Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Report] Canucks to part ways with Judd Bracket

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

On 6/10/2020 at 4:53 AM, nzan said:

Agreed - that all feels pretty close to my guesses on how things unfolded.

Except I don’t think Linden was ever meant to be merely a figure-head, not from his perspective or anyone in the organization. He’s a serious, respectable and thoughtful hockey man.

Truthfully, his long-approach still would have been the better approach if Petey and Hughes weren’t making Benning look so correct.

This is where I get confused... it seemed Linden-Benning were on the same page the first 2-3 years.  I only heard of the 'slow rebuild' that Linden 'wanted' after the fallout.  I can't see how Linden actions show he supported a slow rebuild in the first couple of years. Did this supposed 'slow rebuild' occur after Linden went to other GMs to seek their feedback (as referenced above)?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/10/2020 at 4:00 PM, Fred65 said:

You're right! I don't know for a fact but I think the person that compiled the list wrote it before some graduated to the NHL, date wise. How ever to the point  I wouldn't list that list as all star material which ever way you look at it. Benning is in Edmontonon a defence starved team for the present but likely on his way out and he's the best of the bunch.  There's nothing there that strikes me a home run selection. I keep hearing about Benning being the master of the draft but can't find any collaborating evidence 

Well maybe you need to do a little research and find out what is considered an acceptable drafting level.   How many guys does the average team with an average draft position except to get each draft?  Also spend some time to figure out what scouts consider a bust and what they don’t consider a bust based on the first and second round ... and all the rounds collectively after that.  And what’s a bust from 1-3, 4-6,7-10,11-15,16-31 overall etc.
 

Hint.  If you don’t get a player in a draft from the first round no matter the position you’ve failed.   That said there is a huge difference between a top ten pick and a 25-31ish pick too.   Also only 40% of the second rounders maybe might play 200 games.  Or one every second or third year...    After that around 12.5% of all the rounds together will get a NHL player ... so about one every EIGHT years or so on average.    
 

To really dumb it down GMs except 1 NHLer each draft with a complete compliment of picks ... anything more is a bonus really.  2 is above average - three is outstanding.    
 

So simply evaluating that JB has JV, BB, Demko, AG, Tryamkin, McAAn, EP and QHs so far.   He’s missed on OJ so far he’s a bust for sure based on draft position alone, but he’s also managed to get EP and QHs, both arguably one of if not the best players in the draft so far with a 5th and 7th overall (which is pretty darn good).  2nd founders that play 200 NHL games are not busts at all,  neither are guys past the 2nd round that play that many games of course too.   As of right now JV is about to pass his bust/not a bust scout evaluation too (6–10 overall 5-6 seasons).  So a break even minimum expectation would be 6 players.   And that’s not really fair yet because it takes a few years to develop your picks / the last two drafts maybe shouldn’t be included yet.   Let’s just take Podz draft out ... so five drafts he’s got three core guys, four middle six players, and one KHL bolted defenseman and a backup goalie with starter upside.   That’s 9 guys from five drafts.   Not too shabby - definitely above average drafting.  Almost outstanding.
 

THN does an equalizer where they take each team, their ADP (average draft position) over a five year period and then have scouts rank all the 21 and unders on each team and compare them to each other.  Vancouvers ADP was 7 over that time period last time they did it - and they were given a plus four because we had the 3rd highest ranked group in the league of 21 and unders... in other words even though we drafted around 7 for five years - we drafted like we averaged 3rd overall.   Half the teams were worse, the other half better - it put us in the top third overall drafting in the league since Benning took over.   Does that make him a guru?  Hardly.   But it does make him good.  And he deserves some props for it for sure. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IBatch said:

Well maybe you need to do a little research and find out what is considered an acceptable drafting level.   How many guys does the average team with an average draft position except to get each draft?  Also spend some time to figure out what scouts consider a bust and what they don’t consider a bust based on the first and second round ... and all the rounds collectively after that.  And what’s a bust from 1-3, 4-6,7-10,11-15,16-31 overall etc.
 

Hint.  If you don’t get a player in a draft from the first round no matter the position you’ve failed.   That said there is a huge difference between a top ten pick and a 25-31ish pick too.   Also only 40% of the second rounders maybe might play 200 games.  Or one every second or third year...    After that around 12.5% of all the rounds together will get a NHL player ... so about one every EIGHT years or so on average.    
 

To really dumb it down GMs except 1 NHLer each draft with a complete compliment of picks ... anything more is a bonus really.  2 is above average - three is outstanding.    
 

So simply evaluating that JB has JV, BB, Demko, AG, Tryamkin, McAAn, EP and QHs so far.   He’s missed on OJ so far he’s a bust for sure based on draft position alone, but he’s also managed to get EP and QHs, both arguably one of if not the best players in the draft so far with a 5th and 7th overall (which is pretty darn good).  2nd founders that play 200 NHL games are not busts at all,  neither are guys past the 2nd round that play that many games of course too.   As of right now JV is about to pass his bust/not a bust scout evaluation too (6–10 overall 5-6 seasons).  So a break even minimum expectation would be 6 players.   And that’s not really fair yet because it takes a few years to develop your picks / the last two drafts maybe shouldn’t be included yet.   Let’s just take Podz draft out ... so five drafts he’s got three core guys, four middle six players, and one KHL bolted defenseman and a backup goalie with starter upside.   That’s 9 guys from five drafts.   Not too shabby - definitely above average drafting.  Almost outstanding.
 

THN does an equalizer where they take each team, their ADP (average draft position) over a five year period and then have scouts rank all the 21 and unders on each team and compare them to each other.  Vancouvers ADP was 7 over that time period last time they did it - and they were given a plus four because we had the 3rd highest ranked group in the league of 21 and unders... in other words even though we drafted around 7 for five years - we drafted like we averaged 3rd overall.   Half the teams were worse, the other half better - it put us in the top third overall drafting in the league since Benning took over.   Does that make him a guru?  Hardly.   But it does make him good.  And he deserves some props for it for sure. 

Cracking post Ibatch.
Homerun.. Right out of the ball park. 

You may even add Forsling to the list of players looking very likely to pass the 200 game’s plateau. 
And on top of that there is a few more that may/may not make it. 

Drafting on JB’s watch has been a beacon in the dark. 
 

Edited by spook007
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, spook007 said:

Cracking post Ibatch.
Homerun.. Right out of the ball park. 

You may even add Forsling to the list of players looking very likely to pass the 200 game’s plateau. 
And on top of that there is a few more that may/may not make it. 

Drafting on JB’s watch has been a beacon in the dark. 
 

Yeah, it truly is nuts how many may end up graduating to the NHL. We truly have been spoiled. Some ppl say benning shouldn't have traded so many picks, (which is probably true), but you can only graduate so many players into your team at one time. Granted, it's also about trading capital (eg madden). 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, FairPM said:

Yeah, it truly is nuts how many may end up graduating to the NHL. We truly have been spoiled. Some ppl say benning shouldn't have traded so many picks, (which is probably true), but you can only graduate so many players into your team at one time. Granted, it's also about trading capital (eg madden). 

Madden was a price we had to pay to give the team a fighting chance for the playoffs. We made that deal before announcing Boeser's injury that was believed to be season ending at the time (and of course unfortunately shortly after Marky goes down). It was a price to pay to show the team that we will do what it takes to make winners out of this group. When we hear about teams like Buffalo and Edmonton and the players simply feeling defeated for years, a Madden seems like a small price to pay to boost the morale of the team for the short term and hopeful long term gain. Development of the youth is just as important as drafting them and giving them the confidence that the team (including management) is willing to do what it takes to get you to the next level is a big boost.

  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, spook007 said:

Cracking post Ibatch.
Homerun.. Right out of the ball park. 

You may even add Forsling to the list of players looking very likely to pass the 200 game’s plateau. 
And on top of that there is a few more that may/may not make it. 

Drafting on JB’s watch has been a beacon in the dark. 
 

