Gotta love the attitude that draft picks arent worth as much as 39 year old rentals.
great philosophy.
Not sure exactly what this is in reference too, but I don't think that this philosophy is accurate. In some instances, draft picks are not worth as much as 39 year old rentals. I know that people on here like to think draft picks are incredibly valuable (unless Homer gets one in a trade, then it just isn't), but in reality, the missing piece to a team is worth more than a guy that in 4 years might be a third liner. That's just the truth. The problem is that when a GM (any GM, not just Homer), makes a trade like that at the deadline, there is no way to tell if that player IS the missing piece. But you gotta make that trade if you want to compete. Some trades don't work out the way you want, but at the end of the day, do you really want to stand pat and hope your team as is makes it so that you can keep that draft pick that might maybe one day hopefully crack the top nine?
It just boggles my mind that some folks arent the least bit worried that the Flyers still have one of the worst prospect pools in the entire NHL. Sure there are some guys at the top of our organization rankings but after the first 4 or so it really drops off quick.
the Phantoms have sucked for how long now? yeah who cares because we have a competite team in Philly. oh wait. nmind.
Don't get me wrong, I wish we had better prospects too. But at the end of the day, having better prospects doesn't mean much if those guys never amount to anything. When you are close to contending for a Cup, you have to make the choice of going for it or just going with what you have. Again, do you really want a GM that is going to sit on his hands? Then you'll be saying, WHY DIDN'T GM X MAKE ANY DEADLINE DEALS?! You have to give to get. You won't get the missing piece at the deadline by trading peanuts. It just doesn't work that way. You have to deal picks and prospects to make a run at a Cup. If you don't want to make a run at a Cup, that is a different argument, but I have no problem doing that when the team looks close. This year...I wouldn't do it. Last year, I didn't want to do it. But in year's past, absolutely go for it.
Yeah, having Versteeg for 2 months for a 1st rounder sure was worth it. That didn't look dumb as hell when he was healthy and a good forward for Florida.
Are you saying it was bad to trade for him the first time or to trade him away the other time? I would disagree with both. He seemed like a good fit before he was acquired (young too). And signed past the season for cheap IIRC. But he didn't work out too well. Homer got a 2nd and a 3rd for him. Wasn't great, but he did what it looked like needed to be done.