HFBoards

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

Proposal Thread: Trying It Again

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-05-2014, 11:02 PM
  #101
oilinblood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,193
vCash: 500
First, how does anyone comment on the oilers board and NOT know we went after Schneider, Bernier, and Bishop....AND we also went after Scrivens as a back up in the fall (LABAR WAS A SAFETY NET)

What i also want to point out is that (i should point out that i didnt want the Oilers going after Clarkson because it was said he was looking for as high as 6mill) MacT went on team 1260 in the summer and already stated that he was fine with people mad at him for offering that contract. He said, had Clarkson signed, he would have gotten the player type he felt we needed to compete in our division for free. You have to pay for the fact yiu dont give up an asset and edmonton as a city will always have to pay a black hole premium. What he also said is that there were deals waiting to be finalized pending the acquisition of Clarkson. He didnt dive deeper into it.

Educated guess is that a RW would have been moved for a defenseman.

What is funny is how people will complain about eberle, complain MacT went all in on a free acquisition of size grit and decent hands...who is big in tight hockey like the playoffs and you know..games against big checking teams like our division... Complain of our lack of size and grit...complain we bring guys in with no experience...complain MacT didnt move Hemsky, complain that MacT shopped Gagner but couldnt find anything that included a centre back (for a season where RNH was going to miss a month and Gordon would have been our lone Nhl centre).

Oh and btw MacT went after Hendricks in the summer too...but guess what..no one chooses to come to edmonton for the city. You pretty much have to trade for guys and have them here so you can show them its not so bad. Then you also put them in a bad position of having to turn their backs to you rather than saying no to a group you have never met. Trading for scrivens is putting him in the position to know the group...and if he says no to a contract offer he has to do it with all eyes watching...not as some guy who has never met the team.

Is it too much to ask for people to pay attention. ?.and do math?

Btw in the 1260 interview... I believe MacT went from the Clarkson contract into talking about Yakupov...who Florida had had interest in. It was MacT who inadvertently bridged those two thoughts which makes one think there was a mental bridge connection of Ckarksons signing and Yakupov.
I have been hoping, since that interview, that an insider would provide details of what was "pending" tge clarkson signing. All i know was Fla was rumored to be very interested in yak at the draft and after.

Keep in mind...the mental bridge could have been mact thinking of yak taking on a bigger role on the team had the pending trades been pushed forward. So eberle or hemsky might have been moved. I still think it would have been a minor move of hemsky to get a lesser return than mact wanted but could now accept with clarkson signed...and the contract gone would have made clarksons contract only a 500k difference. Yak can play on the left which is what he did mostly under kreuger for 5on 5. Mact had been pushing hard for a couple dmen at the end of june though so eberle or yak could have been on the table for a gudbranson maybe.

My point is...i cant say the clarkson signing would have been bad. I cant take clarksons time in toronto and say he wouldnt work here. That him jumping the bench to clobber scott for attacking kessel was something i wouldnt want on my team. Our division is also pretty different. I also cant say that i know what was on the table to change this team should we be able to move a yakupov and this past summers value.


Last edited by oilinblood: 02-05-2014 at 11:39 PM.
oilinblood is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 12:14 AM
  #102
Njoy Oilers
Registered User
 
Njoy Oilers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southern Alberta.
Posts: 3,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KlimasLoveChild View Post
Lol! Well that was awkward!?!?

Njoy Oilers is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 12:54 AM
  #103
nexttothemoon
Eight Straight
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,780
vCash: 50
I suggested it before... but had no comments on it... but if the Oilers are ready to give up on Yak and seeing how TB seems to have found their current and future #1 in Bishop (whom the Oilers missed out on)... why not make lemonade and trade Yak straight up for Vasilevski.

Vasilevski is a BEAST and will be a #1 goalie in the NHL... I have no doubt about his abilities at all (prying him out of the KHL might take a bit of $$$... but so be it. )

Do the Lightning do that deal? Well with Bishop ascending I'd say they might be a little more amenable to that trade now... and Yak would surely look good on a wing with Stamkos. If St.Louis and Stamkos couldn't get the most out of Yak I don't know who could.

