Hornqvist couldn't stay healthy whatsoever and his effectiveness at ES had clearly started to show signs of declining. Yet that was somehow okay and they should have kept him?
Hornqvist's ES production in his first 5 season in Pittsburgh:
355GP / 69 goals / 82 assists / 151 points >>>
0.425 ES P/GP
Hornqvist ES production last year
52GP / 14 goals / 11 assists / 25 points >>>
0.480 ES P/GP
So not only did he do better than his average, but he also had worse linemates than normal. Reduced role.
Obviously we'll agree on the health, but playing 52 out of 69 games was decent considering our injuries last year
You would have had a better case if you said PP production, which dropped hard. But even that is largely a symptom of our PP being dogshit last year and not giving him a chance to do his thing. With Reirden taking over the PP, I would have expected Horny to get his mojo back there...at least if they chose to use him again.
Trading him sort of made sense with his age, role and health issues, I suppose. But why for Matheson? We needed to off-load his contract and use the cap space to address one of our needs, like a good 3C, or Pacioretty/Marchessault or something. Instead, we acquired a 3rd pairing caliber D who led the league in giveaways a few years ago, was being benched and has 6 years at 4.875mil left. Overloaded on the left side now, and have a questionable 3rd pair RD in Ceci. Have a solid 3rd pair D in Riikola who's not gonna hurt you, but will probably be eating nachos now... yet again.
Maybe Matheson rediscovers his 2017-18 form but Rutherford's taking quite a leap of faith here. Odds are against him.