Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ivan  Whilst reading the posts about how many on here would like the Kings to tank in order for us to get the magic lottery number, I was struck with the thought that Stamkos would not(for some daft reason as he seems to be the answer to all our problems) coach or gm the Kings.
The point I am making is that whilst Stamkos will probably have an awesome career and put up some great numbers he is in no way the answer to our problems. There must be a reason that teams like Detroit, New Jersey, Colorado and Dallas dont have to rely on the lottery to restock their teams, and surely that reason is that they are well run franchises from the top down who are built to win season after season and do not tolerate mediocrity the way some seem to do. I wonder how long Crawford and Lombardi would have lasted if they had handed the same dross to the afore-mentioned teams that we have had to put up with this season.
Although I like most on here salivate at the chance of getting Stamkos, there is a part of me that cannot help thinking that even if we lose our remaining games, get the 1st pick and choose Stamkos, in 5 years time he might be playing for the Detroits of the league and we might be on here hoping that the Kings lose their last few games so that we can pick some other young stud of a player. |
You must not know your hockey history very well because all of the teams you mentioned sucked hard for many seasons before they finally turned it around and became dominating forces in the league.
How did they start their domination? By having very high draft picks, holding onto them, and then picking the best young players in the draft. Those assets either remained with the clubs in question for a very long time (see Sakic, Brodeur, Yzerman, Foote, etc.) or they were traded to acquire missing pieces (Patrick Roy for example).
There is nothing wrong with wanting the best player available in the draft even if it means losing two meaningless games, and yes Virginia they are meaningless.