Exactly, the logic is ridiculous
- Dozzer
the logic you fabricated, you mean.
holl is not an experienced nhl player, there is a difference between an experienced nhl player and one that has 60 games under his belt at age 28.
an experienced guy who has a rep as a solid player, a guy like holl is an enigma, he hasn't even played any playoff games so how can he be looked at as a key or viable piece to a cup contender?
ekblad on the other hand was a #1 overall pick who is far more talented than holl and also has nhl experience, he is 24 years old and already in his 6th season in the league. he has also played in at least 1 playoff round. since he is far and away a superior talent to holl, it is with ease that you can say ekblad would be a viable key piece to a true cup contending team unlike justin holl and his 60 games nhl experience at age 28.
you guys have interpreted everything that i have said incorrectly, almost like by design just to argue over something so obvious.