• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Dabura

3/14 Conductor GDT - Lightning @ Red Wings - 7:30 PM ET

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

The only thing being overblown is Holland.  By you. 

Giving out bad contracts to five or six players is bad for any team.  

"Holland gave out some bad contracts."

HANG THE MAN!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Gave out some bad contracts
>Didn't draft Kucherov (and the drafting has been terrible, even though it hasn't)
>Won't fire Blashill
>Is not Steve Yzerman

wew lad

It's not looking good for Holland. The case against him is airtight. It's the electric chair for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GMRwings1983 said:

Yeah, let's be more like the Oilers.  :rolleyes:

Do people around the NHL still think Holland is one of the best GM's in the league?  If so, what are they basing that on in recent memory?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but Chiarelli made some good moves in Boston that led to a Stanley Cup and two Finals appearances.  Every dog has his day.  

With all due respect - Holland is a genius compared to Chiapet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dabura said:

"Holland gave out some bad contracts."

HANG THE MAN!!!

No.  Just fire him and let's have a real fresh start while we're at it.

"Some bad contracts" is an understatement.  About 1/3 of their regular lineup are on bad contracts.

Edited by GMRwings1983

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GMRwings1983 said:

No.  Just fire him and let's have a real fresh start while we're at it.

There isn't an owner in the league who would fire Ken Holland right now. (Well, ok, maybe Melnyk.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dabura said:

I think that's disingenuous. You're framing it as "People who are pro-tanking don't understand that you can get great players without tanking." Everyone understands that great players can be acquired without tanking

So then why does everyone want to tank so badly? If you can get good players without losing...then why lose? That's illogical.

11 hours ago, Dabura said:

 

What Holland is doing now is necessary. (And I don't think he has much of a choice anyway. The team is simply bad.)

I thought we already established that tanking and sucking isnt necessary.

11 hours ago, Dabura said:

The odds of finding one or two of that kind of player without multiple high picks spread out across several drafts...are not good

Neither are the odds of winning the lottery to draft those kinds of players.

11 hours ago, Dabura said:

So, personally, I'm fine with tanking. 

I'm not. I think this team can still get high end players without being a bottom dweller. Its totally possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

"Some bad contracts" is an understatement.  About 1/3 of their regular lineup are on bad contracts.

There are two contracts that make me cringe: Nielsen's and Abdelkader's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, kickazz said:

What losing culture lol? Sitting on a computer from Indiana doesn't really give you a birdseye view of what's going on with the fans in Michigan/Detroit. 

You think fan enjoy the losses? People want us to get a good draft pick and then win. 

d68a4365805ef5463bdac7368371fa93.jpg

It's the big picture; this organization is a dominant and one of the best in the league and always will be. They're in it to win big, eventually. There will never be a losing culture with the Detroit Red Wings and there hasn't been since 1926. From the great depression, into WW2, into Civil rights into the Gulf war, this team has been THE TEAM that has won big. Yes the Detroit Lions and football in general is more popular, but it's always been the Red Wings that brought the "win" mentality in Detroit. Michigan pumps the most hockey player talent in the NTDP next to probably Minnesota. 

Losing lots of games...losing culture. Its pretty simple actually.

If you think that one player is going to make a difference, then ok. Its going to take more than one. According to local logic, you have to tank to draft high and get good players. Drafting high multiple times means you have to suck multiple years.  Sucking multiple years makes a losing culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

So then why does everyone want to tank so badly? If you can get good players without losing...then why lose? That's illogical.

Because your odds of getting really great players improve when you're stockpiling picks and finishing low in the standings. (Finishing low in the standings means you pick early in each round, not just the 1st round.)

For the record, I'm not even hardcore pro-tanking. And neither is Ken Holland.

(Wings won't 'sit back' in attempt to rebuild)

In fact, I was firmly against even flirting with the idea of "acceptable sucking"...right up until it became pretty clear that Parity had won and that it was probably in the Wings' best interests to "embrace the suck" for a little while and see what a few tank drafts could do for this organization's talent pool.

