Crowned wrote:The Raycroft trade was a bad one, yes.
However, you don't know what the market is like at any given time, for any positional player. If JFJ traded away a highly regarded prospect for a goaltender, then I could imagine what the market was like at the time, and perhaps the availability of goaltenders on the trade market.
Why wasn't Gerber's name mentioned last season? He wasn't 'recently' acquired by Ottawa. He's having a good season, so JFJ is at fault for not acquiring a goaltender with a hefty price tag that nobody wanted last year?
Martin Biron was traded several months after Raycroft was traded, and Byzgalov was placed on waivers today. What does that have to do with anything? We were supposed to wait around for the off chance that a goaltender was going to hit the waiver wire a year and a half after our starting goaltender was declined a contract extension (Belfour)?.
I'm not going to argue the Toskala trade, ever. I still stand by my original opinion that it was a good one. I don't care if Cherepanov or Esposito become the next Messier or Gretzky, half of the league passed on them for a reason. There's no guarantee that JFJ would've risked his selection and gone with one of them.
The Raycroft trade is in the past. We overpaid for the guy, and he hasn't been the same goaltender that we saw in Boston. There's no sense in discussing "we should've", "what if", "this goaltender is currently available" threads over a trade we completed rather far in the past.
No your right I dont know what the exact market was for goalies at the time but its plainly obvious to most that JFJ went over the market value to get Raycroft. Rask's stock at the time was everrising so fast and Raycrofts value was horribly low coming off a bad year in Boston and a bad year over in europe prior to that. When he found out how high the market was for mediocre goalies he should have moved on and tried to find a comparable goalie elsewhere like Free Agency, not give into the fact the market was high and he desperately needed a tender.
Gerber's name was mentioned lots over the past year on other message boards and many people said they would rather have had him and his mediocre performance and his price tag then Raycroft who also gives you mediocre results but the difference being you didnt have to give up what was a top 10 prospect in the world at the time to get Gerber. Gerber was one example, but explain to me why Legace wasnt more sought after? The guy is from Toronto and was rumoured to be very interested in signing here that offseason. He's also a better goaltender then Andrew Raycroft.
Birons name was brought up along with others to show the trend of value given up for goalies over the past 2 or so years. Biron (2nd rounder) , Toskala who was coming off a good season unlike raycroft and was more proven was had at arguably the same cost. Tomas Vokoun who was also coming off a decent year and more proven then Raycroft was also had for around the same cost as Raycroft.
so if this team miss's the playoffs and Toskala only has a mediocre season, your still going to argue it was a good trade? What was the point of this trade if the team is no better now then it was before the trade?