View Single Post
09-25-2008, 05:25 PM
John-Eric Iannicello
Hockey's Future Staff
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,299
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
I'm all for "play the kids", always have been and always will.

My roster wish list in the other thread had both Mitchell and Williams on my 4th line if I had my way. I had the youngest wish list roster as anyone including Tlusty, Grabs and Kulemin up front and Stralman, Carlo and Schenn on D.

I had Blake and Bell tossed on waivers to dispose of them to make room, and other vets traded, but you cried and complained that I can't have that and they need to stay. You have to make up your mind if your accusing me on not wanting to play the kids now as my position has never changed.

TSN panel discussed this yesterday during the game that Fletcher didn't cut it to the bone deep enough, and left too many vets standing for a team looking for a Top pick in 2009. I agree with them but then again realize some of the players staying is simply a case of no market rather than no desire to move them out.
I agree.

I think "playing the kids" is always a good thing - to an extent. I have no problem with certain depth players sticking around to give some competition. But when a GM goes out, grabs a 34 year old "40 goal" guy over a 5 year term that shuts the door on the kids way more then bringing in a bottom line player for 500k. The 500k guy is easily more disposable then the 5yr 20m dollar man. The 500k guys are easier to hide in the minors (ie. Bates Battaglia).

Follow me on Twitter:!/JE_Iannicello
John-Eric Iannicello is offline   Reply With Quote