View Single Post
07-06-2010, 05:53 PM
Registered User
Jester's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
We'll just have to agree to disagree.

I liken this argument to people judging athletes (Quarterbacks in football in partifuclar) based on how many championships (Superbowls) they've won. I HATE that argument. It's a team game, and yes a QB can have a dramatic impact on a team (much like, say a Chris Pronger can), but it's not the end all be all judge of a player. Just like, I don't believe winning a Stanley Cup is the end all be all of judging the Chris Pronger trade (or any trade). Trent Dilfer won a Superbowl, Dan Marino did not...does that mean Trent Dilfer is better or more successful than Marino? Maybe it's just that Dilfer's team excelled while Marino's failed. You can apply this same logic to evaluating trades IMO.
We're not talking about a team game here. We're talking about the decision a single man made with the assets at his disposal, and the logical justification for making that decision (to win a Stanley Cup). If that deal isn't about getting that done, then you don't make that deal. You're conflating two things that are not one and the same. It is not Chris Pronger's fault (exclusively) if we fail to win a Cup... that's not even Holmgren's "fault," per se. It's just the stakes of the deal he made...

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote