: Salary Cap:
Penguins 2013 (and beyond) lineup discussion | Contract chart in Post #1
View Single Post
01-13-2013, 01:44 PM
Join Date: Aug 2005
Originally Posted by
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
So basically, you want to criticize Shero for making a great, big time trade that minimized risk and paid off incredibly well.
I don't really want my GM making risky trades all the time just for the sake of making risky trades. Only a panicky idiot does that with a contender. We have a lot going right for us, we don't need to shake the foundation every deadline.
Yep, KIRK's playing a bit fast and loose with the facts there.
1. So, which time was Shero a panicky idiot, 2008 or last year? Both times, you had Sid coming back from an injury and the team absolutely flying, looking primed for a cup run. He needed winger help and the defense needed a stable defensive presence. In 2008, he had fewer assets to deal, and he dealt a pair of Kennedy caliber guys, his previous year's first, a first, a second, and a fourth for an elite rental winger, a rental role player, and a defenseman with another year on his deal who was playing like absolute garbage at the time. Last year, with more assets at his disposal, he stood pat.
2. Kind of counterintuitive, if you ask me, to suggest that a GM has to be willing to take risks is the equivalent of wanting a GM to take risks all the time. I'd settle for Shero taking a risk ONCE, which is something he hasn't done of his own volition since the Pens won the cup.
3. Gogloski was 3rd on the team in ice time because of some injuries and PP time, no. What was his ES time when EVERYONE was healthy? Orpik played with Letang. Martin played with Michalek, which means Golgoski was #5 on the depth chart (oh, and by the way, that preseason, Despres had killed it in camp). So, Shero dealt the #5 defenseman on his depth chart for a legit, young 30 goal scoring winger and a young #5 defenseman who'd been a first round pick. Yeah, that sure was risky.
You want to argue against Shero taking a specific risk, then that's fine. But, stripped of all disguise, it's pretty clear that your position is that anything riskier than a Gologoski for Neal and Niskanen type of deal is idiotic.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by KIRK