HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Edmonton Oilers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=38)
-   -   Rumor: Rumor and Proposals Thread Vol. 2: It's not how big you are... (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1340727)

Oilbleeder 02-03-2013 01:12 PM

Rumor and Proposals Thread Vol. 2: It's not how big you are...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Horseradish (Post 58967021)
I've been thinking about Toronto, and how they might make a good trading partner with Edmonton...

Something around Bozak and Gagner.

The Oilers could stand to get bigger and better in the FO dot. Bozak's a 50+% guy, was 6th or so on the team in hits last year, and is a complementary prototypical 2C. He kills penalties, which eases the burden on guys like Belanger and Horc as they get older. He's never going to be a big points guy, but he'd be a useful 2-way 2C. He's also not going to command the same kind of salary that Gagner will, in my opinion, because even though 2 way Cs are super valuable, the ones who score more get paid more.

Toronto needs more of a pure playmaker, and Gagner is exactly that. With Kessel and Lupul, he could easily put up near a PPG, I think.

Leafs fans always seem to include Bozak in proposals, so why not this.

Hell, while we're at it, I'd offer Gagner, Whitney, and a 2nd for Bozak and Gunnarsson (would LOVE Gardiner, but I think that would take a huge overpayment). It would be a gamble for Toronto on Whitney returning to his old form, and I'm not sure he can, but it's why I'd include a 2nd as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DousedInOil (Post 58967235)
The problem with these deals are that Leaf fans overvalue all of their players. They think that Bozak or Gunnarsson are both individually better than Gagner. Not saying it won't happen, but it's hard to gage what kind of deal could be made when one side is delusional.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeridAl (Post 58967589)
Lots of D available, but the asking price are too high and most have 1 or 2 question marks on them. Not to much out there for physical D, teams usually hang on to them like gold. The Oiles don't want to get stuck with a long term contract, because of there D in the system.

The Barons just signed Randy Jones to a PTO, 6'2" D, could this mean that one of the Baron D is coming up or is being traded.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oilbleeder (Post 58967709)
Yeah Bozak isn't as bad as most fans will make you believe. He's not a #1 C like alot of Maple leaf fans think he is, but he also isn't as bad as others make you think.

With that said, I'm not sure I'd trade Gagner for him. While he's got he physicality we'd love for the 2nd line, I'm not fully sold on Bozak's offensive ability. Especially now since Gagner has shown some significant growth.

Also, keep in mind, if we're trading Whitney, any replacement D would most likely have to be a a.) a puck-mover b.) have a breakout pass and c.) preferably have a good shot.

Right now apart from Schultz, Whitney is the only D that gives us any of the above. We need that coming back in if we're shipping him out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmi Jenkins (Post 58968065)
Couldn't the Oilers, in "theory" move Whitney for futures or "truculence" and sign Campoli to fill that bottom pairing puck mover spot?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oilbleeder (Post 58968327)
Campoli a jobber. He's actually worse than Potter. If that clown ever graces us with his presence on the blueline, we know we're aiming for Jones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmi Jenkins (Post 58969955)
:laugh: Fair enough, I'm not a fan either, I was just wondering.

Continue here.

Jimmi Jenkins 02-03-2013 01:21 PM

Apparently the Avs are looking to move a defenseman for a forward, with the Injuries. I wonder if Hemsky + could get you Wilson?

raab 02-03-2013 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmi Jenkins (Post 58971785)
Apparently the Avs are looking to move a defenseman for a forward, with the Injuries. I wonder if Hemsky + could get you Wilson?

Id do Hemsky+Potter for Wilson+Malone. Not sure about Colorado though.

SDig14 02-03-2013 02:31 PM

Wilson is out indefinitely with an ankle injury, so seems as though Barrie or O'Brien will draw into the lineup.

Seems unlikely they move anyone right now, I'd be interested once healthy though.

Shredator 02-03-2013 02:33 PM

Wilson on the same team as Hall.
I dont know. Halls shoulder might appreciate that

iCanada 02-03-2013 02:39 PM

If its me I'd be looking at acquiring a couple big 2nd/3rd line wingers, a bigger defenceman.

And when I say big I mean physical, mean. Think Pronger, not Penner.

Of guys potentially available now I'd be looking at Clarkson, Clowe, Morrow, Brouwer for wingers.

On D guys like Grossman, Erskine, Murray.

And, 100% a pipedream, but I think it would probably be the best moment of my life if in the off season Jarome Iginla signed here, dude still has it physically and hockey wise. Just sayin.

<_<

Lessy 02-03-2013 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iCanada (Post 58978555)
If its me I'd be looking at acquiring a couple big 2nd/3rd line wingers, a bigger defenceman.

And when I say big I mean physical, mean. Think Pronger, not Penner.

Of guys potentially available now I'd be looking at Clarkson, Clowe, Morrow, Brouwer for wingers.

On D guys like Grossman, Erskine, Murray.

And, 100% a pipedream, but I think it would probably be the best moment of my life if in the off season Jarome Iginla signed here, dude still has it physically and hockey wise. Just sayin.

<_<

Agree. Underrated ability to play in the middle too. Wonder if the chance to center elite youngsters and being an Edmonton native put us in the mix I wonder? Add a struggling Drew Stafford to your list too.

Ryan Wilson: Do we really need another mid-caliber defensemen? Answer is an emphatic no.

iCanada 02-03-2013 02:56 PM

People also giving Gagner a lot of trouble for being small, but if one of his wingers was a big mean dude I don't think it'd be an issue.

It'd be even less issue if we had a third line that could throw a check. I dont think I've seen Horc, Smyth, or Paajarvi throw a hit yet. They have size, yet Gagner plays with much much more size and intensity.

I dunno, thats what I'd want to bolster first, and then if we still think top six too small take out a Hemsky and put in a Physical monster.

WeridAl 02-03-2013 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iCanada (Post 58979997)
People also giving Gagner a lot of trouble for being small, but if one of his wingers was a big mean dude I don't think it'd be an issue.

It'd be even less issue if we had a third line that could throw a check. I dont think I've seen Horc, Smyth, or Paajarvi throw a hit yet. They have size, yet Gagner plays with much much more size and intensity.

I dunno, thats what I'd want to bolster first, and then if we still think top six too small take out a Hemsky and put in a Physical monster.

It would help, as to Paajarvi not throwing a hit, you must have very selective eye sight.

Joey Moss 02-03-2013 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmi Jenkins (Post 58971785)
Apparently the Avs are looking to move a defenseman for a forward, with the Injuries. I wonder if Hemsky + could get you Wilson?

Hemsky +? More like Wilson +..

gonzo11 02-03-2013 03:12 PM

vancouver is scouting either the pens or caps

iCanada 02-03-2013 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeridAl (Post 58980563)
It would help, as to Paajarvi not throwing a hit, you must have very selective eye sight.

Okay, let me rephrase that... Paajarvi certainly isn't intimidating anyone. And while he is doing a much better job than in the past he certainly isn't creating net front presence. I like Paajarvi, he plays hard and is certainly responsible, but he is much more of a gentle giant than an intimidating opponent. Oh, and apparenlty all the guys that get paid to record hits in the NHL agree with me... he has apparently thrown 1 check. I'd agree that he wins puck battles though.

I dunno, imagine if we had a real bottom six. Right now we have:

Smyth-Horcoff-Paajarvi
Hartikainen-Belanger-Petrell

Right now all six combined have four points (only one actual goal, Horcoffs two points from PP...) and are a -9. I've liked Harti/Petrell's games, so no real beef to them. Also Kudos to Belanger for being a solid role player, he has been successful as a fourth line center.

That being said you need way way way more from Horc/Smyth/Paajarvi if they aren't going to be matching up as a shutdown line, and especially so if they aren't going to be a physical presence.

We could spend half as much money as we are on that third line and have one that way better at its job. Imagine if it was something to the effect of:
Clowe-Ott-Clarkson

Same footspeed, more offensive zone presence, way more size. I'm not even saying we could have a line like that, I realize it is unrealistic, I just am saying before we get mad at Gagner for being small and not physical enough four our top six, maybe we should worry about the guys there for the purpose of being physical going out and being physical first.

Gagner has more hits than anyone on that third line. His 4 blocked shots is also more than anyone on that line as well. Aside from only being 40% at the dot, Gagner been probably the best player on the team all year.

WeridAl 02-03-2013 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iCanada (Post 58983869)
Okay, let me rephrase that... Paajarvi certainly isn't intimidating anyone. And while he is doing a much better job than in the past he certainly isn't creating net front presence. I like Paajarvi, he plays hard and is certainly responsible, but he is much more of a gentle giant than an intimidating opponent. Oh, and apparenlty all the guys that get paid to record hits in the NHL agree with me... he has apparently thrown 1 check. I'd agree that he wins puck battles though.

I dunno, imagine if we had a real bottom six. Right now we have:

Smyth-Horcoff-Paajarvi
Hartikainen-Belanger-Petrell

Right now all six combined have four points (only one actual goal, Horcoffs two points from PP...) and are a -9. I've liked Harti/Petrell's games, so no real beef to them. Also Kudos to Belanger for being a solid role player, he has been successful as a fourth line center.

That being said you need way way way more from Horc/Smyth/Paajarvi if they aren't going to be matching up as a shutdown line, and especially so if they aren't going to be a physical presence.

We could spend half as much money as we are on that third line and have one that way better at its job. Imagine if it was something to the effect of:
Clowe-Ott-Clarkson

Same footspeed, more offensive zone presence, way more size. I'm not even saying we could have a line like that, I realize it is unrealistic, I just am saying before we get mad at Gagner for being small and not physical enough four our top six, maybe we should worry about the guys there for the purpose of being physical going out and being physical first.

Gagner has more hits than anyone on that third line. His 4 blocked shots is also more than anyone on that line as well. Aside from only being 40% at the dot, Gagner been probably the best player on the team all year.

