Did the Atlanta Thrashers blow it?

[BadCompany]

With the rapidly improving play of the Atlanta Thrashers, and the fair to good chance they won't be picking 1st overall next summer (though that is still a possibility), I was wondering if anybody thought the Thrashers blew it, that they are peaking one season too early.

Here is my logic: Neither Dany Heatley or Ilya Kovalchouk had to play in the NHL this year. Heatly still had two years of NCAA eligibility left, and Kovalchouk of course could have stayed in Russia. If I remember correctly, he wasn't signed until right before the deadline (for coming over to North America).

Wouldn't it have been smarter for the Thrashers to leave those two out of the NHL, picking up the 1st overall again? With the wonder twins up front, and Jay Boumeester on the blueline, we aren't talking about a potentially good team, we are talking about a potentially great team. Worse still, Montreal last year offered Mathieu Garon (top goaltending prospect), Andrei Markov (top young blueliner) and two first round picks (Mike Komisarek and Alex Perezhoughin) for Kovalchouk. Say they were able to finangle a similar package out of a team for Boumeester.

Kovalchouk, Heatley, Stefan, Garon, Markov, Komisarek (or similar player), Perezhoughin (or similar player).

Sprinkle in some vets with Ted Turners money, and within two years the Thrashers could have been, at the very least another version of this year's New York Islanders, but maybe even much, much more.

But if they don't get the 1st overall pick in what is shaping up to be a mediocre draft year, they won't get Bouwmeester, nor will they be in a position to get a huge package of players in return for the pick.

Did they make a mistake in bringing up Heatley and Kovalchouk?

Oh, and as an aside, I'd offer Garon, Markov and our 1st for Bouwmeester this year.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

It's an honest question BC. I just don't know the kid. I could look him up at Hockeysfuture I guess but it seems every rookie has a positive writeup.

If you're willing to give up Garon, Markov, etc, you must think pretty highly of him. But again, I don't know what he brings to the table. Would he be able to play in his first year? Cheers.

[Cranky]

Wait a second guys. Would you really give up Komisarek, Theo and Markov, and more for him? I think AS offered either goaltender. Now I ask you, who is more valuable, a star goalie or a star forward?

Besides, I would never forgive AS if Komi'saurus developed into another Stevens with extra painful size. I would even settle for a Kasparaitis. Can you imagine what will be on every forwards mind when they enter the Habs zone?
         [glow=red,2,300]PAIN, PAIN and MORE PAIN[/glow]

What about Markov? The kid has the smart and the skills.  What if he is another Rafalski at least? With a bit more size. That is well within his development "capabilities".

I am not even going to go to the Theo question. Theo is already a No. 1 and already touted as a star. Give him 2 ro 3 years of maturity and he could well be anoth Fuhr or better. He has the attitude (arrognce) and skills.

Kovalchuk has shown flair and willingness to do what it takes to score goals. Very talented indeed. However, so is Bure. And I won't have Bury within a hundred miles of a Hab's uniform.  Please do not tell me that Kovalchuck has not shown his arrogance already. He may turn out to be one of the biggest Russian arrogant "wonderbra". Did I just mispell that? Or another Mogilny.

Now does it still look like a fair trade?  

Besides, BC, what the heck happened to your ROLL FOUR LINES OF KILLGERS UNTIL THEY SURRENDER.  

And I thought  that you were going to be the next Hab's GM.

Sheesh.

[BadCompany]

Huh?

I wasn't asking if the Thrashers blew it by not making that trade with the Habs (and I think Savard refused to include Theodore, which was apparently the sticking point) I was asking if the Thrashers blew it by bringing Kovalchouk and Heately into the NHL this year, when they could have kept them elsewhere in the organization, picked up another 1st overall (as opposed to the 4th or 5th overall), drafted Jay Bouwmeester and had two dominant forwards, and a dominant defenceman. I was also suggesting they could then trade Bouwmeester (not Kovalchouk) for a package similar to the one Montreal offered for Kovalchouk? Following? I wasn't saying Montreal should trade Komisarek, only asking if the Thrashers could have picked up a player like Komisarek from another team, along with a potential franchise goalie and a smooth skating defenceman.

You are right, I wouldn't traded Garon, Markov, Komisarek and Perezhoughin for Kovalchouk either. Whenever people bring up Lecavalier, I always said it would take a similar package. People (who need people are the luckiest people in the world) would always say "I'd give up 5 first round picks for him" but its a lot more difficult when you start putting names to those 1st round pick. Chouinard, Hossa, Hainsey, Komisarek and Perezhoughin for Kovalchouk or Lecavalier?

