Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew
You can't perpetually rebuild. The Jokinen trade made sense to me at the time. In hindsight you are right. And obviously Sutter made some bad deals, there is no debating this. But he also left the team with some nice pieces.
I don't know what an asset diminishing trade really means. Most trades are assets for assets, sometimes they are about potential for present value. If a trade makes you older, is it asset diminishing? Is trading 3 high picks for 5 years of Dougie Hamilton worth it if you know your team won't be a contender during that time? Do you really need to pay top dollar for Troy Brouwer for veteran leadership when you don't expect to be a contender during any of the prime years of his contract? Do you trade a high second round pick for a backup goalie with one year on his deal if you are rebuilding? Why are you buying a guy out of his contract in a year when you're not a contender, creating a cap burden for the following year?
My point is that current management hasn't really shown they are good at this rebuilding thing, and I'm not prepared to give then credit for it. All they've done is have the luxury of high draft picks by fielding a crappy team, and holding auctions for their pending UFA's at the deadline. That's not yet enough for me to say they are so different from previous regimes.
|
I don't think there is enough evidence yet.
The only serious mis-step so far has been re-signing Giordano in my opinion, everything else has been relatively smooth sailing from a rebuild perspective.