No I said you're projecting, for example "holy fuck man, learn some soft skills" when it is pretty clear that the catalyst was Luongo's role going forward with the team (one consistent with the inevitable trade) and not with some kind of interpersonal issue.mathonwy wrote:And you say "I'm" the one that is trying to make the situation black and white.
Again Luongo wanting a trade before the deadline was apparently a result of the Heritage Classic non-start. "We lost Luo" was going to happen one way or the other. I don't think this was a "go for it" year for this franchise and so I'm not worried about losing 20 games of Luongo - just like I'll take a 5th over Rafael Diaz.You make it sound like the Heritage Classic game was a crazy ass must win ultra important game (it wasn't btw). Coaching is more than just about wins and losses. It's about managing the players, understanding the local dynamics and setting the locker room tone. Giving Luo the FU like Torts did in a meaningless side show game was the worst possible decision. You can bet it pissed off the NHL who had probably invested a tonne into promoting this event. You can also be sure that the other vets weren't too happy about it. Seeing a guy that you had gone to game 7 with treated like garbage. Lack got booed.. wtf. That's just being clueless about what's important to the local fanbase. Torts made the Heritage Classic game about Torts and that's just fucked up.
We lost the game. We lost Luo. And everyone is unhappy.
Yay Torts!
I don't think the Heritage Classic was any more important than any other game which is why I have no issue with Tortorella treating it like any other game rather than some prestige event that should be bestowed on Lou as some kind of honour.
(Although if you want to look at it that way perhaps it still should have gone to Lack as a symbol of where this franchise is headed - which for better or worse, is not towards the 30-something goaltender with declining stats and a two year old trade request.)