HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Jets - Oilers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-06-2012, 10:14 PM
  #1
Jets
Resident Sieve
 
Jets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,407
vCash: 500
Jets - Oilers

To WPG
Lennart Petrell

To EDM
Grant Clitsome

Clitsome is an upgrade over Potter/Peckham while they wait for Klefbom and Musil as the 6th/7th D on the Oil, and Petrell can hold a roster spot in the Jets bottom 6/13th forward utility man.

Pretty much a depth for depth needs deal.

Jets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2012, 10:16 PM
  #2
TurdFerguson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 820
vCash: 500
Jets shouldn't trade Clitsome. Nothing to do with value, but his name is awesome.

TurdFerguson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 12:28 AM
  #3
WeridAl
YuckaFlux
 
WeridAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: 10ft of Snow
Posts: 1,749
vCash: 500
Why would the Oilers need a another 3rd pairing D, a small one at that, they need size at the back end, not just another warm body. Would rather wait to see what Peckham is like, he had a bad year due to his cheese burger diet. I also like Lennart Petrell, good at the PK and adds grit and size the Oilers need, pass.

WeridAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 12:43 AM
  #4
franfrey*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
As a fan of both teams, I wouldn't mind this deal... Clitsome is an upgrade over Potter for sure, whereas Petrell could be a replacement for / upgrade over Glass. I'd say it's more beneficial from an Oilers perspective though.

franfrey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 01:03 AM
  #5
BarDownBobo
Registered User
 
BarDownBobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Yak City
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,863
vCash: 500
Depending how the CBA shakes out, Eager and/or Belanger might not be Oilers. Petrell has also been doing quite well in Finland. Personally, I wouldn't want to move him but value wise it's a good deal.

BarDownBobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 01:19 AM
  #6
Paradise
Individual thinker
 
Paradise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Waiverpeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,721
vCash: 500
Not at all interested in Petrell at all. Wouldn't even give up a 7th rounder for him. He's barely an NHL player and I don't see a need to add him to our AHL team.

Paradise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 02:59 AM
  #7
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 53,766
vCash: 50
Pettell has more value to the oilers then Clitsome. Pattrell is a good ginding 3rd/4th liner. Clitsome(just realized I can not use the usual four first letter short form of his name) while being a good third pairing d-man the oilers have 5 players capible of playing third line d-minutes

__________________
not sure how--but the fish just jumped in the boat and put the hook in it's mouth
52299/14814
The twenty year rebuild is on!!! Embrace the suck
Heaven wont take me and hell is afraid I'd take 0ver
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 03:13 AM
  #8
WeridAl
YuckaFlux
 
WeridAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: 10ft of Snow
Posts: 1,749
vCash: 500
After looking into this a little further, I cannot understand how the OP would consider Grant Clitsome a upgrade over Peckham. If anything it would be a massive downgrade, Clitsome may have a better offensive game, but that's it. Peckham may of had a bad year last year, but he was still better then Clitsome.

WeridAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 04:37 AM
  #9
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
 
garret9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 11,248
vCash: 500
Haven't watched much of Peckham, but Clitsome looks pretty consistently better than Peckham in a stats viewpoint...

Grant isn't small, small... he's stocky small... 215 is pretty big at 5'11 and he can be physical. I doubt he'd be better than a #6/7 D though.

Petrell looks worse than Glass and I wasn't a very loud supporter of Glass. More offensive upside probably though since it was only Petrell's first season...
First year in the bigs makes me temper my thoughts on the outcomes but when every player that played significant minutes with you did worse corsi-wise or +/-wise with you than without... makes me scared of the guy


Last edited by garret9: 12-07-2012 at 04:46 AM.
garret9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 09:20 AM
  #10
Mikey71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 334
vCash: 500
I don't like it for Edmonton, but only due to their defensive makeup. Andy Sutton was supposed to be the muscle on defence, but his career is likely over so they need some muscle to replace him. Peckham doesn't need to be very good (and he isn't), as long as he plays his role. He is of the skill level that he can be in and out of the lineup depending on the opponent and be ok with that, or at least accept that.

The only way Clitsome coming in would make any sense is if Potter went the other way, and that makes no sense for the Jets. It wouldn't accomplish anything and neither would the original proposal.

Mikey71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 01:02 PM
  #11
franfrey*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeridAl View Post
After looking into this a little further, I cannot understand how the OP would consider Grant Clitsome a upgrade over Peckham. If anything it would be a massive downgrade, Clitsome may have a better offensive game, but that's it. Peckham may of had a bad year last year, but he was still better then Clitsome.
As someone who watched around 40 Jets games last year and 80 Oilers games, I can tell you without a doubt, Clitty > Peckham. Maybe not the Peckham of 2010-11 (probably on par with), but definitely last year's Peckham. He's also infinitely better than Potter. This trade would actually make our defensive corps slightly better and improve our extremely poor depth at the position. Petrell might be an upgrade over Glass, but I imagine a lot of Jets fans want to see Machacek on the fourth line.

franfrey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 01:11 PM
  #12
franfrey*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
Pettell has more value to the oilers then Clitsome. Pattrell is a good ginding 3rd/4th liner. Clitsome(just realized I can not use the usual four first letter short form of his name) while being a good third pairing d-man the oilers have 5 players capible of playing third line d-minutes
Absolutely not. It seems to me the Oilers have better depth at the forward position than on defense.
Currently, our lineup looks like this:

Hall- Nugent-Hopkins - Eberle
Yakupov - Gagner - Hemsky
Smyth - Horcoff - Jones
Petrell - Bélanger - Eager
Hordichuk the extra forward, with Paajarvi and Hartikainen knocking on the door, ready for an opportunity.

