The assets acquired are not valuable at all, that is my point, you seem to think they are more valuable, why?
Nobody would give away a valuable asset for hoffman or pitlick,
I am saying the team would be exactly the same if we kept hoffman and pitlick, as opposed to having the return we got,
People are getting all excited over the return, when the return will not help anything, we dumped these guys for basically nothing,
Within this franchise, when is the last time a 3rd round draft pick turned into anything of significance??
I think you are viewing the trades in too narrow of a scope. You have to think of these trades in terms of likelihood of producing future success/acquiring additional assets.
Hoffman and Pitlick on the team have 0 chance to move the needle. They are the definition of deadweight.
All the picks acquired in the series of moves associated with both players have more of chance of moving the needle (even if low) and can do so in two ways:
1. Picking a player at the position that forms into an nhler. The likelihood decreases deeper into the draft, but these are still superior assets to hoffman and pitlick which people either wanted 1. benched 2. waived 3. bought out.
2. The picks acquired can be packaged along with other assets to fill a need. Like when the habs acquired Petry or Dach. These picks have better value in a package than Hoffman or Pitlick.
3. Those picks can even produces drafted players that can become assets in trades like when the habs moved Collberg for Vanek.
Scenarios 1-3 are superior in everyway than keeping both players, waiving them, buying them out, benching them.
In all scenarios, having the picks are superior assets than retaining Hoffman and Pitlick even if the likelihood of impact is lower.
It's odd to have to explain such a fundamental basic principle, but you are just wrong.
