Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason14h
The Flames wouldn't have gotten a ransom though.
They would have gotten some combo of a late 1st, worse roster player, and extra picks . B prospect
And then... Who Cares? Would another Zary on the roster right now really matter?
Late 1sts are the most overrated asset in the league. You have a 25% chance of even an NHL regular and it takes 4-5 years to see them materialize
The Flames should have gone more "All In" - But we didn't have all our ammo because BT wasted it over the years!
No team at 111 points was trading their (or close too) best player. That's insanity. By that logic WHY would any other team trade for him knowing he's hitting FA?
|
That’s not true though. Good teams, well managed teams, like say Carolina or Colorado or Dallas- take risks.
You guys aren’t reading or focusing on what I’m saying. I’m saying you give the guy an ultimatum. Sign by OUR deadline or we’ll trade you.
What this does: takes control of the decision making and timeline. Instead of July 1, it’s now Feb, to sign. If he doesn’t sign, you know his intentions.
What it does for you: gives you the ability to recover assets. Sure, they may not be equivalent to Gaudreau. Sure, they may cost you a chance at the cup that year…
But it’s how you manage a team. You manage over the long-term. Short term calculated risks for long term gains. Not a one year window. Carolina traded for Necas and then IN THE SAME YEAR- even though they had a great team/ still traded Rantanen away because they weren’t confident he would re-sign with them. Did they say- well we have a chance at a Cup this year so have to keep him? No.
Good teams like Boston Carolina or Colorado make good management decisions with their assets. Looking back I was 100% correct. Like, factually. Look at what actually happened. Trading Gaudreau for a 1st and prospects and other stuff would have been better in the long run for the Flames than 1 playoff round win.
You do that same move multiple times you win cups.