Holmgren DOESN'T deserve to get fired
View Single Post
11-12-2013, 07:42 AM
Provolone & The Neck
Join Date: Sep 2009
Originally Posted by
What, so you think every playoff team should trade away their firsts until it causes a team collapse when that becomes unsustainable? So, do what the Flyers did...trade your picks and prospects until you're no longer a contender. That seems dumb. In fact, that's a terrible strategy.
As I stated earlier, no, that is not what I think a team should do. But I do think that if you are close, and a trade is there, you make it. Why wouldn't you? I understand your thinking, that doing that every year will hurt the future of the team because you won't have any picks. But the picks that you are trading are to improve a team that is close to the Cup. What's the point of having all those draft picks if your team is close every year but not over the top? So you can have younger players? So you can have a lower salary cap number? Those things mean nothing if you aren't bring home the hardware.
Do you really think the lack of draft picks from 2007-2010 is why this team is in the shape it is in? Which players would you remove from this roster and replace with theoretical draft picks? John Carlson? You think John Carlson and a bunch of mediocre prospects is the difference between this team sucking and being a contender (look at the players chosen around where the Flyers would have picked...not much there)? Or maybe then JvR doesn't get traded. So now you have John Carlson and JvR. NOW we are contending!
I'm not saying that you HAVE to trade your picks to win. But when you are contending for a Cup, which the Flyers were in this time frame, if you can improve your chances to win the Cup, you do it.
How about this: Build responsibly so you don't have to irresponsibly trade high picks and young talent away for years in a desperate attempt to shore up holes.
The young talent that was traded was mostly for other young talent. It's not like Carter/Richards/JvR were traded for rentals or aging vets. In fact, weren't they all traded for younger talent?
And again, I'd love to have all the draft picks and all the young players and still compete. But that is a lot easier said than done. You want a Hall of Fame defender? You are going to pay for it (either by trading big time for him, or sucking for years until you can draft him (or get lucky with a diamond in the rough)). You need a scoring winger at the trade deadline? Oh, you want one that is under 25 and under contract for another year? Well, that isn't going to be free. You want the rights to two of the top free agents on the market that will have an extremely positive impact on your team? You have to pay for that too!
Yes, he's squandered some picks. Eminger and Carcillo, come to mind. Those are trades I would go back and undo (I'm sure there's more too that I would undo). The rest? I think he made the right choice at the time. Hindsight is always 20/20, but those trades involving the high picks like Pronger/Timonen/Hartnell/Versteeg are all deals I would do every day of the week.
Would you do the Pronger deal?
The Timonen/Hartnell deal?
The Versteeg deal?
That sounds smarter, doesn't it?
Sure it does. But again, it is easier said than done. And even when done it doesn't always work out the way you want. See: Edmonton, NYI, Columbus, San Jose, Vancouver, and the slew of other teams that either have sucked for a decade and kept their picks without making the jump or have kept their picks and are contending but nothing more.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DrinkFightFlyers