Jump to content

Tanking Penguins


Guest Polaris922
 Share

Recommended Posts

In fairness, JVR did score 15 as a rookie and broke 20 as a sophomore (and had 11 in 43 the year after that)

He has five points in the first eight games. That means the "dud" has one more point in the first eight games than Claude Giroux did.

Now, let's see we added Pattykane to the Flyers to go with Crater and Richards. Where would they have done the most damage? On the ice or in Old City?

If JVR comes out as a perrennial 30-35 goal scorer and Luke Schenn is a run-of-the-mill 3/4 defenseman, I'm not so sure we'll even be thinking that the Flyers "won" that trade.

We'll see.

Deliebrately stinking to gain a draft pick is a stupid way to build a franchise - Pittsburgh notwithstanding (we don't want to suck for five years) - and is in no way a guarantee.

The Pens didn't deliberately stink... We legitimately stunk. Big difference! Remember revenue for free agents wasn't here. Hell our entire team nearly folded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That team nearly folding, to getting Crosby/Malkin/Whitney/Fleury, to the Cup really pisses off your cross state acquaintances...seems shady.

And the "seems shady" comment again has no legitimate or even semi-reasonable basis. I understand nobody wants their rivals to win, but if you accuse the Pens of underhanded dealings on those issues... On all but Crosby you're nuts... And on the Crosby lottery whatever you accuse the Pens of you're also accusing the Flyers of because your team rep was in the room when it happened. The facts are the facts. There IS no grassy knoll there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the "seems shady" comment again has no legitimate or even semi-reasonable basis. I understand nobody wants their rivals to win, but if you accuse the Pens of underhanded dealings on those issues... On all but Crosby you're nuts... And on the Crosby lottery whatever you accuse the Pens of you're also accusing the Flyers of because your team rep was in the room when it happened. The facts are the facts. There IS no grassy knoll there.

I said seems shady, not I have proof or am starting a cult lol. That was meant in a little good fun.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Pens didn't deliberately stink... We legitimately stunk. Big difference! Remember revenue for free agents wasn't here. Hell our entire team nearly folded.

I am quite aware. There is also a solid argument to be made that the team did make moves to stay crappy to get higher picks in some of those years.

And, believe me, you'll hear about a fanbase that was so fairweather that they wouldn't support their team until they were almost forced to move, and certainly not until they had stunk long enough to get many top picks.

It's kinda like Phoenix. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am quite aware. There is also a solid argument to be made that the team did make moves to stay crappy to get higher picks in some of those years.

And, believe me, you'll hear about a fanbase that was so fairweather that they wouldn't support their team until they were almost forced to move, and certainly not until they had stunk long enough to get many top picks.

It's kinda like Phoenix. :ph34r:

The only time moves were made was to obtain Lemieux... And thank God they did that. Honestly though I think they'd have finished last anyway, they just made sure. Nobody in the organization now is tied to that though, so old news.

As for fair weather fans, hockey never took off in Pittsburgh as well as you'd think. There were folks who gravitated to it for the back to back Cups, but before and obviously after that, there was still just a core group of us.

Crosby seems to have changed that. Youth hockey programs have become huge, and we've more than doubled the number of ice rinks it seems. I give Lemieux credit for saving the team, but I give Crosby the credit for expanding the true fan base.

I suppose the Flyers would never see a similar decline of obvious support because you have six million to start, but the 'Burgh is much, much smaller so it became apparent during the years before Crosby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Polaris922 It is old news (re Lemieux), but if I remember correctly, they were leading in the final game against NJ, which was a showdown for the top pick between the 2 worst teams...the pens collapsed in the 3rd, (think they even changed goalies??) blew a 2 goal lead and locked up the top pick...thus forever changing the face of the franchise...did I get this right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which brings up an interesting side discussion...should JVR have been given that oppty, or did he never do anything to deserve it?

When the organization* drafts a player #2 overall, you'd think they would want to give them an opportunity.

Although this team is expert at assembling square pegs to fit in round holes.

* term used loosely

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Polaris922 It is old news (re Lemieux), but if I remember correctly, they were leading in the final game against NJ, which was a showdown for the top pick between the 2 worst teams...the pens collapsed in the 3rd, (think they even changed goalies??) blew a 2 goal lead and locked up the top pick...thus forever changing the face of the franchise...did I get this right?

