2 years to contend.
A 2 year rental. A Shattenkirk haul? A prospect, a very late first in a weak draft class and a 2nd
2 years from now is not much of a haul.
Chicago winning in the 2nd year of contention is just one instance. There are plenty of other instances of very good teams who never win a cup, or who win once after contending for years. How many cups do the Canucks have with the twins? The Capitals with Ovi?
To be able to
plan on winning the cup you have to build a team and an organization that is capable of contending year after year and hope that everything falls into place for you at least once.
What we are talking about here is not a policy of forever trading our assets just before they start to pay off. It is one instance of maximizing the value of a player who doesn't want to be here.
You use Shattenkirk as an example. How much more might the Blues have got for him if they had traded him sooner? There was certainly a lot of talk last off-season. They chose to do what you are suggesting and they got peanuts. Meanwhile how many cups did they win while they had him?
I think everybody is a little too worried about a step back. Not that trading Trouba this year wouldn't be a step back. But it needn't be a big one. 1 year and then we are right back, maybe stronger. Yes we would lose a year of Wheeler, Buff, Little. Not ideal. Trouba wanting to leave would not be ideal. Ideal is signing him for 8 years. If he insists on leaving we are going to lose something no matter how we proceed. I think getting value for him now is the best way to minimize that loss.
If Trouba can't be satisfied here we are going to lose something, somewhere, somehow. There is no plan that can completely eliminate that.