Conceptually, is trading part of the core of an 8th-9th place team in the West with a larger part of the core of the 15th place team in the East an intuitively bright move?
After all, aren't these four guys a big part of the reasons why the Leafs are in a much, much worse situation than the Flames?
I'd agree that short term the deal gives the Flames some needed depth up front and - depending upon the speed with which the incoming players can learn the Flames system - may possibly help sneak the Flames into the playoffs . . . . and so save Sutter's job (which is what this is all about).
But Stajan, Hagman and White certainly aren't going to keep Thorton, Marleau, Toews, Kane or the Sedins up at night worrying. The new guys don't make the Flames contenders for anything other than first round roadkill.
Also, this move could just as easily end the Flames' season as save it, if the incoming players' integration doesn't occur quickly. Another five game losing streak, while the new players adjust and build chemistry, would pretty much eliminate the Flames from playoff contention.
So even short term, I can't see the Flames becoming "Leafs West" as being a great thing . . . unless, you're cheering for one of the other Western teams on the playoff bubble.
And long term? Well, due to the UFA/RFA status of Stajan, Mayers and White, the trade really amounts to Pharneuf for Hagman and cap space. And that's a horrible trade. Hagman will never be a top ten forward. And UFAs are usually a poor value proposition. But, Phaneuf has been, and likely will be again due to his age, a top ten defenceman and part of the core of his team.
This trade has Leemanesque or Pedersonesque potential for backfiring.
|