No you didn't get that right bud. They lost the final game to the Islanders... You know, the team that went on to be runner up for the Cup? Lol. Nice try though ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Polaris922 Well, it was quite a while ago, but the general idea of outright cheating to secure Lemieux's sercives was correct as this paragraph from Wikipedia alludes to....man this UGLY, glad it's not my team....IMHO, it takes away the lustre of the Cup wins the Pens won under Mario.....UGLY indeed, I would be ashamed to cheer for a team that would pull this crap..

"

The team had the league's worst record in both the 1983 and 1984 seasons, and with the team suffering financial problems, it again looked as though the Penguins would fold. Mario Lemieux, one of the most highly touted NHL draft picks in history, was due to be drafted in the 1984 NHL Entry Draft. Heading towards the end of the season ahead of the New Jersey Devils, who were placed last, the Penguins made a number of questionable moves that appeared to weaken the team in the short-term. The Penguins posted three six-game winless streaks in the last 21 games of the season and earned the right to draft Lemieux amidst protests from Devils management.[5] Pittsburgh coach Lou Angotti later admitted that a conscious decision was made to finish the season as the team with the worst record, stating in an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that a mid-season lunch prompted the plan, in light of the fact that there was a high chance of the franchise folding if Lemieux was not drafted.[6] In particular, Angotti gave the example of a game the Penguins were winning 3–1, at which point general manager Eddie Johnston asked the coach "what are you doing?" in the first intermission of the game that was eventually lost 6–3. The Penguins were still, despite losing ten of their last twelve games, only two games away from losing Lemieux to the Devils.[6] However, Angotti stated that he did not feel comfortable with the plan, even though it worked and saved the franchise. Other teams offered substantial trade packages for the draft choice, but the Penguins kept the pick and drafted Lemieux first overall."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Polaris922 Well, it was quite a while ago, but the general idea of outright cheating to secure Lemieux's sercives was correct as this paragraph from Wikipedia alludes to....man this UGLY, glad it's not my team....IMHO, it takes away the lustre of the Cup wins the Pens won under Mario.....UGLY indeed, I would be ashamed to cheer for a team that would pull this crap..

"

The team had the league's worst record in both the 1983 and 1984 seasons, and with the team suffering financial problems, it again looked as though the Penguins would fold. Mario Lemieux, one of the most highly touted NHL draft picks in history, was due to be drafted in the 1984 NHL Entry Draft. Heading towards the end of the season ahead of the New Jersey Devils, who were placed last, the Penguins made a number of questionable moves that appeared to weaken the team in the short-term. The Penguins posted three six-game winless streaks in the last 21 games of the season and earned the right to draft Lemieux amidst protests from Devils management.[5] Pittsburgh coach Lou Angotti later admitted that a conscious decision was made to finish the season as the team with the worst record, stating in an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that a mid-season lunch prompted the plan, in light of the fact that there was a high chance of the franchise folding if Lemieux was not drafted.[6] In particular, Angotti gave the example of a game the Penguins were winning 3–1, at which point general manager Eddie Johnston asked the coach "what are you doing?" in the first intermission of the game that was eventually lost 6–3. The Penguins were still, despite losing ten of their last twelve games, only two games away from losing Lemieux to the Devils.[6] However, Angotti stated that he did not feel comfortable with the plan, even though it worked and saved the franchise. Other teams offered substantial trade packages for the draft choice, but the Penguins kept the pick and drafted Lemieux first overall."

I have no shame in that a previous management group did what they did so I have a team to watch. Again they were headed there anyway, so who's to say the Devils didn't do the same thing? (They lost their last 8 in a row!). None of those folks are associated now, and in the first two Cups Patrick had to make real drafts and moves to build a Cup champion, it wasn't won by just Lemieux.

I find this argument against the Pens old and worn out. It's speculation whether it mattered it not, and speculation that the Devils didn't do the same thing. So they could have been next to last instead of last? Regardless, I find no shame in the actions done to save my franchise. I would thank those men if I could. Without their making the tough decisions I'd be without a team and probably not even following the sport I love so much.