13 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

I thought we already established that tanking and sucking isnt necessary.

Do you need your home? Do you need the internet? Do you need to eat as much as you do?

15 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Neither are the odds of winning the lottery to draft those kinds of players.

We need elite talent. Hughes and Kakko are the best of the best, but any one of Byram, Cozens, Dach, et al. would immediately become our top prospect and arguably the best prospect we've had in ages.

19 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

I'm not. I think this team can still get high end players without being a bottom dweller. Its totally possible.

I'm not saying it's not possible. I'm saying the two years or so that Holland will allow the team to suck (before he'd consider doing something drastic) are a chance to get lots and lots of very promising young players and hopefully a franchise player or two, and I'm saying "We shouldn't be doing this. We can assemble a championship-caliber core without being bad" rings hollow.

Rasmussen. Zadina. Veleno. Berggren. McIsaac. That's five 1st-round caliber players in the span of two seasons. And four of those five players were drafted last year. Under "Keep the playoff streak alive at all costs" circumstances, it might take us 3-5 years to assemble that group of players.

I'd like to see the Wings win another Cup before I die. I think embracing the suck for a couple of years will help the cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Losing lots of games...losing culture. Its pretty simple actually.

If you think that one player is going to make a difference, then ok. Its going to take more than one. According to local logic, you have to tank to draft high and get good players. Drafting high multiple times means you have to suck multiple years.  Sucking multiple years makes a losing culture.

They’re not deliberately tanking. They’re not pulling the players to the side and saying “ok we have to lose these games”. You’re trying to push a narrative that only exists in your head. The team sucks, plain and simple. 

They know they’ll end up somewhere high in the draft and hence they've stock piled their picks to use them in the draft at those high points each round. It's pretty simple.  

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

I'm not. I think this team can still get high end players without being a bottom dweller.

Its totally possible.

And they tried from 2009 until last year and it didn't work out. 

As for the second bolded part. Sure it's "possible". But probability is low and we're trying to get good fast and now, and ain't nobody has time to continue wasting trying to hope to find a gem someone in a random draft position. We've been trying that for more than a decade and have had zero luck drafting a worthy player since Franzen/Kronwall pre 2000s. 

Specifically, if you've been paying attention to the last 20 years of our draft, we haven't had much luck trying to get high end players. Nyquist and Tatar were secondary players at best and nothing more. Not a 1D like Kronwall, not a top 3 winger like Franzen. So rather than clinging on to "possibility" like you say; Holland has moved his philosophy towards "probability". And it's a proven point that there's a higher probability of getting good players high in the draft. Period.  

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, kickazz said:

And they tried from 2009 until last year and it didn't work out. 

As for the second bolded part. Sure it's "possible". But probability is low and we're trying to get good fast and now, and ain't nobody has time to continue wasting trying to hope to find a gem someone in a random draft position. We've been trying that for more than a decade and have had zero luck drafting a worthy player since Franzen/Kronwall pre 2000s. 

They tried maintaining a playoff streak and rebuilding at the same time. That's not what I am talking about. Never once have I used the term "rebuild on the fly". What I HAVE said is that it is possible to rebuild while not being at the bottom of the standings. You can still finish at say 20th thru 25th. Thats below a playoff team, while still being respectable. Does that sound so bad? I know, call me crazy for not wanting my team to be a joke.

13 hours ago, kickazz said:

Not a 1D like Kronwall, not a top 3 winger like Franzen. 

How bad was the team when those guys were drafted? Remember Jiri Fischer? Also drafted during the glory years. The team continued to trade away 1st round picks year after year. Thats why the well ran dry.

Edited by Neomaxizoomdweebie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, kickazz said:

They’re not deliberately tanking. They’re not pulling the players to the side and saying “ok we have to lose these games”. You’re trying to push a narrative that only exists in your head. The team sucks, plain and simple.

