Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
Huh? A rebuild isn't justified by prospects. A rebuild is called for when you are intellectually honest and realize that your best players are declining and/or close to retiring (Kiprusoff) and that you need to trade them now to acquire good prospects to jumpstart the rebuild so it doesn't take 7-10 years. Doing this helps you by acquiring the prospects and picks from trading your best players while also making your team worse which makes your own 1st rounder more valuable and more likely to land your next franchise player. Feaster arguably did this a year too late and arguably failed to get good value for Iginla. It's unclear how much he had his hands tied by ownership but then he shouldn't be spouting off about intellectual honesty and selling off players if it was an empty threat.
It's like you have it backwards. You don't start a rebuild when you have good prospects. You rebuild when your team can't contend anymore and now you need to acquire good prospects.
Somehow I get the feeling we aren't going to agree on much lol.
|
I think that's one way to doing it. Look at Vancouver, they have Baertschi, Virtanen and Horvat developing at the NHL level while having "over-the-hill" Sedins and Vrbrata hold the fans over who desire a competitive hockey club. It's rebuild on the fly vs. scorched earth. I think a rebuild is very much justified on what parts you have to build from.
I think to say there's only one way to rebuild a franchises core assets is naïve or arrogant.