Quote:
Originally Posted by Kipper_3434
Lots of talk here about the gm's job. How about replacing the 2 best puck moving defencemen this team lost for nothing in back to back seasons?
|
Yeah, it’s hard to come back from something like that. Our defence now just isn’t very mobile nor are they a strong play driving group.
Just unfortunate how the team, which was already top-end talent starved, has had its skill base erode in the last few years. Losing Brodie and now Gio? That’s just not something you really march forward from without falling on your face.
I don’t agree that Tanev “replaced” Brodie, or that it’s a wash. They’re different types of d-men. I’d say Tanev brought in what Hamonic was supposed to originally. I think Tanev being signed would have improved upon Hamonic and made the team better…instead we also lost Brodie, and Andersson is a far ways off from being as good as Brodie.
It really hammers home just how much toxic contracts can throw things off. Had we never signed Neal, we wouldn't have a 4th liner making $5.25M - which then would have allowed us to retain Brodie and sign Tanev - and then who knows who gets selected in expansion, but assuming they still took Gio, how much better does this look:
Hanifin - Brodie
Valimaki - Tanev
Zadarov - Andersson
Vs.
Hanifin - Tanev
Zadarov - Andersson
Valimaki - Gudbranson
(hard to talk about what ifs, as one move impacts the next - but still...toxic contracts are killer)