Not pushing any narrative. I'll let the fake media do that. If you were actually in my head, you would know that I have never said or even thought this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

They tried maintaining a playoff streak and rebuilding at the same time. That's not what I am talking about. Never once have I used the term "rebuild on the fly". What I HAVE said is that it is possible to rebuild while not being at the bottom of the standings. You can still finish at say 20th thru 25th. Thats below a playoff team, while still being respectable. Does that sound so bad? I know, call me crazy for not wanting my team to be a joke.

How bad was the team when those guys were drafted? Remember Jiri Fischer? Also drafted during the glory years. The team continued to trade away 1st round picks year after year. Thats why the well ran dry.

This is quite literally the dumbest argument I've seen in a while. Call me fallacious or mean or whatever.

You would rather this team miss the playoffs and finish in the bottom third of the league (20th - 25th line you say) and NOT get a high draft pick? I thank the lord we don't have a GM that thinks like this. Your argument is basically egotistical rather than anything being close to rational. That you would rather this team not be "a joke" for some sort of pride issue? A team like you suggest would be the butt end of EVERY joke. "Detroit Red Wings, notorious for finishing 20th in the league every year, missing the playoffs, and having s*** draft pick and then continuing to be try hards and still not making the playoffs nor drafting a top player". This is basically the Detroit Pistons from 2009 to now. Can't get a good draft pick, always finish 20th or a little worse and then rinse and repeat. The repeated cycle caused the Pistons organization to become completely insignificant in the league, and even if they make the playoffs this year they'll likely get demolished because NBA playoffs the super team just simply always win. So unfortunately for them the situation is even worse. 

This debate is over. I have nothing to add towards something this silly.

rickybobby.jpeg?quality=100&w=600

 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

So now you are resorting to name calling and questioning my intelligence. Well done on your empty rebuttal. You forgot to insult my mother tho.

Not a single name call towards you on there. But nice try, I understand it’s 2019 and everyone sensitive needs to have an attempt. (Also hypocritical given how much you criticize certain people of a party for being sensitive specifically when you bring up politics in the forums. Bravo). 

I insulted and dismissed your argument. Because it’s silly and purely rides pride. That's the kind of mentality that f***s up teams for years and years and one of my biggest pet peeves (see above with the colossal failure that Pistons had with your strategy; me being a Pistons fan obviously). 

Wanting a team to miss the playoffs and finish 20th place for ego satisfaction (since it’s not last place) rather than getting a high draft pick is dumb and counterproductive in a parity era. Plain and simple. And it's also not much different than the "rebuild on the fly" that Holland attempted no matter how much you think they're different. The end game is that same, we end up having mediocre picks; rather than top 5 picks. 

Arguing any further on this point would be like arguing with Jonas on one of his trolling arguments. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2019 at 9:42 PM, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Losing lots of games...losing culture. Its pretty simple actually.

If you think that one player is going to make a difference, then ok. Its going to take more than one. According to local logic, you have to tank to draft high and get good players. Drafting high multiple times means you have to suck multiple years.  Sucking multiple years makes a losing culture.

No we're just not a very good team right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, kickazz said:

Not a single name call towards you on there. But nice try, I understand it’s 2019 and everyone sensitive needs to have an attempt. (Also hypocritical given how much you criticize certain people of a party for being sensitive specifically when you bring up politics in the forums. Bravo). 

I insulted and dismissed your argument. Because it’s silly and purely rides pride. That's the kind of mentality that f***s up teams for years and years and one of my biggest pet peeves (see above with the colossal failure that Pistons had with your strategy; me being a Pistons fan obviously). 

Wanting a team to miss the playoffs and finish 20th place for ego satisfaction (since it’s not last place) rather than getting a high draft pick is dumb and counterproductive in a parity era. Plain and simple. And it's also not much different than the "rebuild on the fly" that Holland attempted no matter how much you think they're different. The end game is that same, we end up having mediocre picks; rather than top 5 picks. 

Arguing any further on this point would be like arguing with Jonas on one of his trolling arguments. 

