This trade has to go down as a) One of the biggest deals of all time, involving 10 players on only a two team deal. b) One of the more lopsided deals. Leeman disappointed, while Gilmour became a phenomenal player for the Leafs, and guys like Macoun and Natress became valuable players for them as well. I wonder: 1) What lead to the need for Calgary to trade Gilmour for Leeman. I know his 50 goal season gave Leeman trade value, but, the Flames were coming off a season where they were the highest scoring team anyways. What did they see Leeman providing them that Gilmour wasn't. They were strong at centre, so I can kind of see that being a reason, but, they were strong on the wings as well. Even in the year they were traded, Gilmour, the better two-way player, was still putting up a point per game, while Leeman was far off that pace. 2) What lead to the deal being so large. It's so uncommon to see a deal expand to include so many players. Even weirder was that positionally, the deal was identical. Both teams gave up two forwards, two defenceman and a goalie. No draft picks were exchanged, and, every player played for their new team that season. If it was just a shake-up, why wouldn't Calgary just focus on one player, rather than so much of their roster. Was the deal made from Calgary's end strictly for a shake-up? If so, it seems drastic. As a deal, it slants so heavily towards the Leafs, who managed to translate it from being a horrible, perrenially poor team, into a couple of years where Gilmour carried them to some of the best playoff performance of the franchise post-expansion. The Flames, on the other hand, if they were trying to turn their team around, failed miserably. They didn't make the playoffs that year, and while the Leafs were having some good post-seasons, they were stuck with first round exits for the next few years.