Smyth-Horcoff-Paajarvi line is like have a speed boat with 2 boat anchors. The Oilers need at least one big physical C, with a mean streak, a winger is not really going to do it, it would help, but not totally.

McClelland 02-03-2013 04:11 PM

18 scouts at the sabres-panthers game tonight, oilers one of them. Stafford for hemsky? weiss? theodore ufa in the summer.

Mr Forever 02-03-2013 04:12 PM

Both Florida and Buffalo have veteran players that will probably be traded for prospects and picks.

FunkyChicken 02-03-2013 04:24 PM

Most games have 8-10 scouts at them. When you have a day with only a few games, the number of scouts increases per game. I wouldn't read to much into this unless the same scout watches one team several games in a row.

OilerNut* 02-03-2013 04:36 PM

I wouldn't mind giving Arnott a short term contract if he is willing to come back. Surprised he hasn't gotten an offer, he put up decent numbers last season.

TakkoTime 02-03-2013 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OilerNut (Post 58989041)
I wouldn't mind giving Arnott a short term contract if he is willing to come back. Surprised he hasn't gotten an offer, he put up decent numbers last season.

He did, the Rangers tried to sign him for one year 1.6 Mill (I think) but he failed the medical (knee) and was let go totally. Slats said they would not attempt to re-sign him.

-Takko

OilerNut* 02-03-2013 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakkoTime (Post 58989121)
He did, the Rangers tried to sign him for one year 1.6 Mill (I think) but he failed the medical (knee) and was let go totally. Slats said they would not attempt to re-sign him.

-Takko

Damn, was wondering. Thanks for the info.

N5991989 02-03-2013 06:28 PM

Arnott could be an option if Belanger and Horcoff are out for any length of time.

nofool6110 02-03-2013 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teganandsara (Post 58994147)
Arnott could be an option if Belanger and Horcoff are out for any length of time.

Unless he fails his physical, which he did with the Rangers.

EDIT: Mibad. Seems everyone knows.

Too bad he can't wear number 7 again if he comes "home". Some other guy took it and stuck it at the top of the roof. :sarcasm:

Oilbleeder 02-03-2013 07:20 PM

Jumping on Horseradish's idea, after thinking about it, I actually wouldn't mind trading for Bozak.

I just wouldn't trade him to replace Gagner, rather to give us more depth.

RNH-Gagner-Bozak would be a pretty good trio down the middle. Instead of having a traditional 1st-2nd-3rd line, we'd have more 1st-2nda-2ndb type lines.

With Horcoff probably being brought out in the summer, it makes space. Bozak shouldn't cost more than say 2.5-3M/yr. At most. Having Eberle-Yakupov-Hemsky as the 1-2-3 RW should give us 3 pretty good lines. With Bozak's ability to play on the PK and get greasy goals around the net, it might become a pretty good fit.

It may be a little more expensive for us, but it give us a pretty deep forward group imo.

Paralyzer008 02-03-2013 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oilbleeder (Post 58996811)
Jumping on Horseradish's idea, after thinking about it, I actually wouldn't mind trading for Bozak.

I just wouldn't trade him to replace Gagner, rather to give us more depth.

RNH-Gagner-Bozak would be a pretty good trio down the middle. Instead of having a traditional 1st-2nd-3rd line, we'd have more 1st-2nda-2ndb type lines.

With Horcoff probably being brought out in the summer, it makes space. Bozak shouldn't cost more than say 2.5-3M/yr. At most. Having Eberle-Yakupov-Hemsky as the 1-2-3 RW should give us 3 pretty good lines. With Bozak's ability to play on the PK and get greasy goals around the net, it might become a pretty good fit.

It may be a little more expensive for us, but it give us a pretty deep forward group imo.

The C depth in free agency is kind of slim. I could see Bozak getting 3.5-4.5M/yr as an overpayment

WeridAl 02-03-2013 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oilbleeder (Post 58996811)
Jumping on Horseradish's idea, after thinking about it, I actually wouldn't mind trading for Bozak.

I just wouldn't trade him to replace Gagner, rather to give us more depth.

RNH-Gagner-Bozak would be a pretty good trio down the middle. Instead of having a traditional 1st-2nd-3rd line, we'd have more 1st-2nda-2ndb type lines.

With Horcoff probably being brought out in the summer, it makes space. Bozak shouldn't cost more than say 2.5-3M/yr. At most. Having Eberle-Yakupov-Hemsky as the 1-2-3 RW should give us 3 pretty good lines. With Bozak's ability to play on the PK and get greasy goals around the net, it might become a pretty good fit.

It may be a little more expensive for us, but it give us a pretty deep forward group imo.

I thought they needed size and not another "SMURF" and Bozak's PK isn't the greatest, come on put some thought into it at least.

Shanahanigans 02-03-2013 08:11 PM

I would trade one of Hall, Eberle or Yakupov to get Logan Couture. That's probably what it would take. The kid would be perfect. And yeah Gagner has been playing excellent but Couture at 2C>>>>>Gagner at 2C


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.