View Single Post
Old
04-29-2009, 12:08 PM
  #20
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Lafleurs' Guy:

Sure, we could use another star player -- but blowing up the team and sucking-and-drafting is not much more likely to generate a Cup contender than building slowly and then adding a star player afterwards. There's plenty of teams that tried that route and failed. The strategy may result in spectacular success... and spectacular failure. It's a much bigger gamble.
Like I said, its not going to happen now anyway. Personally, I think we would've been better off if we'd have done it though. We would've rebuilt with higher picks. Instead we squeeked into 8th (sometimes 9th) and have nothing to show for it but picks who we had to take later on. We did well for where our picks were but we could've done better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
And that's my point: going after high picks is a big gamble, one that's highly likely to fail, and it needs to be approached with that in mind. I'm not looking for a guarantee, but I want to emphasize that swinging for the fences in this way is a low-percentage move, one that maybe you need to make, but one that's most likely to net you a good-but-not-great player.
I don't think its a low percentage move. Also, I don't think the cost would be that great. If there's a center out there that could help us we could swap 1st rounders and give up one of our prospects. We've got tons to offer up.

Dealing for Lecavalier would be more expensive, cost us more in the way of talent and its just as risky as he might not pan out either and then we're stuck with a bad contract for years.

Maybe he puts us over the top, but if he doesn't its going to really hurt us. I'd rather go the other route. If that young guy is a bust, we don't give up as much and at least we're not tied to a stupid contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
It may also not be possible most years because the players are not available or, if they are, the team with those picks will be unwilling to deal it. Which means that most likely you need to take your chances in a year where the high pick yields a player that's not a surefire prospect, or else you pay a team-crushing high price for the surefire star.
Sure, it may be impossible to get that high pick. I think we should try though.

For the past couple of years I've suggested that we try for Bobby Ryan or Jordan Staal. Others have disagreed with even trying for those guys. You and I will never know who is and isn't available. We aren't GMs, we can only deal in speculation.

The question isn't CAN we, the question is WOULD you if you were in the GMs seat? This is a message board and its about all we can do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Trading for an established star is much safer, if more expensive. The likelihood of getting someone willing to trade a star player is about the same as someone willing to trade a high pick in a year where that pick may yield a surefire star.
Is it safer? Lecavalier is frought with risks of a different kind.

Sam Polloch built his career on trading established players who's best days were behind them for high picks. He knew how the system worked. Trading for Lecavalier now is like trading for Denis Savard in '91. The guy is still good but he's reached the half life of his career. How many of those years on his contract will he be worth the cap hit? 5 out of 10? If he can't win us the cup now, it really doesn't make sense to make the trade.

The Lightning are going to be a really good team in a few years. They've got Stamkos, they'll get a high pick this year plus whatever they get for Vinny.

If you trade for higher picks you give up less, aren't tied to a contract and get to develop the player yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
You're presenting this as "trade for a high pick and draft a superstar". I'm not against it in principle, but it is nowhere near as simple as you make it sound.
Its not as simple as that, yes it is a risk. I just think its one worth taking and I don't think its the crapshoot that you're making it out to be.

You're right, we could draft a bust. But I think we have to at least try. With the exception of Price we haven't drafted top five since 1980. Its coming back to hurt us now. I can accept trying to do something and not getting it right. I have a hard time when we just sit there and draft in the middle rounds. Its a recipe for mediocrity.

Besides, look at the flipside of your argument if we're trading away prospects and picks in return we could be trading away a bust too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Let's put on a concrete example... the last time I know of that the Habs made a serious pitch for a high pick, it was the Kovalchuk pick. IIRC, the asking price was a package that included high picks (including the Komisarek pick if I'm not mistaken), Jose Theodore, and Andrei Markov, no less. Had they made that trade, the Habs would have had a superstar forward... and yet, probably be further from being a Cup contender now.
Look at the team we have now. We have tons of prospects/young players we can give up. Fischer, Subban, Weber, Chipchura, D'Agostini, O'Byrne, Higgins, McDonnaugh, Halak, Pleks, Paciorretti, Kostitsyn x2, draft picks...

We don't have to strip the cupboard bare. But we could give up one of these guys and swap draft positions. We have the depth that we didn't have back then.

Gainey has done a good job for us. He's been 'slow and steady' and held on to his picks. We've also done well for where we've drafted. Not all of these kids are going to play for us though. Its time we took a look at who we want for the future and deal some others away and try for an upgrade. The longer we put it off, the more its going to hurt us. I don't want us to be in the same position five years from now without a superstar.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 04-29-2009 at 12:17 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote