View Single Post
10-28-2003, 03:19 PM
Registered User
dedalus's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by RANGERDIEHARD
But the Dunham trade was not as lopsided as everyone is making it out to sound. It's just yet another over reaction because Zidlicky started the season off well.
It's not an over reaction, it's a reaction against management's philosophy. The Rangers STOLE Alex Kovalev last year. No one anywhere would deny that they won that deal hands down. Yet there were people, myself included, who despised the deal, not because the Rangers had given up too much, but because the trade represented the to-hell-with-building-we-must-win-now philosophy that has ruled this team for a decade.

Same with Dunham. The value of the trade isn't what matters. What matters is the decision-making that went into the deals and the reason for pulling the trigger.

Although you'd like to claim that this is about the play of Dunham and Zidlicky, you're wrong.

dedalus is offline