They aren't mutually exclusive. It's totally possible to accomplish both. That's my point.

Losing doesn't guarantee anything. Last I checked, all teams that miss the playoffs are in the lottery. Does it increase the odds the worse you are? Yes. But at what expense? Franchise Respectability? Team Confidence? Player Development? 

We are not giving up a Hughes or Kakko by winning more games. We could finish dead last and still not get either of those 2. All losing does is increase the odds in your favor. That's it. Nothing more. I could buy more lottery tickets to increase my chances of winning the powerball, but if I don't win, then its a waste.

You keep using the word "pride". It can be a bad thing, which is probably why you keep using it, it suits your argument better. Replace "pride" with self respect or dignity. Is holding onto either of these a bad thing? I don't think so. If you think it's better to suck, that's your opinion. Doesn't make my argument "silly".

And excuse me if I want to see my team win a few more games, to be a little more respectable, to maintain a little more confidence and dignity. But I guess such things are "silly" when you can gain a few more percentage points in the draft lottery.

2 hours ago, Hockeymom1960 said:

No we're just not a very good team right now.

That's true. But is this team really as bad as the record shows? Does the talent on this team justify being a bottom dweller? I don't think so. I think they are a better team than the points show. Others think it silly, but I do think that losing affects team confidence and desire to win. Do we really think that this team is playing its best hockey every game? I don't. Is losing helping this team in any way other than gaining a few percentage points in the draft lottery? I don't think so. I think it has the opposite effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Losing doesn't guarantee anything. Last I checked, all teams that miss the playoffs are in the lottery. Does it increase the odds the worse you are? Yes. But at what expense? Franchise Respectability? Team Confidence? Player Development? 

Yes the franchise is a joke now, the team confidence is so low that Larkin and AA can't even put up 20 goals. Player development is so terrible that we haven't managed to put together a franchise center yet. This guy Zadina we picked up is lazy and he sucks. Can't even shoot, could barely play in the NHL with the lackadaisical attitude in the locker room. 

4 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

And excuse me if I want to see my team win a few more games, to be a little more respectable, to maintain a little more confidence and dignity. But I guess such things are "silly" when you can gain a few more percentage points in the draft lottery.

 

You’re excused and so is your argument that would get the Red Wings nowhere aside from making you feel better. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kickazz said:

Yes the franchise is a joke now, the team confidence is so low that Larkin and AA can't even put up 20 goals. Player development is so terrible that we haven't managed to put together a franchise center yet. This guy Zadina we picked up is lazy and he sucks. Can't even shoot, could barely play in the NHL with the lackadaisical attitude in the locker room. 

You’re excused and so is your argument that would get the Red Wings nowhere aside from making you feel better. 

The odds at #1 are double if you finish 31 instead of 28.  That's VERY significant.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Wings aren't even really tanking, so this whole argument is sort of stupid.

The team is bad and Holland has concluded there isn't anything he can do to dramatically change that in the here and now, so he's making the best of a bad situation.

Making the best of a bad situation = transition years (younger guys stepping into bigger roles, some older guys getting phased out), trading some non-core pieces at the deadline, getting a lot of picks.

It's a bad situation, but it's also sort of nice (albeit in a perverse way), as this organization desperately needs a major infusion of high-end young talent and it's exceedingly difficult to get that when you're doing everything in your power to make the playoffs every year. (Which is why we're in the situation we're in.)

We're getting a big shot in the arm over two or three years instead of the painfully slow drip that we'd grown accustomed to, the painfully slow drip that would run indefinitely until we'd basically lucked into the two or three franchise players that we need in order to open up a legitimate, sustainable Cup window.

Many people had grown tired of the slow drip. Many of these people think "tanking" is the way to go. We can debate semantics until we're blue in the face. At the end of the day, the reality is that the team is bad and Holland has changed his approach in an attempt to get the organization back to relevance in as short a time as possible.

