Seven assets for two players? Are we talking Nash & Clowe? AA, Dubi, Erixon, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd?
Erixon, so far, = borderline NHL'er
Dubi/AA = 2nd/3rd line players
4 draft picks = unknown asset
Nash = elite top 10/15 player in the league
Clowe = top six forward
First let me say, I loved the Nash trade. Still do and would make the same trade anyday of the week. But, to me this is short-sighted. Assets are assets. And that's what Bluenote was saying.
Erixon is not a borderline NHLer. He may not be the player he projected to be, but he's a useful piece.
If Dubi and AA are second/third line players and Clowe is a top six forward, that's still two assets to one. And Dubi and AA have scored this season.
4 draft picks are unknown. But the more picks you have, the better chance you find success.
The immediate effect here, for a NYR team that "experts" thought were going to be a Stanley Cup competitor (top 4, I'll say) is that we've given up two 2nd/3rd line players and a 6/7th "D" for a top line player and 2nd line player. Those are the immediate effects of these two trades. This doesn't significantly weaken the current team, in fact, it does quite the opposite. Why is the chemistry not great? Why aren't they scoring? Don't know. But these two moves, in the immediate short term (1-3 years) absolutely IMPROVED this team from nearly any perspective you want to take.
Experts might have thought the Rangers were Cup contenders. The play on the ice showed otherwise. And for a team that could miss the playoffs to enter the draft (at present) without a 1st or 2nd, it's a scary proposition for those of us who lived through Lee Falardeau.
How can you even argue that Nash/Clowe isn't > Dubi/AA/Erixon? It's not even close.
In a vacuum, maybe. But when you add in the picks and assets, the picture changes.
Lundqvist is in his early 30's. The year after next season we have very few players signed. The Rangers are obviously playing for this year and for next and feel this is their window.
Does adding a guy who has toughness and no goals really help this team go for it?
Furthermore, the assets that we've lost can be recovered via trading Gaborik for picks or other trades of that nature.
Maybe, but until they are, it's a loss. And this is a deep draft (from what I've heard)
Your crystal ball can't tell me what those four picks will evolve into - it could be four NHL players or it could be NO NHL players. I've already shown you plenty of 2nd and 3rd rounders that we've picked that barely sniffed the NHL - most played 1 game or less and more of them played no NHL games at all.
By that rational, the Rangers should trade all their picks for a fourth liner. Or that Matt Gilroy is worth more than a first round pick.
Short term, they were good deals. If we win the Cup or make the Finals, it was a good deal no matter what.
Looking short-term was the reason for NYR 1998-2004.