dawgbone
Registered User
- Jun 24, 2002
- 21,104
- 0
shveik said:This kind of possessive attitude towards your "assets" is a sign of bad management IMO.
Bad management? How so? Hockey players, especially NHL calibre ones, are assets. They aren't parked on shelves where you can go pick one up at your local Wal-mart.
You acquire these players through the entry draft, free angency or trades. Through the entry draft, most players aren't ready for a couple of seasons anyways, and when you trade you are giving up 1 for 1 (basically). The only way you can add without losing, is through free agents. If there are only a handful of teams willing to cut a player lose, that isn't a viable market. Your choice is to either sign your guy to his 100, or 110% offer, or lose him and maybe pick up a far less valuable player as a free agent.
It simply doesn't work when only a few teams are doing it, and it really doesn't work when a handful of teams will jump all over any asset that gets let go.
The rich teams cannot just sign everybody due to roster limitations anyway,
So they let go of their pressbox guys (which everyone has), in order to pick up a 2nd liner who had a bad season.
Thanks.
and normally they are limited to only signing the young players that are deemed disappointments by their original teams, and the UFAs.
Wouldn't the players we were just talking about fall under the first category?