View Single Post
Old
01-23-2013, 08:46 AM
  #38
RedMachine87
Registered User
 
RedMachine87's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: A^2
Country: United States
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by detredWINgs View Post
Whenever I hear that an underperforming player is demanding a trade because he is "unhappy" with the situation, the ice time, etc, all I hear is "I refuse to take responsibility for my lackluster play and instead place the blame squarely on my team and organization."

As if that weren't enough, there is absolutely no point in trading valuable prospects like Tatar and Nyquist for unproven forwards. If we're open to trading the cream of our prospect crop, it needs to be for a proven defenseman.
Underperforming is the wrong choice of word here. He sucked last year on the Islanders because he was poorly utilized, playing on a checking line with players that cannot generate offense. This year, as a 20 year old, he put up 36 points in 39 games in the AHL. He is also 6'2" 210 pounds and projects to be a power forward. The wings have plenty of smallish, skilled forwards; they dearly need big, skilled forwards.

The NHL has changed in that there are more big, mobile and skilled players than ever before. For that reason, a roster full of small, albeit very talented, forwards is not going to compete. With all the parity you need a mix of size and skill. Especially if your defense is lacking.

I never said trade Nyquist for him, but trading Tatar for him would be intelligent asset management and could very well benefit both clubs in time.

Yes, the wings need a proven, top four defenseman. But it's silly to think that is our only hole right now.

RedMachine87 is offline   Reply With Quote