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 Thread 3.0: Gagner fit for a King?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-12-2014, 03:22 AM
  #351
17Kurri
Registered User
 
17Kurri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
Clifford was in the bottom 5 in +/- in 2 of his 4 seasons (his rookie and sophomore seasons)

Gagner was 2nd last in his rookie year, dead last in his 4th year, led the team in his 5th year, narrowly escaped the bottom 5 in his 6th year, and is 2nd last this year in team +/-.

So tell me why we should expect to see Clifford to be a worse "minus machine" than Gagner?
Because they'll be switching teams and because Gagner can put up points much more capably than Clifford. That said, if Clifford could turn into a Glencross type, it would be a win for us, but I have no faith in him being able to be so. If you do, so be it.

17Kurri is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 03:28 AM
  #352
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
Bozo Buddies
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 51,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 17Kurri View Post
Because they'll be switching teams and because Gagner can put up points much more capably than Clifford. That said, if Clifford could turn into a Glencross type, it would be a win for us, but I have no faith in him being able to be so. If you do, so be it.
Gagner can also abandon the slot like no one else. If we play Clifford at least at times in a top 6 role I could see him providing 25-30 points which would put him roughly 10-15 points behind Gagner's pace this season. I think that we could see Clifford get some net front time on the PP if we trade for him.

__________________
Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Bryanbryoil is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 03:36 AM
  #353
Oilerdiehard
Registered User
 
Oilerdiehard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
Gagner can also abandon the slot like no one else. If we play Clifford at least at times in a top 6 role I could see him providing 25-30 points which would put him roughly 10-15 points behind Gagner's pace this season. I think that we could see Clifford get some net front time on the PP if we trade for him.
I know which guy will win puck battles along the boards and which guy ends up on his snowpants when another player simply sneezes in his general direction. Sometimes offense is not everything in the game and even with offense we are not talking about a world beater or anything even close to it here.

Oilerdiehard is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 03:38 AM
  #354
17Kurri
Registered User
 
17Kurri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
Gagner can also abandon the slot like no one else. If we play Clifford at least at times in a top 6 role I could see him providing 25-30 points which would put him roughly 10-15 points behind Gagner's pace this season. I think that we could see Clifford get some net front time on the PP if we trade for him.
I don't see a potential 25-30 pt/season player in Clifford, but you never know, I suppose.

My main point was that the Kings are capable of hiding Gagner's weaknesses and highlighting his strengths, while the Oilers cannot do the same for Clifford.

17Kurri is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 03:43 AM
  #355
Mr Positive
Registered User
 
Mr Positive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 3,430
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarDownBobo View Post
Henrik Samuelsson, come on down!
Dude, just seeing that makes me happy, but sadly logic brings me back to the sad reality.

Samuelson will be a stud in the NHL. If I'm Maloney there's no way he's for sale.

Mr Positive is online now  
Old
02-12-2014, 03:43 AM
  #356
BlowbyBlow
Registered User
 
BlowbyBlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
The thing i hate about trades like these are this.

Gagner was a player selected based on the idea that the game would be about speed, and skill less about size. - drafted by a team that clearly lacked identification of the type of player they need now.

Clifford (goes into the Eager, Brown, Joennesu basket) in terms of a player you should develop and not have to acquire through trade. Is he a player the team needs now or in the future; possibly.

Now obviously they both cancel themselves out, because whether either player is needed in the future, and will be vital to a cup contending team is debatable. I'm not in the category of trading for the sake of trading unless Gagner was taking a more valuable players slot. I mean is Lander or Pitlick better than him at this point. This team needs competition even among the top lines, and they need bottom lines hard to play against.

The main reason I hate trades like this is - improper developing of a player. Could the Oilers turned Gagner into a Todd Marchant/Andy Mcdonald type center. Is he more suited on the wing. I mean here is a player who wasn't even ever predicted to be more than a #2 center (in his draft) is being shown the door cause the team never had a specific path for him and is expected to be something he's not. This team also said a couple years back they would go in the direction of the Red Wings, yet now Mact wants size, to me its just a roller coaster of making lateral or backward trades.

Trades for the sake of trades never help teams, because you trade Gagner all of a sudden you have to hope Pitlick or Lander can jump up (unless you want Gordon to).This is the other point besides not being challenged for a spot yet, its also leaving a void to fill his position. I don't mind trades that your getting comparable rankings regardless of position (1 for 1 deals) but when its one guy for one prospect and whatever else it doesn't do anything to help a rebuild.

