The mailbag continues its four-part lead-up to the Feb. 26 NHL trade deadline with Pt. 2 of nothing but swap shop questions and answers. We’ll return to our regularly scheduled programming after that.
I am a Flames fan and I have been wondering, do you think the Flames could get Olli Jokinen for Alex Tanguay and maybe a third rounder?
Paul, Granum, Alta.
With all due respect to yourself and thousands of Flames fans, I think the idea of Tanguay (and any draft pick) representing a fair trade for Jokinen needs to be put to rest.
For as good as Tanguay still is, he’s on pace for his worst offensive season since 2001-02. Jokinen, on the other hand, should put up his third straight year of at least 80 points.
The Panthers’ captain is also signed through 2009-10, one year more than Tanguay is locked up for. Therefore, even an upper-level draft pick won’t help sufficiently tilt the balance to make Panthers GM Jacques Martin bite on such a deal.
But Flames fans aren’t the only ones who can overestimate the trade value of any particular player on their team (the proper medical diagnosis for such an affliction is “The Toronto Maple Leafs Effect”).
That’s why, as a general rule, I think rabid fans should always take their view of what one of their hometown players is worth in a deal, and downgrade it by at least 15 percent. That’s the way GMs operate.
I’m curious about your views on the ridiculous amounts of overkill re: trade deadline hype. It seems like, nearly every year, the quality (and impact) of deadline deals always falls short of what the media expects. Do you get wrapped up in it to the same degree everybody else seems to?
Missy Higgins, Long Island, N.Y.
The short answer is, no, I don’t. But I also don’t begrudge people buying into and/or deconstructing all the rumors (I prefer calling them “faith-based reports”), either.
As Ducks GM Brian Burke has noted on more than one occasion, trade talk keeps hockey fans engaged with the game. The NHL needs as much of that obsession amongst its fan base as it can get. And if that means debating the merits of deals that never get past the theoretical stage, I’m all for it.
I think Dwayne Roloson could be on the move out of Edmonton instead of the younger Mathieu Garon. I think a great fit would be to deal him to Ottawa after they ship away the moody and inconsistent Ray Emery.
This would add the maturity of a backup to Martin Gerber and someone who could step in and do the job in the event of a Gerber injury or collapse. What do you think?
Chris, London, Ont.
First of all, given the way he’s played this season, there’s absolutely no chance Garon will be on the move. So, yes, it’ll definitely be Roloson who gets dealt, if – and that’s a big, big if – Lowe can find a taker for him.
Personally, I don’t think he will. As the aforementioned Mr. Emery has found out this year, there’s not a great market for goalies with what charitably can be called mediocre stats who also earn more than $3 million a season beyond this year.
If there’s a franchise that’s looking to clear cap space beyond the 2008-09 campaign (when Roloson’s contract expires), Lowe may find a fit. But I strongly suspect there aren’t too many teams thinking that far ahead – and the ones who are likely aren’t also desperate for a 38-year-old backstopper right now.
Roloson will have trade value, but that value will be maximized next year, not this year.
Ask Adam appears Tuesdays and Fridays only on The Hockey News.com. To send us your question or comment, click HERE.
From now until the trade deadline (Feb. 26) The Hockey News is having a subscription sale. Click HERE to get $10 off our regular subscription price.