Worst Trade Post 2004 Lockout?

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,174
97,099
With hindsight being 20/20...and based on the discussion in the other thread. What was the Canes worst trade post 2004 lockout? Also, would be good if you posted why you feel it was the worst.

1) JJ and Tverdovsky for Gleason and Belanger
2) Ladd for Ruutu
3) Williams for Cole (realize O'Sullivan part of it..but it was essentially for Cole)
4) Jokinen for conditional pick (plus salary retained)
5) Alt and Boucher for Pither
6) 2nd and 6th for Sanguinetti
7) Sutter, Dumoulin and #8 pick for J. Staal
8) Other
 

RodTheBawd

Registered User
Oct 16, 2013
5,529
8,604
I'd go with the Ladd for Ruutu, moreso for how everything (contracts, cap, other trades) played out as a result than just who the straight up better player was/is.
 

What the Faulk

You'll know when you go
May 30, 2005
42,121
3,851
North Carolina
I have to vote for Jack Johnson for Gleason. In today's terms, it'd be like moving Hanifin and Liles for Justin Schultz and Derek Roy. Nevermind that Johnson supposedly wouldn't sign here. I just don't understand how this was the most attractive offer. Cases could be made for some of the other deals, even Ladd for Ruutu, but this was just not good.
 

garnetpalmetto

Jerkministrator
Jul 12, 2004
12,476
11,841
Durham, NC
Worst post-2004 Lockout Hurricanes Trade

For reference, here's all transactions that occurred from the lockout on. I realize some of these won't matter much/at all, but for the sake of completion, here they are.

Date | Team | Pick/Player Relinquished | Pick/Player Acquired
10/3/05|Mighty Ducks|Bruno St. Jacques|Craig Adams
12/28/05|Capitals|Colin Forbes|Stephen Peat
12/28/05|Coyotes|Pavel Brendl|Krys Kolanos
12/29/05|Blackhawks|Radim Vrbata|Future considerations (2007 4th round pick (Cade Fairchild) received as part of future trade for Danny Richmond, 2006 4th round pick (James Remier)
1/20/06|Blackhawks|Danny Richmond, 2006 4th round pick (James Reimer)|Anton Babchuk, 2007 4th round pick (Cade Fairchild)
1/30/06|Blues|Jesse Boulerice, Mike Zigomanis, rights to Magnus Kahnberg, 2006 1st round pick (Matt Corrente), 2006 4th round pick (Reto Berra), 2007 4th round pick (Cade Fairchild)|Dough Weight, rights to Erkki Rajamaki
3/9/06|Penguins|Niklas Nordgren, Krys Kolanos, 2007 2nd round pick (Kevin Marshall|Mark Recchi
9/29/06|Kings|Jack Johnson, Oleg Tverdovsky|Tim Gleason, Eric Belanger
11/21/06|Rangers|Brad Isbister|Rights to Jakub Petruzalek, 2008 conditional 5th round pick (if Isbister played more than 40 games in the remaining 06-07 season) (not exercised)
11/29/06|Blue Jackets|Derrick Walser|Mark Flood
1/8/07|Coyotes|Kevyn Adams|Dennis Seidenberg
9/29/07|Predators|Eric Belanger|Josef Vasicek
2/23/07|Blue Jackets|2008 5th round pick (Tomas Kubalik)|Anson Carter
6/23/07|Canadiens|2007 7th round pick (Scott Kishel)|Michael Leighton
7/17/07|Rangers|Andrew Hutchinson, Joe Barnes, 2008 3rd round pick (Evgeny Grachev)|Matt Cullen
1/17/08|Blackhawks|Craig Adams|2009 conditional 7th round pick (if CHI re-signs Adams before his contract expired) (not exercised)
1/31/08|Penguins|Dave Gove|Joe Jensen
2/7/08|Sharks|J.D. Forrest|Future considerations
2/11/08|Senators|Cory Stillman, Mike Commodore|Joe Corvo, Patrick Eaves|
2/26/08|Blackhawks|Andrew Ladd|Tuomo Ruutu
6/19/08|Predators|2009 5th round pick (Michael Zador)|Rights to Darcy Hordichuk, 2009 or 2010 conditional 4th round pick (2009 if Hordichuk re-signed with Carolina, else 2010)(2010- Louis Domingue)
7/1/08|Oilers|Erik Cole|Joni Pitkanen
2/7/09|Lightning|Wade Brookbank, Josef Melichar, 2009 4th round pick (pick forfeited)|Jussi Jokinen
3/4/09|Kings|Justin Williams|Patrick O'Sullivan, 2009 2nd round pick (Brian Dumoulin)
3/4/09|Oilers|Patrick O'Sullivan, 2009 2nd round pick (Jesse Blacker)|Erik Cole, 2009 5th round pick (Matt Kennedy)
7/24/09|Bruins|Patrick Eaves, 2010 4th round pick (Craig Cunningham|Aaron Ward
8/31/09|Islanders|Bobby Hughes|Rob Hennigar
12/3/09|Maple Leafs|Rights to Philippe Paradis|Jiri Tlusty
2/7/10|Sharks|Niclas Wallin, 2010 5th round pick (Cody Ferriero)|2010 2nd round pick (Mark Alt)
2/12/10|Senators|Matt Cullen|Alexandre Picard, 2010 2nd round pick (Martin Marincin)
3/3/10|Canucks|Andrew Alberts|2010 3rd round pick (Austin Levi)
3/3/10|Capitals|Scott Walker|2010 7th round pick (Ricard Bildstrand)
3/3/10|Avalanche|Stephane Yelle, Harrison Reed|Cedric Lalonde-McNicoll, 2010 6th round pick (Tyler Stahl)
3/3/10|Capitals|Joe Corvo|Brian Pothier, Oskar Osala, 2011 2nd round pick (Tyler Wotherspoon)
3/3/10|Ducks|Aaron Ward|Justin Pogge, 2010 or 2011 4th round pick (2010, Justin Shugg)
5/13/10|Coyotes|2010 5th round pick (Louis Domingue)|Rights to Jared Staal
6/26/10|Flyers|2010 7th round pick (Ricard Bildstrand)|Jon Matsumoto
6/26/10|Oilers|2010 2nd round pick (Martin Marincin)|Riley Nash
6/26/10|Rangers|2010 6th round pick (Jesper Fasth), 2011 2nd round pick (Tyler Wotherspoon)|Bobby Sanguinetti
11/17/10|Flames|Anton Babchuk, Tom Kostopoulos|Ian White, Brett Sutter
11/23/10|Ducks|Stefan Chaput, Matt Kennedy|Ryan Carter
2/18/11|Sharks|Future considerations|Derek Joslin
2/24/11|Panthers|Ryan Carter, 2011 5th round pick (Sean Kuraly)|Cory Stillman
2/28/11|Panthers|Sergei Samsonov|Bryan Allen
7/5/11|Bruins|Joe Corvo|2012 4th round pick (Trevor Carrick)
12/9/11|Canadiens|Tomas Kaberle|Jaroslav Spacek
1/18/12|Panthers|Jon Matsumoto, Mattias Lindstrom|Evgeni Dadonov|A.J. Jenks
1/20/12|Devils|Alexei Ponikarovsky|Joe Sova, 2012 4th round pick (Jaccob Slavin)
6/22/12|Penguins|Brandon Sutter, Brian Dumoulin, 2012 1st round pick (Derrick Pouliot)|Jordan Staal
1/13/13|Kings|Anthony Stewart, 2013 4th round pick (Kyle Platzer), 2014 6th round pick (Jake Marchment)|Kevin Westgarth
1/13/13|Flyers|Brian Boucher, Mark Alt|Luke Pither
4/2/13|Lightning|Adam Hall, 2013 7th round pick (Joel Vermin)|Marc-Andre Bergeron
4/3/13|Penguins|Jussi Jokinen|2013 conditional pick (6th round if Jokinen played in 50% of playoff games and Penguins won 2013 Stanley Cup, 7th round if Jokinen played in 25% of playoff games and Penguins reached 2013 Stanley Cup Finals, else nothing) (not exercised)
6/30/13|Sabres|Jamie McBain, 2013 2nd round pick (J.T. Compher)|Andrej Sekera
9/28/13|Canucks|Zac Dalpe, Jeremy Welsh|Kellan Tochkin, 2014 4th round pick (Josh Wesley)
12/30/13|Flames|Kevin Westgarth|Greg Nemisz
1/1/14|Maple Leafs|Tim Gleason|John-Michael Liles, rights to Dennis Robertson
3/5/14|Devils|Tuomo Ruutu|Andrei Loktionov, 2017 conditional 3rd round pick
12/18/14|Jets|Jay Harrison|2015 6th round pick
2/25/15|Jets|Jiri Tlusty|2015 conditional round pick (5th round if Jets quality for 2015 playoffs, else 6th round)
2/25/15|Kings|Andrej Sekera|Roland McKeown, conditional 1st round pick (in 2015 if Kings quality for 2015 playoffs, else 2016)
2/28/15|Capitals|Tim Gleason|Jack Hillen, 2015 4th round pick

