View Single Post
02-16-2013, 02:20 PM
garret9's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 19,035
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Brogosian View Post
I don't get this though. Why do you trade away pieces that can help you win to acquire draft picks that may or may not develop into pieces that may help you win in the future?

It doesn't make sense. A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. If you wanted to trade say, Kane, because you thought he was too one dimensional or causes problems, then I get that. However, he is a player that other GM's would trade actual young NHL'ers for. Those players are ALWAYS worth more than draft picks.

If you want to trade a guy like Antropov because you don't see us making the playoffs. I get that too. He and Hainsey are the kinds of guys that trading for picks make sense.

If you are talking about trading a guy like Burmistrov for picks, you lost me. This guy is right on the edge of being a very important hockey player to a winning team. He is a core piece and you don't move that, unless you are getting a core piece back.
Because this is how armchair gm works.
Draft picks>prospects>roster
Burmi and Kane are 3-4 years out of draft... If we traded for draft picks cos of "highest value" (which I'd like to know how he can tell the future, especially when players usually peek at 24-25 for pts/gp so it is highly unlikely) like that we'd become a yearly bottom team and become the farm team for the NHL

garret9 is offline