Something in another thread just reminded me of a frightening thought I had the other day.
Many have attempted to understand our failure to rebuild three years ago, or two years ago, or last year, or this year. Geoff's contract collection leaves us pretty messed up until 2010, and signing Mikki until then seemed like the last nail in the coffin; that we'd be locked into a period of 4-5 years where we were no good, but couldn't do much beyond cost cutting and bandaids. This makes no sense in a number of ways, so we've been reduced to pondering whether Geoff has lost his mojo, his marbles, or both.
This assumption (Geoff is blowing it, and/or the Maloofs are meddling horribly) is not necessary, however, for a logically consistent (and simpler) explanation.
If I were one of the Maloofs, something I absolutely MUST have done by now is to make contingency plans in case the arena situation did not get resolved. To neglect that would be absolutely nuts. There's no way they're going to share Plan B with us, but one must exist.
In that context, stalling on the rebuild, while applying bandaids and cost cutting measures, makes sense to some degree. I don't think it's what I'd do as an owner, but the temptation to do a complete remake of the team in conjunction with a move is understandable. They could have a new location, with a new roster, new colors, maybe even a new team nickname. Should Geoff feel more inclined to retire than to move, he'd be leaving his successor a pleasingly clean slate to work with. Circumstances like that would also make the franchise very attractive to prospective purchasers, should the Maloofs feel that they had to bail. And if nothing had been resolved vis-a-vis the arena by 2010, it seems almost certain that Stern would okay a move, sale, or whatever, at that time.
I'm not saying that this theory has nothing going against it, the facts don't all line up perfectly behind it. But it does seem (to me, off the top of my head) at least as probable as many of the straws that we've grasped at in the past. Maybe we've neglected thinking in this direction because it's even more depressing than meddling owners, a slumping GM, or a front office which is blind and directionless.
What do you think? Does this notion seem more in tune with reality than the alternatives, or is it merely another wrongheaded attempt to explain away things which are illogical?
Many have attempted to understand our failure to rebuild three years ago, or two years ago, or last year, or this year. Geoff's contract collection leaves us pretty messed up until 2010, and signing Mikki until then seemed like the last nail in the coffin; that we'd be locked into a period of 4-5 years where we were no good, but couldn't do much beyond cost cutting and bandaids. This makes no sense in a number of ways, so we've been reduced to pondering whether Geoff has lost his mojo, his marbles, or both.
This assumption (Geoff is blowing it, and/or the Maloofs are meddling horribly) is not necessary, however, for a logically consistent (and simpler) explanation.
If I were one of the Maloofs, something I absolutely MUST have done by now is to make contingency plans in case the arena situation did not get resolved. To neglect that would be absolutely nuts. There's no way they're going to share Plan B with us, but one must exist.
In that context, stalling on the rebuild, while applying bandaids and cost cutting measures, makes sense to some degree. I don't think it's what I'd do as an owner, but the temptation to do a complete remake of the team in conjunction with a move is understandable. They could have a new location, with a new roster, new colors, maybe even a new team nickname. Should Geoff feel more inclined to retire than to move, he'd be leaving his successor a pleasingly clean slate to work with. Circumstances like that would also make the franchise very attractive to prospective purchasers, should the Maloofs feel that they had to bail. And if nothing had been resolved vis-a-vis the arena by 2010, it seems almost certain that Stern would okay a move, sale, or whatever, at that time.
I'm not saying that this theory has nothing going against it, the facts don't all line up perfectly behind it. But it does seem (to me, off the top of my head) at least as probable as many of the straws that we've grasped at in the past. Maybe we've neglected thinking in this direction because it's even more depressing than meddling owners, a slumping GM, or a front office which is blind and directionless.
What do you think? Does this notion seem more in tune with reality than the alternatives, or is it merely another wrongheaded attempt to explain away things which are illogical?