Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
Well we don’t know but it seems like the Flames wanted to move on so perhaps whatever happened could not be repaired
Your post speaks to checking egos and if he wasn’t willing to do that do you agree that you have to part ways?
|
I think regardless, the fact that they got an anchor in every way (as a player and as a contract), was a very bad deal. I didn't like Neal the player last year. I posted he was a loser when he essentially played lazy, but I don't think the addition by subtraction approach is smart when logic would dictate he should regress to his norm. I had no problem dealing Neal at all. But at the expense of Lucic, it was a resounding no. The only thing I can hope for as a fan is that Lucic gets taken by Seattle and the 3rd round pick turns out to be a great pick. But that's the ultimate outcome. This trade to me was bad at the time, and now has been much worse than originally thought. To answer your original question, I still think you have to play the card that you want to make it work with him to the point that you play it like you're going to love him until it hurts, because getting an anchor of a contract in a cap world is a terrible scenario.