Wizop wrote: we gave up two low firsts this year but say we kept them and replaced Doug and JJ, how much PT do you think the guys who went where we would have picked would've gotten? I think we have more than enough guys who are still developing so in a very real way we're having our cake and eating it too.
maybe I should qualify this by adding that I've never been a boom and bust believer. some call it treadmilling but I'd be quite satisfied if we just are starting another 20 year stretch of playoff appearances.
Fair enough. I don't think trading for Pascal was horrible. He's a fine player and gives us much better chance to have a team we can cheer for. That is worth something.
But we gave up three 1sts right? Three chances at guys in hopes that maybe one will be as good as Pascal... when we need them.
It's the timing I don't like. I see us as two years away. By then we now need to have our youngsters be really good and Pascal to remain a near all-star. Seems optimistic, but optimism is not a terrible thing.
I think "in for a penny in for a pound". I'm not thrilled with giving up three firsts and then hoping to get out of the first round.
This now is our window, and where are the pieces we need NOW to contend? Can we even point to possibilities?
That was my question. ...and will we take another big swing to get them?
Again I'm cautious so I would not unless it was a fair deal for a really strong player. those are very scarce, especially after yesterday. Our competitor gobbled them up.
So this window feels closed already, without a big stoke of luck. And the real window, in two-three years ...will maybe have Pascal as a mid thirties back up, and us three 1sts short.