Quote:
Originally Posted by JiriHrdina
The funny thing is that nowhere in the post did I say "what we got is good".
One needs to look at the context of the situation to understand why the return was what it was.
The organization is paying for past mistakes - namely not doing this sooner.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!
Supposedly Feaster's demands were a top prospect, a decent prospect, and a 1st.
I think the top prospect was the most important part of the return. I would have rather seen Feaster leave both the 1st and the middling prospect on the table rather than give up on getting a top prospect.
Honest to god, I would rather have had Kaspars Daugavins and Jussi Jokinen off of waivers, over the return that they actually got.
|
Those were good demands, but I don't think they were plausible. With a salary cap, blue chip prospects are almost never traded. Would you give up an A prospect for a couple months of a 36-year-old player who frankly isn't an elite player anymore? Thinking you're getting a top prospect and a first rounder is daydream believing.
You can fairly argue that they could have gotten more 2 years ago. Now? I'm not buying it. Especially given Iginla's NTC, I don't think he could have gotten significantly more. And would I take this over letting him walk for nothing? Yes.