Process = Poor, in whose opinion? Yours?
If the process = We have liked Pouliot for a long time, and there is developmental upside we can tap, let's trade for him.... then it seems the Process = excellent.
Don't mistake thinking Pouliot was worth Pedan and 4th = not caring about a 4th round pick.
Because YOU didn't think it was good asset management, does NOT mean it wasn't.
Warning... Appeal to Authority: The professionals in charge seemed to think it was worth it.
Please show an example of a rebuilding club dealing picks for fringe assets as a primary mode. If you can do that, then show how this rebuilding club's actions are representative of the actions of most rebuilding clubs. If you can do do both, then you have established that Benning's actions constitute "good asset management" within the context of a rebuilding club. If you can't, then that should signify that what he has done is atypical. If it's atypical of a rebuild, how can it be judged as being "good" outright?
It's not my standard that Benning is failing. It's the standard of what is usually expected in a rebuild. But instead of figuring out a way to prove that his clearly atypical approach is as good or better than the typical approach of a rebuild, I get "he did it, so it must be good". Or, "he wanted it, so he paid for it". Beautiful.
Also a rebuild isn't an all or nothing approach. Not every transaction is or has to be a trade for a pick going only one way. Sometimes you trade a depth pick for a 23 yr old. Don't think you can find a single team that's rebuilt well that did not trade picks in their process to target players they felt fit their team.
Pouliot significantly changes the complexion of our group of young dmen.
Seems like he will be a middle 3 offensive defender for our team for the next decade. That's a nice asset to have for a cost of .... assets.
Or we can dismiss the Pouliot trade and pretend they just willy nilly lucked out on this one.
This has already been addressed. No one has put forth that it's an all or nothing approach, but the exception also does not prove the rule. If the primary actions of a rebuilding club is to acquire picks, then exceptional cases where picks are dealt for fringe assets do not alter that understanding.
"why is the super scout GM trading picks in a rebuild?". Where is that rationale?
Maybe consider maybe the management feels like we have our high end elite prospects now and a decent cupboard of potential depth... so let's move forward and support them with some veterans with the goal of winning and pushing for the playoffs now because a competitive environment will breed and produce better character players than if they actively wasted a professional year of service of all our current players having a lineup of unsupported youth flounder around the ice.
So going forward... the plan is to break in players like they are Goldobin... create some depth above them that they have to break thru to earn a spot and earn to keep it.
You want Pettersson to do the same thing next yr. Dalhen. Juolevi.
Feel bad for Burmistrov and Weircoch who signed on for an opportunity to play for their next contracts..... but have become a safety net for our roster instead.
Sedins are obviously coming back next yr... Vanek may not be - definitely not for $2mil... but I'm off on a tangent now.
My point... Just cuz YOU don't understand the rationale of Pouliot for Pedan and 4th, does not mean there is a lack of it.
I understand the rationale: Benning is re-tooling under the guise of a rebuild. He has never actually attempted a proper rebuild.
Further, your point about now supporting the already in-house elite prospects rings hollow when we realize that Benning has been doing this even when he didn't have Pettersson, Juolevi and/or Dahlen. This has been his mode throughout. From the time of getting Vey at his first draft to now in getting Pouliot Nothing has changed. Yet, he keeps dealing picks for fringe assets. Is there any wonder why fans looking for a rebuild (his stated goal) are questioning his actions? There shouldn't be.
I think Benning would do himself a great service if just admits he's not rebuilding and it's always been about making the current product competitive, faster. Nobody would be questioning the process then. Everybody would understand he's just continuing the re-tool.