View Single Post
Old
01-14-2013, 07:12 AM
  #854
Fozz
Registered User
 
Fozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoalJudge View Post
But it's not really years of losing. It's literally 48 games. With the right trades we could end up with 6 picks in the top 60, one of those being top 5. In a deep draft!

That means in the past 2 years we'd have done the rebuilding that some teams take 5 years to achieve.

Gally
Colberg
Hudon
Vail
Thrower
Top 5
1st(traded for)
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd (traded for)

In basically a year and a half's worth of games. No brainer.
You don't think we have enough with:
Gally
Colberg
Hudon
Vail
Thrower
AND
1st
2nd
2nd
2nd?

Add and solid stable of young d-men and guys like Kristo and Leblanc and that's more than enough to build a good young core around. Like it or not, the team is already in good shape for the future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Krautso View Post
I'm all for trading vets on expiring contracts to make way for young guys who are ready to step in. Thats a key part of rebuilding. I'm not supportive of trading everyone we can for picks with no thought to what kind of team we would ice just because some people have a stronger stomach for watching bad hockey and losing.

I think the GM position needs to be held to a higher standard. Its his job to balance present/future and to find deals (like paccioretty). Trading everyone for picks and then losing for years on end to stockpile talent is not a strategy I would expect of a professional hockey executive.
I couldn't have said it better.

Fozz is offline