy so bad and waited until he was finished in Quebec.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Hackey

They had personnel problems yet the personnel is basically the same minus the coach and they won their division.

There were one or two wee roster changes. Benoit, Holden, a full season from O'Reilly. They had Semyon Varlamov (2.41, 0.927) actually playing instead of a scarecrow wearing his uniform (3.02, 0.903). They sold some of the worst garbage off their roster to some schmuck in Alberta somewhere. Oh, yeah, and added some kid named Nathan somebody.

I agree that they decided to write off the year and take the high pick after the wheels fell off. But that team wasn't going to win its division with all the wheels on.

[Hackey]

Tweaking a roster to improve it isn't evidence that the team tanked purposely the year before. So far no evidence has been shown that they tanked other than keeping a coach. Except that coach was a Jack Adams finalist 2 year prior so some type of loyalty and commitment is likely there to not just instantly can him. Not to mention it was the lockout season. Bringing in a new coach for a 30 game stretch might not be the best idea. Oh ya and the biggest reason they wanted Roy. So based on that I don't think keeping Sacco for 30 games is tanking but rather the logical choice at the time. You can say they sat O'Reilly on purpose but that's pretty ridiculous. Piss off a player so the team might suck. People have said they had a roster of good players. Predicting that holding O'Reilly out would lead to the results it did doesn't make sense. And O'Reilly is having the same issues this year again so that theory doesn't really hold up. People just love to jump on that tanking bandwagon. It's nothing but a bunch of whiners. Colorado had a lot go wrong that year and rather than call it what it is people try to make up things like management did it all on purpose. Sounds like a bunch of cry babies.

[keenan87]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Tweaking a roster to improve it isn't evidence that the team tanked purposely the year before. So far no evidence has been shown that they tanked other than keeping a coach. Except that coach was a Jack Adams finalist 2 year prior so some type of loyalty and commitment is likely there to not just instantly can him. Not to mention it was the lockout season. Bringing in a new coach for a 30 game stretch might not be the best idea. Oh ya and the biggest reason they wanted Roy. So based on that I don't think keeping Sacco for 30 games is tanking but rather the logical choice at the time. You can say they sat O'Reilly on purpose but that's pretty ridiculous. Piss off a player so the team might suck. People have said they had a roster of good players. Predicting that holding O'Reilly out would lead to the results it did doesn't make sense. And O'Reilly is having the same issues this year again so that theory doesn't really hold up. People just love to jump on that tanking bandwagon. It's nothing but a bunch of whiners. Colorado had a lot go wrong that year and rather than call it what it is people try to make up things like management did it all on purpose. Sounds like a bunch of cry babies.

You need to add spaces to your post because I might be the only one but I hate reading a block of text.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Why are we talking about the Avs?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Why are we talking about the Avs?

Because the Sabres are setting up for a vicious tank, and people are discussing another recent tank.

[19Yzerman19]

So basically in my view he just became the best defenceman on the UFA market this summer. 29 teams should be pursuing his services.