View Single Post
01-07-2010, 02:20 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by The Inebriator View Post
Well it depends what you qualify as "mismanaged". As much as I like Carcillo, the Upshall trade was mismanagement. Not a major loss, but that qualifies in my view. The Eminger trade was poor as well, and not in a "looking back" type manner as most people were baffled at the time. The Gauthier thing was a waste of a 2nd round pick as well.

The other things I've seen listed I wouldn't count as egregious losses of assets including Pitkanen/Lupul, Carle trade, Pronger trade. You could easily argue these trades as being wins for the team if you chose to do so, so I think labeling these as mismanagement is splitting hairs at best

So essentially, you have 3 bad moves that could be labeled as mismanagement of assets. I don't think that's the issue here.
I think trading a 1st rounder for Timonen and Hartnell was a waste of a first. I think they probably could have signed both to similar deals as UFAs, and kept the first, to boot.

Trading a 1st rounder for Eminger was a horrible mismanagement of assets. If they had signed Eminger to an offer sheet for what they signed him for, the compensation wouldn't have been a 1st rounder. The fact that they traded him later doesn't mitigate the initial bad trade...and now that Downie seems to be maturing, even getting Carle might be a less defensible trade.

The deals for Carcillo, and sending Gauthier were moronic. Recalling Jones was idiotic. Losing Vaananen and Metropolit was dumb.

They are far too cavalier with their minor assets.

Scoopyten is offline   Reply With Quote