North Cole
♧ Lem
- Jan 22, 2017
- 11,424
- 12,729
And I think it's dumb when people bring it up with the Hall-Larsson trade too. Hall for Larsson was bad because it was a bad trade right when it happened, it wasn't bad because of what Hall did in the future.
No, but what he did in the future made it worse. It's a classic example of why you don't sell low. I'm not saying that you have to hold on to a guy forever because of FOMO on the best value, but there has to be some middle ground (like Sakic and Duchene). It's not like he dumped a one hit wonder player and I get the idea that Neal wasn't a fit due to the line structure in CGY; however, you can't convince me that Lucic was the best value. GM's don't trade with division rivals on a whim or to dump a piece. Both Holland and Tre believed that the guy they were picking up would benefit their team and the guy they were giving away was dead weight to their rival. One of these GMs looks a lot more correct than the other at this time. There's a 0% chance that CGY does this trade if they assume Neal is going to score 30 goals playing for the Oilers, unless they have an unhealthy need for toughness. I don't think toughness is what sank them last year.
Lucic-Neal trade was bad from the start, because of a misguided idea that toughness builds team character and contributes to wins. What Neal is putting together is potentially making it more lopsided. The toughness schtick is the same idea Chiarelli had when he started trading for slower, bigger guys. NHL is a skill game now, I'm not saying Neal is a hugely skilled player, but he does a lot of little things better than Lucic and thinks the game better.
There's literally no other reason for Chiarelli to bring in guys like Petrovic, Manning, etc. other than an obsession with size/grit. In my opinion, it doesn't win games. We don't need Semenko types in the current NHL.