And this underscores the long view on proposed trades such as a Hoffman trade.
Would we rather have:
1. Kyrou at 900k'ish salary (plus potentially Stas resigned at 5ish million if one is in favor of adding decent but aging talent)?
or
2. Hoffman at his contract for two more years (at the end of which he will be 31 years old)--Kyrou gone in a trade and Stas might be gone b/c we added Hoffman's salary?
In sum, I would prefer to keep the young, cheap talent that we finally have managed to accumulate b/c:
1. it does look to be very good talent
2. it is cheap talent
3. we do not have a first round pick this year
4. potential cheap talent provides more cap flexibility to add the true impact UFA
5. adding a guy like Hoffman isn't going to put us over the top this year and probably will be a neutral to bad move when looking at the next 5 years.
6. we already are one of the older teams in the NHL and have a few contracts that don't appear that they will age well---Steen, Bergie, etc.
7. The older talent sometimes blocks young guys that simply would be a better option if given the chance (Bo--Dunn)
8. we are literally one year away from finding out how a few of our younger guys look in the NHL.
We need to be patient and commit to getting younger and faster. Put another way, trading good young talent for guys on the edge of hitting 30 or extending guys on the edge of hitting 30 BACKFIRES more often than not. Unless the guy who is on the edge of hitting 30 is in the truly elite class, it is usually a band-aid move that mortgages the future for the present. I am a bit sick of DA's repeated mistakes with older players. Let Bill Armstrong do his work.
