HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Rumor and Proposal Thread Vol. 4: Tambo: Here's my number, call me maybe?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-21-2013, 11:57 AM
  #176
s7ark
Moderator
LeonTheProfessional
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,042
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CornKicker View Post
I cant think of one that is looking to be dealt anywhere, but if St Louis came out and said we will give you backes, shattenkirk and a 1st pick for RNH do you at least think about it? I dont think the value is there and i dont think RNH should be traded but i also dont think he is untouchable and if the correct deal came out I would listen.
St Louis is in win now mode and Backes is a better option for them now than RNH is. And RNH is a better option for us down the reoad than Backes is. Trade doesn't work, imo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CornKicker View Post
A 30+ year old player? who would offer one of their young stars? thats retarded.

Burke was going to trade perry for comrie, so yes he is still an idiot.
But I thought you were laughing at GMs that have untouchables. But not putting Getz on the table for the best d-man in the world at the time was smart? And if it's retarded for Burke to offer up one of their young stars at the time, why is it smart for us to do exactly that?

And Perry was just drafted at the time and Comrie was coming off a 30g season as a young C. Burke didn't know Perry would turn into anything more than many other late 1st round picks, and neither did Lowe.

s7ark is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:05 PM
  #177
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,672
vCash: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by CupofOil View Post
This doesn't make any sense.
Who would be overly upset about the idea of moving Gagner, Hemsky, Smid for the right package and of all people Nick Schultz and Petrell?
I don't see the correlation between moving young, core players like RNH, Hall and Eberle and the players you mentioned.
Did you not see the Gagner or Hemsky thread?

Yes I've seen people say Petrell should be kept because he is the ideal 4th liner

joestevens29 is online now  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:07 PM
  #178
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by B A T M A N View Post
Like I mentioned before, can we afford to trade Eberle (regardless of the return) with the risk of upsetting Hall?
I agree that this could be an issue. Yakupov would be the one I would prefer to see traded at this point instead of Eberle.

ponokanocker is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:11 PM
  #179
CupofOil
Registered User
 
CupofOil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rock Bottom
Country: United States
Posts: 14,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Did you not see the Gagner or Hemsky thread?

Yes I've seen people say Petrell should be kept because he is the ideal 4th liner
Sure, some people are opposed to dealing Gagner and Hemsky, never heard that about Petrell but i don't see anybody saying that any of these guys are untouchable.
The talk about dealing RNH, Hall or Eberle is another story altogether. It just doesn't make sense to deal those guys and in particular RNH unless it's an unrealistic, massive overpayment.

CupofOil is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:12 PM
  #180
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoobs View Post
We can get those parts without trading Eberle. Hemsky and Gagner have value. Draft picks have value. A few of our prospects have value. Trading Eberle right now is a dumb move. 29 other teams in the league would love to have him.

I don't like how everyone here is programmed to think that we have to deal one of Eberle or Hall to get value back.
I agree that you could possibly get a top pairing D man without moving Eberle/RNH/Hall/Yakupov. The problem becomes the cap, which is shrinking. Adding another top salary without eliminating one will put us above the cap within a year or 2. We could do like Chicago did after they won the cup, which is to gut our depth up front and on the blueline. Chicago seems to have finally rebounded from doing that, but it sure cost them.

ponokanocker is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:15 PM
  #181
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,672
vCash: 374
Interesting 3-way proposal on main boards.

Jbo-Edmonton
Hemsky- Columbus
Brassard - Calgary

Like I said on the main board, could be some more smaller pieces involved, but not bad value.

joestevens29 is online now  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:17 PM
  #182
CornKicker
Still burning Lowood
 
CornKicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,889
vCash: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
St Louis is in win now mode and Backes is a better option for them now than RNH is. And RNH is a better option for us down the reoad than Backes is. Trade doesn't work, imo.



But I thought you were laughing at GMs that have untouchables. But not putting Getz on the table for the best d-man in the world at the time was smart? And if it's retarded for Burke to offer up one of their young stars at the time, why is it smart for us to do exactly that?

And Perry was just drafted at the time and Comrie was coming off a 30g season as a young C. Burke didn't know Perry would turn into anything more than many other late 1st round picks, and neither did Lowe.
you are talking about one trade where the players were untouchable, it doesnt work universally, you dont think if burke was offered crosby for getz and perry he wouldnt have done it? when someone offers a 30+ dman on the decline you have untouchables, its not uniform.

CornKicker is online now  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:18 PM
  #183
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,672
vCash: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by ponokanocker View Post
I agree that you could possibly get a top pairing D man without moving Eberle/RNH/Hall/Yakupov. The problem becomes the cap, which is shrinking. Adding another top salary without eliminating one will put us above the cap within a year or 2. We could do like Chicago did after they won the cup, which is to gut our depth up front and on the blueline. Chicago seems to have finally rebounded from doing that, but it sure cost them.
Should've never overpaid for that depth in the first place and they would've been able to keep more of it.

The reality is most the good teams lose depth at some point. Boston is really the only one that has kept everyone, although they did lose Thomas. But they also had their stars all sign to decent deals.

joestevens29 is online now  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:22 PM
  #184
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Interesting 3-way proposal on main boards.

Jbo-Edmonton
Hemsky- Columbus
Brassard - Calgary

Like I said on the main board, could be some more smaller pieces involved, but not bad value.
I like it. Jbo doesn't have much time left on his contract, so the high cap hit won't be a problem. It addresses our biggest need, we lose a player that isn't in the long term plans, whose value is decent now that he is back to playing well and not injuried. I'm just not sure management wants to make a big push this year with RNH clearly playing injuried. Unless this is an injury that will heal while playing, which is highly unlikely.


Last edited by ponokanocker: 02-21-2013 at 12:27 PM.
ponokanocker is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:27 PM
  #185
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
The Oilers Best
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 51,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oiltankjob 4 93 64 View Post
You make Gagner sound like a echl plug in everyone of your posts, the guy is above a ppg 1/3 way through season . So Gagner could never win a cup no matter where in you opinion cause he would bring any team down.Can understand you don't like the guy but wow.
Unless Couturier became an elite 1C I don't see a team winning a cup with those 2 as their top 2 centers, that's as much of a shot at SC as it is Gagner TBH. Gagner could win a cup with the right team and mix of players, IMO SC as your #1 or #2 center is not it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
RNH is not the organizations best piece, IMO it's Hall, he's the heartbeat of this team. Without him were easily last in the west.
IMO it's debatable but as far as I see it they are 1 and 2 no matter how you slice it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grod View Post
Each to their own. He is currently, yeah. Hopkins imo projects to be the better player for good reason which you may discredit if you wish but at that they both bring their own unique dynamic own qualities that are both pivotal and instrumental to this organizations growth. Trading either is a a step back not forward.
Exactly, they play different games but both will be key in our teams future success.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grod View Post
The idea of offer sheeting ROR is awfully enticing hey. He's arguably what you hope your first round selection from this years draft develops into depending on draft position and with an extra second we have the depth to compensate.

He did after all have the most takeaways in the NHL last season. That elite company where he could badly use assistance.
If the plan is to keep Gagner and Hemsky then you almost have to do it if we aren't DOA after our 9 game road trip.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paralyzer008 View Post
Can we just stop talking about trading RNH?

Our lineup definitely doesn't look balanced with Gagner as the No.1 C and Couturier or whoever as the No.2. It makes us look like we need a No.1 C...

What we should be talking about is whether or not we will be buyers or sellers at the deadline. Who would we buy? Who would we sell? That's the bigger discussion right now.
Good call, and better yet who could we buy and retain beyond this season?

Quote:
Originally Posted by B A T M A N View Post
Couturier is going to be a 50-60 point Selke-calibre centre. That's great, but definitely not someone that is going to be a franchise player. He'll be a complementary player. RNH will be competing for the Art Ross.

As for a proposal:

Eberle/Yakupov, Gagner, 2nd for OEL, Hanzal, 1st?
I'd do that trade if it was Nail and not Eberle for the reasons that you've mentioned below. I'd hate to give him up but OEL and Schultz would be as good of a pairing as there is in the NHL IMO and Hanzal would be a solid 2nd/3rd line center. We'd then need to get on the horn to try and acquire another top 6 forward.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pros and Cons View Post
You should be a sports writer for the Oilers, that was an accurate description of RNH.
Put in the good word for me

Quote:
Originally Posted by RustE View Post
this. I'd add Klefbom to that if he's all he's cracked up to be.

don't want to move Eberle, Yak, Smid, Petry, Dubnyk, but would if the deal was right. everyone else, i hope pretty much expect to be moved.
I'd move any of the last 3 if it was for an upgrade in a package deal. The first 2 would need to be a clear win for us and trading Eberle would probably upset RNH and Hall at least and that is not a good thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by B A T M A N View Post
The thing with moving Eberle is that we're moving Hall's best friend...even if we get a great value deal it may be a bad idea to move him if it means losing Hall after his contract is done.
Yeah I'd rather not go there, that's why I'd consider moving Nail first of the big 5, not because he shows the least promise, but because he hasn't been around long enough to bond as tightly with the core yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MinnesotaFats View Post
I agree with everything you say on RNH. I know there are people frustrated with his offense this year, but he's 19 and we know that the offensive skill is there. He's going to be special - maybe I'll take heat for it, but I see a lot if Datsyuk in him.

That said, Coururier is exactly the type of player this team needs to help get to the next level. No idea what the price might be, but the time to get him is now. In a couple more years, as he improves, he'll be an untouchable in Philly. With Schenn and Giroux at C, you have to wonder if they'd move him for a winger.
I'd overpay for SC, but what would Philly be looking for?

__________________
Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Bryanbryoil is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:41 PM
  #186
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
Unless Couturier became an elite 1C I don't see a team winning a cup with those 2 as their top 2 centers, that's as much of a shot at SC as it is Gagner TBH. Gagner could win a cup with the right team and mix of players, IMO SC as your #1 or #2 center is not it.

I agree. RNH should be as untouchable as they come. We have no one that could replace him as a #1 centre.


I'd do that trade if it was Nail and not Eberle for the reasons that you've mentioned below. I'd hate to give him up but OEL and Schultz would be as good of a pairing as there is in the NHL IMO and Hanzal would be a solid 2nd/3rd line center. We'd then need to get on the horn to try and acquire another top 6 forward.

This is the move I'd like to see happen as well.
I don't think it would be a huge issue to find a physical winger that could work in our top 6. We could even give Harti a try up there to start with until a deal could be found.

ponokanocker is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:43 PM
  #187
Moose Coleman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,016
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Should've never overpaid for that depth in the first place and they would've been able to keep more of it.
Should have learned to work a fax machine, you mean.

Moose Coleman is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:45 PM
  #188
Moose Coleman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,016
vCash: 500
Can't believe people would rather part with Yak than Eberle. Eberle is good and a good character guy, but Yakupov is going to be a far better player.

Moose Coleman is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:46 PM
  #189
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
The Oilers Best
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 51,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Coleman View Post
Can't believe people would rather part with Yak than Eberle. Eberle is good and a good character guy, but Yakupov is going to be a far better player.
If we deal Eberle and piss off Hall, RNH, and Schultz in the process is it really better?

Bryanbryoil is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:48 PM
  #190
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,672
vCash: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Coleman View Post
Should have learned to work a fax machine, you mean.
Lol, ya.

joestevens29 is online now  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:48 PM
  #191
s7ark
Moderator
LeonTheProfessional
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,042
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CornKicker View Post
you are talking about one trade where the players were untouchable, it doesnt work universally, you dont think if burke was offered crosby for getz and perry he wouldnt have done it? when someone offers a 30+ dman on the decline you have untouchables, its not uniform.
So who is the Crosby-like player that we get offered in order to make moving one of our untouchables not retarded?

