From: kim@guppy.uucp (Isaac Kim)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Oates-Janney Trade revisited
Date: 10 Nov 1992 07:33:58 GMT
Organization: UC San Diego
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: guppy.ucsd.edu

In article <1992Nov9.235209.19247@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
>In article <1992Nov9.185836.13791@athena.mit.edu> sancho@athena.mit.edu (Scott G Smith) writes:
>
>>but i do not think that the trade will help st. louis move any closer to the 
>>stanley cup now or any time within the next ten years
>
>If it helps St. Louis, it's a good trade, no matter what happens to St. Louis
>in the next X years.  If St. Louis trades Curtis Joseph for Patrick Roy, it
>will probably still not win a Cup, but that doesn't mean that it would be a
>bad trade to trade Joseph for Roy.
>
Nelson, the whole point of making trades is to try to
optimize your teams chances of winning the Stanley Cup,
either immediately or in the near future.  If a trade makes
a team a slightly better team winning percentage wise, but
does not help the team WIN THE CUP, I would think that it
would not be considered a good trade.

Two examples:

1. Calgary trades Brett Hull and Steve Bozak to St. Louis for
Rob Ramage and Rick Wamsley in the spring of 1988.  Using your logic, 
you would consider this a good trade for St. Louis.  They
gave up two aging veterans for a young future superstar.  It
is unclear, however, if this trade has gotten the Blues
closer to the Stanley Cup.  However, both Ramage and Wamsley 
were significant in Calgary winning the Stanley Cup the following 
season. Calgary may have mortgaged the future away for what
should have been more then one Stanley Cup, but winning that
one Cup was so important that most Flames fans would
consider that Calgary got the best of the trade. 

2. (One you are a little more familiar with) Los Angeles
trades Jimmy Carson, Martin Gelina, first round picks in
1989 (with was traded to New Jersey), 1991 (Martin
Rucinsky), 1993 and cash for Mike Krushelnyski, Marty
McSorely and Wayne Gretzky.  Since the Kings have become a
better team winning percentage wise, even squeaking out a
regular season Smythe title, by using your criteria, you would 
consider this trade good for Los Angeles.  Well, the trade
has made it easier to watch alot fo hockey during the
regular season, but it has also made it damd expensive to go
see a game these days.  But these are just my personal
opinions about the trade.  Now suppose the Kings do not win
the Stanley Cup this year or next year.  Unfortunately, by
that time, Wayne will probably be out of hockey and alot of
the Kings' older players will be past their prime.  It could
be a long time before LA would be able to field a
competitive team.  Then you begin to wonder....Geez, if we
kept Carson and tried to build the team with good young high
draft picks....
I know that hindsight is 20-20, but if that trade does not
bring the Kings a Stanley Cup, would you still consider it a
good trade for LA?

How about today? Do you consider it a good trade for LA??


>===============================================================================
>"M. C. Hamrlik: Can't Touch This Lightning."
>GO LOS ANGELES KINGS!  Luc Robitaille for Hart!

How long did it take you to realize that Wayne wasn't going
to win the Ross this year :)

>GO SAN JOSE SHARKS!  Sandis Ozolinsh for Calder!  Jeff Hackett for Vezina!
>===============================================================================
>Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
>rec.sport.hockey contact for the San Jose Sharks

Isaac (kim@bull.ucsd.edu)

From: karlf@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (Karl Fengler)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:38:27 GMT
Subject: Re: Who's the best goalie? Re: Where are the Maple Leaf fans?
Organization: Hewlett Packard - Boise, ID