JojoTheWhale
CORN BOY
- May 22, 2008
- 33,774
- 105,341
I would rather have kept Simmonds (as long as they didn't re-sign him) than sign Hartman to the 2/6 he's going to get.
What did people really expect? Simmonds is a shell of himself and other teams know it. Hextall should have moved him last off-season when Simmonds still had some name value.
It's not even a conditional 3rd/2nd. It's a 4th/3rd. And Hartman. C'mon! I didn't think Fletcher could make this disappointing, but he did. Hartman is just......an average-ish 3RW. He's another Laughton. He's not poor or anything. He's an RFA needing a contract, so he won't cost much to retain. But with our prospect pool and depth at RW, give me the 1st all day that can be used in a bigger package. Fletcher settled on a short-term NHL move at a value cost. We don't need Hartman now or next year. We needed the best asset, flip it or not. Hartman+3rd is not worth a 1st today. They can coat it up, but it was less value than a 1st round pick.
Turd polishing