Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Lightning should think about unthinkable deal

By GARY SHELTON
Published May 30, 2006

Once, it was an absurd question.

Once, it begged for a blunt answer.

Once, the response was not no, but heck no, a thousand times no, and what kind of nutjob would even ask? Before, an opposing general manager bold enough to raise the possibility risked a faint trail of laughter followed by the sharp sound of a telephone being slammed in his ear.

Now, the world has changed, and a game along with it, and a roster is soon to follow. Now, the question no longer seems beyond asking.

Is it time for the Lighting to consider trading Vinny Lecavalier?

Is it time to at least listen?

Once, such a suggestion would have been considered heresy. Once, Lecavalier was untouchable, and trading him was considered unthinkable. He was the chosen one, a rising star that the franchise was determined not to see shine elsewhere. It is not a coincidence that the last general manager who considered trading Lecavalier, Rick Dudley, was soon looking for work himself.

Trade Lecavalier? He was too young, too talented, too charismatic. As far as the Lightning was concerned, Lecavalier was priceless. You might as well have asked Switzerland to trade the Alps.

Economics have reshaped hockey, however, and expectations have redefined the Lightning. And although general manager Jay Feaster was elected on the I'm-Not-Trading-Vinny platform, yesterday's proclamations should not dictate to a man trying to improve today's roster. Even when the subject is trading Lecavalier, the Lightning no longer can afford a deaf ear.

Trade Lecavalier? It would be wildly unpopular, of course. Lecavalier is that rare bit of promise that is mostly delivered, and the feeling is that he and his team have grown up together. He is a 26-year-old talent coming off a career-high 35 goals, a dazzling player capable of breathtaking highlights. Admittedly, I'm among those who thinks Lecavalier has left too much of his ability untapped, but there is no denying his skill on the ice.

Trade Lecavalier? It would be risky. If the Lightning loses the trade, if it accepts too little or the rest of Lecavalier's career becomes too much, it could regret the deal for years to come. Remember when Boston traded Joe Thornton away for pretty good players and then Thornton exploded? Given Lecavalier's age and ability, that could happen again. The last thing the Lightning needs is for Lecavalier to become the Steve Young of its franchise.

Trade Lecavalier? It could be rewarding. The Lightning would demand, should demand, a high price for anyone interested. Just how high a price is worth considering.

Suppose, for instance, the Lightning could trade Lecavalier for Panthers' goaltender Roberto Luongo? Maybe a third team - Montreal, for instance - gets involved so Lecavalier ends up there, Luongo in Tampa Bay and several players end up in Florida?

Wouldn't you consider that deal?

Shouldn't Feaster?

The safer path, the more comfortable path, is for Feaster to trade lesser players for a lesser return. A lot of people around here appreciate Fredrik Modin, for instance, but if Modin is the cost of a trade for Evgeni Nabakov or J.S. Giguere, well, most feathers would remain unruffled. If Vinny Prospal or Ruslan Fedotenko have to go for the Lightning to be a more complete team, well, that's the price of an upgrade.

Trade one of those players for, say, Giguere, and if it doesn't work out, it's Giguere's fault.

Trade Vinny, and if it doesn't work out, it's Feaster's fault.

Still, the safest path isn't always the smartest, and the salary structure of the Lightning suggests it's worth considering such a trade. As of now, most of the Lightning's stacks of cash are on the offensive end. Trading one of the Triplets could help spread that around, too.

Brad Richards? No, it isn't going to be Richards, not considering how important he has become on the ice and in the dressing room. When Richards signed his new contract last week, he became the most untouchable player on the roster.

Marty St. Louis? Despite all the Internet rumors, it isn't likely to be St. Louis, either. St. Louis turns 31 next month, and he has five years to go on a hefty contract.

Among the big-deal-of-the-day candidates, that leaves Lecavalier and the intriguing question of just how intrigued other franchises might be.

Trade Lecavalier? Much of it comes down to this: How much can you expect from another team if you do? And this: How much can you expect from Lecavalier if you don't?

For the Lightning, that's the money question. Trading a productive player is always an attempt to see the future.

With Lecavalier - often brilliant, occasionally befuddling - that's not easy. If the team senses Lecavalier will yet reach the upper echelon of stardom in the NHL, that his 35 goals will grow to 50, then it should consider hanging onto him with both hands.

On the other hand, if it believes that this is as good as Lecavalier is going to get, if it suspects that he lacks the obsession that makes very good players great, then there is something to be said for selling a stock at its highest price.

Trade Lecavalier? It's improbable, even if it's no longer impossible.

For the Lightning, however, it is time to answer the phone.

It is time to think it over.

[Last modified May 30, 2006, 01:09:11]