Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
A young rebuilding team isn't going to give up the player they drafted 1st overall. That's the kind of player they're going to look to build around. AKA they're not trading Hall.
Nor would I want to give up what it would take to get him. Rangers haven't gotten where they are by trading away a ton of assets for a single player.
I feel sorry for the undividuals who feel the need to write a book to describe the need or no need for a trade like this. I will do my best to save everyone some time here:
The Oilers will not trade Taylor Hall. Get over it!!
A young rebuilding team isn't going to give up the player they drafted 1st overall. That's the kind of player they're going to look to build around. AKA they're not trading Hall.
Nor would I want to give up what it would take to get him. Rangers haven't gotten where they are by trading away a ton of assets for a single player.
Bold: fair enough. That appears to be the majority consensus.
Underline: Disagree, conditionally. I would do the right 4 or 5 for 1 when that single player is a young sniper as talented as Hall with no baggage.
I've always believed that the team getting the better player wins the trade. There is a lot of value offered up in the OP, but at the end of the day Hall is almost certainly going to end up being the best player in that trade.
I think I would pass this trade over as a fan of the Oil. Hall is a special talent, I'd like him to remain an Oiler.
I feel sorry for the undividuals who feel the need to write a book to describe the need or no need for a trade like this. I will do my best to save everyone some time here:
The Oilers will not trade Taylor Hall. Get over it!!
This is a debate to which you are entitled to your opinion and voice.
Please do not shout unnecessarily.
While some have disagreed to the value, a good number of Oiler fans have said value is sufficient or even more than sufficient but Hall is not going anywhere because he is "face of the franchise" or there is some emotional attachment.
That is fair and fine.
The question behind the proposal, assuming the viewer can objectively conclude as to value it is win-win, is then are Oilers better with slow development (another 2 or 3ish years of drafts) or accelerated effort by this deal for their development to not just win, but win at a level to at least compete for the Cup.
That is a fair question beyond Oilers will or will not make this trade, or make it today.
Some fans want Hall and slow and steady. Period. No deviation.
Others look at bottom line is if enough has come back, then would consider some trade like this.
This debate will continue, therefore, until either or both:
(a) Oilers do not need development, with or without Hall, because they have obtained enough development --- from draft, free agency, and other deals, meaning they are competitive enough and strong enough not to need to get the benefit of the proposed deal.
(b) Rangers get/develop enough snipers/Pens lose or diminish in their edge as to snipers, making need to acquire a sniper no longer paramount as to consider overpayment.
We will not be trading any of the kids......give it up.......Hall is worth too much to the franchise and the city. RNH and Ebs are surefire stars. We haven't had players like this in a loooooong time. We aren't about to trade them away. No matter the return....no team will pay the asking price. If we trade anything it will be our first this year.
This is a debate to which you are entitled to your opinion and voice.
Please do not shout unnecessarily.
While some have disagreed to the value, a good number of Oiler fans have said value is sufficient or even more than sufficient but Hall is not going anywhere because he is "face of the franchise" or there is some emotional attachment.
That is fair and fine.
The question behind the proposal, assuming the viewer can objectively conclude as to value it is win-win, is then are Oilers better with slow development (another 2 or 3ish years of drafts) or accelerated effort by this deal for their development to not just win, but win at a level to at least compete for the Cup.
That is a fair question beyond Oilers will or will not make this trade, or make it today.
Some fans want Hall and slow and steady. Period. No deviation.
Others look at bottom line is if enough has come back, then would consider some trade like this.
This debate will continue, therefore, until either or both:
(a) Oilers do not need development, with or without Hall, because they have obtained enough development --- from draft, free agency, and other deals, meaning they are competitive enough and strong enough not to need to get the benefit of the proposed deal.
(b) Rangers get/develop enough snipers/Pens lose or diminish in their edge as to snipers, making need to acquire a sniper no longer paramount as to consider overpayment.
Like you said: "get over it"..
Thank you for the words of wisdom but I, as an Oiler fan, will kindly decline any such trade for Taylor Hall. You may try and dilude the facts of the trade with a bunch of BS as displayed and articulated by yourself, but the end of this debate in my opinion is very near. Good effort by you but like I said earlier: The Oilers will not trade Taylor Hall
This is a debate to which you are entitled to your opinion and voice.
Please do not shout unnecessarily.
While some have disagreed to the value, a good number of Oiler fans have said value is sufficient or even more than sufficient but Hall is not going anywhere because he is "face of the franchise" or there is some emotional attachment.
That is fair and fine. The question behind the proposal, assuming the viewer can objectively conclude as to value it is win-win, is then are Oilers better with slow development (another 2 or 3ish years of drafts) or accelerated effort by this deal for their development to not just win, but win at a level to at least compete for the Cup.
That is a fair question beyond Oilers will or will not make this trade, or make it today.
Some fans want Hall and slow and steady. Period. No deviation.
Others look at bottom line is if enough has come back, then would consider some trade like this.
This debate will continue, therefore, until either or both: (a) Oilers do not need development, with or without Hall, because they have obtained enough development --- from draft, free agency, and other deals, meaning they are competitive enough and strong enough not to need to get the benefit of the proposed deal.(b) Rangers get/develop enough snipers/Pens lose or diminish in their edge as to snipers, making need to acquire a sniper no longer paramount as to consider overpayment.
Like you said: "get over it"..
Most have disagreed with the value and have been telling you from the start quality=/=quantity.
The problem is the value isn't win-win. Trading Hall for parts might accelerate the rebuild but we wouldn't have the pieces we'd need for a legit cup run. We'd have the pieces we need to see the 1st or maybe 2nd round the playoffs before elimination but making the playoffs isn't the only long term goal here. From EDM's POV it's a short term fix that won't put us over the top only make us a bubble playoff team again like we were in the early 2000's.
AS to condition A taking Hall restarts our rebuild and puts us back a year in terms of rebuilding and nobody likes being at the bottom year after year. Trading the player with the most potential on your roster for depth is never a recipe for success in the NHL. Teams need to balance high end talent with veterans and pay special attention to salary and cap hits to really be competitive. You want a high end young sniper who can possibly push you over the top...but so do we. What would Pitts be without one of Crosby/Malkin/Staal? Detroit without Datsyuk/Zetterberg? Chicago minus KAne/Toews/Sharp? I'm not saying Hall will be that good but he has barely scrathced the surface of his potential and Edmonton won't risk that kind of trade.
Edmonton is in year 3 of a 5 year rebuild. If not for injuries this year I believe Edmonton would be picking 5-10 not 2nd overall. We will start to make our way up the ranking and finish guessing 8-12 next year and be a bubble team the year after that. There's no reason for us to jump the gun and trade our most valuabel asset.
You are coming up with some pretty long winded responses trying to convince everyone why this is not that bad of an idea.
Counter...
Edmonton gets -
Henrik Lundqvist
Marc Staal
NYR gets -
Ryan Smyth - consistent 25-35 per year goal scorer
Cam Barker - decent defencemen
Devan Dubnyk - good young goalie
MPS - change of scenery would do him good
David Musil - good young D prospect
2012 2nd Rounder
Why do NYR Rangers do it?
They get that goal scorer you covet to compliment Gaborik
They get a roster defencemen to fill in the spot vacated
They get a good young goalie
They get a highly touted prospect who could use a change of scenery
They get the 31st overall pick last year and a good D prospect in Musil
They get a solid early 2nd rounder this year
Why does Edmonton do it?
They fill two needs in Lundqvist and Staal that will help them get over that hump
Most have disagreed with the value and have been telling you from the start quality=/=quantity.
