F A N
Registered User
- Aug 12, 2005
- 18,819
- 6,001
They also traded Pedan for him who was acquired for a 3rd before. Its not like Pouliot cost nothing, trying to spin it this way is just dishonest. While taking calculated risks does make sense here in there, trading picks away for failed prospects is not really a smart option. Those picks likely will never turn out to be something useful but they may as well ending up being a Madden and a Gaudette - but hey Pouliot didnt cost anything.
It makes little sense to say that taking calculated risks makes sense and at the same time saying that trading picks away for failed prospects is not really a smart option. If you're against trading picks for "failed" prospects then your position should be that the calculated risks involving draft picks for "failed" prospects isn't worth taking because presumably one has done the math and figure the risk worth taking. Logically it doesn't make sense either because presumably if you're not trading draft picks you're trading a player or prospect that you could have traded for a draft pick.
Take Brett Connolly, was he worth two 2nd round picks? No. But the Bruins could of kept Connolly as he did emerge as a pretty useful player.