Thus far, Holland's approach has paid off pretty well; he's moved out a few players that were deemed expendable and he's managed to add a lot of high-end(ish) young talent in a relatively short span of time.

Again, last year's draft basically got us four years' worth of 1st-round picks. We might be looking at a similar return in this year's draft. At the very least, this draft will be giving us one elite prospect, quite possibly the best prospect we've had in a very long time (even if it isn't Hughes or Kakko).

I'm going to link to this piece again:

Red Wings won't 'sit back' in attempt to rebuild [NHL.com] (October 25, 2018)

When I say I'm fine with tanking and I claim that Holland is embracing the suck, what I basically mean is that I'm down with what Devellano and Cotsonika are saying in this piece.

Highlights:

Quote

"We know how we got here," Devellano said.

The Red Wings were star-studded during their glory days. They extended their window by mining two star centers deep in the NHL Draft -- Pavel Datsyuk in the sixth round (No. 171) in 1998, Henrik Zetterberg in the seventh round (No. 210) in 1999 -- but that's hard to do consistently. During their playoff streak, their average first pick was No. 38.

Quote

"We're superstar driven, and it pains me, it pains Ken, that we are bereft of a superstar," Devellano said. "Superstars win games. Superstars sell tickets. Superstars drive TV ratings. And to sit here and not have that kind of player, or preferably players, is painful. But that's as candid as I can be with you. We do have a plan."

The Red Wings tried to extend the playoff streak as long as possible. But when they saw it was about to end in 2016-17, Holland sold at the NHL Trade Deadline and collected picks. He did the same last season. They want to be as competitive as possible, while playing out contracts to create salary cap space, developing young players, collecting more picks and finding the next generation of stars in the draft. 

The worry is that a rebuild will take many years, as it has for other teams. If you finish last, you aren't guaranteed the No. 1 pick because of the NHL Draft Lottery. You can fall as low as No. 4. Even if you get the No. 1 pick, you aren't guaranteed a quick turnaround.

"The one thing we don't want to do is make promises," Devellano said. " 'Oh, we're going to be really good two years from now.' 'Oh, we're going to be really good four years from now.' Because quite frankly, we don't know, and we have precedents with these other teams to see how long it has taken.

"Quite frankly, we're not the most patient people. We've been used to winning. We may have to go outside the box to push this program along. I won't go into detail about that, but we may have to go outside the box and do things that normally aren't done in order to push us up the standings and to get more competitive."

Quote

"You need to start somewhere with a superstar," Devellano said. "We recognize that. I can tell you as long as Ken Holland and Jimmy D are involved, we will be aggressive.

"We won't be placid. We've been placid the last two years. We're going to be placid the remainder of this year. There's not much we can do. But if people think that as long as Ken and I are involved that we're going to sit back and not do something to shake the tree, so to speak, that ain't happening.

"That's where we are. We're in a tough situation."

Embrace the suck, but don't enjoy it. Hate every minute of it. And always have some form of an "IN CASE OF EMERGENCY BREAK GLASS" escape plan. Don't trust that 30 picks spread across three consecutive drafts will definitely get you to where you want to be. At the same time, recognize that this is an opportunity to set things right and put this organization "back in business" in a relatively short time.

That's what I think the brass should be doing and that's what I think the brass *is* doing.

Edited by Dabura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Dabura said:

The Wings aren't even really tanking, so this whole argument is sort of stupid.

The team is bad and Holland has concluded there isn't anything he can do to dramatically change that in the here and now, so he's making the best of a bad situation.

Making the best of a bad situation = transition years (younger guys stepping into bigger roles, some older guys getting phased out), trading some non-core pieces at the deadline, getting a lot of picks.

It's a bad situation, but it's also sort of nice (albeit in a perverse way), as this organization desperately needs a major infusion of high-end young talent and it's exceedingly difficult to get that when you're doing everything in your power to make the playoffs every year. (Which is why we're in the situation we're in.)