The problem is the value isn't win-win. Trading Hall for parts might accelerate the rebuild but we wouldn't have the pieces we'd need for a legit cup run. We'd have the pieces we need to see the 1st or maybe 2nd round the playoffs before elimination but making the playoffs isn't the only long term goal here. From EDM's POV it's a short term fix that won't put us over the top only make us a bubble playoff team again like we were in the early 2000's.
AS to condition A taking Hall restarts our rebuild and puts us back a year in terms of rebuilding and nobody likes being at the bottom year after year. Trading the player with the most potential on your roster for depth is never a recipe for success in the NHL. Teams need to balance high end talent with veterans and pay special attention to salary and cap hits to really be competitive. You want a high end young sniper who can possibly push you over the top...but so do we. What would Pitts be without one of Crosby/Malkin/Staal? Detroit without Datsyuk/Zetterberg? Chicago minus KAne/Toews/Sharp? I'm not saying Hall will be that good but he has barely scrathced the surface of his potential and Edmonton won't risk that kind of trade.
Edmonton is in year 3 of a 5 year rebuild. If not for injuries this year I believe Edmonton would be picking 5-10 not 2nd overall. We will start to make our way up the ranking and finish guessing 8-12 next year and be a bubble team the year after that. There's no reason for us to jump the gun and trade our most valuabel asset.
I get where you are coming from.
We can both agree to agree, and agree to disagree.
However, as to:
"The problem is the value isn't win-win. Trading Hall for parts might accelerate the rebuild but we wouldn't have the pieces we'd need for a legit cup run. We'd have the pieces we need to see the 1st or maybe 2nd round the playoffs before elimination but making the playoffs isn't the only long term goal here. "
that is not as cut and dried as you make it.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that is a matter of subjective opinion.
For example, the closer you are to a "good enough" team, setting aside what that definition is, the more likely you are to get the free agents you want.
As that applies here, do you think you are better served by seeing if Shea Weber will come to Edmonton after whatever you draft this year and next and add that to the present team? Or do you think he'd find a team that is more developed better worth his time and effort, since he's gonna get top dollar, cap not withstanding, wherever he goes?
Good luck with the longer rebuild.
I expect you will succeed. It will just take longer.
You are coming up with some pretty long winded responses trying to convince everyone why this is not that bad of an idea.
Counter...
Edmonton gets -
Henrik Lundqvist
Marc Staal
NYR gets -
Ryan Smyth - consistent 25-35 per year goal scorer
Cam Barker - decent defencemen
Devan Dubnyk - good young goalie
MPS - change of scenery would do him good
David Musil - good young D prospect
2012 2nd Rounder
Why do NYR Rangers do it?
They get that goal scorer you covet to compliment Gaborik
They get a roster defencemen to fill in the spot vacated
They get a good young goalie
They get a highly touted prospect who could use a change of scenery
They get the 31st overall pick last year and a good D prospect in Musil
They get a solid early 2nd rounder this year
Why does Edmonton do it?
They fill two needs in Lundqvist and Staal that will help them get over that hump
Ridiculous isn't it?
Your suggestion certainly is ridiculous.
The only reason Rangers would make the overpayment I suggest is because of a need for a sniper, preferably young, preferably no baggage, which = very expensive.
Since Rangers do not have depth of enough highest quality (multiples of McDonagh, for example, so can afford to trade 2 or 3), they must offer 1 premium piece (Stepan) and other high quality pieces (Girardi etc.)
The fallacy with your effort to belittle me is that:
a) Rangers do need the sniper that Edmonton could afford to part with;
b) Edmonton has little else but a handful of snipers at the moment;
Those are real actual facts that apply.
Your rant filled with cannot be taken seriously.
Rangers don't benefit from that mix. For example, Ryan Smyth is NOT a sniper, let alone a young one. Other claims you make are or infer are also dubious.
Edmonton does benefit from my proposal. And it is not accurate or fair to deny that fact!
It is fair and reasonable to ask whether or not that is the best course of action by Edmonton; that is a related, but separate point.