I have never really been in favor of the big trade, just because I think it seriously depletes your depth, and rarely seems to work anyways. Bure, Jagr, Lindros, Fleury,even Edmonton with Doug Weight, or Boston with Ray Bourque, it just seems to help the team trading the superstar away a lot more than it does the team acquiring the superstar. At the very worst, its an even trade-off (in many cases anyways).

But back to what I was saying. Again, I wasn't trying to say Montreal should make that deal for Kovalchouk, I was just saying that IF the Thrashers got the 1st overall again this year, they could trade it away for a deal LIKE the one Montreal offered (and not necessarily to Montreal), which would then give them two elite forward prospects, a good goalie prospect, a good young defenceman and maybe another pick or two. I think the Thrashers blew it by having Heately and Kovalchouk in the NHL this year, thus negating their chance at filling in all the missing holes in one fell swoop.

I still think Montreal should go for the 4 lines of Kilgers, that hasn't changed.

Having said that, I would still trade Garon, Markov and a 1st for Jay Bouwmeester. Leaving aside Al Strachan's claim that Bouwmeester "is as good as Bobby Orr" (sheesh) Bouwmeester does have all the tools. 18 years old, 6'4 (or thereabouts), skates like Paul Coffey, great offensive instincts, man, what an addition to the blueline he would be. Think a bigger Scott Niedermeyer. Montreal would be dealing from a position of strength here - Garon's future in Montreal is getting dimmer and dimmer with every Theodore start (and Garon is only, like a year younger than Theodore), Tarasov, in extremely limited pre-season and AHL action, showed that he at least has the potential to be a solid NHL backup, and Olivier Michaud just keeps getting better and better as the season wears on. Michaud of course, is a long shot still (all 18 year old goalies are) but with Theodore in Montreal for the next 8 years, there is no rush. So Garon is more than expendable. Markov is a prize, and I really like him, but you gotta give in order to get. The Thrashers (or whoever holds the 1st pick and is going to draft Bouwmeester) would like an offensive defenceman to replace the potential they could have gotten in Bouwmeester, and while Markov is a step down, it isn't a huge step down. Montreal can also easily replace Markov with Hainsey next year, and Bouwmeester himself the year after that (if not next year as well). So again, Montreal is dealing from strength. They give up a good player in Markov, but get a better one in Bouwmeester. The 1st round pick is gravy.

So looking at it that way, we give up;

• a potential franchise goalie in Garon, which we don't need cause we already have a franchise goalie in Theodore and two good prospects in Tarasov and Michaud,
• a smooth, potentially very good offensive defenceman in Markov, who is replace immediately by Hainsey, and by Bouwmeester
• a 1st round pick, which is always bad, but we are getting one back in return

.

I don't know, I don't think that would hurt us at all.  

[Cranky]

This new board is hampering my mind. All this razzle dazzle gave me a frazzle.  

First thing, I writing about kettles and your talking about spaghetti. Sorry BC.

Yes, of course I would make that trade. We are reaching a postion that 2 for 1's and 3 for 1's are goingto be in the near future. We have some depth, not huge, but some. Giving it up to concentrate on developing out defence is a no-brainer. It goes back to what I have been saying .

A team is like a tree. Have the strong and deep root (goaltending) that will hold down a tree through storms (bad times). The trunck must be solid and robust(defence) so the branches can grow and flourish(forwards). Even if the tree is sick, if you have strong roots and trunk, you can always graft more limps on it.

Sheesh, all this "plant wisdom". I think I'm growing grass on my head as we speak. Good God, I'm a walking Chia Pet.

The new "Ministry of Defense". Please stop making me drool, I look silly in a bib.

[PTH]

Problem is, they couldn't know how well their kids were going to turn out.

If you're sure you have a franchise player in the wings you act one way, if you have a kid who might need some seasoning you give him a chance....

And remember that a top-5 choice will yield another top notch player, normally.

Maybe Atlanta needed to give something to its fans to show that they weren't going to suck forever.

Maybe the only way of keeping Kovalchuk happy was to bring him in now and give him a chance, and it was felt that bringing in 2 kids would lessen the pressure on each.

Who knows.

They'll still rule soon enough !