View Single Post
Old
02-16-2014, 02:08 PM
  #337
Paralyzer008
Registered User
 
Paralyzer008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
You criticize a poster for saying we couldn't get a dman prospect from Pitts then add a proposal like Gagner for Berglund!

Theres a better chance we get Harrington for Hemsky then of us getting Berglund for that trash. The race in the east is close I could see more then a few teams being interested in Hemsky to the point there could be a bidding war. Montreal, Pitts, Carolina, Washington, Ottawa, Columbus, could all be interested. I don't think its unreasonable to assume we at least get a 1st for him.
Berglund has 212 points in 412 GP
Gagner has 282 points in 461 GP

I don't see how it's really that off, especially considering Berglund is struggling a bit this year in the goals department. Sure we'd have to add, and retain salary from Sam, but Berglund is 12th in scoring on St. Louis and is an RFA in the summer, so not necessarily a keeper there especially if he asks for too much. I think you're overvaluing size like most of the Oilers posters around here. Gagner (at least 800K retained) + Musil + Moroz or another sizeable prospect could maybe land you Berglund IMO.

You're dreaming if you think Pittsburgh is dealing Harrington for anything less than Vanek or MAYBE Moulson or a scorer with a contract.

If we trust Bob Stauffer, Hemsky is worth either a B prospect or B prospect + pick, or 2nd rounder, and MAYBE a first rounder but he said it himself, Hemsky is not the top option on anyone's list so we'll have to see what happens before March 5.

Now as for Misfit's comment, I've watched enough Gagner to see that he just isn't the right No.2 C for us because he's better off as a complimentary scorer for someone else, and we need a bigger, more two-way guy at that spot. Now, I wouldn't hurry in dealing him (like NO to Gagner for Clifford that's gross) but I do want him traded.

Paralyzer008 is offline