Again... I personally want to keep Yak... but if Yak wants out and/or the Oilers are ready to move him... Vasilevski would definitely be a player I would want in return. Sign Scrivens or another decent starter and have Vasilevski play a 1B role... and yes he is that good. He's playing well in the KHL and has played well his entire career. In my view he's as sure as it gets to a future franchise goalie.

Yaks value isn't as huge right now as it might have been but I think many teams still see his potential... some might say Vasilevski is too much of a gamble.. I don't think so... a future #1 goalie is invaluable (as we've seen this season when the Oilers didn't have one).

Anyway... I'm sure most would rather trade Yak for a top-pairing dman or a big #2 centre but personally I think the situation with Bishop doing so well in TB might just open up a deal like this to obtain a very solid goaltender who could be a star for the next decade on this team.


Last edited by nexttothemoon: 02-06-2014 at 01:05 AM.
nexttothemoon is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 12:59 AM
  #104
rockinghockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,376
vCash: 500
Goalies are too hard to determine how good they are going to be and their value is never big. I guess you wanted to trade Yak last year no wait he is having a bad year so now we have to get rid of him crazy thoughts

rockinghockey is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:04 AM
  #105
Cloned
Sexy Genesis
 
Cloned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,719
vCash: 500
No to Yak for Vasilevski. Goalies are the hardest prospects to predict; good ones come out of literally nowhere and the success rate of the "hyped" ones is iffy at best - for every Carey Price you have a Justin Pogge or Andrew Raycroft.

If we're using Yak as trade bait it has to be for a defenseman or established forward.

__________________

Sig AND X-mas avatar courtesy of The Nemesis

"Pull yourself together!" - Solid Snake to Otacon, multiple times in the series
Cloned is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:07 AM
  #106
SupremeTeam16
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 503
vCash: 500
Why would we move Gagner to LA so he can come back and kill it against us like so many other ex-oilers seem to do. LA will just put him with two big skilled players and he will probably eventually settle into their 2nd line either as a center or a winger and probably put up 55-60 points a season.

SupremeTeam16 is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:13 AM
  #107
Soli
Moderator
Supervision Required
 
Soli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 13,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
I'm going to guess something like Frattin, Martinez and a pick, if it goes down.

A hometown 3rd line(potentially 2nd line) winger and an underrated defenseman wouldn't be the worst return.
I think Frattin is a good guess being an Eakin's project, having roots in Edmonton, and because he hasn't acquitted himself well this season in LA. It may be due to the system play or being a RW pushed into a LW spot earlier this season, but when he was with the Leafs and Marlies he was physical, quick and had a scoring aura about him.

With what's being said by Hoven, I'd be surprised if Clifford wasn't part of the return.

Maybe Clifford + Frattin + 1st. I'd still want to hold Gagner till we find a better match. Feels too much like a crappy loot bag.

Soli is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:17 AM
  #108
Cloned
Sexy Genesis
 
Cloned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soli View Post
I think Frattin is a good guess being an Eakin's project, having roots in Edmonton, and because he hasn't acquitted himself well this season in LA. It may be due to the system play or being a RW pushed into a LW spot earlier this season, but when he was with the Leafs and Marlies he was physical, quick and had a scoring aura about him.

With what's being said by Hoven, I'd be surprised if Clifford wasn't part of the return.

Maybe Clifford + Frattin + 1st. I'd still want to hold Gagner till we find a better match. Feels too much like a crappy loot bag.
Make that a 2015 1st and I'd consider it.

Getting three useable and above average assets for Gagner would be considered a wash to a win, which is all we could ask for with his performance and contract situation.

And there's always the chance LA could bomb next year and give us a shot (or two…) at McDavid.

