Quote:
Originally Posted by kyuss275
I have not gone through every post, but has it been talked about that this is the 2nd move the flames have made this season with a player with Burke connection's?
I wonder if it's just coincidence, or if Burke is pulling more strings than originally said?
|
Burke said all along that Feaster will act with his guidance. It's Feaster's job to find out who might be available and tell Burke about it. Burke has full authority to tell Feaster to negotiate a trade for Smid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by moon
Isn't his connection that he came in and traded him away after about 1 year in the job?
Now he got Pronger back so understandable why he dealt him but it doesn't seem like a guy he identified, drafted/traded for and then integrated into his team.
Seems more like coincidence than a guy Burke would have identified as a guy the Flames should get.
|
Considering that Burke traded Lupul in the same deal and apparently targeted him when he was a Flyer and ended up trading for him years later, the fact that Burke traded Smid in a deal for Pronger does not preclude Smid from being a guy Burke identified and targeted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by moon
I think that the Feaster comments about them talking for 3 weeks prior to the deal and the Tencer comments indicate that the Smid trade was about Smid as a player and not them dumping him for salary concerns (especially since they didn't really have any) but if people think it was a salary dump that didn't have to do with Smid as a player they are free to think that.
|
It's a bit of both. Tencer suggests that MacT identified Smid as a guy who wasn't going to fit in as part of the team's top 4 defense going forward and wanted to dump his salary. It's like Tallon trading David Booth a few years back. It's both about Booth the player and the trade being a salary dump.