Mike Comrie HNIC interview
View Single Post
11-11-2003, 03:07 AM
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Waterloo, ON
Originally Posted by
Not true at all. Ottawa's Alexei Yashin had a contract done on the Island AFTER the trade. Mike Peca as well. Fact of the matter is that trading a player's rights and trading a player are not that much different. The other club desiring to acquire Comrie will work out suitable contract terms prior to the trade or there will be none.
Exactly. And my point is Winters said Comrie would sign elsewhere for *less*. Why? I can't think of many (any?) teams that wouldn't gladly pay a 30 goal scorer 1.13 mil (or whatever the qualifying offer was), so why oh why say he'll take half?
[QUOTEAs I've stated before... Comrie isn't going to get an offer sheet. Call it collusion between the owners if you want but there has yet to have been a offer sheet for a young player in the NHL as of yet. Gaborik didn't get one when he held out. Neither did Havlat. Neither did Gagne. Neither did Lecavalier. Neither did Stuart. It won't happen.[/QUOTE]
It's not collusion, I don't think, at least not in Comrie's case. Say a team does make an offer sheet. Say it's not at all front-loaded or back-loaded and the bonuses are reasonable. Boom, the Oilers match it and Comrie's under contract. He's gotta play, or he can get suspended and he still doesn't get paid. And the next time that team has an RFA, Lowe goes headhunting. That latter bit is likely why teams don't often make offer sheets: the risk is too high. You think Reasoner would have cleared waivers last year if Lowe had jumped on the chance to screw somebody earlier? Anybody remember the Soupy Campbell incident?
Nope. I think I've stated this before. Comrie loses most if the situation fails to get resolved. Comrie and Rich Winter would have to bet on the total abandonment of the RFA system for Comrie to be freed from Edmonton. Do you really believe that to be plausible? That's a whole heck of a lot to bank on for Comrie.
That's exactly what I'm saying. No matter what the Oilers have lost this year, Comrie's sitting on his butt (practising is better than not, but it's not NHL hockey and he's not getting into games, he'll be rusty), his skills aren't as sharp as they could be, and 22 is NOT the time you want to start having to play catch-up.
Comrie loses a year, maybe two, of development. This means two years of not being in game shape for the NHL physically or mentally.
Two years if he's lucky. One year if he's REALLY lucky. I'd place it at 3. A year and a half to get back to where he was, say, this time last year, and another year and a half to get to where he should be *now*.
The objective for Lowe is to have the best future for this Oiler team. If that means Comrie sits until Lowe can maximize the value, he sits. There's nothing more to it than that really.
Amen. Comrie's saying "it's what's best for me", Lowe's saying "it's what's best for the Oilers". What would be really best (for both parties) would be a happy Comrie under contract, but that likely isn't going to happen.
Next best is for Lowe to pretend Comrie doesn't exist until he figures out where the team needs help the most, and finding a suitable trade partner. Comrie is now an asset for the team; a depreciating one, mind, but an asset nonetheless, and eventually, somebody will get hurt and a team will desperately need to fill a hole.
That, or Mike will finally succeed in turning blue, sign a contract with Lowe, and start playing hockey again. Like Lowe, I still see this as inside the realm of possibility, but barely. Worse has been forgiven, I'm sure; as both sides say, it's a business, and Lowe's smart enough to not take things personally. (If he wasn't, no way he'd have lasted as long as he did as a player.) I'm not holding my own breath on this possibility though.
View Public Profile
Visit kraigus's homepage!
Find More Posts by kraigus