View Single Post
Old
02-25-2014, 04:28 PM
  #94
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 10,883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raspewtin View Post
That's not what I meant.

People are talking like if we lose Callahan, losing Girardi is absolutely not an option. They have nothing to do with each other.
I disagree. Downgrading the roster in two areas is worse than downgrading the roster in one. Callahan for a few months isn't going to bring back an equal player signed beyond that. Girardi, even with a contract, is probably not going to bring back a guy who is a 1D today, or can play 1D passably today. Say they bring back good prospects. That's great, but this team this year, and maybe even next, is weaker at RW and D.

Personally, I'd like to see a trade deadline pass without massive, massive roster turnover. Gaborik for all those guys last year made sense at least. Trading Callahan makes sense. I don't think trading Girardi does short of a blockbuster steal.

I know that around here, downgrading the team today is seen as a means to a better pick, but I'd imagine on the ice and in the locker room, the players want to win yesterday, today and tomorrow. It sends a bad message to sell off two pieces that are really emblematic of the team's culture at once, especially when one of them is willing to take a reasonable contract that other, good teams are willing to sign him to, and even more so when you don't have replacements lined up for either of them. I'd like the players to be happy with the team as much as possible so that we can avoid this circus every time a good player is creeping toward UFA.

haveandare is offline