Hey, they could. Brown is on a serious decline and Richards is on the start of that slope too. Quick has proven to be pretty inconsistent and they lack scoring in a big way.

Cloned is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:24 AM
  #109
SchultzSquared
Registered User
 
SchultzSquared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloned View Post
No to Yak for Vasilevski. Goalies are the hardest prospects to predict; good ones come out of literally nowhere and the success rate of the "hyped" ones is iffy at best - for every Carey Price you have a Justin Pogge or Andrew Raycroft.

If we're using Yak as trade bait it has to be for a defenseman or established forward.
Obviously it would not just be for Vasilevski... but he would go a long way to filling a big hole in our pipe line...

Yak for Vasilevski, Connolly, TB 1st? Get the big goalie, a winger to replace some of his offense (maybe) and a late 1st... which MacT probably then turns into 2nds and then into 3rds...

SchultzSquared is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:24 AM
  #110
nexttothemoon
Eight Straight
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,780
vCash: 50
A 1st round pick is never a bad asset to obtain... they can obviously be used to draft a potentially very useful piece... or traded as part of a package for a useful roster player.

I agree... a 1st in 2015 will be a potentially very valuable commodity with a potential franchise player in the mix. Sure LA might not drop to last overall... BUT could they miss the playoffs in the very tough West and be a lottery team? Yes

And also... if the Oilers were to trade their own 2015 1st AND the Kings 2015 1st... you'd have to think the return would be pretty decent.

nexttothemoon is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:27 AM
  #111
soothsayer
Registered User
 
soothsayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nexttothemoon View Post
I suggested it before... but had no comments on it... but if the Oilers are ready to give up on Yak and seeing how TB seems to have found their current and future #1 in Bishop (whom the Oilers missed out on)... why not make lemonade and trade Yak straight up for Vasilevski.

Vasilevski is a BEAST and will be a #1 goalie in the NHL... I have no doubt about his abilities at all (prying him out of the KHL might take a bit of $$$... but so be it. )

Do the Lightning do that deal? Well with Bishop ascending I'd say they might be a little more amenable to that trade now... and Yak would surely look good on a wing with Stamkos. If St.Louis and Stamkos couldn't get the most out of Yak I don't know who could.

Again... I personally want to keep Yak... but if Yak wants out and/or the Oilers are ready to move him... Vasilevski would definitely be a player I would want in return. Sign Scrivens or another decent starter and have Vasilevski play a 1B role... and yes he is that good. He's playing well in the KHL and has played well his entire career. In my view he's as sure as it gets to a future franchise goalie.

Yaks value isn't as huge right now as it might have been but I think many teams still see his potential... some might say Vasilevski is too much of a gamble.. I don't think so... a future #1 goalie is invaluable (as we've seen this season when the Oilers didn't have one).

Anyway... I'm sure most would rather trade Yak for a top-pairing dman or a big #2 centre but personally I think the situation with Bishop doing so well in TB might just open up a deal like this to obtain a very solid goaltender who could be a star for the next decade on this team.
OK, so Bo Horvat gets traded (essentially) straight up for Schneider, and Yakupov is going to get traded straight up or Vasilevski? I'll let you figure that one out.

soothsayer is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:30 AM
  #112
Cloned
Sexy Genesis
 
Cloned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchultzSquared View Post
Obviously it would not just be for Vasilevski... but he would go a long way to filling a big hole in our pipe line...

Yak for Vasilevski, Connolly, TB 1st? Get the big goalie, a winger to replace some of his offense (maybe) and a late 1st... which MacT probably then turns into 2nds and then into 3rds...
Meh, Yakupov is one of our most valuable trading pieces. If you use him you have to get something the team needs AND that you are fairly certain about being a sure thing, and none of those assets in that proposal addresses both of those requirements.

Cloned is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:32 AM
  #113
Soli
Moderator
Supervision Required
 
Soli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 13,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloned View Post
Make that a 2015 1st and I'd consider it.

Getting three useable and above average assets for Gagner would be considered a wash to a win, which is all we could ask for with his performance and contract situation.