BlowbyBlow is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 03:51 AM
  #357
Mr Positive
Registered User
 
Mr Positive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 3,430
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlowbyBlow View Post
...

Trades for the sake of trades never help teams, because you trade Gagner all of a sudden you have to hope Pitlick or Lander can jump up (unless you want Gordon to), but its just not important to trade Gagner. This is the other point besides not being challenged for a spot yet, its also leaving a void to fill his position. I don't mind trades that your getting comparable rankings regardless of position (1 for 1 deals) but when its one guy for one prospect and whatever else it doesn't do anything to help a rebuild.
There are obvious exceptions though. Smid comes to mind, and the void he left allowed Marincin to come in and for us to sign Bryzgalov.

If we did trade Gagner we would call up Arco I'm sure. Personally I wouldn't mind giving Lander a shot there, especially at this point. There's also the possibility that Gagner will be untradeable this summer and that the main reason LA is looking at him is because they are desperate to make the playoffs now. There was that article saying that MacT ditched Smid at just the right time considering where his numbers were trending.

Trading for the sake of trading is bad, but keeping a player for the sake of keeping him is just as bad. Creating a void is bad, but filling a void with a player that has no future here is equally bad. Gagner takes up cap space and a roster spot that might prevent us from getting the right player if he suddenly becomes available.

Mr Positive is online now  
Old
02-12-2014, 03:52 AM
  #358
17Kurri
Registered User
 
17Kurri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilerdiehard View Post
I know which guy will win puck battles along the boards and which guy ends up on his snowpants when another player simply sneezes in his general direction. Sometimes offense is not everything in the game and even with offense we are not talking about a world beater or anything even close to it here.
If any semblance of this trade occurs, it won't be about Clifford, it'll be more about what comes along with him, imho. Hopefully, it's a diamond in the rough or two and not Colten Teubert clones.

17Kurri is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 03:56 AM
  #359
Oilerdiehard
Registered User
 
Oilerdiehard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlowbyBlow View Post
The thing i hate about trades like these are this.

Gagner was a player selected based on the idea that the game would be about speed, and skill less about size. - drafted by a team that clearly lacked identification of the type of player they need now.
I was with you until you said Gagner was selected based partially upon speed. The guy is not a fast skater. I would say skating / foot speed is one of his obvious limitations.


Quote:
Now obviously they both cancel themselves out, because whether either player is needed in the future, and will be vital to a cup contending team is debatable. I'm not in the category of trading for the sake of trading unless Gagner was taking a more valuable players slot. I mean is Lander or Pitlick better than him at this point. This team needs competition even among the top lines, and they need bottom lines hard to play against.
As far as short term replacement for Gagner. He is not quite as good offensively but Arcobello does just about everything else better than Gagner. He is faster, much much stronger on his skates, he hits often and pretty hard for his size, he wins draws, he is a solid PKer and he is a lot better than Gagner defensively. If we are talking short term replacement I would rather Arco playing in his spot right now. So that is not a big worry for me. Gagner does not fit the make up of this team and the make up of our top six makes him a bad match for this team. So MacT IMO needs to be looking for a more suitable replacement for Gagner even if he does not get traded and is still here. So yeah I will take Arco as a replacement in the meantime and be okay with that.

Quote:
The main reason I hate trades like this is - improper developing of a player. Could the Oilers turned Gagner into a Todd Marchant/Andy Mcdonald type center. Is he more suited on the wing. I mean here is a player who wasn't even ever predicted to be more than a #2 center (in his draft) is being shown the door cause the team never had a specific path for him and is expected to be something he's not. This team also said a couple years back they would go in the direction of the Red Wings, yet now Mact wants size, to me its just a roller coaster of making lateral or backward trades.
Not sure what you are getting at here. Gagner has been groomed as a 2C ever since he was drafted. It just so happens he is a 2C that sucks defensively, is not even remotely physical, loses just about every puck battle he gets into and usually falls down the process, he is terrible at face offs etc... I think his offense if you only look at that is nothing all that special but he has done fine for a 2C on offense if you only look at that one thing and nothing else.