Your suggestion certainly is ridiculous.
a) Rangers do need the sniper that Edmonton could afford to part with;
b) Edmonton has little else but a handful of snipers at the moment;
a) Edm cant afford to part with Hall. Who scores from LW? If the answer is Smyth then NYR can have him instead.
b) Who does EDM have besides Eberle and Hall that can notch 25 goals? Hemsky,Omark, RNH, Smyth, Horcoff, Gagner?
EDM is going nowhere without goaltending and a top pairing Dman. Offer up those 2 and we'll talk.
I get where you are coming from.
We can both agree to agree, and agree to disagree.
However, as to:
"The problem is the value isn't win-win. Trading Hall for parts might accelerate the rebuild but we wouldn't have the pieces we'd need for a legit cup run. We'd have the pieces we need to see the 1st or maybe 2nd round the playoffs before elimination but making the playoffs isn't the only long term goal here. "
that is not as cut and dried as you make it.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that is a matter of subjective opinion.
For example, the closer you are to a "good enough" team, setting aside what that definition is, the more likely you are to get the free agents you want.
As that applies here, do you think you are better served by seeing if Shea Weber will come to Edmonton after whatever you draft this year and next and add that to the present team? Or do you think he'd find a team that is more developed better worth his time and effort, since he's gonna get top dollar, cap not withstanding, wherever he goes?
Good luck with the longer rebuild.
I expect you will succeed. It will just take longer.
You're treating all cities as if they can equally draw UFA's in and that us incorrect. No big names sign here as UFA. We have to make due with fillers.
For markets like Edmonton, Buffalo, Islanders we generally have to draft top end talent. These are the realities of the NHL and Edmonton will not trade Hall hoping Weber will sign here with a balanced team. We're better off developing from within and taking 2-3 years than taking a shortcut and crossing our fingers.
You're treating all cities as if they can equally draw UFA's in and that us incorrect. No big names sign here as UFA. We have to make due with fillers.
For markets like Edmonton, Buffalo, Islanders we generally have to draft top end talent. These are the realities of the NHL and Edmonton will not trade Hall hoping Weber will sign here with a balanced team. We're better off developing from within and taking 2-3 years than taking a shortcut and crossing our fingers.
Bold: With sincerity, good luck with that.
Underline: I claim no special insight. It has been speculated Weber will not sign extension wants to go home, originally thought to be Vancouver.
My point is, IF this my above sentence is true, you have a reverse, an exception to the normal rule which I'm assuming at face value based on your word is correct.
I understand your attachment to Hall. But it's gotta be him or RNH, who has more time on ELC. Trade 1, develop faster, draft Grigorenko at 2, take a shot at Weber...
Underline: I claim no special insight. It has been speculated Weber will not sign extension wants to go home, originally thought to be Vancouver.
My point is, IF this my above sentence is true, you have a reverse, an exception to the normal rule which I'm assuming at face value based on your word is correct.
I understand your attachment to Hall. But it's gotta be him or RNH, who has more time on ELC. Trade 1, develop faster, draft Grigorenko at 2, take a shot at Weber...
Why? What essay will you reply with. I see no reason why its between one or the other
I feel sorry for the undividuals who feel the need to write a book to describe the need or no need for a trade like this. I will do my best to save everyone some time here:
The Oilers will not trade Taylor Hall. Get over it!!
That's fine. We get that. Tell your moronic brethren to stop these ass-backwards proposals where Dan Girardi/MDZ/McD go to Edmonton for crappy prospects that you all think have value because "they're yours".
We have to consistently bring this up, because you consistently bring THAT up.
I feel sorry for the undividuals who feel the need to write a book to describe the need or no need for a trade like this. I will do my best to save everyone some time here:
The Oilers will not trade Taylor Hall. Get over it!!
As regards the OP, they'd do it in five seconds or less. Would be different if Hall was their best young forward, but he is third.
rant filled with 
cannot be taken seriously.