Whitney - J. Schultz
Smid - Petry
N. Schultz - Peckham
Potter the extra D-man, with Teubert (who hasn't impressed at all in the AHL) knocking on the door.
Peckham, Potter and Teubert are garbage. And with an extremely injury prone Whitney, a currently injured Smid, the D-corps could be a disaster with our extremely poor depth.

So, in summary, I don't think you know what you're talking about here...


Last edited by franfrey*: 12-07-2012 at 01:16 PM.
franfrey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 01:13 PM
  #13
MessierII
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,184
vCash: 500
No thanks Petrell is awsome wicked fourth liner. Excellent PKer.

MessierII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 01:22 PM
  #14
MeestaDeteta
Registered User
 
MeestaDeteta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Saskazoo
Posts: 7,631
vCash: 250
I think I'd rather hang on to Petrell as a 4th line winger.

MeestaDeteta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 01:33 PM
  #15
MeestaDeteta
Registered User
 
MeestaDeteta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Saskazoo
Posts: 7,631
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yourface View Post
Absolutely not. It seems to me the Oilers have better depth at the forward position than on defense.
Currently, our lineup looks like this:

Hall- Nugent-Hopkins - Eberle
Yakupov - Gagner - Hemsky
Smyth - Horcoff - Jones
Petrell - Bélanger - Eager
Hordichuk the extra forward, with Paajarvi and Hartikainen knocking on the door, ready for an opportunity.

Whitney - J. Schultz
Smid - Petry
N. Schultz - Peckham
Potter the extra D-man, with Teubert (who hasn't impressed at all in the AHL) knocking on the door.
Peckham, Potter and Teubert are garbage. And with an extremely injury prone Whitney, a currently injured Smid, the D-corps could be a disaster with our extremely poor depth.

So, in summary, I don't think you know what you're talking about here...
Clitsome and Potter have very similar numbers, so I'm not sure how you can consider a huge upgrade.

Peckham doesn't play an offensive game, but he still has value as a bottom pairing, press box guy.


I don't see how he's much of an upgrade over what we currently have available for a bottom pairing role.

MeestaDeteta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 01:59 PM
  #16
Roof Daddy
Registered User
 
Roof Daddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,980
vCash: 500
Oil fan who'd rather keep Petrell. Solid pk'er who plays a responsible game with some grit. We don't exactly have an abundance of players that can be said about unfortunately.

Roof Daddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 02:02 PM
  #17
franfrey*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nailor Hopberle View Post
Clitsome and Potter have very similar numbers, so I'm not sure how you can consider a huge upgrade.

Peckham doesn't play an offensive game, but he still has value as a bottom pairing, press box guy.


I don't see how he's much of an upgrade over what we currently have available for a bottom pairing role.
Clitsome >> Potter in the D-zone. Clitty isn't a stalwart, but it's hard not to be better than Potter in that department. Keep in mind Clitsome doesn't play (or rarely plays) on the PP, which is where Potter probably got most of his points. He's also a better skater.
I'd also like to hold on to Peckham, as he can be a valuable asset if he reverts back to his 2010-11 form. Not many D-men were as bad as he was last year though.
You have to be blind not to realize that our defensive depth is pretty bad, compared to our offensive depth. I think the addition of Clitsome would be worth giving up Petrell for.

It's not like the loss of one decent (not great) PKer will impact the team's performance really. Smyth, Horcoff, Bélanger, even Eberle or Paajarvi can all PK pretty well.


Last edited by franfrey*: 12-07-2012 at 02:34 PM.
franfrey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 03:03 PM
  #18
ManByng
Moroz fan
 
ManByng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: St. Albert, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,535
vCash: 500
not a fan of Petrell or Potter....you can have both for Clitsome, deal?

