Quote:
Originally Posted by Da_Chief
Hmm no. This is a trade for a pick. When you trade a player for player then you can debate if player A would've been better then player B. In this case did he have bubble teams offering him a earlier 2nd? no, did he contenders offering a last 1st no?
Treiliving clrealy said the return might get worse by Monday that's why he pulled the trigger. His opinion, he's the one making decisions. He made a judgement call.
I'm not one of those people that rags Feaster for the Iginla trade. He could've done better in Boumeester trade but for Iggy, he clearly only wanted to go to Pittsburgh. Trade him there or lose him nothing. Sure he could have held on for longer and potentially get a better or worse value from Pittsburgh. We'll never know. Btw, I'm very high on Agostino still so hopefully it's a good trade in Flames history.
Let me ask you though, what would've been a sufficient return?
|
Yes, a trade for a player is different. But it still applies. Saying he got the best he could says it couldn't have been better. And if he waited, it might have been better.
As for what I thought would be a good trade: as I have said, it was an ok return - anything better than a 4th 2 years from now would have been fine.
I went in thinking: a 2nd and a 3rd was the line in the sand (i.e. a good return). Two 2nds would be a very good return. A 2nd and a prospect - depending on the prospect - would have been a great return.
Packaging him in a hockey trade was also a possibility.
Lots of different options. So saying 'it's the best he could have got' is kind of meaningless since we simply don't know that.