HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

Breadcrumbs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-04-2010, 07:42 PM
  #26
frag2
Registered User
 
frag2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by okgooil View Post
No way we draft Fowler. I would love to sign Hamhuis, he is young and reliable, he will probably get 4 mill a year.

I don't see us dealing Souray though, we would have to take a bad contract back to do so. Souray for Briere or something is the only way. No thanks.
Weren't there rumors about Souray being gone period according to Tencer? Something about just "giving" him away for something reasonable?

I'm curious as to why the Oilers never scout outside NA and just sign a "semi-pro" out of Europe, ala Hejda. Yeah, Hejda was drafted by the Sabres but I don't recall him playing on that team ever.

frag2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2010, 08:37 PM
  #27
John Hancock
Registered User
 
John Hancock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,451
vCash: 500
I don't think trading our current defensemen signals that we are drafting Fowler at all.

1. There is no guarantee we will draft in the top 3. I know it looks like it now, but things happen. We wouldn't be planning for that now. We'd make the necessary changes in the off-season, after we have picked the player.

2. There's no guarantee Fowler will be able to step straight up into the NHL. It sounds like he's good, but you can't expect defensemen to be studs right away. They usually take longer to develop, so it would be pretty dumb to be "making room" for him when he might play in the AHL next season, if we end up drafting him at all.

3. Us moving out expensive defensemen is easily explained by our cap problems and our commitment to rebuilding. Visnovsky was 33, and worth $5.6 million for the next 3 years. Moving him doesn't mean we are looking to replace him next season with our draft choice, it simply means we are looking to move older bodies that are costing us money. Same deal with Staios. Moving a 36 year old making just under $3 million next year is a no brainer when you are starting a rebuild. It's in the best interest of the player and the organization to move older guys when you start a rebuild. They won't be around when we are ready to make a run for the cup, anyway. It's a waste of a collective $8.3 million to pay both Vis and Staios to play for a losing team until they retire.

-JH.

John Hancock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-05-2010, 11:37 AM
  #28
Alex87
Registered User
 
Alex87's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,919
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Hancock View Post
I don't think trading our current defensemen signals that we are drafting Fowler at all.

1. There is no guarantee we will draft in the top 3. I know it looks like it now, but things happen. We wouldn't be planning for that now. We'd make the necessary changes in the off-season, after we have picked the player.

2. There's no guarantee Fowler will be able to step straight up into the NHL. It sounds like he's good, but you can't expect defensemen to be studs right away. They usually take longer to develop, so it would be pretty dumb to be "making room" for him when he might play in the AHL next season, if we end up drafting him at all.

3. Us moving out expensive defensemen is easily explained by our cap problems and our commitment to rebuilding. Visnovsky was 33, and worth $5.6 million for the next 3 years. Moving him doesn't mean we are looking to replace him next season with our draft choice, it simply means we are looking to move older bodies that are costing us money. Same deal with Staios. Moving a 36 year old making just under $3 million next year is a no brainer when you are starting a rebuild. It's in the best interest of the player and the organization to move older guys when you start a rebuild. They won't be around when we are ready to make a run for the cup, anyway. It's a waste of a collective $8.3 million to pay both Vis and Staios to play for a losing team until they retire.

-JH.
Good post, and I think it accurately reflects the state/mindset of the team. The management on this team has at times been maddening to watch, but I think they took the logical, necessary steps that most would have expected of them (e.g. getting younger and cheaper).

When you pick first or second overall, BPA seems to reign supreme, and why wouldn't it? The drop between each player gets smaller and smaller as the draft goes on, but in the first pick or two it is quite narrow. As you say, there is no guarantee the Oilers will draft first or second, but I think after what this fanbase has endured this season, not getting a top two pick would be one of the most tragic and heartbreaking strokes of bad luck to ever affect this organization.

Fowler is a great player and would be one hell of a consolation prize of we fell to three. And even though it's impossible for management to know who they'll be able to draft at this point in time, I think it's safe to say Tambellini and co. have one of Hall or Seguin's name written in pencil for 2010-2011. Fowler is probably written down somewhere under the heading "Plan B."

Alex87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.