Quote:
Originally Posted by Monahammer
Context is king. In the post you replied to, the continuing argument largely surrounds whether trading Monahan and Gaudreau would constitute a full rebuild, not necessarily whether a full rebuild is the right path forward.
By your identification of the core players, I would surmise that you believe we could trade one or both of Monahan and Gaudreau while remaining competitive. I agree with you. I disagree strongly with Flash that we should use these players to target middling pieces that can play now. That is how we wind up with Phaneuf trades and look like idiots.
|
Very reasonable observation. What the Flames currently lack is pace and drive up front, and simply adding more serviceable components is unlikely to fill the gap. If the Flames were to deal Gaudreau and/or Monahan they really need to have the fortitude to accept some risk and look for higher picks and prospects with high ceilings. It's easy to understand why some managers tend to pursue the known commodity, as the risk of absolute failure is negated, but that type of thinking generally lends itself to mediocrity. It would be counterproductive to deal either of these players if you don't have the potential to obtain potential game changers in return, and that is unlikely to happen in a classic "hockey trade".
Given his history I would say it is quite unlikely Treliving would embrace a risk aggresive philosophy, so hopefully the Flames stick with the known quantity and avoid merely flipping some deck chairs.