clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Not the Positive I was Looking For

New, comments

I ask for positives, and Russo gives me this:

"I'll just say we were willing to look at our players with the exception of our younger players," Risebrough said. "How do I know that's the right way to go? The counteroffers are usually with those guys. When you make a proposal and you're saying, 'Here's what I'll do,' and their counter back is usually your young guys, you know it's the right thing not to do."

So simply because they ask for young players automatically means it is the wrong deal? I really do not follow the logic. While I agree with Risebrough's logic in the story of not trading away his first round pick (and only pick with any meaning), I do not understand what it is he hoped other GMs would want.

The story reports that Risebrough continued his hunt of Oli Jokinen. Did Reisebrough believe that Phoenix would want Veilliux, Bergeron, or Skoula for a Jokinen caliber player? What else do the Wild have to offer except young players or picks? The answer, of course, is nothing.

So, since the Wild refused to trade its most elite players, its top young players, its first-round pick and no longer owns its second- or third-round picks, its trade deadline maneuvering was limited.

The way I read the article, the clubhouse is not over flowing with confidence in the stretch run, and the lack of help at the deadline.

So to be blunt, as coach Jacques Lemaire said Wednesday, "This is our crew and we'll go with the crew."

"This is the time of year where you see the good teams. It's not a good time to lose four games in a row," center Eric Belanger said. "We have to make sure we don't slip more than we're doing right now. A lot of teams got better, and a lot of teams are thinking they have a chance to go in the playoffs and win. These are the guys we have to go with."

Is it just me, or does Belanger sound like a guy who wants out of this place more and more every day?

Still looking for that positive.

-Buddha