View Single Post
05-11-2013, 04:46 PM
Upoil's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 875
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Yossarian54 View Post
Yes, I realise that. But that is the purest case of '20/20 hindsight' (and I mean that with its negative connotation) you will ever see.

Imagine if we were about to start a 7 game play-off series. Your number 1 goalie is injured. Which option do you think gives us a better chance to win: playing one of the best goal tenders of the last 10 years, or playing a goal tender with a total of 14 games AHL experience?

The choice is blindingly obvious. It's still blindingly obvious even if you factor in a trade return. You can't play a draft pick in a play-off game. A player returned in a trade, unless it's Sidney ****ing Crosby (and perhaps not even then), doesn't change that. Ben Scrivens doesn't change that.

Here is my contention: had Gillis moved Luongo at the trade deadline, our sweep by the Sharks would have been partially, if not fully, blamed on that very move. Not moving Luongo at the deadline was good asset management, because the reported potential returns were not great enough to outweigh the contingency of having a top-10 NHL goal tender as your backup. It looks to be an even better decision because the injury occurred, and the contingency was required.
Great points. Well articulated! Couldn't agree more.

Good post.

Upoil is offline   Reply With Quote