Comments on: Dominic Moore traded to the Montreal Canadiens

By: blaze

blaze — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 08:39:27 +0000

is that supposed to be insulting?

By: dumbassdoorman

dumbassdoorman — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 08:31:34 +0000

I agree with the extention upping value. But I do not think poni is going to do that. I only say this because his family is from TO….and he wants to stay. I think if they traded him he may want to try and return.

By: HABSSTAR

HABSSTAR — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 08:23:28 +0000

I think any GM looking for a rental at the trade deadline is going to be willing to pay more for a guy with a cup ring on his finger. Of course I could be wrong. But that's just the way I see it.

Or if the team looking to get Poni is able to get him to agree to an extension along with the deal then I could see him going for more than Cullen.

By: pezzz123

pezzz123 — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:58:33 +0000

Cullen is a centre, has a ring and doesn't take nights off. But Poni should get you a good return, don't worry. Pittsburgh might offer you something like Dustin Jeffrey, a 2nd rounder and a 4th rounder.

By: jpmac

jpmac — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:25:54 +0000

Atleast we aren't Team USA version 2.0

By: dumbassdoorman

dumbassdoorman — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:50:35 +0000

Plus trying to not get to hyped and therefore disappointed. I think if we get around, that being slightly better player return that cullen got we did okay. And if we were all told a month agao we would get a 2nd rounder and decent player/propect for poni most would have done cartwheels…..lol.

By: hockey_lover

hockey_lover — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:48:51 +0000

Ohhh I getcha. I thought you had meant that the first 30 guys in the draft have as much potential as 30 random dudes in the 5th round. THAT is very bold to say and Im sure you would disagree if someone said that. But yes, the chances of finding a higher number of talented players out of a group of 180 is better than in the group of 30, without a doubt.

I agree with you for the most part. Losing a first round pic isnt the end of the world. But it could potentially be a big loss in the future. But thats all it is .. potential. Like you said, soft assets. There are very few sure things. Yes, everyone knew that Crosby was going to be a big deal. But people also said the same about Daigle.

By: dumbassdoorman

dumbassdoorman — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:46:45 +0000

I am saying that because i just don't think anybody is gonna pay much more if at all. There points are fairly equal and Cullen has a ring….that being said i think it equals things out as long as teams don't get desperate, than things could change. And younger means nothing for a rental player to me.

By: reinjosh

reinjosh — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:44:09 +0000

well its just a numbers thing
Yes the first 30 picks have players with higher potential. But thats 30 guys.
30 guys versus 180 guys?
Where is the better player going to come from?
Likely the bigger numbers.
I am not saying first rounders are not great. Of course they are and losing them can hurt. But its not the end of the world.
Teams like Atlanta, Florida, Columbus and the Islanders really have nothing to show with a lot of first rounders.
Teams like Colorado, Detroit, Dallas have lots too show without many first rounders.

All I am trying to argue is that trading away 1st rounder does not equal doom like everyone on this site suggests. Now if a team were to trade everyone of their picks away, well then I would completely say thats stupid as anything.
But having no first rounder is completely fine. It all depends on the simple question of whether that first rounder will bring you more by keeping it than it could by trading it away. Philly, Toronto, Calgary and New Jersey all fell that they could get more by using the first's as trade chips. With Calgary it may have bombed (we won't know until their pick gets turned into a player), with New Jersey they bought a legitimate chance at a cup, with Philly they got a guy to patrol their blueline for years (they gave up other assets but chances are that any one asset wouldn't have turned out like Pronger). Toronto felt they could speed up the rebuild and get a guy that may or may not turn out better than one of their picks (more of an even movement). It all depends on what you use picks for.
I just hold a different view on picks than most people on here. They are soft assets (they have worth but their worth is determined later on) that can be used in so many different ways. Their is no one good way to use them.

By: hockey_lover

hockey_lover — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:33:50 +0000

No, I dont think ANY move is the end of the world. Ovechkin going down for the season in game 1 is terrible but they'd survive.

Wow, thats a bold statement. Interesting though. I disagree but I know where you are coming from.