Oilerdiehard is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 03:57 AM
  #360
Oilerdiehard
Registered User
 
Oilerdiehard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 17Kurri View Post
If any semblance of this trade occurs, it won't be about Clifford, it'll be more about what comes along with him, imho. Hopefully, it's a diamond in the rough or two and not Colten Teubert clones.
I think it will be about Clifford at least partly. But I agree on the other fifty percent of the trade (if we are lucky enough to get that much) that hopefully it is a prospect that will turn into something useful at the NHL level.

Oilerdiehard is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 04:05 AM
  #361
BlowbyBlow
Registered User
 
BlowbyBlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Positive View Post
There are obvious exceptions though. Smid comes to mind, and the void he left allowed Marincin to come in and for us to sign Bryzgalov.

If we did trade Gagner we would call up Arco I'm sure. Personally I wouldn't mind giving Lander a shot there, especially at this point. There's also the possibility that Gagner will be untradeable this summer and that the main reason LA is looking at him is because they are desperate to make the playoffs now. There was that article saying that MacT ditched Smid at just the right time considering where his numbers were trending.

Trading for the sake of trading is bad, but keeping a player for the sake of keeping him is just as bad. Creating a void is bad, but filling a void with a player that has no future here is equally bad. Gagner takes up cap space and a roster spot that might prevent us from getting the right player if he suddenly becomes available.
i agree with 99% of what you say. My only concern is do we essentially do to Gagner what we did to Mike Comrie (trade Doug Weight) then what happened to Shawn Horcoff (trade Comrie), - basically putting guys ahead of there expected position.

I'm not saying Lander or Pitlick wouldn't be bad fill ins because I am definitely in the camp of lets give all these players 30 game tryouts till the end of the season. There's no point to padded stats, and useless wins. Smid seems to be a trade more based on locker room attitude (apparently calling out some team mates). Part of it is (a) does dumping Gagner's salary matter; will it make room for any potential trade's, ufa signings (at this point his salary is a hindrance and most teams would like the Oilers to retain salary (b) is he a bad example to other players; work ethic, attitude, ect.

I sort of look at it like Brad Richards last year - was a good player, lost a step = diminished value, but as found a continuous role on the team. Would Gagner be untradeable - that's the feeling but i don't believe it because there has been players who were distractions (Erat), bad work ethics (Semin), attitude issues (Grabovski) and they all found teams - these guys are slightly better than Gagner but there all know for taking more than a few nights off.

See I look at it like the chicken and egg analogy - the Oilers want size (which they have had in the past; Penner) yet lacked work ethic, and intensity. Gagner doesn't have size but he does have other good attributes and much like Yakupov if you have a player who is willing to commit to a role that maybe less than what you expected you should put that player in that role (in this case Gagner) - provided he's not worse than the potential player you are acquiring. My first post really was more about who is Gagner's comparable, will they play the same role here, will they have the intensity, can this team develop that player and save an asset, who will replace Gagner's role, ect.

BlowbyBlow is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 04:18 AM
  #362
BlowbyBlow
Registered User
 
BlowbyBlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilerdiehard View Post
I was with you until you said Gagner was selected based partially upon speed. The guy is not a fast skater. I would say skating / foot speed is one of his obvious limitations.
He is not ever been a great skater but he's not horrible either

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilerdiehard View Post
As far as short term replacement for Gagner. He is not quite as good offensively but Arcobello does just about everything else better than Gagner. He is faster, much much stronger on his skates, he hits often and pretty hard for his size, he wins draws, he is a solid PKer and he is a lot better than Gagner defensively. If we are talking short term replacement I would rather Arco playing in his spot right now. So that is not a big worry for me. Gagner does not fit the make up of this team and the make up of our top six makes him a bad match for this team. So MacT IMO needs to be looking for a more suitable replacement for Gagner even if he does not get traded and is still here. So yeah I will take Arco as a replacement in the meantime and be okay with that.
It stands to reason if Arco can do Gagner's role temporarily and even better. This team has not put huge expectations on Arco like Gagner and that could change if he's not capable of the position or more is expected. Brief stints on the line is fine but playing every game changes that fast.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilerdiehard View Post
Not sure what you are getting at here. Gagner has been groomed as a 2C ever since he was drafted. It just so happens he is a 2C that sucks defensively, is not even remotely physical, loses just about every puck battle he gets into and usually falls down the process, he is terrible at face offs etc... I think his offense if you only look at that is nothing all that special but he has done fine for a 2C on offense if you only look at that one thing and nothing else.
I think fans after the first season expected he'd be more of a #2C but the expectation for points because of lack of defense has put more pressure on him. Which I sort of see happening with RNH - this team could never handle a situation where a player was taught more about defense for the sacrifice of offense. That's why i never am hard on RNH because most would expect everything from him and he has to learn the defense side of the puck first, and then be a offensive threat. Basically every team has 1 strong defensive first or second line center that has to sacrifice points to face other teams top players. That also indirectly is my answer to Arco if RNH doesn't step up fans will be down on him for being paired with guys to create offense/defense like Gagner (fans never really knowing what they want) - fans will point to Gagner's plus/minus other fans won't care about that but will be talking about points/game production.

