View Single Post
10-11-2003, 06:45 PM
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Originally Posted by
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
I'm not sure if you're saying you would or wouldn't have traded Hemsky to get a guy like Comrie. At the top you say you would have traded Comrie for Hemsky, and then you say you would have traded Hemsky for Comrie.
I guess I'm saying that Carolina could trade Staal for Comrie, but it might not be very long before it starts to look like a real foolish trade for them. Untapped potential is just extremely valuable in the league today.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Seachd