Calgary's Rivals Weigh in on Phaneuf Trade

by Quisp on Jan 31, 2010 11:56 AM PST in Trade Deadline Comment 5 comments

Some crowd.

Edmonton blog thinks Calgary blew it ("The leafs won this deal, and it's not even close"). Avs blog thinks Sutter is a genius ("Sutter might just have acquired a Stanley Cup").

The Maple Leafs get:

The Ducks get:

The Flames get:

The Kings get:

much less Phaneuf.
a slightly stronger Anaheim.
a possibly freaked-out and therefore more dangerous Flames, with a deeper offense and higher team I.Q..
an end to the deafening, idiotic Phaneuf and/or Giguere to Kings for Brown, Simmonds, Hickey and Schenn rumors.

Clear winner: Kings!

1 recs | Comment 5 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

kings vs trades

Phaneuf was a physical force that I hated playing against, but I was also glad to know he was a defensive liability. Overall I think Burke blew it big time and Calgary is MUCH stronger! That means here they come to challenge for a playoff spot again; (deep breath). I don’t know if we can really say yet that the Flames are stocking up to go after Kovalchuk. But I’m sure just like every other team, including the Kings, they’ll throw together something to see if Atlanta bites. What I think they may now have done though is given themselves the pieces to get Kovi as a rental without really altering the team too much in a bad way BEFORE this trade. Smart approach, I think.

I know Anaheim had to lose Giguere, but I really don’t see this as much of a help. Blake’s not all that, nor does he fit their mold at all. To me this is a whatever/whatever…

But the dominoes have started falling, so we shall see what happens next… It will definitely be interesting!!!

In Dean I trust!!!

by roadtripper on Jan 31, 2010 1:12 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Interesting take, roadtripper

I was trying to think what Calgary gets out of this, and figured it was basically a panic move. I hadn’t thought of the Kovalchuck angle, but that makes sense. I can see them taking Hagman and adding a couple of pieces for a Kovi rental and probably benefitting from it. I don’t think it would put them over the top, but that’s really Sutter’s call.

The Mighty Dorks get to free up cap space for next year.

From Brian Burke’s angle, I don’t really see the logic. Phaneuf is someone you get if you think you can seriously contend this season or the next. I think Toronto is going to need more time than that. Does Burke really think he can rebuild in a hurry around Phaneuf, Gustafsson and Kessel?

by DougX on Jan 31, 2010 1:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

the "logic"

Burke: Phaneuf is an elite #1 defenseman. JSG is an elite #1 goalie. I win.
Sutter: Phaneuf is redundant because of J-Bo. Phaneuf is locker room poison. I get some secondary scoring. I win.
Ducks: (per RudyKelly) I was spending 7 million on a back-up. Now I can spend half that and put it on the ice, and get some secondary scoring. I win.

My take? Well, all of those things are true. So in that since, to some degree, everybody wins. What I don’t see is this being some kind of Kovalchuk precursor. My understanding was (based entirely on bullshit rumors) that Sutter was balking at trading Phaneuf, so if that’s the case why would this trade “position” them?

I think Calgary will be energized and “shored-up” for an attempt not to crap out and miss the playoffs. Will they do it? Their schedule sucks. And someone is going to miss out. You’ve got CGY, DET, VAN, COL, LA, PHX and NSH, seven teams, fighting for six spots. CGY is trending down. Everyone else is either hot, trending slightly up or holding steady. (I’ve left DAL, ANA, STL and MIN out of the conversation, but it’s clearly possible that one or more of them get hot and make a break for #8, in which case that’s more competition for CGY).

Toronto, frankly, wins in part because Burke wants desperately not to give Boston the #1 pick overall. In a weird way, he’s a buyer, as these two trades illustrate. If he can just get the team into the middle ten, it will be a major victory.

Wait till this year.

by Quisp on Jan 31, 2010 1:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs