IMO you have to look at the trade this way.
Would you rather four years of Lucic at his current salary (net of retention).
Or
2 years of Neal at his salary, then likely a buyout which leaves four more years of dead money.
In that scenario, I take Lucic in a close call.
Does everyone fully understand the expansion facts? There are two scenarios.
Lucic doesn't waive, in which case Flames have to expose someone they didn't want to lose or give up an asset. That would make this a bad trade.
Or Lucic waives and nothing happens. Because Seattle is not claiming him.
|