Walman lost his first-pair role and was a healthy scratch late in the season, do people think other GMs didn't notice? That no pro scouts with a positive evaluation of Walman went to their boss and recommended he look into it, that in their view Walman could help them? If GMs thought the same way that many fans here seem to think about Walman's ability, wouldn't at least one of them have approached SY during the 10 weeks from the end of the regular season to Draft week to find out what it would take to acquire him? SY is gonna say, "Nah, I'd rather give YOU a second-rounder Biff. How does that sound?" Do fans think there is some kind of mandatory trade protocol, that the GM who would like to add a player has to wait for an invitation to make an offer? If SY screwed up his evaluation of Walman, then so did every other GM in the league who whiffed on a chance to improve his defense for nothing more than FC or even gain a late-round pick.
The scenario of suddenly needing more Cap space to add a player makes no sense either when SY had the entire off-season to go over the Cap. He could have traded Maatta almost any time if necessary. Could he have retained on Walman and got something? Maybe, but two years' retention might get in the way of being able to move other guys during those two years. It's not just the potential Cap dumps involved, it's the guys with trade value that might need 10-20 per cent retained to fit into the other team's Cap, or to improve the value of the return.
As much as some fans might want to think Walman had value -- and of course he had some -- he didn't have enough for the two-year pricetag and the strings attached. If the dressing room is done with him, a string becomes a hangman's noose. One of those strings may be the cause of Walman being a healthy scratch now. One of them might have been why the Blues gave up on him in the first place. It doesn't really matter, something in addition to Walman not being as good as fan perception probably played a part in both wanting to get rid of him and what IMO was a total lack of interest from other teams. Ottawa and St. Louis paid the same Draft pick this summer to move similarly-priced players they didn't want, but I guess that's just a coincidence rather than one of the established costs of doing business.
The scenario of suddenly needing more Cap space to add a player makes no sense either when SY had the entire off-season to go over the Cap. He could have traded Maatta almost any time if necessary. Could he have retained on Walman and got something? Maybe, but two years' retention might get in the way of being able to move other guys during those two years. It's not just the potential Cap dumps involved, it's the guys with trade value that might need 10-20 per cent retained to fit into the other team's Cap, or to improve the value of the return.
As much as some fans might want to think Walman had value -- and of course he had some -- he didn't have enough for the two-year pricetag and the strings attached. If the dressing room is done with him, a string becomes a hangman's noose. One of those strings may be the cause of Walman being a healthy scratch now. One of them might have been why the Blues gave up on him in the first place. It doesn't really matter, something in addition to Walman not being as good as fan perception probably played a part in both wanting to get rid of him and what IMO was a total lack of interest from other teams. Ottawa and St. Louis paid the same Draft pick this summer to move similarly-priced players they didn't want, but I guess that's just a coincidence rather than one of the established costs of doing business.