Also remember Wikipedia is information submitted without verification by users. I know some staff members said they made some moves to ensure their struggles would continue, but never saw any of this quoted stuff before. Is it legit or just some Flyers fan jealous? ;)

Edited by Polaris922
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Polaris922 You're old GM is on record as carrying out a plan to basically fix games, in order to secure a better draft pick....if it was not accurate, it would have been deleted...those are some serious quotes. I'd also like to point out it's a criminal offense to fix games, just thought I'd toss that out there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Polaris922 Well, it was quite a while ago, but the general idea of outright cheating to secure Lemieux's sercives was correct as this paragraph from Wikipedia alludes to....man this UGLY, glad it's not my team....IMHO, it takes away the lustre of the Cup wins the Pens won under Mario.....UGLY indeed, I would be ashamed to cheer for a team that would pull this crap..

"

The team had the league's worst record in both the 1983 and 1984 seasons, and with the team suffering financial problems, it again looked as though the Penguins would fold. Mario Lemieux, one of the most highly touted NHL draft picks in history, was due to be drafted in the 1984 NHL Entry Draft. Heading towards the end of the season ahead of the New Jersey Devils, who were placed last, the Penguins made a number of questionable moves that appeared to weaken the team in the short-term. The Penguins posted three six-game winless streaks in the last 21 games of the season and earned the right to draft Lemieux amidst protests from Devils management.[5] Pittsburgh coach Lou Angotti later admitted that a conscious decision was made to finish the season as the team with the worst record, stating in an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that a mid-season lunch prompted the plan, in light of the fact that there was a high chance of the franchise folding if Lemieux was not drafted.[6] In particular, Angotti gave the example of a game the Penguins were winning 3–1, at which point general manager Eddie Johnston asked the coach "what are you doing?" in the first intermission of the game that was eventually lost 6–3. The Penguins were still, despite losing ten of their last twelve games, only two games away from losing Lemieux to the Devils.[6] However, Angotti stated that he did not feel comfortable with the plan, even though it worked and saved the franchise. Other teams offered substantial trade packages for the draft choice, but the Penguins kept the pick and drafted Lemieux first overall."

This is really eye opening. I never knew about that. Pretty sick to do, but there's no changing it now. Just makes you hate the organization that much more that the team (deliberately) sucks in order to get TWO absolute generational talents and then goes on to win the Cup in large part because of those guys, while teams like the Flyers are major contenders (almost) every year and work hard to build a team the "right" way but can't get it done.

Even this year, if the team continues to suck, HELL YEAH I want Seth Jones. I wouldn't want them to deliberately finish last to get there though. It takes away from the teams that are truly horrible and it's ethically (and in some ways legally) wrong and I wouldn't feel right about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@jammer2

@PHI Flyers10

Angotti's interview regarding the "tanking" was as follows:

"If Pittsburgh hadn't gotten Mario Lemieux that year, I think the franchise would've folded," Angotti said. The plan was hatched over a midseason lunch between him and E.J. Forget gold, they were going for the mold. "We didn't actually try to throw games. But, you know, we went in there with the understanding ... we weren't going to be upset if we lost." That's a far cry from the way it's been sold by some of you guys by eliminating the "We didn't actually try to throw games" part. I hate when people edit the facts to paint their own views. I'm sure you just copied that from somewhere so not your fault but still..

You miss that their only good players, Kehoe, Paul Gardner and Randy Carlysle were all hurt. Did they make a questionable move in bringing up an AHL goalie to play some games towards the end of the season? Sure.. but many teams that are out of playoff contention do so to see what the kid has, which is exactly how E.J. Johnson said they did it. It's not like their current goalies were winning big games. Why did they not mess with Mike Bullard? He scored 51 that season... you'd think he'd be someone you'd want sitting, not scoring 92 points. The best goaltender was Denis Heron... with 8.. yes EIGHT wins. A stellar 4.08 GAA. That team just really really sucked! And if you look, the Devils losing streak to end the season was a couple games longer than the Pens.

So much for the great revelation posted in Wikipedia. Though I watched then I was only 13 and not educated enough in the game to know exactly what I was seeing... however, there are plenty of forum posts by people who follow other teams who said the Pens were legitimately that bad. Sounds to me like a little orange and black adding fuel to an ember.