At this point fans have to realize this team doesn't have one well rounded player who can be good/great offensive, and likewise with defense. You're either getting high powered offense (Hall, Yakupov), yet no defense, or the other way around.
[/QUOTE]

BlowbyBlow is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 04:27 AM
  #363
Mr Positive
Registered User
 
Mr Positive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 3,430
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlowbyBlow View Post
i agree with 99% of what you say. My only concern is do we essentially do to Gagner what we did to Mike Comrie (trade Doug Weight) then what happened to Shawn Horcoff (trade Comrie), - basically putting guys ahead of there expected position.

I'm not saying Lander or Pitlick wouldn't be bad fill ins because I am definitely in the camp of lets give all these players 30 game tryouts till the end of the season. There's no point to padded stats, and useless wins. Smid seems to be a trade more based on locker room attitude (apparently calling out some team mates). Part of it is (a) does dumping Gagner's salary matter; will it make room for any potential trade's, ufa signings (at this point his salary is a hindrance and most teams would like the Oilers to retain salary (b) is he a bad example to other players; work ethic, attitude, ect.

I sort of look at it like Brad Richards last year - was a good player, lost a step = diminished value, but as found a continuous role on the team. Would Gagner be untradeable - that's the feeling but i don't believe it because there has been players who were distractions (Erat), bad work ethics (Semin), attitude issues (Grabovski) and they all found teams - these guys are slightly better than Gagner but there all know for taking more than a few nights off.

See I look at it like the chicken and egg analogy - the Oilers want size (which they have had in the past; Penner) yet lacked work ethic, and intensity. Gagner doesn't have size but he does have other good attributes and much like Yakupov if you have a player who is willing to commit to a role that maybe less than what you expected you should put that player in that role (in this case Gagner) - provided he's not worse than the potential player you are acquiring. My first post really was more about who is Gagner's comparable, will they play the same role here, will they have the intensity, can this team develop that player and save an asset, who will replace Gagner's role, ect.
Smid was gone for about half a dozen reasons. Maybe the locker room thing was the reason for the exact timing, but I figure that his days were numbered the day we signed Ference. At any rate, the reasons are irrelevant. Marincin would not have had his shot if it weren't for that trade. Smid is vastly overpaid as a 3rd pairing D, which is what he is on Edmonton and Calgary, two of the worst teams in the league currently. Addition by subtraction is real.

I totally agree with what you say about Gagner, as well as players like Penner. I just don't see how to translate Gagner's value to our team success. If we had drafted a player other than Yakupov and weren't so logjammed at RW, I could see Gagner be a 2RW. If Joensuu turned out to be the next Lucic, I could see Gagner staying as 2C next to him. If MacT made a few trades that surrounded Gagner with big linemates to give him room, I could see it. I just don't see those things happening.

Mr Positive is online now  
Old
02-12-2014, 05:40 AM
  #364
Blue And Orange
Kevin Lowe Must GO!!
 
Blue And Orange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,443
vCash: 500
Don't know if I mentioned this in this thread but IMO, trading Stoll was a big mistake. IMO, Stoll not only would've helped mentor Gagner back in 2008, but he would've provided easing for Gagner as he figures out his role.

Essentially after Gagner's rookie season, Lowe felt confident that Gagner was the real deal and threw him into the wolves, thus hurting his development.

Again, I hate Lowe for everything he did to this team, but that's a rand on another thread for another day.

Blue And Orange is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 06:12 AM
  #365
BarDownBobo
Registered User
 
BarDownBobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Yak City
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Positive View Post
Dude, just seeing that makes me happy, but sadly logic brings me back to the sad reality.

Samuelson will be a stud in the NHL. If I'm Maloney there's no way he's for sale.
If there's even a remote chance he's moved you know MacT will be all over it. Moroz and Samuelsson would be 2/3 of what would likely be a really good third line in the future. I'm not getting my hopes up though.

