Yeah... but we would have gotten two players who would play for us in return... this makes the trade even worse.
They would have just traded it at the draft anyways...
I have determined that I no longer give a flying #%&@ what anyone thinks of what I say.
You all have no hockey sense if you think he has played well to this point, think he will be the difference in winning a cup, think that he will make losing Stuart or Lidstrom okay, or think that he is worth the salary and draft pick we will give up, or think that losing Kindl as well doesn't make the trade worse, or thinks that the two college boys we were looking at would have been any worse than using the first pick we traded and signing them for depth.
It all boils down to options. Giving up that first for Kyle severely limited our options. If we saw significant short term benefits, then we would be able to justify it. True, we don't know if he will make a difference in the playoffs yet. From what I see, the only logical conclusion is to not bet on it. I really hope I am wrong, but well you can be the judge. I just find your judgement to this point to be flawed if you perceive my "negativity" as anything but realistic appraisal of what has happened to this point.