Golden_Jet
Registered User
- Sep 21, 2005
- 22,588
- 10,994
We won the trade because Paul is currently a better player than Spezza
Spezz was still better this year
We won the trade because Paul is currently a better player than Spezza
The organization itself was on a much different footing in each of those cases.
Personally, I'd argue that Hossa and Havlat were more similar than Alfredsson.
Fans of Hossa and Havlat were incensed, but there were no significant alarms being raised by the fanbase as a unified group.
If anything, there was less push-back for Hossa leaving in that we received a superstar in return - unlike with the Havlat deal where all we got was cap relief and a third-pairing defencemen that we could sneak into the lineup with his $600K salary.
The impact on Chara's willingness to stay was not immediately known.
Ultimately, both were moves that could be perceived as motivated by the imposition of the cap. Heatley's original cap hit over three years was a bargain at $4.5M.
Alfredsson departing was regarded as more of a symptom of what was happening with the Senators organization and its owner as a whole.
My post was in jest, but i was honestly surprised how close their production was, and that small difference can almost entirely be explained by having double the PP time.Spezz was still better this year
My post was in jest, but i was honestly surprised how close their production was, and that small difference can almost entirely be explained by having double the PP time.
Spezza wasn't used in a role that suits his skill set while paul was, thats the real difference, but if you are looking to fill the role Paul played i would take paul over Spezza.