Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
Pretty simple actually. His performance exceeds any other year he's played. To keep him you have to believe that this performance is the new normal for him. I don't. I also look at acquisition cost versus the potential benefit of moving him. We are likely in a big advantage in benefit versus cost. The whole idea for rebuilding teams is to get better over the long term by dealing away short term assets. Russell is a very short term asset. Using your same logic the Flames shouldn't deal Stajan because he's been our best center. The Flames should deal away Cammalleri because he's been our best goal scorer. The Flames shouldn't trade away Stempniak because he's been our best character player. You have expiring contracts you have to evaluate where they fit in the long term plan and deal accordingly. None of the players on expiring contracts fit in the team long term, especially Russell.
|
First of all, unlike Stajan, Russell is still getting better.
As to the bold - acquisition cost is irrelevant. If you had a stock worth $30 would you sell it for $25 just because you only paid $10 for it? An asset is worth what it is currently worth, no more no less, regardless of what you paid for it.