I have to vote for Jack Johnson for Gleason. In today's terms, it'd be like moving Hanifin and Liles for Justin Schultz and Derek Roy. Nevermind that Johnson supposedly wouldn't sign here. I just don't understand how this was the most attractive offer. Cases could be made for some of the other deals, even Ladd for Ruutu, but this was just not good.

It wasn't "supposedly." Every time the Hurricanes talked to Johnson and his camp (read: his parents), they got static about promises made to Michigan, etc. Upon getting traded to LA, those promises seemed not to matter so much. Knowing what we know about Jack Sr. I think it's a fair assessment that Jack didn't want to go from being the Dancing Dad, as much part of the show as Jack Jr. himself, to being out of the limelight in a smaller market.
 
Last edited:

tomdundo

Registered User
Sep 11, 2011
7,722
287
Raleigh
While it's definitely not the worst trade (I'm voting for the Gleason one from a value perspective, as WTF mentions above), I'll make a case for the Sanguinetti trade.

That 2010 6th round didn't produce a whole lot at first glance, but Mark Stone was drafted down at #178 and is having an excellent season this year.

As for the 2011 2nd rounder...we initially had acquired Washington's 2nd in the Corvo deal. It ended up being the #57 pick. Calgary took Wotherspoon at that point, but among the players we could have taken is Nikita Kucherov (#58).


So if we look at it that way, we traded (potentially) Mark Stone and Nikita Kucherov for 40 NHL games of awful play resulting in 6 points from Sanguinetti and 86 points in 127 AHL games.
 

DaveG

Noted Jerk
Apr 7, 2003
51,016
47,853
Winston-Salem NC
I still say Ladd/Ruutu but it's pretty close.

The Johnson trade was flat out not good even if Gleason did reach expectations and Johnson never sniffed his. BBA's point that it was seemingly almost as much about dumping Tverdovsky's salary has merit there big time IMHO, though I'd love to know what all else was offered aside from the rumored absurd Pittsburgh price (Johnson + Ladd for #2 pick).

Giving up on Jokinen (with salary retention) for that instead of seeing if he can bounce back, and giving up that much for a guy that wasn't far off from being borderline waiver fodder already anyway in Sanguinetti were both quite brutal as well.


re: Sanguinetti trade - among those still on the board that have seen NHL time:
Wotherspoon
Kucherov
Shane Prince
Vincent Trocheck
Adam Lowry
Nick Shore
Johnny Gaudreau
JG Pageau
Ondrej Palat
Andrew Shaw
 

garnetpalmetto

Jerkministrator
Jul 12, 2004
12,476
11,841
Durham, NC
I'll go with Jokinen (with retention) for nothing. The conditions on the trade were ridiculous and amount to what might be referred to on The League as a trade ****. Not only do we lose a player who'd been a critical and clutch portion of the forward corps but we have to keep paying him AND we get absolutely nothing in return? Oh and to add insult to injury the next season he rebounds while we fire the coach who he didn't jive with. That's almost as good as being poked in the eye with a sharp stick. At least in the other controversial cases we got something out of it. We got a few good years out of Gleason and even in his return this year he was a serviceable component of the defense. At least Ruutu played well in his first few seasons for us. Getting rid of Jussi netted us nothing whatsoever.

Also deserving more discussion is Anson Carter for a 5th. Yes, it was "just" a 5th, but at the time guys like Spurgeon, Atkinson, Rinaldo, and Wingels were still on the board. At the time we got him we were still in the playoff hunt and buying...and bought a guy who scored one entire goal for us.
 