Thanks Spook...thought of adding Bear, just because he cost us a 2nd...but Forsling is a good call.  Definitely are still guys not from last years draft that could make it...3-4 guys...was it 7 guys JB stated we had that could possibly make the show (including last years draft)?  Pretty sure it was.   That would be pretty awesome, especially if one or two turn into core guys. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/30/2020 at 11:50 PM, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

We must be reading different reports then.

 

From Drance (The Athletic):

 


https://theathletic.com/1845528/2020/05/29/autonomy-and-a-breakdown-in-trust-why-judd-brackett-is-leaving-the-canucks/

 

EDIT: Even in Judd’s own words:

 

”Unfortunately an agreement on the level of input going forward with regard to staff personnel and process could not be reached”

 

 

Reading between the lines here, but I think Brackett wanted more of an input on the hirings/firings of scouts. Nowhere is says he wanted the ability to hire/fired his own scouts. As well no one knows how much of an input he had as the director of scouting. Maybe he wanted to be apart of the management group where they discuss what players to look for, or how to run the draft. Much like what Timmins and Murray do for their clubs. 
 

I don’t see this much as a Brackett vs. Benning debate. They are both great talent evaluators and wished they could have set their differences all aside and partner up as a tandem, running the scouting department. What bother me the most is Weisbrod is basically going to take over Brackett’s duties as the head of the scouting department. As a great Irishman once said, “I had no idea what he (Weisbrod) did around here.”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

Thanks Spook...thought of adding Bear, just because he cost us a 2nd...but Forsling is a good call.  Definitely are still guys not from last years draft that could make it...3-4 guys...was it 7 guys JB stated we had that could possibly make the show (including last years draft)?  Pretty sure it was.   That would be pretty awesome, especially if one or two turn into core guys. 

Yes there are a few sleepers...

For starters it will be interesting to see, how Lockwood will be doing over the next few years... Seeing how Brock and Gaudette have performed has definitely made it interesting...

Others of interest is Brisebois, Rathbone, DiPietro, Lind, Woo...(maybe even Jasek has an outside chance) and of course we are still all hoping for OJ, although time is passing by... @£#$ injuries.

And finally VP and Hoglander both with very decent chance of making the show.

 

if only 3 out of Brisebois,Rathbone, DiPietro, Lind, Woo, OJ, Podz and Hoglander) makes it, it is still averaging 2 NHL players with 200+ games each draft....

I'd say that is pretty darn good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Madden was a price we had to pay to give the team a fighting chance for the playoffs. We made that deal before announcing Boeser's injury that was believed to be season ending at the time (and of course unfortunately shortly after Marky goes down). It was a price to pay to show the team that we will do what it takes to make winners out of this group. When we hear about teams like Buffalo and Edmonton and the players simply feeling defeated for years, a Madden seems like a small price to pay to boost the morale of the team for the short term and hopeful long term gain. Development of the youth is just as important as drafting them and giving them the confidence that the team (including management) is willing to do what it takes to get you to the next level is a big boost.

I thought the madden/toffoli trade was reasonable. Good even. Great if we can resign him. There's a cost to make a trade and as good as madden was trending, we can only have so many smaller players on the team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FairPM said:

I thought the madden/toffoli trade was reasonable. Good even. Great if we can resign him. There's a cost to make a trade and as good as madden was trending, we can only have so many smaller players on the team. 

I guess it depends on if it's one and out for the play-offs. There had to be at time of the trade some financial pressure you would think. Sadly I don't know if the new play-off format is a case of share the spoils or  share the pain. If we're one and out we could have achieved that without Toffoli. A nice player and seemed to fit in with the roster but he is 28 come next season, will he be around for the real play-off run in 2-3  years??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

I guess it depends on if it's one and out for the play-offs. There had to be at time of the trade some financial pressure you would think. Sadly I don't know if the new play-off format is a case of share the spoils or  share the pain. If we're one and out we could have achieved that without Toffoli. A nice player and seemed to fit in with the roster but he is 28 come next season, will he be around for the real play-off run in 2-3  years??

Hindsight is great but who knew we would have a play in round? No one did. 

 

I see it as a win win. Even if we lose, the team got more experience. Plus, the lotto odds are better than what we would have gotten had we just missed the playoffs.

