Thread: Wade Redden
View Single Post
Old
01-28-2013, 12:45 PM
  #4
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,426
vCash: 500
no loss imo.

the guy has 2 goals in as many games, after not playing in the NHL for 2+ years. i doubt he continues this point streak.

there was a reason he didn't play for the Rangers for years. he was behind a pool of talented young Dmen, he was aging and losing his ability to surpass them. it's possible and most likely the case here in LA also.

at some point you have to bring up the 'kids' and see if they can do it. what if the Kings did bring him in last season or now? where does that leave Voynov, AMart and now Muzzin in their development? that pushes at least one of them down into MAN.

Hickey couldn't make the cut and he never saw a game with LA. you can't continue to sign big name vets and 'take a chance' at the expense of the home grown talent you put time and money into. otherwise what's the point of drafting at all?

you draft and develop talent and work from an inside-out philosophy, one that builds from within. this is how you build a team that competes each and every year. taking 'a chance' on Redden means we don't see Muzzin now. for him to 'get his chance' after busting his hump in MAN. it also means Whiskey doesn't get his chance to step in and contribute.

so far Muzzin and Whiskey have played well and in time, their value increases (hopefully) that at some point it gives DL a 'tough decision'. remember the last 'tough decision' from last season? that was Voynov pushing JJ out and letting DL go after Carter.

we saw for decades where that got the Kings. no place fast when it came to playoff and Stanley Cup results. the only thing it accomplished was for aging vets to grab a quick contract before retirement in most cases

"Why is he good enough for the Blues but not us?"

the Blues aren't as deep on the blueline as LA, or NYR have been the past few years.

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote