SensontheRush
Never said it was Sunshine
I actually don't think the Ryan trade is that bad, especially when we traded Hoffman pretty much straight up for Boedker (except we traded a 5th down to a 6th ).
It doesn't belong in the top-5, but honorable menation for old-timer fans has to go to the Bob Kudelski trade.
When we traded Kudelski, he was a point-per-game winger with 26 goals by the halfway mark of the 1993-94 schedule, and we traded him for... Evgeny Davydov and some late-round picks.
Kudelski was like the ONLY GOOD THING about the first half of the 1993-94 season, it was a truly terrible hockey team, he was our leading goal scorer when he was dealt, and we got nothing for him.
Isn't hindsight an important tool for judging a GM's work?The zib and bishop trades only look bad in hindsight. Spezza and Heatley deals looked terrible when they happened but both looked better in hindsight when the players regressed. Judge the deals based on what the gms knew when they happened, not the aftermath.
Conacher WAS good though. He was even good for us for a while too. Players change over time and GMs can only forecast so much.Isn't hindsight an important tool for judging a GM's work?
A huge part of their job is to predict the outcomes of the moves they make, not just for today but for tomorrow and the next day. Injuries are a fair variable that can't always be predicted of course and maybe they were the best you could do for your asset, but if say someone like Cory Conacher turns out to just suck like he did, then isn't that on the GM for targeting a guy that was no good?
Conacher WAS good though. He was even good for us for a while too. Players change over time and GMs can only forecast so much.
The Ryan trade itself wasn't that bad, we lost it long term, but it wasn't that bad. The issue there was re-signing him to a bloated contract combined with injuries causing his rapid decline.I actually don't think the Ryan trade is that bad, especially when we traded Hoffman pretty much straight up for Boedker (except we traded a 5th down to a 6th ).
Isn't hindsight an important tool for judging a GM's work?
A huge part of their job is to predict the outcomes of the moves they make, not just for today but for tomorrow and the next day. Injuries are a fair variable that can't always be predicted of course and maybe they were the best you could do for your asset, but if say someone like Cory Conacher turns out to just suck like he did, then isn't that on the GM for targeting a guy that was no good?
That's exactly what I'm talking about. I think its how they should be judged and its fair to call it a fail based on their bodies of work after the trade. GM's cant predict everything, but the good ones are usually able to forecast well and have more hits than misses. Future performance and contract status need to be taken in to account unless it was a rental from the get go.Conacher WAS good though. He was even good for us for a while too. Players change over time and GMs can only forecast so much.
Agree completely. No gm is going to be perfect and injuries are an unpredictable variable most of the time. The good Gm's just have more hits and less misses than the bad ones.But doesn't that go both ways?
Both Turris and Methot had pretty significant declines after they left here
I agree that hindsight should apply unless there are exceptional circumstances
But it needs to apply both ways....
But doesn't that go both ways?
Both Turris and Methot had pretty significant declines after they left here
I agree that hindsight should apply unless there are exceptional circumstances
But it needs to apply both ways....
I actually don't think the Ryan trade is that bad, especially when we traded Hoffman pretty much straight up for Boedker (except we traded a 5th down to a 6th ).
What about the Radek Bonk trade? Can anybody give some context to that one? Was it a planned 3 way trade, or did LAK pull a Doug Wilson on us when he flipped Bonk to MTL? Wasn't Garon a big piece at that point? Didn't he get more for Bonk than we did? (Even know he gave up Huet.)
5b. Dahlen for Alex Burrows.
I was too young at the time to know the full context around this, and it obviously doesn't deserve a spot in this thread based on the fact the deal netted us Redden/Rhodes, but does anyone remember if Martin Straka was seen as a throw-in to Berard/Redden?
Berard/Redden was a wash (very slight edge to Berard since he went 1st)
Rhodes/Beaupre is obviously in Ottawa's favour since Rhodes was a decade younger
Maybe "throw-in" is strong, but Straka always seemed like overkill in that deal considering he went on to put up 717 points in 954 games.
Barasso was the worst, don't think there was a player I disliked more while they were here.Tugnut ANd Lauchaunen for Barasso is up there or me.
BUt thats sentimental lol