HFBoards

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

Trade Rumours and Proposals Thread Part 17: What does "bold" mean?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-10-2013, 11:50 AM
  #101
Mr Forever
The Oilers :(
 
Mr Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: COLLEGE
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewy View Post
God Nichuskin looks like a player, but, I've got a baad feeling about him. Similar to my bad feelings about Semin, who it turns out is awesome.
Nich having a contract in Russia for the next two seasons is a plus for us actually, IMO. It means we won't be capable of rushing him over to NA and messing up his development as we seem to do with almost every Euro. It's two years of development in a pro league without burning any ELC years, I think.

Mr Forever is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 11:51 AM
  #102
MinnesotaFats
Registered User
 
MinnesotaFats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,942
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
The only team need Berglund fills is height.

That's not the type of need I trade a 7th overall pick for.


I'm all for trading the pick if it makes sense.

Trading it for Berglund doesn't make any sense, imo.
Like I said, I am not saying Berlund is necessarily the answer (although I think hes an intriguing option and is getting severely underestimated here by many).

But if the goal is to make moves that can start improving this team starting next year, rolling the dice on the 7th overall when there is a deal for a guy like Berglund on the table is short sighted.

Hell, even if you don't end up moving Gagner after you acquire Berglund, having RNH, Gagner and Berglund down the middle looks a hell of a lot better than what we have now plus a lotto ticket in whoever we pick at 7.

MinnesotaFats is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 11:56 AM
  #103
Mr Forever
The Oilers :(
 
Mr Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: COLLEGE
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinnesotaFats View Post
Like I said, I am not saying Berlund is necessarily the answer (although I think hes an intriguing option and is getting severely underestimated here by many).

But if the goal is to make moves that can start improving this team starting next year, rolling the dice on the 7th overall when there is a deal for a guy like Berglund on the table is short sighted.

Hell, even if you don't end up moving Gagner after you acquire Berglund, having RNH, Gagner and Berglund down the middle looks a hell of a lot better than what we have now plus a lotto ticket in whoever we pick at 7.
The reason most of us don't want to trade the 7 OV is because Berglund could probably be had for less. An offer sheet is pretty realistic, then we give up next years pick instead of this years, and we fill two holes.

Mr Forever is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 11:58 AM
  #104
Lewy
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Forever View Post
The reason most of us don't want to trade the 7 OV is because Berglund could probably be had for less. An offer sheet is pretty realistic, then we give up next years pick instead of this years, and we fill two holes.
I think the Oilers are going to have to be very careful with how they add salary, slight mismanagement could lead to disaster. (losing one of the #1's)

Lewy is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:00 PM
  #105
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinnesotaFats View Post
Like I said, I am not saying Berlund is necessarily the answer (although I think hes an intriguing option and is getting severely underestimated here by many).

But if the goal is to make moves that can start improving this team starting, rolling the dice on the 7th overall when there is a deal for a guy like Berglund on the table is short sighted.

Hell, even if you don't end up moving Gagner after you acquire Berglund, having RNH, Gagner and Berglund down the middle looks a hell of a lot better than what we have now plus a lotto ticket in whoever we pick at 7.
At the same time you could say having a guy like Darnell Nurse stepping into the line-up in two years looks a lot better than Berglund walking as a UFA in two years.

I think MacT is going to have to be pretty careful. He needs to improve the team drastically, but he can't go into "win-now mode" and give up too many futures.

I don't think the team is at a point where they should be making a move like 7OV for Berglund just yet. If Berglund does walk when he becomes a UFA, you might only get one play-offs out of him. Maybe none at all.

It just seems a little too desperate to me.

dnicks17 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:01 PM
  #106
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,884
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinnesotaFats View Post
Like I said, I am not saying Berlund is necessarily the answer (although I think hes an intriguing option and is getting severely underestimated here by many).

But if the goal is to make moves that can start improving this team starting next year, rolling the dice on the 7th overall when there is a deal for a guy like Berglund on the table is short sighted.

Hell, even if you don't end up moving Gagner after you acquire Berglund, having RNH, Gagner and Berglund down the middle looks a hell of a lot better than what we have now plus a lotto ticket in whoever we pick at 7.
Move Gagner to the wing ,trade PRV for d help. Honestly is it going to hurt having 5 centers on the team next year? Not lets have 4, with one being a banged up RNH and one potentially being a rookie in Lander and then having nothing when Horcoff or Gagner gets hurt.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:03 PM
  #107
MinnesotaFats
Registered User
 
MinnesotaFats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,942
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Forever View Post
The reason most of us don't want to trade the 7 OV is because Berglund could probably be had for less. An offer sheet is pretty realistic, then we give up next years pick instead of this years, and we fill two holes.
Maybe, maybe not. If I've learned one thing having posted on and read these boards for roughly 8 years, its that 99% of the people here have no idea what a player's value is in a trade. I count myself as part of that 99%; if you think you're in the 1%, good for you.

But thats beside the point. Would a deal like that make us immediately better? Yes. Is that MacT's objective? Yes. Could he do better for the 7th overall pick? You have to assume he takes the best deal available to him if he is willing to move that pick for immediate help.

MinnesotaFats is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:03 PM
  #108
Conkanen*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinnesotaFats View Post
Like I said, I am not saying Berlund is necessarily the answer (although I think hes an intriguing option and is getting severely underestimated here by many).

But if the goal is to make moves that can start improving this team starting next year, rolling the dice on the 7th overall when there is a deal for a guy like Berglund on the table is short sighted.

Hell, even if you don't end up moving Gagner after you acquire Berglund, having RNH, Gagner and Berglund down the middle looks a hell of a lot better than what we have now plus a lotto ticket in whoever we pick at 7.
Look, if your goal is to get better at all costs next year then that's a different argument. The last 10 years, the #7 pick has garnered an decent NHL player every time (Jack Skille notwithstanding) with the chance at hitting the jackpot too (Ryan Suter). The upside of the #7 pick is waaay too good to pass up in this draft imo.
Outside of Skille it's a pretty decent list of current NHLers.

Conkanen* is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:04 PM
  #109
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,884
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
At the same time you could say having a guy like Darnell Nurse stepping into the line-up in two years looks a lot better than Berglund walking as a UFA in two years.

I think MacT is going to have to be pretty careful. He needs to improve the team drastically, but he can't go into "win-now mode" and give up too many futures.

I don't think the team is at a point where they should be making a move like 7OV for Berglund just yet. If Berglund does walk when he becomes a UFA, you might only get one play-offs out of him. Maybe none at all.

It just seems a little too desperate to me.
Why exactly is Berglund walking? Why are you assuming he'll only sign a two year deal? And why you assuming Darnell Nurse is going to step in so soon and make an impact?

Lots of assumptions.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:06 PM
  #110
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,884
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Forever View Post
The reason most of us don't want to trade the 7 OV is because Berglund could probably be had for less. An offer sheet is pretty realistic, then we give up next years pick instead of this years, and we fill two holes.
I'd be all for not trading the 7th ov and getting him for less, but offer sheet isn't the next best option.

Next best option is seeing what STL wants for him. Hartikanien and next year's 1st? Do they have interest in PRV+.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:10 PM
  #111
Conkanen*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
At the same time you could say having a guy like Darnell Nurse stepping into the line-up in two years looks a lot better than Berglund walking as a UFA in two years.

I think MacT is going to have to be pretty careful. He needs to improve the team drastically, but he can't go into "win-now mode" and give up too many futures.

I don't think the team is at a point where they should be making a move like 7OV for Berglund just yet. If Berglund does walk when he becomes a UFA, you might only get one play-offs out of him. Maybe none at all.

It just seems a little too desperate to me.
Sums up my stance perfectly thank you. I think "win-now" mode could make for some short sighted moves.

Conkanen* is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:15 PM
  #112
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Why exactly is Berglund walking? Why are you assuming he'll only sign a two year deal? And why you assuming Darnell Nurse is going to step in so soon and make an impact?

Lots of assumptions.
I realize that, but the opposite is assuming the 7th overall pick will underwhelm and that Berglund would flourish(or at least continue to be as good) in Edmonton.

Assumptions are all we really have to go on, isn't it?

dnicks17 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:15 PM
  #113
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkanen View Post
Look, if your goal is to get better at all costs next year then that's a different argument. The last 10 years, the #7 pick has garnered an decent NHL player every time (Jack Skille notwithstanding) with the chance at hitting the jackpot too (Ryan Suter). The upside of the #7 pick is waaay too good to pass up in this draft imo.
Outside of Skille it's a pretty decent list of current NHLers.
And yet the #6 and #8 players taken in the draft the last 10 years has a lot more busts. It is still a risk at #7.

ponokanocker is online now  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:19 PM
  #114
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,884
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
I realize that, but the opposite is assuming the 7th overall pick will underwhelm and that Berglund would flourish(or at least continue to be as good) in Edmonton.

Assumptions are all we really have to go on, isn't it?
I think it's a lot less of an assumption to assume Berglund continues to be a 20-20 guy than a 7th overall d-man stepping in to the lineup in 2 years.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:26 PM
  #115
Conkanen*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
I think it's a lot less of an assumption to assume Berglund continues to be a 20-20 guy than a 7th overall d-man stepping in to the lineup in 2 years.
It's about upside folks. Berglund is not going to be the difference between this team being where it is now and hoisting Lord Stanley neither is the downside of the #7 pick. There are other ways to acquire guys like Berglund.

Conkanen* is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:26 PM
  #116
gqmixmaster
Registered User
 
gqmixmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,196
vCash: 50
never trade lucky number 7

If you trade it you take a risk the player you get sucks or the player picked at 7 by the team you traded with becomes a star.

If you draft a player that is expected to go at 7 and he doesn't pan out so be it - no one will know who exactly would have been available for that pick in a trade.

gqmixmaster is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:29 PM
  #117
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
I think it's a lot less of an assumption to assume Berglund continues to be a 20-20 guy than a 7th overall d-man stepping in to the lineup in 2 years.
Yeah, that's reasonable, but the Oilers haven't really had much success in having newly acquired players continuing their past success in an Oilers jersey though.

dnicks17 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:30 PM
  #118
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,884
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
Yeah, that's reasonable, but the Oilers haven't really had much success in having newly acquired players continuing their past success in an Oilers jersey though.
Ah so we shouldn't make another trade again. Makes sense

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:31 PM
  #119
belair
Registered User
 
belair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Maybe because the first step is to actually make the playoffs.
While I honestly can't argue that point, do you see either team this year making the postseason in an 82-game schedule?

With the firepower of our young forwards, I honestly don't see us as the team limping into the playoffs once it finally happens.

belair is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:32 PM
  #120
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,884
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conkanen View Post
It's about upside folks. Berglund is not going to be the difference between this team being where it is now and hoisting Lord Stanley neither is the downside of the #7 pick. There are other ways to acquire guys like Berglund.
Is there really one NHLer that is that?

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:34 PM
  #121
Lewy
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Is there really one NHLer that is that?
Maybe 1.

Lewy is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:34 PM
  #122
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,884
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by belair View Post
While I honestly can't argue that point, do you see either team this year making the postseason in an 82-game schedule?

With the firepower of our young forwards, I honestly don't see us as the team limping into the playoffs once it finally happens.
Tough to say, if it were a 82 game schedule and we had a GM willing to move some players around we could've made the playoffs.

As for the Leafs, they probably would've been close at the very least.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:34 PM
  #123
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Ah so we shouldn't make another trade again. Makes sense
Well, sure if you want to hyperbolize my point to ridiculousness.

Maybe I should call everyone a moron for wanting to trade the pick because we got Grant Fuhr with an 8th overall pick therefore everyone who wants to trade the 7th overall pick wants to trade away a franchise goalie...

Jeez louise.

dnicks17 is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:35 PM
  #124
Conkanen*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
Is there really one NHLer that is that?
Arguable but I would sure love a spin at a potential Jeff Skinner or Ryan Suter.

Conkanen* is offline  
Old
05-10-2013, 12:36 PM
  #125
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,884
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
Well, sure if you want to hyperbolize my point to ridiculousness.

Maybe I should call everyone a moron for wanting to trade the pick because we got Grant Fuhr with an 8th overall pick therefore everyone who wants to trade the 7th overall pick wants to trade away a franchise goalie...

Jeez louise.
Ridiculous is assuming Berglund would suck because others have sucked here.

I mean do I say lets trade for Evander Kane and you use the same response?

Really useless comment on your part. Don't expect that from a mod.

Don't want Berglund because he doesn't fit, fine but don't make crap up.

joestevens29 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 01:19 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.