ManByng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 11:39 AM
  #19
rockinghockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,477
vCash: 500
Petrell is more valueable to the Oilers than Clit would be so no thanks, Petrell is also very good at killing penalties plus he has some size to him something we need. EDM is not going to trade for a bottom dman there are plenty of those guys around.

rockinghockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 12:12 PM
  #20
franfrey*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
My gawd Oilers fans are stubborn it's ridiculous!
"Petrell is more valuable to the Oilers than Clitsome."
Wtf no he's not.. Look at where we have depth and where we don't... It's pretty obvious that our defense could be a disaster if we suit up two or three of Potter, Peckham and Teubert. Clitsome >> All of those.

franfrey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 12:38 PM
  #21
oilers92
Registered User
 
oilers92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,923
vCash: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yourface View Post
My gawd Oilers fans are stubborn it's ridiculous!
"Petrell is more valuable to the Oilers than Clitsome."
Wtf no he's not.. Look at where we have depth and where we don't... It's pretty obvious that our defense could be a disaster if we suit up two or three of Potter, Peckham and Teubert. Clitsome >> All of those.
why give up a good pk'er for yet another bottom pairing d especially when the pk started to click for the 1st time in a long time? move a 3rd pairing d-men and a pick for a slightly better 3rd pairing d-men or just sign one of the numerous ones there are in fa each yr

oilers92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 01:42 PM
  #22
Puritania
Skooma Addict
 
Puritania's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Omicron Persei 8
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,908
vCash: 900
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yourface View Post
My gawd Oilers fans are stubborn it's ridiculous!
"Petrell is more valuable to the Oilers than Clitsome."
Wtf no he's not.. Look at where we have depth and where we don't... It's pretty obvious that our defense could be a disaster if we suit up two or three of Potter, Peckham and Teubert. Clitsome >> All of those.
I really don't see how wanting to keep a good 4th line pk'er over a bottom pairing defenseman is ridiculous. The value of the trade is good, you can't blame people for wanting to keep one over the other. Likewise it's just fine if Jets fans would want to keep their offensive bottom pairing guy over our grinder fourth liner. You wag your finger at people too much on these boards in my opinion.

Puritania is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 01:51 PM
  #23
Eskimo44
Registered User
 
Eskimo44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by garret9 View Post
Haven't watched much of Peckham, but Clitsome looks pretty consistently better than Peckham in a stats viewpoint...

Grant isn't small, small... he's stocky small... 215 is pretty big at 5'11 and he can be physical. I doubt he'd be better than a #6/7 D though.

Petrell looks worse than Glass and I wasn't a very loud supporter of Glass. More offensive upside probably though since it was only Petrell's first season...
First year in the bigs makes me temper my thoughts on the outcomes but when every player that played significant minutes with you did worse corsi-wise or +/-wise with you than without... makes me scared of the guy
Petrell got saddled with the worst linemates on the team and was used as a defensive winger. He is a PK ace. I would caution against using stats to judge Petrell on as he really wasn't put in a position to succeed. Petrell is a 4th liner but he's a 4th liner who is physical, fights, can play up in the lineup, and is excellent on the PK.

Peckham is very underrated, he's got more potential than most on HF realize. Another PK ace he has the ability to be a Matt Greene type player who can double as an enforcer. People forget but Peckham is young and has had some very solid stretches of play. In his 1st season he played alot of the teams tough minutes with Gilbert and fared pretty well in doing so. I'd easily take Peckham over Clitsome. I think you are valuing Corsi far too much without considering things like the team Peckham played on or the role he played. Also things like his PK and enforcing abilities add a lot more to the equation than EV strength stats can account for. Peckham is very hard to play against and was a quality shutdown AHL defender, he's still developing.

All in all the deal is fair, and Clitsome certainly would be an upgrade over Potter, but i don't know if it helps Edmonton. Myself i would much rather see Eager moved over Petrell. And 3rd pairing small puck movers tend to be easily signed (Chris Campoli anyone).

Eskimo44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 01:53 PM
  #24
franfrey*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puritania View Post
I really don't see how wanting to keep a good 4th line pk'er over a bottom pairing defenseman is ridiculous. The value of the trade is good, you can't blame people for wanting to keep one over the other. Likewise it's just fine if Jets fans would want to keep their offensive bottom pairing guy over our grinder fourth liner. You wag your finger at people too much on these boards in my opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers92 View Post
why give up a good pk'er for yet another bottom pairing d especially when the pk started to click for the 1st time in a long time? move a 3rd pairing d-men and a pick for a slightly better 3rd pairing d-men or just sign one of the numerous ones there are in fa each yr
I'm pretty sure you can attribute the PK's success more so to the additions of Bélanger and Smyth. Petrell wasn't even in the lineup often enough to make a big impact.
Maybe it's just me but the presence of Petrell in the Oilers' lineup isn't going to make or break the team as much as depth on a somewhat injury-prone blueline is going to. Teubert and Potter aren't even 3rd pairing D-men at this point, they belong in the AHL.

franfrey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 03:36 PM
  #25
Roof Daddy
Registered User
 
Roof Daddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yourface View Post
I'm pretty sure you can attribute the PK's success more so to the additions of Bélanger and Smyth. Petrell wasn't even in the lineup often enough to make a big impact.
Maybe it's just me but the presence of Petrell in the Oilers' lineup isn't going to make or break the team as much as depth on a somewhat injury-prone blueline is going to. Teubert and Potter aren't even 3rd pairing D-men at this point, they belong in the AHL.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you that Teubert and Potter are horrible options, but unless you want meatheads like Eager killing penalties, you keep Petrell. Like it or not we have limited options.

Roof Daddy 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 11:22 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.