View Single Post
Old
02-19-2013, 11:22 PM
  #66
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glovesave_35 View Post
Sorry man, I'm not buying this. I understand where you're coming from with just looking at every option but piqued is right, there is no surplus in talent anywhere on this team to make a trade of the kind you're proposing; it's almost definitely a lateral move.

This season has seen the Stars bring along a number of young players. Don't pry into your core to make a trade at this point, wait until you know more about your young players. Aside from Dillon and Eakin (and probably Oleksiak) we don't know what we've got, or just how special any of them can be. The point is, theoretically I'm open to trading a loved player for the right price BUT the timing has to be right. The timing here just isn't right.

The Texas Rangers model pre-playoff days was a beauty and something the Stars should follow. When they were developing their young players in the minors and giving them time in the majors they were constantly signing a few veterans in the offseason whom they were more than 50% sure would return a usable asset via trade midseason. Some of those players turned into prospects who turned into players or were shipped off elsewhere to bring in other guys who played/are playing for them. That model takes one important thing that the Stars haven't demonstrated a penchant for - giving precedence to long term success by giving up on the short term to make it happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fly Like a C5 View Post
If we accept the premise that Loui has peaked and that his 36 goal season was an anomaly, we are still left with a player who can score 25-30 goals while having Selke caliber defense. Loui's success isn't based on speed or physicality, but on his outstanding hockey sense. That means that he should be able to continue to play a high level for at least 6 or 7 more seasons. A player like that is very valuable. Not only does he bring goal scoring and excellent defense to the team; he's a veteran for younger players to emulate. In the next two years the team is going to have to replace Jagr, Whitney, Ryder, and Morrow and that means several young guys playing in the top 6. You're going to want some reliable and experienced players to help steady those young guys. The only way trading Eriksson truly helps the team is if he gets Dallas a young #1 defenseman. Trading Eriksson for Morrow and Despres is a lateral move. Guys like Karlsson and Pietrangelo are very rarely available. Joe should be willing to listen to any offer for a Dallas player, but you don't give any consideration to a deal unless it involves a young #1D.
Good points fellas. And I can't say I really disagree with anything. Like I said, not saying we need to trade him, just saying it could be worth kicking tires to see if anyone will give something that WILL make it worth pulling the trigger. If nothing is available or offered, fine. The point isn't to get rid of Eriksson. The point is that he is someone teams could back up the truck for. And when you look up and down the lineup, hes the one guy approaching the area of 30 that would bring in anything substantial. Everyone else is either Kari, under 25, or not worth a lot on the market.

I'd argue that getting a couple good young players (whether defensemen or forwards) wouldn't necessarily be a lateral move though. Not if we get two high caliber players in return who are younger. But that's an IF - which is basically what this is based on.


Last edited by tjcurrie: 02-20-2013 at 12:27 AM.
tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote