Quote:
Originally Posted by howard_the_duck
I agree it's a factor. I question whether 'showing them the way' needs to come via a top pairing D that would command a king's ransom on the trade market and doesn't fit in your competitive window, or can come from elsewhere. There are a glut of veterans available at camp time every year on PTO. There's always the option to overpay a character veteran ALA Derek Engelland or Erik Gudbranson in free agency. Going this route, you'll be less competitive on the ice of course, but you still have the pillars for your team's culture in place, leaning on their experience to guide you through the hard times.
To me, you need to explore both paths. Yes to bringing in veteran leadership to set the culture, but absolutely move on from your top assets and maximize their value to the franchise via trade if they don't fit in your competitive window. I think it's potentially misguided to keep these players around on the premise of showing them the way, especially if their being on the team keeps you from securing a better draft position.
|
But that's saying a filler type veteran has the same value as a drafted and developed (recognized) veteran of the Flames.
Not sure that's the case.
A terrible team isn't attracting the best veterans. You would need to either go character (and have them bottom roster), or way over pay for the player to add them later.
And even if they were impactful (and expensive) they may not have the same affect as a home grown player that everyone identifies as a Flames player.