As for the comments about "illegal"... yeah that would apply to any player or coach who intentionally loses a game by some direct act. I don't see where putting a lineup card out there is throwing a game. You can't tell me they got 20 players to say "Oh hell let's lose". What was the big lineup change they made to guarantee them losing? Replacing a 25 losses goalie with a young kid to see what he can do? Bringing up some AHL kids to cover injuries to Kehoe and Gardner? They traded Carlysle trying to fill gaps... should they have traded the injured somehow too?

Conspiracy theory.... grassy knoll... "oooo he said they didn't really care if they lost! That means they tanked it!!"

Come on... I understand 38 years is a long time and there is a bitter rivalry... but they lost a ton of games before the end of the season, and the Devils lost their last 8... more than the Pens... so who was really tanking at that point??

and PHI Flyers10... who is the second draft you're implying they tanked to get? Do tell...

Edited by Polaris922
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're tired of tanking rumors for Lemieux, we are tired of BSB treatment from TEN years prior to that. And yet here we are. At least the media doesn't frenzy over it.

For the record I've consistently said there is no bias against your organization, but only individual players which is what EVERY franchise deals with. The only BSB stuff I routinely see is from media outlets and when B21 argued here that there is still a group of Flyers fans who embrace that identity, in which he is accurate. B21 and I have both acknowledged that not every Flyers fan is a BSB proponent, he simply argued a point of hypocrisy from a large group of BSB fans regarding cheap shot artists. Obviously nobody said EVERY Flyers fan is that way.

I don't see any Pens fans, players, or staff, current or former, standing around waving a sign saying "Home of the folks who threw games to get a draft pick", because that is NOT truthful, or at least if it IS truthful there is no real evidence of it.

We prefer to argue points with facts, not speculation or conspiracy theories with no evidence to support them. I often think Lamoreillo threw that allegation out there to deflect from his own team losing more to end the season than even the crappy Pens team did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@jammer2

@PHI Flyers10

Angotti's interview regarding the "tanking" was as follows:

"If Pittsburgh hadn't gotten Mario Lemieux that year, I think the franchise would've folded," Angotti said. The plan was hatched over a midseason lunch between him and E.J. Forget gold, they were going for the mold. "We didn't actually try to throw games. But, you know, we went in there with the understanding ... we weren't going to be upset if we lost." That's a far cry from the way it's been sold by some of you guys by eliminating the "We didn't actually try to throw games" part. I hate when people edit the facts to paint their own views. I'm sure you just copied that from somewhere so not your fault but still..

You miss that their only good players, Kehoe, Paul Gardner and Randy Carlysle were all hurt. Did they make a questionable move in bringing up an AHL goalie to play some games towards the end of the season? Sure.. but many teams that are out of playoff contention do so to see what the kid has, which is exactly how E.J. Johnson said they did it. It's not like their current goalies were winning big games. Why did they not mess with Mike Bullard? He scored 51 that season... you'd think he'd be someone you'd want sitting, not scoring 92 points. The best goaltender was Denis Heron... with 8.. yes EIGHT wins. A stellar 4.08 GAA. That team just really really sucked! And if you look, the Devils losing streak to end the season was a couple games longer than the Pens.

So much for the great revelation posted in Wikipedia. Though I watched then I was only 13 and not educated enough in the game to know exactly what I was seeing... however, there are plenty of forum posts by people who follow other teams who said the Pens were legitimately that bad. Sounds to me like a little orange and black adding fuel to an ember.

As for the comments about "illegal"... yeah that would apply to any player or coach who intentionally loses a game by some direct act. I don't see where putting a lineup card out there is throwing a game. You can't tell me they got 20 players to say "Oh hell let's lose". What was the big lineup change they made to guarantee them losing? Replacing a 25 losses goalie with a young kid to see what he can do? Bringing up some AHL kids to cover injuries to Kehoe and Gardner? They traded Carlysle trying to fill gaps... should they have traded the injured somehow too?

Conspiracy theory.... grassy knoll... "oooo he said they didn't really care if they lost! That means they tanked it!!"

