Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew
I think there were enough on ice reasons to justify trading Hamilton, particularly given the return.
But you do have a point. Things weren't perfect. Treliving said it himself post trade. I tend to follow the principle that you can't believe anything a GM says in public, but I will believe his comment that "we want players who want to be here". Hamilton didn't want to be there it seems, and they didn't feel strongly enough about him as a player to try and make it work.
The not hanging out with the team thing? Well, if a guy is giving it all on the ice, I suspect most of that can be forgiven.
|
Agreed ... when you think of the mixture of assets, age and team control. The taking a step back on the blueline but still getting a great young asset, while greatly altering your forward core it's a good deal. Selling high on Ferland and his UFA status are other feathers.
Good hockey deal.
I think Shannon's comments were funny, but they shouldn't have become the poster child for the trade the way they've been. That's not his fault as he was giving a facetious example, not reporting. But it's clouded over the trade to the point where it looks like he was studious and rejected for being so which I'm guessing wasn't the case.