Our "all-in" isn't visible from close range. We have limited assets, particularly by way of picks.
I think the same model should hold now as always: Prioritize long-term assets we will have more than a couple of months of control over. Tampa has been applying that model well, even with the occasional hiccup (i.e. Jeannot vs Guentzel, Hagel, Paul, Moser).
Toronto doesn't need a Guentzel type deal. But when I look at Utah and see Barret Hayton, Jack McBain, Olli Maata and Michael Kesselring, I can't help but think, now there's a team worth entering serious discussions with. Maybe another smaller deal with Philly for Seeler/Hathaway types. That's an "all-in" scenario l I can get my head around because we'll have controlled assets that are support players that didn't break us.
Foligno type all-in deals need to be reserved for when our club justifies the gamble. When we come close in the year prior - as in - we went to the Conference Finals. Otherwise, we're playing with those future assets that should and must be maximized for the long haul because its obvious the team before wasn't worth the gamble.
And its got to be that hard-assed, there have to be lines we commit to not crossing no matter the "beleaf".
