NHL winners and Losers Trade Deadline Deals.

[BruinLVGA]

Way too early to say. If you traded serious assets for a rental and don't win the cup, you are probably a loser. Although, the only deal that really went down like that was the Rick Nash deal. It is just the nature of making those types of trades. For Tampa or Pitt to win their deals, they need to win a cup in the next 2 years considering the assets they gave up for a playoff run and a season from the guys they got. Unless they re-coup the assets in the summer or at next years TDL.

Not really... The 1st was a given for a player like Rick Nash... Spooner was not going to be extended here because it would have cost much more + his track record in consistency wasn't something that made folks very confident... Lindgren was probably our 4/5th best D prospect...
Depends what "serious assets" are for you. For me those aren't that... serious.

 

[4ORRBRUIN]

I didn’t say you were losers, but that to justify you being winners on the deal you have to win the cup. When you pay a hefty price for a pure rental that is really the only way to win it.

So just say anytime a team gives up assets to improve their chances to win a cup at the deadline are losers. Except the team that wins the cup.

Bruins are clearly winners due to the fact they gave up futures that they could easily give up. If Nash signs a new deal does that change?