 

It's just too bad it's a 5 game series and not 7. I think our edge would be better with a 7 game series. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fred65 said:

I guess it depends on if it's one and out for the play-offs. There had to be at time of the trade some financial pressure you would think. Sadly I don't know if the new play-off format is a case of share the spoils or  share the pain. If we're one and out we could have achieved that without Toffoli. A nice player and seemed to fit in with the roster but he is 28 come next season, will he be around for the real play-off run in 2-3  years??

Are you so sure? Boeser's injury was announced right after. If we didn't have Toffoli, who was one of our best players after we acquired him, that could've been a tough stretch due to morale and loss of depth. It wasn't even quite set in stone yet even with Toffoli. Boeser returned sooner than expected, which pushed LE out of the top 6 finally. Marky getting hurt didn't help either.

 

It was a trade made to tell the team that management isn't giving up on this group (despite Boeser's injury) and they hope that the group continues to push forward. This is a winning attitude. We have seen examples like Buffalo where their players are saying otherwise and despite a hot start for them, they collapsed in the 2nd half right out of even a play-in opportunity.

 

It doesn't matter if it is "one and out", we wanted playoff experience (even if it's an early exit) for the young core for development and assessment and to get us over that hump. Toffoli brought us much closer to that goal than likely without him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Are you so sure? Boeser's injury was announced right after. If we didn't have Toffoli, who was one of our best players after we acquired him, that could've been a tough stretch due to morale and loss of depth. It wasn't even quite set in stone yet even with Toffoli. Boeser returned sooner than expected, which pushed LE out of the top 6 finally. Marky getting hurt didn't help either.

 

It was a trade made to tell the team that management isn't giving up on this group (despite Boeser's injury) and they hope that the group continues to push forward. This is a winning attitude. We have seen examples like Buffalo where their players are saying otherwise and despite a hot start for them, they collapsed in the 2nd half right out of even a play-in opportunity.

 

It doesn't matter if it is "one and out", we wanted playoff experience (even if it's an early exit) for the young core for development and assessment and to get us over that hump. Toffoli brought us much closer to that goal than likely without him.

Quite honestly I couldn't give  a fig for the current play-off system and frankly I always felt that  "we need the experience" is nonsense( a consolation ribbon )  I think at the end of the day we're still a legitimate piece missing and now we're heading for the worse place of all mediocrity. Never quite a high enough to draft for another prominent player and to far from the top to make any noise if we get in. Some thing like SJ, nearly good enough but a player or two short. Mediocrity is the worse place to be. I'm into summer mode, I want to get to the cottage in the worlds worse way, do a little fishing and putzing around the place.  :lol: Maybe, maybe, Podkolzin is that player that makes the difference but with this roster ….. not yet.

Edited by Fred65
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

Quite honestly I couldn't give  a fig for the current play-off system and frankly I always felt that  "we need the experience" is nonsense( a consolation ribbon )  I think at the end of the day we're still a legitimate piece missing and now we're heading for the worse place of all mediocrity. Never quite a high enough to draft for another prominent player and to far from the top to make any noise if we get in. Some thing like SJ, nearly good enough but a player or two short. Mediocrity is the worse place to be. I'm into summer mode, I want to get to the cottage in the worlds worse way, do a little fishing and putzing around the place.  :lol: Maybe, maybe, Podkolzin is that player that makes the difference but with this roster ….. not yet.

You don't simply jump into the playoffs whenever you decide you want to. Just read how the players in Buffalo feels about constant losing despite wanting to make the playoffs. Teams like Edmonton and Buffalo kept finishing low and continued to add "prominent" pieces and how did they fare? It also doesn't matter if you're a dominant team in the regular season, just look at Tampa last year. You get over that hump and become a playoff team to ever have a chance to win a Cup as there's no one formula in winning a Cup. You lose, you learn and you try again.

 

If we already supposedly have the final piece in Podkolzin, then what's the point of not even trying to gain that playoff experience?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

You don't simply jump into the playoffs whenever you decide you want to. Just read how the players in Buffalo feels about constant losing despite wanting to make the playoffs. Teams like Edmonton and Buffalo kept finishing low and continued to add "prominent" pieces and how did they fare? It also doesn't matter if you're a dominant team in the regular season, just look at Tampa last year. You get over that hump and become a playoff team to ever have a chance to win a Cup as there's no one formula in winning a Cup. You lose, you learn and you try again.

 

If we already supposedly have the final piece in Podkolzin, then what's the point of not even trying to gain that playoff experience?

Yep, experience matters.  There's a reason why there are perennial champion contenders and repeat winners. Winning breeds winning and losing breeds losing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, FairPM said:

Yep, experience matters.  There's a reason why there are perennial champion contenders and repeat winners. Winning breeds winning and losing breeds losing.

It does to an extent, it is mostly on the players, system and who is hot at the time that matters and wants it more

Take the last few years as recent examples

A 1st year Knights team makes it to the Stanley Cup Final, The next year they get knocked out in the 1st round, They weren't  better for the experience

They have always had a winning record,

Tampa Bay had previous playoff experience and then were the President Cup team and then were swept in the 1st round as well , but as i said, anything can happen in the playoffs

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ba;;isticsports said:

It does to an extent, it is mostly on the players, system and who is hot at the time that matters and wants it more

Take the last few years as recent examples

A 1st year Knights team makes it to the Stanley Cup Final, The next year they get knocked out in the 1st round, They weren't  better for the experience

They have always had a winning record,

Tampa Bay had previous playoff experience and then were the President Cup team and then were swept in the 1st round as well , but as i said, anything can happen in the playoffs

That terrible call cost them the first round too let’s not forget...five minute major four goals or whatever it was in a game seven...SJ lucked out.   Which adds to the last sentence of your posts so good example.  We went to the finals and also lost in the first round to the eventual cup champs - a little reminiscent of the Linden teams who seemed to always lose to the eventual cup champs or final team after a hard fought series (which was also often then hardest series that team had during their run too - starting with CAL).  CHI (went to the final and lost), COL (won the cup)...and later on when he came back DET of course just a few examples.  
 

LA is the only 8th seed I can re-call to win a cup.   Sure there might be one other example but don’t think there is.   But it can happen too (and of course we happen to be the team on the other end ha ha).    TB was the most dominant regular season team I can think of to lose on the first round...Vancouver is largely considered the best team of the modern era not to win a cup too.   Yes definitely anything can happen.   Right now I’m hopeful and excited for this year ... not sure I recall us having so much depth since the cap came in, and really even the Linden teams didn’t have this sort of middle/bottom six depth.  Could make for a perfect storm if we can get through a round or two - once the attrition starts the next guy up is so close to the guy they replace and so on..

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, IBatch said:

That terrible call cost them the first round too let’s not forget...five minute major four goals or whatever it was in a game seven...SJ lucked out.   Which adds to the last sentence of your posts so good example.  We went to the finals and also lost in the first round to the eventual cup champs - a little reminiscent of the Linden teams who seemed to always lose to the eventual cup champs or final team after a hard fought series (which was also often then hardest series that team had during their run too - starting with CAL).  CHI (went to the final and lost), COL (won the cup)...and later on when he came back DET of course just a few examples.  
 

LA is the only 8th seed I can re-call to win a cup.   Sure there might be one other example but don’t think there is.   But it can happen too (and of course we happen to be the team on the other end ha ha).    TB was the most dominant regular season team I can think of to lose on the first round...Vancouver is largely considered the best team of the modern era not to win a cup too.   Yes definitely anything can happen.   Right now I’m hopeful and excited for this year ... not sure I recall us having so much depth since the cap came in, and really even the Linden teams didn’t have this sort of middle/bottom six depth.  Could make for a perfect storm if we can get through a round or two - once the attrition starts the next guy up is so close to the guy they replace and so on..

I agree, but that is my point, that with previous playoff experience Tampa Bay had and then becoming a stronger, dominating President Cup team, that they never should have let it get to a final game in the first round, if gaining playoff experience is all that important

Anything can happen in a series, who is hot, goalie, bad call, lucky bounce or goal, poor coaching etc.