We're getting a big shot in the arm over two or three years instead of the painfully slow drip that we'd grown accustomed to, the painfully slow drip that would run indefinitely until we'd basically lucked into the two or three franchise players that we need in order to open up a legitimate, sustainable Cup window.

Many people had grown tired of the slow drip. Many of these people think "tanking" is the way to go. We can debate semantics until we're blue in the face. At the end of the day, the reality is that the team is bad and Holland has changed his approach in an attempt to get the organization back to relevance in as short a time as possible.

Thus far, Holland's approach has paid off pretty well; he's moved out a few players that were deemed expendable and he's managed to add a lot of high-end(ish) young talent in a relatively short span of time.

Again, last year's draft basically got us four year's worth of 1st-round picks. We might be looking at a similar return in this year's draft. At the very least, this draft will be giving us one elite prospect, quite possibly the best prospect we've had in a very long time (even if it isn't Hughes or Kakko).

I'm going to link to this piece again:

Red Wings won't 'sit back' in attempt to rebuild [NHL.com] (October 25, 2018)

When I say I'm fine with tanking and I claim that Holland is embracing the suck, what I basically mean is that I'm down with what Devellano and Cotsonika are saying in this piece.

Highlights:

Embrace the suck, but don't enjoy it. Hate every minute of it. And always have some form of an "IN CASE OF EMERGENCY BREAK GLASS" escape plan. Don't trust that 30 picks spread across three consecutive drafts will definitely get you to where you want to be. At the same time, recognize that this is an opportunity to set things right and put this organization "back in business" in a relatively short time.

That's what I think the brass should be doing and that's why I think the brass *is* doing.

Well yeah, we're not tanking as in purposely losing games. But the bolded parts is basically the way of getting a high draft pick. Which is what people equate to modern day tank. Neo was of the opinion that we don't get rid of Nyquist for draft picks. That we keep the secondary guys around, and if we finish in the 20th place it would be more respectable than finishing last and build through that.

I'm saying that's stupid. Pardon my bluntness. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"We're superstar driven, and it pains me, it pains Ken, that we are bereft of a superstar," Devellano said. "Superstars win games. Superstars sell tickets. Superstars drive TV ratings. And to sit here and not have that kind of player, or preferably players, is painful."

I think this is a pretty important point, one that Wings fans maybe tend to overlook.

Heading into a brand new building with no superstar talent and a dead-and-buried playoff streak and waning fan enthusiasm...is not a good situation. (I think if Holland was going to get axed, it would've happened right after the playoff streak ended. And I probably would've been ok with that.)

If you're the owner, you want to reverse this situation as quickly as possible. You want that playoff revenue. You want butts in the seats. You don't want The Brand to be tarnished, dragged through the mud.

If you're the GM...well, same thing.

So. What do you, the GM, do? Which path forward gives you the best shot at getting to where you ultimately want to be within the next, say, four years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dabura said:

"We're superstar driven, and it pains me, it pains Ken, that we are bereft of a superstar," Devellano said. "Superstars win games. Superstars sell tickets. Superstars drive TV ratings. And to sit here and not have that kind of player, or preferably players, is painful."

I think this is a pretty important point, one that Wings fans maybe tend to overlook.

Heading into a brand new building with no superstar talent and a dead-and-buried playoff streak and waning fan enthusiasm...is not a good situation. (I think if Holland was going to get axed, it would've happened right after the playoff streak ended. And I probably would've been ok with that.)

If you're the owner, you want to reverse this situation as quickly as possible. You want that playoff revenue. You want butts in the seats. You don't want The Brand to be tarnished, dragged through the mud.

If you're the GM...well, same thing.

So. What do you, the GM, do? Which path forward gives you the best shot at getting to where you ultimately want to be within the next, say, four years?

First round pick. Jack Hughes.

Even the post dead wings era; when we drafted Yzerman with the 4th pick; its been said that it was an instant seller and caught the attention of many. Yzerman singlehandedly  sold tickets and brought life to Red Wing hockey. 

Superstars sell tickets. They make everyone around them better and they win championships. 

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this