Thread: Speculation: Evander Kane
View Single Post
Old
07-13-2013, 01:00 PM
  #87
Iron Duke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
It's an extreme example; I'm aware he's not that good. The point I was getting at is that blithe whining about "he's just too much of a ***** to give up the needed assets to Get The Deal Done" in the absence of context is patently absurd.

See, I'm willing to bet that when folks make that complaint, it's because they're convinced that if they tack on just one more piece that hurts depth slightly, then that constitutes "enough pain for us" and therefore it's the way to close the deal, but that folks who don't like that "pain" are going to not have the strength of character to do that. When in fact the usual "pain" required isn't in terms of more depth players given up, but players higher up on the depth chart - it's not "Ellis + 1st and we'll just have to stretch to include Beck BUT IT WILL BE WORTH IT", it's "Jones + 1st".

I suspect that manages to evade a lot of people, despite the fact that it's demonstrated repeatedly in plain sight on T&R every single time every fan of The Other Team makes a counteroffer.
Well, and we clearly know how it feels in the reverse. How often are we being pitched something like Weber for Gagner, Hemsky, 1st, and our counter is for two of the Big 4+. It's really tough to get a true sense of player value unless you really watch a ton of hockey and see every team on a semi-consistent basis. There's more to player value than just the stat sheets.

Iron Duke is offline   Reply With Quote