Quote:
Originally Posted by fleury
Fair. Does it make it right that they sold their asset at the bottom of his value and replaced him with a larger problem? If there's a communication problem between team and the player, fix it. Give him every opportunity to show some potential than deal him. It's the player and contract that the Flames got back that's the problem. The fact that Neal is doing this well, nobody at all could have seen coming. The fact he was better than he was here isn't, and if he was in fact tanking because he was sulking, then a simple discussion to get to the root of it should have been in line with management. I'm totally against trading players at their bottom when it's not in line with their average years. Getting back slow bones at that much of a cap hit was the icing on the cake.
|
No, Neal is/was the larger problem on the Flames. His value was never going to get higher here. He had already played his way off the team.
I don’t understand the fans who can’t recognize that Neal played himself off the team last year. All year they tried to get his value back. They fed him ice time he didn’t deserve trying to get him going and get his value back. They wasted a whole season on Neal and his godawful play. He was NEVER going to get another chance to redeem himself after an entire season of failing to show up.
He HAD to be dealt this summer. And obviously it had to be for another bad contract. That is the reality of the situation. A reality some people seem to be in denial of. You are an example of this.