View Single Post
10-11-2003, 01:30 PM
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Originally Posted by
But it was the same with Hemsky last year. Would you have traded him at the beginning of last season for someone older, if though he hadn't done anything? Keep in mind Hemsky's still a kid trying to make it as well.
Yeah, there's a possibility a player like Staal could bust. But it's also very likely that we see pretty soon that he can handle this league, just like we saw with Hemsky. The fact that there's a small chance he could bust doesn't lower his value at all. Maybe it should - I don't know. But it doesn't.
last year at this time yeah i would have traded a comrie type for hemsky
the way i look at it, a player that is aknown commodity is worth more than a player who might be a little bit better..... let me explain, i consider hemsky to be a little bit better than comrie (i think comrie will max out at around 75-80 points a season and hemsky might get to the 85-90 range one day)..... so that is why i would have traded him for comrie... i would not have obviously traded him for some player whos top-end potential was significantly lower
the way i look at it, you have to give up a little "possible" return for a known commodity, because the known commodity is more of a garenteed thing (as much as anything can be garanteed in a sport that is).... i guess if i was a baseball player id rather be batting .330 and only hit 10 HR, than bat .210 and hit 35 HR... i dont know if that was a good anaology but i think you get my point
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by jadeddog