sensdiehard wrote:I remember back when the Hawks won their first Cup, and they had Huet as a $5mil backup and Campbell as a $7mil #5 dman. And their fans would brag, haha we won the Cup, we are the greatest. And then we would say, yeah but that asset management, that is brutal. And they would hang their heads in shame slinking off the boards red faced. Yeah, no, asset management not the primary focus for team building.
What a nerdy, missing the forest for the trees that complaint is to me. Oh yeah, we got better but we overpaid. Good grief. I’d note that we were well built and stocked enough that we were in a position to be able to afford to overpay. Unlike other teams, Dudley Dorion got his man. Holding out for a deal where we don’t overpay probably leaves us 5 years later wondering what if, having had Turris walk as a ufa for nothing. We probably don’t have enough spots for all the prospects coming up already. We cant just horde picks indefinitely, paralyzed by fear over what if one of the picks becomes good, unable to ever improve in the present. We can trade one of these players at the deadline in a few years and get picks back if we want, when we are rebuilding. Now is not the time for going all Muckler and refusing to pay the price for what we need.
Silfv, Mika, Turris for Ryan, Brassard, Duchene. Slowly improving the team. Its not a series of fleecings with huge discrete step improvements. Its slowly remaking the team, stronger, faster, better than before, the way a smart small market can. Only thing is that now a $6mil dollar man is on the way out, not the answer.
I was never too crazy about Duchene, like Spezza he doesn’t seem defensively strong enough to me for a real #1 C. But neither was Turris. On a cheap long term contract, Turris was great support. As a guy we want to commit long term at ufa process – not so much. I like the trade. Bold. No sweater vests for Dorion.
My problem isn't specifically overpaying for the thing, it is overpaying for no thing. Is Duchene really such an improvement over Turris that it was worth giving up a 1st, a 1st rd prospect and a 3rd? Couldn't the Sens have gotten more for those assets at the deadline while keeping Turris?
As for asset management not being important, assets are a team's currency. Once the currency runs out... The other problem being that if a GM shows he is willing to overpay, why should other GMs accept anything less than overpayment from him? It's a common tactic to ask for packages of different value from teams, ie a "swing for the fences" package, a "good package", a "I'll take it if my back is against the wall" package. Guess who is going to be getting a lot of "swing for the fences" requests from other GMs. Sure, it's not catastrophic. But Dorion is making life harder for himself, which is bad because this trade didn't measurably improve the team IMO.
You're saying you're happy Dorion spent assets on not addressing our lack of a true #1 centre. How does that make sense?