View Single Post
12-09-2012, 12:15 PM
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 16,172
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Both teams benefiting is not the barometer between a win/loss, asset value is. This is the point that is being missed here. For instance, what helps more? Lupul or a top5 draft pick? The pick isn't going to help the team win, but Lupul will. So the natural answer is Lupul -> But that doesn't mean Lupul brings more _value_ back in the deal. That is the crux of the argument. Asset value matters more than supplementary pieces.

This is black and white for a reason. It is an ideology that has carried weight amongst many GMs over many years of practice. They the know the power of _quality_ in an asset vs. quantity, or even the short-term benefits. Quality trumps all, as that quality is more likely to stay within the organization longer while other pieces fade out.
Except teams are constantly willing to 'lose' trades in terms of value to address team needs. We see 1st rd picks dealt for Paul Gaustads at every trade deadline.

Fans are always dumbfounded by how much teams overpay at the trade deadline for marginal talents. Thats because there is more to this formula than strictly winning a deal based on asset value. Winning hockey games...

Drop the Sopel is offline