The case for a 1-year surgical tank for the Habs
View Single Post
08-11-2012, 07:19 PM
Join Date: Sep 2004
Originally Posted by
You and others are milking an assumption about Gauthier's not trying to get more than he did for Cammalleri. You're relying on plausibility but that doesn't make a case. It reminds me of the even shakier assertion that Gauthier was as at least as responsible as Gainey for the Gomez trade. Mark me down as skeptical about both.
Fact is that feasted made it clear gather had been trying to get bourque for a long time... Meaning we had not met the asking price.
Clammy spouts off, and the deal gets closed within a day...
Add to that the post trade comments that at least some gms around the league had no idea clammy was in the block before getting traded, and I'd say that your skepticism is misplaced or misdirected.
As fans, we will never know the full story, but connecting the dots on some moves is easier than others... In this case, the dots point to PG making the deal he wanted for the asset he wanted vs shopping the player around to gauge the possible returns available.
And to point out... While I think it's bad management practice to not properly find out what your assets are worth, I do think GMs need to at times be bold enough to specifically target certain assets almost regardless of the cost to land them (bourque certainly does not qualify for that)...
And, I think the clammy trade was at least decent for us ignoring what "may" have been offered by other teams.
That's to say the trade itself wasn't so bad, just the apparent process used to get there. In management, process and culture are king, and PG failed at both.
View Public Profile
Miller Time's albums
Find More Posts by Miller Time