Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
That's a pretty snappy judgement for a new general manager in a set market with players he has to move.
If GM X decides to move a player with term to make his team better but makes it worse ... it's easy to judge. He wasn't forced to make a move. He made his team worse than it was.
But a GM having to move assets in a market defined by supply, demand, cap space, and in this instance an agent that eliminates 90% of the trade pool I think that's a silly judgement.
Unless you are thinking other teams offered way more and Conroy was to stupid to recognize a better package.
|
I think it’s really weird every time this argument comes up. Do I think he took a worse deal on purpose? Obviously not, because nobody in the entire world would think that. He’s probably just bad at assessing value in his deals, is bad at negotiating, or has a poor eye for talent.
Feaster was terrible at trades too, but he of course always took the best deal available. Doesn’t change the perception though, does it?
I don’t know why you among others feel the need to police people’s opinions, like calling a spade a spade is somehow way out there. Everyone outside of CalPuck is calling this deal an L for the Flames. Mysteriously, this Russian no-name went from a contract throw-in before we knew the return, to intriguing young player with upside after. Wonder what changed? When you look around the general opinion of Conroy is that he’s gotten mediocre to poor returns on his trades. It’s not just me who believes this. And even if it were, why do you care so much? Does me not liking Conroy’s moves as a GM bother you that much?