View Single Post
01-07-2014, 04:33 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Da Big Apple
Country: United States
Posts: 12,853
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
The taking two or three steps back is darn easy.

How do you take four five steps forward in the coming years? Nobody is giving even a remotely plausible scenario for how to accomplish that in four five years.
Nothing is automatic, my friend.
Everything has risks.

You are weighing the risk of keeping assets who should deteriorate over time versus the risk of replacing, and if you replace with the wrong assets, even if they are in better condition, you go backwards.

It's a crapshoot; our consolation is we are mostly picking good lately, so we should use that to our advantage.

The Black Hawks were beyond terribad horrible, then got Towes and Kane and a couple of asset like Sharp and a few others fell into place and --- voila! They can win/compete and still draft guys like Beach (bustimundo so far) and McNeil (not a bust but disappointing and behind schedule). Why? One, they also draft guys like Saad. Two, they make smart decisions. They remind me of the 49ers of yesteryear. They knew when to trade for Garrison Hearst, when to deal him, and for how much both times.

It's lunacy to expect Sather and even his heir apparent to match the late truly great Bill Walsh, greatest GM ever IMO.

But we have Kreider and McDonagh, not to mention Hank, and a coupla others. We just need to convert a certain amount of actual assets into a larger number of greater potential quality assets.

You add enough, then percentages work in your favor (subject to certain assumptions like your GM is not a total idiot who gets the draft wrong EVERY time).

It's not easy, certainly not automatic, but it is do-able

bernmeister is offline