Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee
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.
|
But you were the best team in the NHL. So you threaten JG, He doesn't sign - And then what?
You don't get better by trading him. Sure you get a late 1st and fillers. But then what?
A late first has about a 25% chance of being relevant.
I think most of what the Flames do is poor management. But I don't see a world where a team is the best in the NHL trading their best player for a late 1st and scraps eventually leading to a cup win!