So... No Extension for Edler..?
View Single Post
10-02-2012, 06:42 PM
Join Date: Oct 2010
Originally Posted by
True but we didn't know we were getting Garrison back then, in hindsight I'd take the Hoff at $5m over Ballard. We still had Salo-Bieksa-Tanev (+ continuing conversion attempt on Ballard) for the right side.
It would also have ruled us out of the Schultz sweepstakes before it began (Hoff/Bieksa/Tanev on the right, assuming he was even on Gillis's radar.
The real reason was the big prize - Weber. We were in there trying to get him until Philly screwed things up. It feels like that is what Gillis was planning for when we let Ehrhoff go. Either Bieksa or the Hoff for the second pairing - I we had Weber I'd probably take the Hoff over Bieksa - without Weber I'd take Bieksa. Ballard could always have been moved if we got Weber and Garrison.
I can always dream of what might have been in hindsight (Edler-Weber, Hamhuis-Hoff, Garrison-Tanev)
I agree about Weber & for some reason I forgot about that.
When I was writing my post I was dreaming of a D like this:
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Ehrhoff
Garrison - Tanev
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Scottrockztheworld*