Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
It seems like some people are arguing that a top 3 pic is probably going to be better than an 8-10 pick. Well duh. That isn't up for dispute.
The issue though is it worth the trade off?
I look at the growth of Brodie, Backlund, Bouma and others, and I am thankful they are not playing in a more loser-ish environment (for lack of a better word). Would Brodie be as good as he is if the Flames sucked? No one knows of course. But not having Giordano here would definitely make the team worse, and I think it's safe to say that Brodie wouldn't have developed as much as he has if Gio wasn't here.
THAT'S the argument. That's the cost. Obviously a top pick has good chance of being a better player than a later pick. The question is: what is the cost to the other prospects of sucking enough to get that pick?
|
Well its not like its about its a 90 point team vs a 60 point team, what it probably comes down to is probably like 3 wins. Now I'm not saying to throw a game to get those 3 extra losses, but do I think 3 more losses over 82 games, or even multiple years maybe 240 games, will make the difference between a "winning" culture and being lost in purgatory?
not really