Come on... I understand 38 years is a long time and there is a bitter rivalry... but they lost a ton of games before the end of the season, and the Devils lost their last 8... more than the Pens... so who was really tanking at that point??

and PHI Flyers10... who is the second draft you're implying they tanked to get? Do tell...

So Agnotti says the franchise would have folded if they hadn't gotten Lemieux, potentially wiping out a multimillion dollar investment.

He also says he hatched a plan over lunch with E.J.

Yet he takes offense when people claim they deliberately lost games?

How do you acknowledge the demise of your franchise and then take the active step of hatching a plan to save it, yet not deliberately tank games? You're telling me the the grand plan of business men with millions of dollars on the line was to "not be too upset if we lost'? Bull****.

Something doesn't compute. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.

He can't admit anything because it would be illegal. These are smart people who know what they're doing.

BTW, I'm not passing judgment. I'm just saying Agnotti is full of s*&t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Agnotti says the franchise would have folded if they hadn't gotten Lemieux, potentially wiping out a multimillion dollar investment.

He also says he hatched a plan over lunch with E.J.

Yet he takes offense when people claim they deliberately lost games?

How do you acknowledge the demise of your franchise and then take the active step of hatching a plan to save it, yet not deliberately tank games? You're telling me the the grand plan of business men with millions of dollars on the line was to "not be too upset if we lost'? Bull****.

Something doesn't compute. Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.

He can't admit anything because it would be illegal. These are smart people who know what they're doing.

BTW, I'm not passing judgment. I'm just saying Agnotti is full of s*&t.

They could've passed on trades, agreed to bring up AHL talent, any number if little things that may or may not impact it. Certainly. But they didn't injure Kehoe or Gardner or Carlyle. Again their winningest goaltender going into the last games of the season had 8 wins... How much do you have to sabotage a team where the best goalie has 8 wins? And explain not trading away Bullard then? If you're tanking you don't skate a 50 goal scorer.

Illegal? So bringing up an AHL goalie should be illegal if you're in the running for last place? What about teams that rest their best talents before the playoffs and lose games they may have won? That's gotta be throwing a game then too right? Oh wait that's to be able to win later so that's ok. Wait what?

The simple fact is the Pens made two or three minor moves in a season they clearly stunk in. Yes they only won 16 games... But people forget they only won 18 the year before with Kehoe, Carlysle and Gardner all in the lineup. They had all three out and only lost two more games? But none of you knew that because it doesn't fit the conspiracy theory. Or the Devils losing more to end the season than the Pens did. Why isn't anyone pointing at them saying they threw even more games if that's the case? You do know the Devils placed higher than the Pens the year before that too, right??

I remember the Pens stinking that badly. I've suffered with my team and seen them get some great draft picks because they stunk so badly. If you don't think the worst teams should get a better crack at the better prospects, that's the NHL.

Haters gonna hate... And blind themselves with partial truths to justify it.

And some say trying to bankrupt the Preds was just good business strategy to get Weber.... IF my franchise did in any way weaken its chances of winning to get one guy to save itself, it's still more respectable than trying to bankrupt another to get what they already have. If I should be ashamed over some highly doubted conspiracy theory, you all should be ashamed of an attempted pillaging. :D

Edited by Polaris922
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please. The idea that they "hatched a plan" to get Lemieux by "not deliberately" losing games, but losing them nonetheless, is laughable.

Ridiculous. Worthy of ridicule.

The team admits they didn't do everything they could to win games. That, in fact, they had a plan to not win game - but, of course, not to *lose* them either. Because they didn't want to lose the franchise.

But, we're supposed to believe that there is no way they would have done it *again*.

Oh, noooooooooooo. Never. After all, they were only about to lose the franchise...

Inconceivable. :ph34r:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They could've passed on trades, agreed to bring up AHL talent, any number if little things that may or may not impact it. Certainly. But they didn't injure Kehoe or Gardner or Carlyle. Again their winningest goaltender going into the last games of the season had 8 wins... How much do you have to sabotage a team where the best goalie has 8 wins? And explain not trading away Bullard then? If you're tanking you don't skate a 50 goal scorer.

