Trading for a guy like Laperriere should not be a priority, since we have more pressing matters to address. However, were we able to positively address the other areas of need, finding a way to swap Laperriere with Voros on the bottom lines would benefit the team as well. Again, it's all "if the price is right." I don't think anyone is advocating trading prospects or valuable assets for Laperriere, rather moving some of our redundant parts for him. Simply because he's not THE answer doesn't mean he wouldn't be worth adding.
wrong. it's because we're not the Doug MacLean Bluejackets. we're a team that's in a playoff position, and has aspirations of winning playoff series (I'm talking about management and not the fans).
those types of teams aren't scared of picking up 35 year old players at the deadline. those types of teams don't discount attributes like character and leadership. notice the Devils picked up Shanahan, and the Sharks picked up Claude Lemieux.
I would gladly sit Voros, Sjostrom, Orr, or Dawes for him.
Ok. The problem is, we're not nearly as good as either of the teams mentioned.
However I would sit any of those players with the exception of Orr, given how incredibly soft this team is.
Obviously, we need to address plenty of other issues as well and a Lapperriere type isn't worth giving up much for, but if you can't understand why dressing Lapperriere over Voros or even Sjostrom would help this team than I don't know what to tell you. Look at the teams that win cups. There's ALWAYS a few gritty, seasoned character guys and usually when you look at the Cup winner's roster, a couple of them stepped up in the playoffs to get them that Cup. Without a BIG spark to our offense, I don't know that we should be talking about the Cup but that's an entirely different argument altogether. The point is, if the price is a 3rd or Kalinin, for example, and it makes us an obviously better team, than I'm all for it. Hell, just trade Voros + Kalinin FOR Lapperriere, right?