 

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, ba;;isticsports said:

I agree, but that is my point, that with previous playoff experience Tampa Bay had and then becoming a stronger, dominating President Cup team, that they never should have let it get to a final game in the first round, if gaining playoff experience is all that important

Anything can happen in a series, who is hot, goalie, bad call, lucky bounce or goal, poor coaching etc.

 

It's not that playoff experience gets you further every year, it's about allowing a young core get that experience and be shown that this team (and management) are working on that common goal to win. It may or may not be successful in the long term, but we would never get there if we are playing this game of trying to get prominent picks and then suddenly deciding now is the time to go for it. That didn't work for Buffalo and even with "the greatest player in the game" it hasn't worked well for Edmonton either so far. This talk of us not being ready yet, so there's no point of even trying and might as well go for a high pick is a losers mentality (anyone who's seen The Last Dance would confirm that a champion like MJ doesn't feel this way). I get this thinking at the start of a rebuild, but at some point you make that leap (especially when you have several picks panning out to start developing that young core). Someone like EP who had a great rookie season, still found weaknesses in his game that he wanted to work on in the off-season. The more experience he gets, the more he knows what he wants to improve on. He will face challenges in the playoffs that he likely wouldn't see in the regular season for the most part.

 

This experience is also important for management to assess where they need to tweak in the lineup and which players they need to expect a higher level or move on from. Continuing with EP, he's a clear example of a player that you see working hard to get better the next season because he wants to win and those are the players management will want to see to deem them worthy of being long term future Canucks that will hopefully bring a Cup home.

 

So yes anything can happen in the playoffs and there's no one route to winning a Cup, but you will never have that opportunity if you don't try. But there are clear examples of teams that have developed a losing culture and it is very hard to turn it around over night. So even if we aren't "ready" now, we are on the trajectory to start preparing for that next step.

  • Cheers 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

It's not that playoff experience gets you further every year, it's about allowing a young core get that experience and be shown that this team (and management) are working on that common goal to win. It may or may not be successful in the long term, but we would never get there if we are playing this game of trying to get prominent picks and then suddenly deciding now is the time to go for it. That didn't work for Buffalo and even with "the greatest player in the game" it hasn't worked well for Edmonton either so far. This talk of us not being ready yet, so there's no point of even trying and might as well go for a high pick is a losers mentality (anyone who's seen The Last Dance would confirm that a champion like MJ doesn't feel this way). I get this thinking at the start of a rebuild, but at some point you make that leap (especially when you have several picks panning out to start developing that young core). Someone like EP who had a great rookie season, still found weaknesses in his game that he wanted to work on in the off-season. The more experience he gets, the more he knows what he wants to improve on. He will face challenges in the playoffs that he likely wouldn't see in the regular season for the most part.

 

This experience is also important for management to assess where they need to tweak in the lineup and which players they need to expect a higher level or move on from. Continuing with EP, he's a clear example of a player that you see working hard to get better the next season because he wants to win and those are the players management will want to see to deem them worthy of being long term future Canucks that will hopefully bring a Cup home.

 

So yes anything can happen in the playoffs and there's no one route to winning a Cup, but you will never have that opportunity if you don't try. But there are clear examples of teams that have developed a losing culture and it is very hard to turn it around over night. So even if we aren't "ready" now, we are on the trajectory to start preparing for that next step.

I see both sides of the debate, one that you have stated and one where we  waited a yr and could have got another EP, Hughes like player before bringing in expensive players who sit. I myself thought the rebuild was hastened once EP proved he was for real, and I would have had the patience with them waiting a year before spending on players 

You mentioned moving on from players, if they are the fairly expensive players (or not), it isn't easy moving on from them without adding prospects or picks, that is why who you sign to big dollars in a cap world and where you spend it, is very important

You also mentioned or we could be like Edmonton, they have there 2 stars locked up with no cap space, we have no cap space without our 2 stars signed, so in a way we are more like them than we think, but i like our team and can't say which is the better way to go, but i hope in the end it all works out for the best

  • Like 1
  • Huggy Bear 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...