Illegal? So bringing up an AHL goalie should be illegal if you're in the running for last place? What about teams that rest their best talents before the playoffs and lose games they may have won? That's gotta be throwing a game then too right? Oh wait that's to be able to win later so that's ok. Wait what?

No, bringing up an AHL goalie is not illegal if your intent is not to deliberately lose games. It's all about intent. They openly admit to hatching a plan to 'not be too upset if they lost games'. That's a legal way of saying they had dead last in their sights. They openly admit that MILLIONS of dollars are on the line. No businessmen in their right minds will let things passively happen when millions are on the line. They didn't get to where they did by just letting **** happen. They MAKE stuff happen.

But none of you knew that because it doesn't fit the conspiracy theory.

Are you serious? It's not a conspiracy theory if the parties involved ADMIT to it. They're just not fully admitting because of legal implications, I'm sure.

IF my franchise did in any way weaken its chances of winning to get one guy to save itself, it's still more respectable than trying to bankrupt another to get what they already have.

Oh please. Offer sheeting is completely legal and part of the collective bargaining agreement. If the owners and players don't like it, then they should negotiate to remove it.

Tanking games to get the first overall pick that would save a franchise is not respectable in any sense of the word. It is, however, incredibly smart business sense if you can pull it off. Faced with the same situation, I would probably do the same. People can call it unethical all they want, but you don't need to be ethical to get ahead.

People confuse the players - who we fans like to think of as having integrity, loyalty, being ethical in the way they *play* the game - with owners, who are proto-capitalist billionaires. Ethics has nothing to do with that part of hockey. I'm sure Snider could give you a list several pages long of people he's screwed over on his way to his massive fortune.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And some say trying to bankrupt the Preds was just good business strategy to get Weber.... IF my franchise did in any way weaken its chances of winning to get one guy to save itself, it's still more respectable than trying to bankrupt another to get what they already have.

How is making a legitimate/legal CBA certified offer equal to possibly tanking games? C'mon, Polaris...you are a great contributor here, but get off the Weber offer sheet issue. It was a cut-throat move, no doubt, but it was NOT ILLEGAL.

If you have an issue with it, it should be with the league/owners allowing them in the 1st place. Personally, I think they are garbage, and should be done away with. But to insinuate the Flyers making a LEAGUE CERTIFIED business decision/offer is equal to possibly intentionally losing games is simply ludicrous.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand nobody wants their rivals to win, but if you accuse the Pens of underhanded dealings on those issues... On all but Crosby you're nuts... And on the Crosby lottery whatever you accuse the Pens of you're also accusing the Flyers of because your team rep was in the room when it happened. The facts are the facts.

well, once burned and all. you guys did throw games for mario. the organization is not above such things. and then the pens -the most embarrasing team-on-the-verge-of-collapse scenario of the day- walk into a closed door secret lottery with a 1-in-16 chance of getting the first overall pick, and walk out with the best player the league had seen since....mario.

so, yeah. grassy knoll. and that a flyers rep was on hand only means so much. if the board of governors in general had decided that it was best for the league for the pens, owned by league legend mario lemieux, to get the help they needed to survive........

it's a tinfoil-hat-appropriate thing, imo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can any of you please tell me what they did to 'throw games' as keeps being stated? Nobody admits to it, and statute of limitations is well expired so no legal concerns there. In fact, they only say they DIDN'T throw games they just weren't going to be upset about losing them.

Nobody here has shown me how they did this terrible thing. What exactly did they do? I've given a few examples of what they DID do. I.e. replace their goalie who had 8 wins, lost fewer games to end the season than Jersey, kept a 50 goal scorer on the ice, lost only 2 more games than the year before but without Kehoe, Gardner or Carlyle...

The only thing I get in return is "they admit it!" Yet no statement or quote admitting anything but that they wouldn't be upset about losing. I've looked for such comments. I want to know if there's truth to it. But I can't find any and apparently neither can you. *shrugs*

Sorry boys but they really were THAT bad. The ONLY move that hurt the team was trading Carlysle away but they got decent return for him in the end so I dunno... Show me the sabotage please.

And don't even try to say it happened more than once. You're failing to substantiate even once, let alone twice. Anybody with open eyes can see Crosby, Malkin, and anyone else couldn't be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...