Who was supposed to play 2C? Ummm. Isn't that Gorton's job? That's kind of the root of this debate, isn't it? And again, it's the decision to extend Strome and DeAngelo instead of trading them. Everyone knew Strome's point accumulation last year was mainly due to playing with an MVP candidate in Panarin. Hell, how about signing Mikael Granlund, which most of us wanted. Or being creative and trading for one?
Yes. And if there is no better solution, what does one do? You cannot wish a another solution, though you may try. Since you think it was bad, very bad, surely you can come up with a solution that was better. Granlund was not the better solution play with Panarin. Creating a trade market that did not exist is also just playing fantasy land.
Trouba - first off, huh? What do the pandemic, flat cap and winning the lottery have to do with Trouba? Second, ummm. you pointed out the issue yourself. They gave him market rate for a top pair defenseman....except he hasn't played like a top pair defenseman now, has he? They overrated his talent.
The pandemic and flat cap has everything to do with his contract. And yes, he is a top pairing d-man. Not a one, but most certainly a 2. It should also be pointed out that his partners (i.e supporting cast) have been Smith, Sjeki & a kid that cannot buy beer legally.
How'd the defense look without him last night?
Jack Johnson - it hurts no one...except when he actually plays and it hurts the team.
Regurgitated ad nauseum. Martin wanted someone that was a) familiar with his system and b) he was comfortable with. On occasion, GMs act on advise from advisors.
"Kreider signed a below market rate contract for a top line player. What crystal ball showed you a) the pandemic b) the flat cap c) winning the lotter?" Once again, HUH? Second of all and once again...again, it's the decision to extend him instead of trading him. If you recall, he was on the trading block all of last year.
What a crock. He was not on the block for the entire year. And when push came to shove, both parties got to somewhere where they wanted to be. Kreider with the team on a below market rate contract. That trumped any possible trade profiles that may have existed at TDL.
That is the point. There was nothing better.
LOL, what kind of twist is this? We traded a top-pair defenseman and a top-6 F for two prospects with limited ceilings, a late first rounder and a late second rounder. We all knew it was a horrible trade at the time and nothing has proved otherwise. Lundkvist looks like a fantastic prospect, but he hasn't played an NHL game yet. At best, you're looking at a top-pair defenseman and top-6 F for a young promising prospect.
By "we all knew" you mean you and a few others that love hindsight? McD also gets the benefit of playing behind Hedman. But forget that. How would have fit him in there under the cap? And you would rather this team had him now with his future cap him than Lundkvist? That is how rebuilds are done?
Dude, you're literally making my argument for me. "Not everyone gets the benefit of redoing drafts with hindsight a few years later" - umm. isn't it the GM's job to take the guy who projects to be an excellent NHLer? Isn't that why Jeff Gorton is in charge of drafting these prospects and not a layperson like you or me? He's a GM precisely because he can identify talent and how they translate into the NHL. He whiffed BADLY on Andersson.
What you are doing is called cherry picking. As you seem to want to dump him on his drafting ability, I will note that in these last 4 years, in addition to Andersson in the first round, Gorton also drafted Chytil, Kravstov, Miller, Lundkvist, Kakko, Lafreniere and Schnieder. Since taking Lindbom in the second round, he has also taken Robertson & Cuyelle in the second and a Zac Jones in the 3rd. But year, when evaluating what a GM does in a draft, let's very generously leave all of these out and cherry pick Andersson and Lindbom as signs of drafting failures.
