<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; His concussion and impending unrestricted\u00A0free agency, the team's ownership situation and the stretch drive will all determine if the Dallas Stars were winners by not trading Brad Richards. (AP Photos)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;By Stu Hackel&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Who were the winners and losers at\u00A0Monday's trade deadline? The easy answer is: any team that had a need\u00A0it addressed. But the correct answer is: it's too soon to tell.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Once upon a time, hockey's wiser minds would say that you couldn't judge a trade for a few years. It's not that way now. Today, every transaction is subject to instant analysis as long-term judgments fall victim to immediate gratification. So, let's say the Canucks wanted to solidify their fourth line and made some deals to that end (which they did). We call them winners. The guys they acquired\u00A0&lt;em&gt;haven't played a game&lt;/em&gt; for Vancouver yet. Maybe things won't work out. No matter. We declare the Canucks\u00A0winners anyway and that's kinda stupid of us.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Were the Kings &lt;em&gt;really&lt;/em&gt;\u00A0big winners because they landed Dustin Penner? Or have they been proclaimed big winners because they traded for the biggest name? They gave up a first rounder, a conditional third rounder and a prospect for him, which seems high for someone with his history of inconsistency and occasional lethargy, especially because he wasn't the Kings'\u00A0first target (they wanted Ilya Kovalchuk\u00A0last summer, then\u00A0Brad Richards, then Ales Hemsky, before settling on Penner). Was this actually a great deal? Or was it\u00A0merely the best available for GM Dean Lombardi, who was\u00A0feeling pressure to do &lt;em&gt;something&lt;/em&gt; with lots of cap space and draft choices? How good will it look if the Kings don't make the playoffs?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Were the Panthers losers because they couldn't move Tomas Vokoun, David Booth or Stephen Weiss? Sure, they may lose Vokoun\u00A0as a UFA, but even if they do, holding on to Booth and Weiss is a good place to start a rebuild. They also had a net gain of two draft picks, plus they got some young talent and unloaded some big contracts and gained lots of cap space. The overhaul seems to be underway and, for GM Dale Tallon, that's a good thing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Were the Capitals winners? They added Dennis Wideman and Jason Arnott, who may be huge factors in\u00A0turning\u00A0Washington's struggling power play around. Wideman will help if Mike Green isn't healthy and Arnott\u00A0is a previous Stanley Cup champion. But they surrendered David Steckel, which robs them of a good faceoff man and penalty killer. Aren't the Caps trying to be better defensively? In any case, it's possible their problems might be deeper than\u00A0what\u00A0was\u00A0addressed by adding Arnott and Wideman.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;What about teams like the Blue Jackets and Flames? For years, critics have ragged on them for not acquiring top-flight centers to play with star wingers Rick Nash and Jarome\u00A0Iginla\u00A0respectively. Neither team\u00A0did that yesterday, and no one seemed terribly concerned about it. Columbus GM Scott Howsam\u00A0wanted to make his\u00A0Jackets tougher to play against, which theoretically he did, and Flames interim GM Jay Feaster\u00A0didn't want to mess up his team's chemistry since\u00A0it has\u00A0played so well in the last two months, so he only made a minor deal. No one called these two teams\u00A0losers, but they've still each got a superstar forward who could be even better with the right linemate.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, there's the Montreal\u00A0Canadiens. They still lack some size and consistent scoring up front, and while they were supposedly in the hunt for Penner, they didn't want to, or couldn't, pay as much or more than what the Kings surrendered for him. The Habs\u00A0were also\u00A0decimated on defense by injuries and have been\u00A0surrendering\u00A0players and picks\u00A0for adequate replacements, including Brent Sopel, who helps their penalty kill and eases the burden on Roman Hamrlik, who was playing too many minutes for a 36-year-old. Even though they had some success during the trading season, some puck pundits have declared the Habs big losers for not getting a big forward.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;And then there are\u00A0the highly complicated situations like the one in Dallas. The Stars\u00A0have Brad Richards, an impact player\u00A0and pending UFA with a no-trade clause who they hope will help their playoff run, but he\u00A0is recovering from a concussion.\u00A0\u00A0Dallas\u00A0may not be able to re-sign (in no small part because while Tom Hicks remains the owner of record, banks and the NHL control the club\u00A0while the league seeks a new owner). The Stars were only going to part with\u00A0Richards for a substantial return and only to a team approved by him. They didn't get their asking price and so they now have him to make a playoff push -- when he's healthy again. Are they winners or losers? And if they are winners today, what happens if they don't make the playoffs and can't re-sign Richards and he walks away for no return in July? Are the Stars then losers as we look back on\u00A0the deadline\u00A0and say they blew it by setting their asking price for him too high?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;And were the Rangers losers, as some claimed, because they couldn't land Richards? They refused to pay the price that Dallas GM Joe Nieuwendyk\u00A0was asking for someone who might end up being a rental: a package that seems to have included Brandon Dubinsky, Artem\u00A0Anisimov\u00A0and a draft pick, which would have gutted the Rangers' entertaining and competitive youth movement -- something they haven't\u00A0had\u00A0for...forever. How does this make the Rangers\u00A0losers? Plus, New York added Bryan McCabe at little cost\u00A0to give them at least one experienced blueliner. That doesn't seem so bad.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;So immediately naming winners and losers can be elusive, deceptive, inaccurate and even pointless. Sure, the Bruins\u00A0seem to have made good moves to improve themselves, especially by getting Tomas Kaberle\u00A0from Toronto and filling holes up front, although they did nothing of real consequence on deadline day.\u00A0Boston's current torrid road trip may be proof that GM\u00A0Peter Chiarelli pushed the right buttons.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;And, yes, snaring Maxim Lapierre and Chris Higgins should give the Canucks some very fast, effective depth up front. They are two experienced guys who can play important roles for Vancouver if healthy and properly motivated.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;But in lots of cases, the consequences of the last month's transactions really can't be known until we see how things play out.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you're into immediate gratification, however, and want to read some winners/losers stories, TSN\u00A0analysts Pierre McGuire, Darren Dreger and Bob McKenzie had some thoughts here. There are also the W's and L's as seen by Ken Campbell of The Hockey News, and\u00A0Wes Goldstein of CBS Sports.com. For those who accentuate the positive, Kevin Allen in USA Today ranks 16 teams who helped themselves the most\u00A0during the past month and Craig Custance of The Sporting News lists three winners, no losers.\n&lt;/p&gt;"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.si.com/nhl/home-ice/2011/03/01/trade-deadline-winners-losers-not-clear-yet>