View Single Post
Old
10-26-2003, 09:44 PM
  #34
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilo
Once again if Edmonton doesn't pay their YOUNG 30 goals scorer first line center more than 2M$, why would they trade him for an OLDER first line center who would cost 4M$ ???
No logic there.
Think about both sides of the deal.
This deal can't be done with Edmonton.
It can be done as far as money goes. I've heard the budgeted payroll should be around $34-35M this year & its currently at $30.8. Last year Comrie made $4.5M with his bonuses.

I'm assuming that Straka has two years left on his contract. The reason why it would make sense to bring in an older player is that it will bring in a fairly known quantity to bring in results. It would not work on a one for one deal because Straka is not likely to stick around for much longer than his current contract allows (if he even stays that long)... but the fact that Kraft comes with the package makes this more doable.

Edmonton needs a first line centre more than they need youth. It would make sense for Edmonton because they can get two years from a talented guy who would probably do quite well in the less-defensive Western conference. He might then be traded at the deadline before he becomes a UFA. Two years would allow some of their younger centres to develop (Kraft if they get him, plus Niinimaki and Pouloit).

MrMackey is offline