: News Article:
Mathias Brunet Worries Gauthier Still Allowed to Make Trades
View Single Post
01-20-2012, 02:19 PM
Join Date: Apr 2007
Originally Posted by
What youth was moved? Are you referring to D'agostini, Sergei, Lapierre and O'byrne? Which of these guys would be the difference maker today. The Sergei trade sucked, but we're not even close to knowing whether or not the return in the D'agotini or O'byrne trade has been maximized. You said later in the post that you judge on a case by case basis, as of right now two of the "youth" trades under Gauthier can't even be fully evaluated.
Wisniewski and Moore performed their duties exceptionally well. They were two very sucessful rentals.
Aside from the two 2nds for rentals, which assets did we lose that would change the entire make up this team into a more positive image?
Isn't that what mortgaging the future is? Selling potential long-term gains for short-term ones? That is exactly what your post implied.
How has it been well established? This is pure speculation.
That's all I need to know about the situation, but we have no proof other than speculation that the ones is directly influencing the latter. If that is the case, then how can we blame Gauthier for these trades if he isn't the man behind them at all.
Also it is guilt by association. You are assuming that because one worked under the other that they must have agreed in regards to the moves made. You are assuming that the two cannot disagree and are lumping the moves made by one on the other. There are stories that Andre Savard under Gainey wanted Carter instead of AK and Kopitar instead of Price. Here are two instances where someone working under another can disagree with the moves made. So it's a fallacy to say that they "agreed on all moves", you don't know that, it's pure speculation.
You say you follow trades and transactions on a case by case basis yet you take things out of context. You just on the other page spoke negatively about the Moore trade, but failed to take into account that as a rental(which is a common occurence in the nhl) that the Moore trade was highly successful. As was the Wisniewski trade as a rental.
I don't think Gauthier has been excellent by any means, but negativity has been a gross exaggeration. He's been average and I don't think there is any one move or combination of moves that are enough to warrant a firing.
Sigh, you just don't get it, and proceeded to type way more than I care to respond to. But cliff's notes:
Who are the players/assets than have been brought in to replace the spots of Kostitsyn, Grabovski, Ribeiro, D'Agostini, Lapierre, O'Byrne, and how are they performing/valued compared to those players on their new teams?
You keep going on about the success of the Moore/Wisniewski deals, but I'm commenting on the lack of success keeping them in the organization when they obviously filled their roles well and contributed to making us a better team.
And if financial reasons prevented keeping them, it sure looks silly on a guy who was involved in tying up money in Cammy/Gio/Gomez, only to see him unloading two of them for whatever they can get halfway through the contracts he gave them so soon afterwards.
"Mortgaging the future", to me, implies a full scale and deliberate process of unloading youth for experience, whereas we've been talking about "minor" transactions involving both influx/effluent of veterans AND youth/picks, whose cumulative effect seems to be making us worse. I see huge difference in the two, but apparently you don't, and that's fine.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Ohashi_Jouzu