: Prospect Info:
David Musil vs. Oscar Klefbom
View Single Post
02-18-2014, 08:59 PM
Now 11.5% more Zen
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Originally Posted by
I wasn't aware that we were in the hunt for the Stanley Cup when we traded Penner.
It's almost like context doesn't exist.
Were we in the hunt for icing an actual NHL team capable of competing?
Your comment is kind of silly. Because essentially with this you are stating the Oil weren't in the game anyway so may as well toss their chips in anyway. Nothing lost because nothing was to be gained.
But what an org loses should be obvious in reference to where we are. That when it loses veteran assets like Souray, Penner, Vishnovsky, its a series of questionable decisions that culminates in a club that becomes so completely bad. I'll never buy that should be the objective of any org to completely tarnish their brand like that. This team didn't become bad, or uncompetitive it became pathetic as a result of a series of bad decisions (many more have been listed).
The LA KINGS accomplished their immediate objective, already done, already cashed in the chips. They got the elusive cup the org had never won before. Penner had a good playoffs and was a part of it.
The Oilers, like any teams, objective should be in getting reasonable reflection of asset back
The Kings asset paid off. The Oilers much deferred asset is still in the mix and we don't know. WE do alredly know that the one part of the asset mix was an entire crash and burn.
I did want to introduce the concept that immediate assets are not the same thing as long range deferred assets and with immediate assets of course being preferential. It seems as if this differential value hasn't even been considered in the discussion.
Unless you buy the whole "we're just trying to suck and make this the worst team possible" posthoc revision that the org foisted on a fanbase at some point after they made the trade.
Last edited by Replacement: 02-18-2014 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Replacement