How about we just wait for our kids to mature rather than trading them away before their peak?

s7ark is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:49 PM
  #192
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Coleman View Post
Can't believe people would rather part with Yak than Eberle. Eberle is good and a good character guy, but Yakupov is going to be a far better player.
There's definitely pro's and con's to each. I do think Yakupov will end up being better statistically. I also think Yakupov will command more $ due to this. As others have pointed out, dealing Eberle could rock the boat on the team, causing players potentially wanting to leave. It's an extremely tough call.

ponokanocker is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 12:57 PM
  #193
Moose Coleman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,016
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
If we deal Eberle and piss off Hall, RNH, and Schultz in the process is it really better?
Come on, these guys are professionals. Trades are part of the business, especially trades to improve the team as a whole. If they can't handle that, then the delicate flowers have no business being in the league.

Moose Coleman is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 01:12 PM
  #194
dustrock
Too Legit To Quit
 
dustrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
How about we just wait for our kids to mature rather than trading them away before their peak?
Because this fanbase is obviously tired of waiting.

dustrock is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 01:13 PM
  #195
jsho
Registered User
 
jsho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oil Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Coleman View Post
Come on, these guys are professionals. Trades are part of the business, especially trades to improve the team as a whole. If they can't handle that, then the delicate flowers have no business being in the league.
You think its just that simple with guys that young and new to the league?

You don't think something along the lines of "we want you and Eberle here long term" came up to Hall when he signed his extension in the summer?

jsho is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 01:19 PM
  #196
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
So who is the Crosby-like player that we get offered in order to make moving one of our untouchables not retarded?

How about we just wait for our kids to mature rather than trading them away before their peak?
If RNH wasn't hurt, I'd say go for it this year by dealing Yak for a D. We essentially have 2 windows with this team.
1. Right now, while they are on their ELC's and we can have other huge contracts up to the cap.
2. After they are off their ELC's, and we are struggling to fill out the roster with other players, similar to other high end teams right now.

ponokanocker is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 01:23 PM
  #197
Beerfish
Registered User
 
Beerfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Interesting 3-way proposal on main boards.

Jbo-Edmonton
Hemsky- Columbus
Brassard - Calgary

Like I said on the main board, could be some more smaller pieces involved, but not bad value.
Calgary would have to get a LOT more than that in that deal. I'd be all over that trade as an oiler fan.

Beerfish is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 01:23 PM
  #198
Moose Coleman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,016
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsho View Post
You think its just that simple with guys that young and new to the league?
Like I said, it's a business. They should know that.

Quote:
You don't think something along the lines of "we want you and Eberle here long term" came up to Hall when he signed his extension in the summer?
If trading Eberle were to land players that will help vault the team into the top tier of the league and put them into playoff and Cup contention, I think Hallsy would get over losing his buddy.

Just to be clear: I'm not suggesting trading Eberle as a course of action, but if one of the big five were to go, he's the logical choice.

Moose Coleman is offline  
Old
02-21-2013, 01:29 PM
  #199
jadeddog
Registered User
 
jadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 11,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
So who is the Crosby-like player that we get offered in order to make moving one of our untouchables not retarded?

How about we just wait for our kids to mature rather than trading them away before their peak?
patience? are you suggesting letting two 19 year olds (RNH and yakupov) get to the ripe-old-age of 21 or 22 before we make a judgement on them, thats crazy talk around these parts, lol

jadeddog is online now  
Old
02-21-2013, 01:29 PM
  #200
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,175
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose Coleman View Post
Like I said, it's a business. They should know that.



If trading Eberle were to land players that will help vault the team into the top tier of the league and put them into playoff and Cup contention, I think Hallsy would get over losing his buddy.

Just to be clear: I'm not suggesting trading Eberle as a course of action, but if one of the big five were to go, he's the logical choice.
This is my feeling with Hall as well. As much as it would hurt to lose playing with a friend, I get the feeling above all else, he wants to win.
Schultz came here because he saw the opportunity to get a tonne of playing time, and because he saw the potential for us to turn into a winner. If we trade any players away, get him a very good D partner, and become a winner, he is going no where.

ponokanocker is offline  
Closed Thread

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 11:13 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.