Last edited:

tomdundo

Registered User
Sep 11, 2011
7,722
287
Raleigh
re: Sanguinetti trade - among those still on the board that have seen NHL time:
Wotherspoon
Kucherov
Shane Prince
Vincent Trocheck
Adam Lowry
Nick Shore
Johnny Gaudreau
JG Pageau
Ondrej Palat
Andrew Shaw

If we look at our 2011 draft as a whole...


Well, we can chalk up the Gaudreau miss to Ritch Winter being an ass. Took Hofmann exactly one pick before Gaudreau.

And we took Brody Sutter in the 7th prior to Palat being drafted.

I'll leave Shaw alone, since we had previously traded that 5th rounder for Cory Stillman again.


But then there's also taking Rask in the spot directly above Saad.
 

RodTheBawd

Registered User
Oct 16, 2013
5,529
8,604
While it's definitely not the worst trade (I'm voting for the Gleason one from a value perspective, as WTF mentions above), I'll make a case for the Sanguinetti trade.

That 2010 6th round didn't produce a whole lot at first glance, but Mark Stone was drafted down at #178 and is having an excellent season this year.

As for the 2011 2nd rounder...we initially had acquired Washington's 2nd in the Corvo deal. It ended up being the #57 pick. Calgary took Wotherspoon at that point, but among the players we could have taken is Nikita Kucherov (#58).


So if we look at it that way, we traded (potentially) Mark Stone and Nikita Kucherov for 40 NHL games of awful play resulting in 6 points from Sanguinetti and 86 points in 127 AHL games.

I know this whole thread will be hypothetical, but "we could have taken so and so with this pick who turned out to be a decent NHLer" is a bit of a stretch.

I still think Jussi was done more wrong than any other player here. The guy was asked to play on a different line and different role every night, even within games, it was no wonder he struggled. I don't think that trade was as bad as the Ladd and JJ ones, it was probably just the ********* trade.
 

tomdundo

Registered User
Sep 11, 2011
7,722
287
Raleigh
I know this whole thread will be hypothetical, but "we could have taken so and so with this pick who turned out to be a decent NHLer" is a bit of a stretch.

I still think Jussi was done more wrong than any other player here. The guy was asked to play on a different line and different role every night, even within games, it was no wonder he struggled. I don't think that trade was as bad as the Ladd and JJ ones, it was probably just the ********* trade.

Oh, I'm well aware that it's nonsense. But it's always fun/interesting to look at what we could have done with our picks knowing what we do now.


Looking at just the 2011 draft

ROUND 1:
We took Murphy (#12). One could make a case for keeping that pick, but I wonder what a trade down would have earned us if we had dropped to the end of the round to take Rickard Rakell (#30)

ROUND 2:
Replace Rask(#42) with Bradon Saad(#43)

ROUND 3:
Replace Lowe(#73) with Klas Dahlbeck(#79) or Jordan Binnington (#88)

ROUND 4:
Replace Hofmann(#103) with Johnny Gaudreau(#104)

ROUND 5:
No pick. Was traded to re-acquire Cory Stillman

ROUND 6:
Replace Mahalak(#163) with Laurent Brossoit(#164)

ROUND 7:
Replace Sutter(#193) with Ondrej Palat(#208)
 
Last edited:

A Star is Burns

Formerly Azor Aho
Sponsor
Dec 6, 2011
12,269
38,822
I feel like any deal with a draft pick where the rationale is, "look who was on the board" is ridiculous. No reason to think the Canes would have drafted any of those players or that they would have developed as well with the Canes either. History pretty much suggests otherwise. Look at the value of the pick itself, not what it could have turned into if everything had gone right.

I went Ladd for Ruutu. Ruutu was solid for the Canes for several years, but Ladd could have been a cornerstone and was starting to play better prior to the trade. At least it wasn't a total bust.

Next I'd probably go JJ/Gleason. Again, not a total bust as Gleason was okay for a while. And I don't really miss the player that JJ became, so that helps. But it always seemed like he should have been able to pull a better offer. Even with Tverdovsky having to be thrown in it seems like JR just panicked trying to get a piece for the line up to defend the Cup.

Obviously we know how Williams for Cole looks, but I understand the trade. At least we kept Cole for a while and he was productive and we made the only playoffs we have in some time and came close another time with him playing well. And it likely was better for Williams to move on.

I don't really think the Jokinen trade hurt us all that much even if it was a bad move.

I hate throwing in prospects, but I'm not sure that Alt will amount to much.

