Quote:
Originally Posted by gvitaly
Would you be able to trade either Huberdeau or Kadri for future considerations this offseason without retaining salary?
I don't mind staying positive about their production. It still doesn't change the fact that both those signings looked bad at year 1, and 0 respectively. I get that Tre was better than Feaster and Sutter, but that's still a pretty low bar. I hope Conroy is a much better GM than Tre.
Anyways I'm tired of this discussion. I'm pretty sure you guys see where I'm coming from.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gvitaly
I understand I didn't mention age right off the bat. It's difficult to mention everything without making my posts a km long, resorting to fine print, or hiring a lawyer to make a forum post. I don't mind clarifying what I meant, or agreeing to disagree before repeating the same arguments over and over.
I just find it difficult when I'm having a discussion with one poster that only mentions things he/she/they disagree with. As soon as I reply to that poster, another will find something else to knit pick in the new post, and eventually the argument/point gets derailed altogether.
In this instance I wasn't trying to take shots at Tre, as much as I was suggesting that GMs should be held to a higher standard than 'this move seemed good at a time'. They don't have hindsight, but they spend millions on trying to obtain hindsight in various methods. If a team keeps misevaluating players in trades/free agent signings then there might be something wrong and perhaps it can be tweaked/improved in the decision making process. That's something I hope is done under Conroy. Somehow the argument evolved into well then you can't sign any free agent to long term deals and then into you can't sign any player to a long term deal because we don't have 20/20 hindsight... that wasn't my point. My point was that the Flames kept misjudging veteran players' fit and production before signing them and Huberdeau looked like an instance of where they could've tested it beforehand.
As for the odds(I finally got to the 2nd point of your post, so I apologize for the long read), I can see where you're coming from and I think that betting on a 20-25 year old player to improve is a safer bet than betting on a 30+ year old to play at the same high level for the duration of his retirement contract.
|
Nobody signs a 30+ year old expecting them to not decline at some point. It's a fairly simple consideration of the team's trajectory and where they are in their build-cycle. I don't understand how posters can be so hopeless about the next few years, but worry that we're somehow undermining our potential in the late 2020s.
As for GM standards, IMO you are underestimating the autonomy of every other stakeholder in the league (ie. all players, coaches, and other GMs). Every single decision is a compromise. Waiting to find out that Huby wasn't an immediate fit doesn't really help anything...it would simply force you into an urgent situation to sell low.