BarDownBobo is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 06:15 AM
  #366
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 17Kurri View Post
I don't see a potential 25-30 pt/season player in Clifford, but you never know, I suppose.

My main point was that the Kings are capable of hiding Gagner's weaknesses and highlighting his strengths, while the Oilers cannot do the same for Clifford.
So what's the answer? Wait in hopes that Gagner's value rises?

Even at his very best he is still not a great fit on many teams in the league. He has skills for sure but he needs to be surrounded by players who can a) take advantage of those skills and b) neutralize his deficiencies. There are teams that fit this mold. LA, Chicago, San Jose, Boston, St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Anaheim come to mind. San Jose and Boston would have no need for him. I am not sure why Pittsburgh, St. Louis or Anaheim would either. But he is not the type of player that any of those teams will give up quality skilled roster players for. So you are looking role players, prospects or picks. After that you need to look at teams like Nashville. He would be a fit there in so much as they need his scoring ability but would it be realised without the high quality line-mates? And who do you get from them? Not Roman Josi for sure. Maybe you might have gotten Klein, but that ship has sailed.

The longer you wait with Gagner the less you can use the "but he's still young card". This is his 7th year in the league. By this point his skillset is established. Teams should know what they are getting and what it's value is to them.

My feeling about Gagner has not changed for some time. I like the kid and hope that if he is traded that he will be a success where ever he goes. But he does not fit the current make-up of the team and it would be foolish to try and change the team to fit him. To me he seems like a diminishing asset. I will say however, that the Oilers are in a position to retain a good deal of his salary, both financially and in terms of the cap. If they refuse to do that then they are ignoring one of the few advantages that a franchise like Edmonton has in a competitive market place.


Last edited by Fourier: 02-12-2014 at 06:32 AM.
Fourier is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 08:59 AM
  #367
yukoner88
Registered User
 
yukoner88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dawson City, YT
Posts: 3,019
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Nuge View Post
Especially with how development goes. Lander was drafted to be a middle 6 center. Now we're just hoping he can be a 3rd line center (that said, maybe we shouldn't be writing him off as the #2C either given he's a shutdown center who's over a PPG in the AHL at 22, and is once again, captain of his team)
here here. If a young guy has comes in and plays his heart out and wins the spot through blue collar hard work, that's a benefit to both the team and the player. But to the people all of a sudden tooting Yakimov's horn, to bring a kid from Russia for the sole purpose of just giving him the 2C role, would only end in disaster. Its not so much the process of a player translating his game to North American ice, it's the challenge of getting his body use to an 82game grind. By game 25, Yakimov would simply wear out, lose his confidence, and become everyone's favorite whipping boy

yukoner88 is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 09:20 AM
  #368
Oilfan2
Oil the way..
 
Oilfan2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
The return has been rumored as Clifford+. So I'm thinking its Clifford+Muzzin. If we look at that deal this is how our roster shakes out after.

Hall-RNH-Yakupov
Perron-Arcobello-Eberle
Clifford-Gordon-Hendricks
Gazdic-Smyth-Jones

Muzzin-Petry
Ference-Schultz
Marincin-Potter?
Belov

If we can sign a good RHD going into next summer to pair with Muzzin our D looks very respectable if thats the deal. Something like:

Muzzin-Morris
Ference-Schultz
Marincin-Petry

Damn that would be a huge upgrade to what we started the year with this year. You'd have to think by signing one shut down Dman and a semi decent center like Legwand, Grabovski, Goc, etc... we'd be in contention for a wild card spot after the deal.
If the best we have for a top 2 is Muzzin/Morris, we're in the lottery again. No way we can afford to not get at least one top 2 defenceman...hopefully 2, before next season, which neither of these is.

Oilfan2 is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 09:49 AM
  #369
frag2
Registered User
 
frag2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bestmyfeeling View Post
has lander been completely written off? i still believe lander can turn into something
Lander is pretty slow in skating and lacks offensive instincts at the NHL level to be useful IMO

frag2 is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 09:51 AM
  #370
raab
Where's the Hart?
 
raab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,962
vCash: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilfan2 View Post
If the best we have for a top 2 is Muzzin/Morris, we're in the lottery again. No way we can afford to not get at least one top 2 defenceman...hopefully 2, before next season, which neither of these is.
Muzzin has played nearly the whole year on the top pairing in LA... If you think we'll be able to add more then two top 4 dmen this summer prepare to be disappointed. I think personally we'll be lucky if we can get one guy like Morris let alone a guy or two better then him.

raab is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 10:40 AM
  #371
Oilbleeder
Moderator
RattsSSV on the avy
 
Oilbleeder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oil Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourier View Post
So what's the answer? Wait in hopes that Gagner's value rises?

Even at his very best he is still not a great fit on many teams in the league. He has skills for sure but he needs to be surrounded by players who can a) take advantage of those skills and b) neutralize his deficiencies. There are teams that fit this mold. LA, Chicago, San Jose, Boston, St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Anaheim come to mind. San Jose and Boston would have no need for him. I am not sure why Pittsburgh, St. Louis or Anaheim would either. But he is not the type of player that any of those teams will give up quality skilled roster players for. So you are looking role players, prospects or picks. After that you need to look at teams like Nashville. He would be a fit there in so much as they need his scoring ability but would it be realised without the high quality line-mates? And who do you get from them? Not Roman Josi for sure. Maybe you might have gotten Klein, but that ship has sailed.

The longer you wait with Gagner the less you can use the "but he's still young card". This is his 7th year in the league. By this point his skillset is established. Teams should know what they are getting and what it's value is to them.

My feeling about Gagner has not changed for some time. I like the kid and hope that if he is traded that he will be a success where ever he goes. But he does not fit the current make-up of the team and it would be foolish to try and change the team to fit him. To me he seems like a diminishing asset. I will say however, that the Oilers are in a position to retain a good deal of his salary, both financially and in terms of the cap. If they refuse to do that then they are ignoring one of the few advantages that a franchise like Edmonton has in a competitive market place.
Well said.

We're going to Hemsky the situation if we hold on too long.

__________________
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v200/nemesis15/QuadSig-OB.gif <-- Credit goes to The Nemesis.
Oilbleeder is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 10:42 AM
  #372
Valic
BOOOOOOOOOO
 
Valic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,726
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Muzzin has played nearly the whole year on the top pairing in LA... If you think we'll be able to add more then two top 4 dmen this summer prepare to be disappointed. I think personally we'll be lucky if we can get one guy like Morris let alone a guy or two better then him.

Playing with Doughty. Did you not watch 06? MA Bergeron played top pair with Pronger. Same thing.

Valic is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 12:14 PM
  #373
SoftDumps
Registered User
 
SoftDumps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 461
vCash: 450
Brandon Sutter is a very interesting piece. Gagner would probably end up on the wing in Pitt, and Crosby does need a RW...
Do the Pens have the cap space though?
I do think Sutter would bring something we need. We would sacrifice some offensive production for someone who can play a nice well rounded game. Wonder how the value is between these players? We probably have to add? Penguins likely include a salary dump of some sort, which I am pretty sure we can take on at the moment.

SoftDumps is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 12:15 PM
  #374
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
Bozo Buddies
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 51,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 17Kurri View Post
I don't see a potential 25-30 pt/season player in Clifford, but you never know, I suppose.

My main point was that the Kings are capable of hiding Gagner's weaknesses and highlighting his strengths, while the Oilers cannot do the same for Clifford.
Clifford had 14 points in 48 games in the lockout which is a prorated 24 points over 82 games. Now it is entirely possible that he would've slowed in that pace, but playing in a more offensive environment (in more ways than one ) he could match that type of a pace in a good year. That said fair enough if you don't see him capable of such numbers, I'll agree to disagree with you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilbleeder View Post
Well said.

We're going to Hemsky the situation if we hold on too long.
Exactly add to that that this team needs to take the next step and REALLY ****ing soon and we need to move on.

Bryanbryoil is offline  
Old
02-12-2014, 12:19 PM
  #375
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoftDumps View Post
Brandon Sutter is a very interesting piece. Gagner would probably end up on the wing in Pitt, and Crosby does need a RW...
Do the Pens have the cap space though?
I do think Sutter would bring something we need. We would sacrifice some offensive production for someone who can play a nice well rounded game. Wonder how the value is between these players? We probably have to add? Penguins likely include a salary dump of some sort, which I am pretty sure we can take on at the moment.
No chance you get Sutter for Gagner. The plus would have to be significant. He is basically their Couturier.

Fourier 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 02:28 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.