In (Partial) Defense Of Scott Howson's Recent Trade History
View Single Post
09-25-2012, 11:51 AM
Join Date: Nov 2011
Originally Posted by
I only read four comments and they were all positive, so i stopped reading assuming it would only god own hill from there.
to the OP:
Great post. I"m a bit of a closet Blue Jackets fan (everyone loves an underdog) and my take was: At the time of trade, the carter trade was fine, a 40-50 point forward and a first for a consistent 60-80 point forward? not bad.
Then of course, as you stated, it all went to hell. Even at the draft time it was pretty close to a loss, add in the carter issues and yah, it didn't look good.
The LA trade was great. A very good d man and a first for the shell of a 60+ point forward? sign me up. that was a definite "everybody wins" trade.
Finally, the nash trade was not bad. Howson DID shoot himself in the foot by making that trade request public, and probably could have gotten a little bit better, but even then, a very decent return (i'm also an inexplicable fan of Anisimov so i'm a little biased).
Good too see someone sharing the view, though i do think Howson is quite bad as a gm, maybe not due to this string of trades, but someone must be responsible for the piss poor development rate of their players
That's the thing, all the trades were fine however its the moves that Howson didn't make, not the moves he did make that were the problem.
It doesn't matter how good or bad your lineup is, when your starting goalie puts up a save% of 0.894 it makes your team suck. The Rangers (top in the East) would have finished 2nd last if they had Mason in net.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DJOpus