And there's always the chance LA could bomb next year and give us a shot (or two…) at McDavid.

Hey, they could. Brown is on a serious decline and Richards is on the start of that slope too. Quick has proven to be pretty inconsistent and they lack scoring in a big way.
Meh, I'm not sure adding Frattin to Clifford + 1st makes the package anymore enticing to be honest. The value is there, but not overly fond of the assets. The 1st is the most valuable thing there, and I think trading Gagner for a pick as a centerpiece is a step backwards. Unfortunately, thats where I think we're headed.

There's only so many teams that can suck in the Pacific, somebody has to make the playoffs. Anaheim and San Jose; Edmonton and Calgary make up the chocolate cookie bookends. Vancouver, Arizona () and Los Angeles make up the delicious creamy center. Maybe you can enjoy one wild card flavor.

I suppose it's possible, but I fathom it unlikely that Los Angeles would have balls in the McDavid lottery. Then again, the 2015 draft looks deeper then this year. I'd keep an eye on Connor Bleackley near the back of the 1st round if we get their 1st this year.

Soli is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:33 AM
  #114
nexttothemoon
Eight Straight
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,780
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by soothsayer View Post
OK, so Bo Horvat gets traded (essentially) straight up for Schneider, and Yakupov is going to get traded straight up or Vasilevski? I'll let you figure that one out.
Well I likely have a biased view of Vasilevski... I would have picked him #4 in that draft... so obviously I feel he is a VERY high end prospect who will be a #1 goalie in the NHL.

Saying that... of course if the Oilers can pry another asset or pick to "even up" the deal then so be it... but the core of the deal would be Yak for Vasilevski... and yes even if it was only straight up I think he's good enough to live up to that trade.

nexttothemoon is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:35 AM
  #115
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
I Know A Thing Or 6
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: About Winning
Posts: 50,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
I'm going to guess something like Frattin, Martinez and a pick, if it goes down.

A hometown 3rd line(potentially 2nd line) winger and an underrated defenseman wouldn't be the worst return.
Frattin adds nothing new to this team although I don't mind him as a player and saw him torch OKC a few years back. IMO Clifford is a must in this trade, adding a younger guy that can play physical would be a nice move at least until guys like Moroz are ready. Martinez gives us yet another LHD, not really liking that move too much TBH.

__________________
Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Bryanbryoil is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:38 AM
  #116
armandh01
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
Frattin adds nothing new to this team although I don't mind him as a player and saw him torch OKC a few years back. IMO Clifford is a must in this trade, adding a younger guy that can play physical would be a nice move at least until guys like Moroz are ready. Martinez gives us yet another LHD, not really liking that move too much TBH.
Another LHD? That isn't a bad thing considering our choices are Marincin, Ference and that's it. The later being nothing short of NSchultz version 2.0.

armandh01 is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:44 AM
  #117
nexttothemoon
Eight Straight
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,780
vCash: 50
LA is only 4 pts up on Phoenix who are in 9th place in the West.

It's certainly not a given that the Kings make the playoffs this year... especially when they are playing like they are with 1 win in their last 10 games.

They are putting up Buffalo type offensive numbers (13 goals in their last 10 games) and I honestly doubt Gagner is going to spark them that much.

I think that LA 1st could be more valuable than we think (if it's indeed part of that package coming back).

nexttothemoon is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:51 AM
  #118
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
I Know A Thing Or 6
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: About Winning
Posts: 50,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by armandh01 View Post
Another LHD? That isn't a bad thing considering our choices are Marincin, Ference and that's it. The later being nothing short of NSchultz version 2.0.
Marincin, Nurse and possibly Klefbom could all be knocking on the door next season. Are you fine with Martinez in our top 4? Also I forgot Fraser but I haven't seen him since he came over as I've missed both games unfortunately.

