Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe
Robertson is a great player, but should the Flame really be tying up that much salary on the wings? Organizationally, wing is by far the strongest and deepest area for the Flames. I am a person who believes impact - to - franchise players are needed at any position, but I really wouldn't want to spend assets to add in an area of strength, that is also the easiest to draft in, and that is also the least impactful on the ice.
Center - Defence - Goalie. Build the spine of a team with your assets.
I just think the plan is to simply draft and develop out of being a mediocre team. Whether that's drafting at the top of the draft or not, Flames will draft their core. Spending valuable assets in a position of strength (and of least importance), and then having significant cap in those areas just doesn't seem like the best asset management. If I had a great center, and didn't have a good sniper on my team, I would definitely be trying to acquire Robertson. I just don't see that it makes sense. Going out and trying to acquire top players without paying attention to the cap structure + positional need + where the Flames are in the competing spectrum just doesn't make sense to me at least.
|
I think it's interesting how any move made for an asset, that is not a draft pick, get's viewed as an end state move for the club. If we bring in Robertson, we write him in blood on the roster for the next xxx years? I'm not saying that's not a possibility, but isn't the job of Conroy, on the transaction for Anderson, to maximize the assets he gets in return?
I'm aligned with the fact, that in an ideal world, what we need is a centre, so if you could get that for Anderson in the right age and right ability you'd prioritize that. We all know that Anderson isn't going to net us our centre of the future in the form of a current NHLer, so I get how that shifts focus to get a draft pick that could maybe be leveraged for acquiring said centre. But as soon as you start talking draft picks, aren't you now in the get the best asset category? Shouldn't Conroy be evaluating the position of likely draft pick vs. what he thinks the value of Robertson as an asset (that could be moved in future deals). For example: Suggesting that Conroy should take say the 30th overall pick in the draft, because that 30th overall pick in the draft COULD be a centre vs. taking Robertson because Robertson IS a winger is flawed logic IMO.
I don't know which asset is more valuable in this example, a late first, or Robertson, but the goal of finding our top centre is the right one, but I think if that goal isn't one transaction away with the Anderson trade, then Conroy has to maximize his asset cupboard on the trade, because that gives him the most flexibility in the future to make other deals to eventually get that asset.