NHL general managers tend to be judged, at least from what I've read and heard, on their individual trades. Or the accumulation thereof.
Which is, of course, terribly unfair.
Even setting aside all the facets of a GM's job that are more time-consuming and occur more commonly -- primarily internal evaluations, free-agent signings and the draft -- what's most fallacious about focusing on trades is that seldom is the broader picture of those trades fully taken into consideration. Rather, it's simply Player A being placed on one side of the scale, Player B on the other, and wait to see which way it tilts.
Well, weigh this: The moves Jim Rutherford executed Tuesday were on some other scale.
To continue reading, log into your account:
