The bolded is my point.
Adding toughness you can plug in won't win you any games and will likely lose you games.
In a vacuum, I would trade Tkachuk for Dahlin, not that Buffalo would ever do it. I just think Tkachuk means more to us, which is what I am saying.
I mean that you can get tough players who can play lower in the lineup and be effective in FA, through the draft or when rebuilding teams are doing a sell off.
So those good teams have no Tkachuck in the top end but have tough good depth and as a result are much tougher than us and more skilled.
You need your high cost players to be competitive and beat the other team on the scoreboard. Toughness and punching faces and even hitting you can leave to the bottom depth. And still be overall very tough.
Like our toughest player to play is arguably Zub and he only costs 4 mill. You have another Zub at 4-5 mill you have a pretty tough and gritty blue line.
I think Brady means more to us because of our emotional attachment vs what he brings on the ice compared to talent like Hughes or Dahlin. That is the only reason we pause.
Otherwise the argument is that the toughness that Brady brings offsets the talent that Hughes or Dahlin bring. Which I think is a stretch because you can get toughness a lot easier and also we would have made the playoffs already if that was the case.
If someone else had Brady and they offered him to us for Stutzle or Sanderson we'd laugh at them.
But with that said the only thing Brady is missing from his game is defensive acumen and then he is a player you only move for a gross overpayment, and I'm confident with Martin and Alfredsson in charge that is the Brady we will eventually get.
www.sportsnet.ca
