Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainYooh
Well, you could say that about LA last season. But they are back in the game, they are spending money and will likely win a couple more cups in the next 10 years. I don't quite get this long-term investment attitude for an NHL franchise business. What's long-term these days? Star forwards reaching their peak by 23-24 years of age. Star defensemen - a bit later. When DO you invest short-term and pay heavily to get a cup now? Nobody knows at the end of regulation which team has the best chances to win the cup. So, it's always gonna be somewhat a gamble. I believe this is just another politically correct way of saying: "the owners told us not to spend too much money at this point".
Not saying that a team needs to sell its best assets for questionable benefits. But to say that ALL our trades will be only for long-term benefit tells me that the team doesn't even hope for winning the cup in the near future. That's not right. I sincerely hope I am wrong assuming this.
|
You're really off.
We may have a few players reaching their peak production, but not reaching when they're playing their best hockey. Especially defensemen.
Treliving needs to accumulate assets for next year, the year after, etc because caching your chips in for a few bodies now doesn't get the flames a cup, but may in the future. Keep building.
I don't understand your reference to last year's Kings. First off, they're an anomaly. Secondly, by trading pieces for a cup run last year and missing they lost a first round pick and proved a point