Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 54,318
- 31,517
Why on earth would we have kept Pageau?
That's like keeping a thoroughbred race horse to work on a farm instead of selling him for a nice sum to someone who will race him at the Kentucky Derby.
Well, first off, i think calling Pageau a thoroughbred off to race at the Kentucky derby is a bit hyperbolic. We didn't trade Chabot or Tkachuk, he isn't Stone or Karlsson, he is a middle 6 center.
Its looking more and more like the return will be in the 28 to 31 range, so a nice sum might be a touch exageratted as well (particularly when juxtaposed with your thoroughbred analogy). A pick in the range we will likely get has around a 30% chance of becoming a decent player or better.
Now there is certainly something to be said for getting moving on before the player starts to decline particulary now that he has a fairly big contract with some term, and maximizing value on what appears to be a career year, but as a young developing team, there is value to having a player like Pageau who can insulate the rookies, teach them how to be good pros and is young enough that we might have gotten a couple more good years once we were ready to contend before he declined. Basically it boils down to over paying a rotating cast of veterans at the end of their career like Hainsey or Anisimov, at 3.5m or 4.5 mil cap hits respectively, to act as that veteran leadership, or keeping around a more useful player at a bit of a premium.
Admittedly, i was for trading Pageau, and still am happy with the decision (sucks that the nyi look like they will make the conference finals and significantly decrease the value of the return though) but there is/was clearly valid reasons why keeping him could have been preferable.