UWSaint wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2018 6:56 am
A debate can be had about whether it is better to have a Leipsic type or a Motte type now with a year to make or break or in 4 or 5 years or for now. But most likely, that's what we are talking about and that's the debate to have.
These kinds of moves made sense to me in 2014/15/16, because of the space on the farm and in the roster, the age of the team, and the lack of prospects.
Now, there is room on the farm, and a lack of waiver-exempt youth. But Benning acquired NHL-roster players, with very little upside, who aren't waiver-exempt.
None of them are a big deal, because as Blob's been saying garbage-in, garbage-out. But I don't understand why these trades were made. If this is meant to say that Goldobin and Boucher are going nowhere on this club (which is implicit since their roster-bubble-spots are now gone), then why not move those players who likely had a bit of value (at least Goldobin should have)?
I guess I just don't see the organizational need that was addressed by these moves - small, sort-of skilled forwards that aren't waiver-exempt and may join the list of early-20s forwards that can't quite crack the NHL lineup.
It takes 2-3 years for a 3rd or 4th rounder picked out of NCAA to even make the AHL roster, so I see late-rounders as improving the pipeline of prospects a few years into the future, and also giving a chance of the pick turning out great - which will not happen with Leipsic and Motte.