Don't love giving up a 2nd rounder for Sanguinetti, but again, the 6th is just a 6th, not who it could have magically been, so that doesn't bother me as much.

I don't think the Staal trade deserves to be on here. It seems like it will ultimately be a few years of third line Sutter, and a good young dman in Pouliot. I don't expect much from Dumoulin other than a depth dman. So a really good young prospect dman and a third liner for a really solid player that still may have better hockey to give himself is a trade I don't mind making. Especially since Grigorenko is a player that has actually been said to be who we were targeting. In this case we may actually know who the pick was going to be, so it's a bit different. If it really came down to us having Staal or Sutter, Grigorenko, and Dumoulin, seems like even more of a no brainer.
 

Anton Dubinchuk

aho
Sponsor
Jul 18, 2010
25,982
54,306
Atlanta, GA
Going with the Boucher trade because it's a microcosm of everything that's wrong with this organization. It's certainly not the most "unbalanced" trade, but ratio-of-value-wise it's brutal. Even if Alt doesn't turn into anything it's just the principle of the thing, let's trade a recent 2nd round pick to get out from under a contract that was completely inconsequential.

Ladd for Ruutu is the one that ended up the worst. And it's not like the Boucher trade set us back all that much. But from beginning to end it was the Boucher trade. We all knew it was bad, and then it ended up bad. It's just piss poor and lackadaisical management of assets.
 

Blueline Bomber

AI Generated Minnesota Wild
Sponsor
Oct 31, 2007
38,857
39,466
Debated between Ladd/Ruutu or Williams/Cole, but ultimately went with the latter. It made sense at the time due to William's health issues, but considering he was a large reason LA won their two cups, it makes you wonder what could have been if he had stayed in Carolina.
 

What the Faulk

You'll know when you go
May 30, 2005
42,121
3,851
North Carolina
It doesn't really seem fair to call Williams for Cole the worst since that only looks as bad as it does (which is still better than anything on this list) with the benefit of hindsight.

It's interesting the parallels that can be drawn from that era Williams and present day Semin, by the way.
 

GoldiFox

Registered User
Apr 21, 2014
13,287
32,030
Any trade in which the Hurricanes retain salary is my least favorite.

It seems like the Canes are the only team in the league that uses salary retention to fix mismanagement mistakes and save relative pennies. Meanwhile every other team uses salary retention to maximize trade returns.

This is just unacceptable as a budget team. Canes can barely pay the players they have, much less pay players to play for opponents.
 

Blueline Bomber

AI Generated Minnesota Wild
Sponsor
Oct 31, 2007
38,857
39,466
It doesn't really seem fair to call Williams for Cole the worst since that only looks as bad as it does (which is still better than anything on this list) with the benefit of hindsight.

It's interesting the parallels that can be drawn from that era Williams and present day Semin, by the way.

Does it really require hindsight though? Williams was an extremely productive player before the injuries, which most agreed were of a fluke nature. IIRC, he actually made an ASG appearance before being nailed by those injuries. And he was in his prime, only 25 (I believe) at the time. The only reason the trade seemed to happen was to get Cole back beside Eric Staal, which is the filmiest reasoning to do a trade.

If anything, it's the Ladd/Ruutu trade that only looks bad in hindsight, because at the time, we were trading for a more developed version of Ladd. Of course, Ladd developed (as young players tend to do), so it looks terrible now, but it seems like a lot of people get hung up on the fact that "Ladd was starting to show something" when we traded him (which he was), but that ignores the fact that he had 8 points in the previous 4 months before that streak.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,174
97,099
Justin Williams was my favorite player when he was here, and I hated to see him go, but I also understood that to some extent. The guy was struggling to stay healthy here in Carolina. Even when he was traded, he only played 12 games with LA the rest of that year and only 49 the following year. It wasn't until the last year of his contract where he finally had a semi-healthy year (73 games).

