Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
He didn't say Bean nixed Holtz - he suggested it was Bean who didn't want the retetnion (or the return on the retention). So what about the no-retention deal. That seems to have caved overwhat was being offered.
Edit - about this: "I would argue you have the problem here. You have unreasonable expectations that if Conroy holds his breath long enough that teams are just going to fold and give in, making players magically available. That has not happened once in any trade Conroy has made. Sometimes you have to take the best asset available. Holtz is a very good asset, in the same way that Connor Zary is a very good asset. You build by collecting the best assets available to you. Mercer just isn't available. No top center prospect is available for a 35 year old goaltender with two more years on a $6M deal. The Flames would likely have to kick in something substantial which would probably be counter to their rebuild/retool."
I don't have any problem with what the team did. And you are projecting a lot here. What has happened in every trade is that Conroy has identified a player he wanted to come back and fill a position of need.Sharangovich, Miromanov, the two D prospects from Vancouver. He hasn't held his breath with other teams. Yet the team didn't want Holtz - without retention.
|
But it sounds like they did agree to a deal with Holtz involved that got killed.
Also sounds like they may have changed their demands to Mercer after, who knows.