Bryanbryoil is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 01:52 AM
  #119
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
I Know A Thing Or 6
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: About Winning
Posts: 50,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nexttothemoon View Post
LA is only 4 pts up on Phoenix who are in 9th place in the West.

It's certainly not a given that the Kings make the playoffs this year... especially when they are playing like they are with 1 win in their last 10 games.

They are putting up Buffalo type offensive numbers (13 goals in their last 10 games) and I honestly doubt Gagner is going to spark them that much.

I think that LA 1st could be more valuable than we think (if it's indeed part of that package coming back).
IMO it'll be a top 20 pick, I'd definitely key in on it and use it as a trading chip or on a prospect that we really like in the draft.

Bryanbryoil is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 02:03 AM
  #120
nexttothemoon
Eight Straight
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,780
vCash: 50
Ok let's say LA's pick is #20.

Draft day comes and the Oilers have the #2 pick.. they trade #2 plus #20 to Buffalo and the Oilers choose Ekblad at #1(or just give the Sabres #20 in exchange for them leaving Ekblad for the Oil to choose at #2).

That 1st is a useful piece and gives the Oilers some ammunition. The bonus with a 1st is it has no contract or cap space attached to it so it's a "clean" asset with no strings attached... very liquid.

nexttothemoon is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 02:06 AM
  #121
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
I Know A Thing Or 6
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: About Winning
Posts: 50,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nexttothemoon View Post
Ok let's say LA's pick is #20.

Draft day comes and the Oilers have the #2 pick.. they trade #2 plus #20 to Buffalo and the Oilers choose Ekblad at #1(or just give the Sabres #20 in exchange for them leaving Ekblad for the Oil to choose at #2).

That 1st is a useful piece and gives the Oilers some ammunition. The bonus with a 1st is it has no contract or cap space attached to it so it's a "clean" asset with no strings attached... very liquid.
Or we use it to land a guy like Brouwer or Hartnell and add a much needed big body to our top 6. Lots of possibilities.

Bryanbryoil is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 02:18 AM
  #122
nexttothemoon
Eight Straight
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,780
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
Or we use it to land a guy like Brouwer or Hartnell and add a much needed big body to our top 6. Lots of possibilities.
Yep... it suddenly looks a LOT better if you could get Clifford and then flip the 1st for Brouwer.

Hard to complain about that return when you put a possible name to it rather than just a generic "pick".

nexttothemoon is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 02:21 AM
  #123
nexttothemoon
Eight Straight
 
nexttothemoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,780
vCash: 50
One thing about MacT... he seems to do deals in sets so I doubt he'd stop at just flipping Gagner for Clifford and sit still until summer. I bet there would be a chain of at least 1 or 2 more once that 1st trade went through.

Got to give him credit... it feels like he's done about half the trades this season in the NHL.

nexttothemoon is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 09:05 AM
  #124
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 24,908
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powder View Post
What if the Oilers went a different route and rolled with 3 solid pairs of #3/4 d-men instead of trying to worry about landing that big fish and trading away big assets to get it?

You could play whoever was going that particular night a little more and switch things up from game to game depending on who matched up well with who.

This way we'd never be relying too much on one or two guys but being able to roll with 6 solid interchangeable D that could go on any given night.

Perhaps this would free up money to be spent else wear?
This is what we should be trying to do and if a top pairing guy comes available then adjust.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Preston View Post
According to Kevin Karius of Global, during the 2009-10 season a Souray for Hartnell trade was done (Hartnell even waived his NTC to come here) but Tambellini pulled out at the last second.
I've heard this rumor, but it's funny no one else every really talked about it.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
02-06-2014, 09:43 AM
  #125
Toydarian
Registered User
 
Toydarian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
This is what we should be trying to do and if a top pairing guy comes available then adjust.

I've heard this rumor, but it's funny no one else every really talked about it.
In regards to Hartnell/Souray, I was under the impression it was a done deal and then Souray broke his hand fighting Iginla, which skuttled the deal. It wasn't Tambo getting cold feet.

Toydarian 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 06:07 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.