Even if the Canes didn't trade him when they did, I'm not so sure they would have re-signed him again based on how injured he was in the prior contract (also not so sure he wouldn't want a fresh start himself). A lot of "what-ifs", but the last year of his contract was also the year the Canes were terrible and trading everything not nailed down at the deadline. This board would have been furious if JR didn't trade Williams at the deadline that year and IMO, he probably would have.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,174
97,099
For me, with hindsight, it's between the JJ for Gleason and Ladd for Ruutu trades. Although they are similar in that they both represent JR making a rash (or as some said panic) move for "help now at the expense of the future", they are also a bit different how they were viewed at the time vs. in hindsight. In hindsight, the JJ for Gleason trade wasn't as bad as many first deemed it to be, but as I've stated earlier, what JR was trading at the time was a recent #3 OA pick that was still a highly valued defensive prospect. In that light, the return wasn't good at all, but in the end, JJ didn't end up being as good as touted/projected.

The Ladd for Ruutu trade, on the flipside didn't look as bad at the time of the trade, and probably for a few years after the trade, but in the long run was worse as Ruutu broke down and Ladd developed into a solid power forward, superior player, and captain of his team.

In the end though, JR got poor returns for two very high draft picks. It's close for me, but I'm going with Ladd for Ruutu.

Re: some of the other ones where he tossed in prospects/picks and/or retained salary, yeah..those aren't good, but to me, they don't rise to the level of getting a poor return for a #3OA (JJ) and #4OA (Ladd) pick.
 

Identity404

I'm not superstitious, but I am a little stitious
Nov 5, 2005
2,738
6,640
Washington DC
Ladd seems like the obviously choice.

Alt and Boucher for Pither is a distant second to me. This trade is the epitome of GMJR.
 

What the Faulk

You'll know when you go
May 30, 2005
42,121
3,851
North Carolina
Justin Williams was my favorite player when he was here, and I hated to see him go, but I also understood that to some extent. The guy was struggling to stay healthy here in Carolina. Even when he was traded, he only played 12 games with LA the rest of that year and only 49 the following year. It wasn't until the last year of his contract where he finally had a semi-healthy year (73 games).

Yep, exactly. From 2007 to 2010, Williams scored 23 goals in 130 games. I want to say he was making somewhere around $3.5 million at the time. Cole scored 50 in 193, which works out to about 7 more goals per 82 games.

Actually, let's look at 2007 to now:

Williams: 480GP, 113 goals (19G/82GP), 185 assists (31A/82GP)
Cole: 540GP, 155 goals (24G/82GP), 145 assists (22A/82GP)

Slight edge to Williams, but he was on the better team.
 

cptjeff

Reprehensible User
Sep 18, 2008
20,381
33,935
Washington, DC.
Does it really require hindsight though? Williams was an extremely productive player before the injuries, which most agreed were of a fluke nature. IIRC, he actually made an ASG appearance before being nailed by those injuries. And he was in his prime, only 25 (I believe) at the time. The only reason the trade seemed to happen was to get Cole back beside Eric Staal, which is the filmiest reasoning to do a trade.

If anything, it's the Ladd/Ruutu trade that only looks bad in hindsight, because at the time, we were trading for a more developed version of Ladd. Of course, Ladd developed (as young players tend to do), so it looks terrible now, but it seems like a lot of people get hung up on the fact that "Ladd was starting to show something" when we traded him (which he was), but that ignores the fact that he had 8 points in the previous 4 months before that streak.

I don't think most agreed the Williams injuries were mostly flukes. There was a lot of talk about how he was irredeemably injury prone and how we needed to dump him because he would always be injured. I was one of the ones arguing that the injuries were flukes and that we should keep him, and I remember that being a pretty controversial stance.

We spent way too much to get Cole back. Williams was still an excellent player when he was able to play, and Cole was clearly on the decline at that point.

I do agree that Ladd/Ruutu was absolutely the right move at the time, and I'd still make it. Ladd wasn't contributing and had completely stalled in his development here, and Ruutu gave the team a physical spark that we really needed. He had an immediate positive impact, and was reasonably successful on this team for several years.

Justin Williams was my favorite player when he was here, and I hated to see him go, but I also understood that to some extent. The guy was struggling to stay healthy here in Carolina. Even when he was traded, he only played 12 games with LA the rest of that year and only 49 the following year. It wasn't until the last year of his contract where he finally had a semi-healthy year (73 games).

Geography doesn't affect how healthy a player is. He had struggles recovering from a couple of fluke injuries, and if we had been patient with the recovery process, we'd likely still have him on the team now, back in peak form. We were impatient, and had a gigantic hole on the first line wing for years because of it. That alone was probably enough to cost us a couple of playoff appearances.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->