View Single Post
Old
10-15-2003, 12:35 AM
  #2
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,272
vCash: 500
I would say the first trade is slanted terribly for Montreal. Perreault would not be of interest to the Oilers in my opinion due to his price tag. It's not a question of whether Edmonton could afford Perreault, but more of whether they would want to. He doesn't fit into the Oil's style of run and gun, physical hockey, giving 100% effort on every shift.

If the Oilers were looking to move that package, the second deal would be closer to the value to expect given Comrie's situation. Bulis and Hainsey are both cheap and could fit in very nicely in Edmonton.

With that said, I'm not sure if Montreal does this deal. Right now there's Koivu, Ribeiro, Perreault, Juneau, Begin, and Higgins (who is looking NHL ready) at center. Every single one of those players is best suited down the middle. Now, Comrie is a head and shoulders ahead of everyone there except Koivu, but why deal two assets from relatively weak positions (Hainsey - LD; Bulis - LW) to strengthen an already deep position? Granted, Comrie brings the quality that Montreal needs, but there's also a need for puck moving defensemen which Hainsey provides.

Overall, tough deal for Montreal to pull the trigger on. I would likely do it, because I think Comrie would thrive in a second line center role behind Koivu. But I'd cringe at the thought of Koivu, Comrie, and Ribeiro being the top three centers here.

From Edmonton's perspective, I'm not sure how it addresses needs either. Hainsey fits into the puck moving, fast-skating team the Oil strives to be, but the team's biggest weakness I'd think would be size and strength down the middle, as well as top 6 scoring forwards.

Mike8 is offline