View Single Post
07-31-2013, 08:24 PM
Registered User
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 25,218
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
- extending DD
- extending Bouillion
- Trading Cole for Ryder (who played exactly how you'd expect him to play, arguably on the high end of productivity, yet season ends and the team has zero interest in retaining him) *and i like that move in terms of asset management*
- Signing Briere
- trading a smallish AHL/NHL prospect for an even smaller AHL/NHL prospect
- keeping all 6 top-90 draft picks (and using 2 of them on undersized forwards)

I don't see how any of these decisions fits with the stated objective of making the team "harder to play against"...
And you'll find that the only rationale people come up with defending many of those moves involve comparisons to other transactions that have been deemed "worse". I mean, that's basically admitting that as stand alone moves they're questionable (at best), if that's the main line of defense reasoning. If the Habs' moves were the only ones made by any team in the NHL all year, how would they look? Horrible, I submit, but in fairness they aren't the only moves/changes so far.

Ohashi_Jouzu is online now   Reply With Quote