Thread: Proposal: Ana-Buf
View Single Post
Old
09-18-2012, 01:36 AM
  #38
tsujimoto74
Registered User
 
tsujimoto74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 8,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
First off, other players have fallen too, and hindsight has shown there was just cause. Cherry picking a few players who fell, but still exceled does not dispute what I said.

Furthermore, I wasn't saying he was a mirror image of Getzlaf. Let's say, like Getzlaf, he can be a top center in the league. Anaheim still has no motivation to move Getzlaf. They already have a fantastic center. Being pedantic isn't an argument. Anaheim is still taking all the risk. There is absolutely no guarantee that Grigorenko becomes even half as good as any of those players you named. Don't get your shackles up because I don't think my team should take a risk on a prospect you like, a prospect the Ducks already had an opportunity to acquire. If he proves the naysayers wrong, great. I'm happy for your team. But Anaheim would be insane to move Getzlaf in hopes that one day Grigorenko might be able to replace him.
I figured it was pretty obvious that the premise of this trade was Getzlaf won't re-up in Anaheim but will work out a deal with Buffalo. In that case, yes, it absolutely makes sense for the Ducks to get assets for him (including a blue chip center prospect that could replace him) rather than letting him walk for nothing. I don't follow the Ducks closely so I don't know what those odds are -- y'all seem to believe the likelihood is very high that Getzlaf will re-sign, and if that happens, then this trade obviously doesn't. Which is fine, because I'm very excited about Grigorenko and can't wait to watch him develop and become a Sabre and would honestly rather keep investing in the youth movement than in a core of players who haven't done anything since Drury and Briere left.


Last edited by tsujimoto74: 09-19-2012 at 12:51 PM.
tsujimoto74 is offline   Reply With Quote