Obviously, reading isnt a strong suit for you'
I never said trade Bolland for him. I said they should look to get him though because he is unsigned/RFA wanting out, a center...and a decent/young player. And per Bolland's history - he can't stay healthy. Feel free to look at his history if you need help. He's an asset when in the lineup, of course/no shit. But does no good for the team when the back flares up and he's out 2 weeks.
People cry/moan about Q having to move lines - when it's done most when Bolland is out/hurt (which has about 25% of the season in his first 3 years) - because this team has 1 other center, in Toews.
What a foolish idea to try to get a 22 year old center to add depth for this team. But let's break out the tissues when Bolland is hurt/out of the lineup and there's line juggling/players playing out of position.
I'm all for the guy if he's able to play 82 - well, 81 now games. But, history says...he can't/won't. If he does..and they get another center - then the have 3 - which is called....wait for it....depth. I don't see a problem with trying to get insurance or depth so that Kane, Sharp, Frolik, Smith - can all play wing. Maybe even....now hang on here...as everyone wants Toews/Sharp/Kane together - is hard to do when those 3 are your other centers. Especially when Bolland is out. Don't you think now (and take a breath here), that if they had another center...they could play that line together AND still have Bolland/Bickell/Frolik....then Hossa/Brunette/Turris (or whoever)? And when Bolland goes down - they still can keep their top 2 lines together? Yeah....pretty fucked up idea.
And why Turris? No love fest for the guy, but right now - not many teams are going to trade someone off their roster at this point/this early. He wants out, is a center, is young, talented...don't know why it's such a foolish notion.
But you're right...all is well since he scored a seeing eye goal and an empty net. All the center problems are solved.
