Quote:
Originally Posted by AR_Six
It's surprising to me to see people jumping to the conclusion that "of course Gillis is full of crap and no such deal or team exists".
The idea that a GM is flat out lying about a factual matter seems less than likely to me. I am used to GMs being dishonest about opinion matters - i.e. "We're very confident in our goaltending situation with Scrivens and Reimer", or "We have no current plans to do X" (well, what constitutes a "plan" in your mind?) and things that you can sort of fudge or equivocate on. That I can see. But someone coming out and saying something demonstrably untrue like "there is a deal in place with club X pending them doing something with a guy on their roster"? I guess Holmgren lied to an agent about the Richards trade but it just doesn't seem like something that happens terribly often.
|
GM's flat out lie all the time. Most coaching changes or big trades are preceded by a vote of confidence, for instance.
But the point in this case is that there is no point to Gillis revealing that he might have a trade done, pending another deal by the other team. He has nothing to gain by saying this if it is true - he just bides his time and completes the transaction when he can.
However, consider this: Consider the theory that the Canucks have a deal in principle with a team, say Philly, pending their ability to move someone, say Bryzgalov. You are the GM of say, the Sharks, and you are taking to Philly about Bryzgalov. Now you know that the Flyers are desperate to make this move so they can get Luongo. As the GM of the Sharks, you might lower your offer to take advantage of Philly's perceived position of desperation.
Gillis doesn't help his own team out by saying this, but he can hurt his theoretical trading partner. It doesn't make sense if there is a real trade But trying to sell his own fan base, or trying to sell a wavering suitor does make sense..