They would have to work around his NTC. Tough to sell a goalie moving from one of the best teams in the league to the worst.
If management came to him and said we are going to run with Schneider as the starter and we will look at moving you if thats what you want. Don't think there would be more than a couple of teams looking to take on that contract. CBJ, Tampa???? Would have to think he would rather be starting then be a backup.
They can't trade him if they match. Not for a year. You could probably screw their cap situation something fierce by doing that.
I don't think we'll do it. I could see someone else doing it though.
Yeah, they could potentially get screwed by an offer sheet from some team because if they match the offer sheet, thus not allowing him to be traded for the season, he ends up being a UFA once the season is done.
it would be interesting to see what Scneider's agent wants in a contract. We could offer him long term at around 3.3 mill and the compensation is only a 2nd round pick.
Around 5 mill costs us a 1st and 3rd. IMO, that is a deal that we could live with. 7 years @ 5 mill and we have an elite long term goaltender. Either way, the Canucks are in trouble wit the cap next year if they match
They can't trade him if they match. Not for a year. You could probably screw their cap situation something fierce by doing that.
I don't think we'll do it. I could see someone else doing it though.
Even more reason to do it then. I couldn't care less about upsetting Gillis. It'd be nice to have someone like that in the Oilers' org... like maybe, in the GM position.
Anyway, the Burke method in obtaining Kessel would be okay with me as well. Burke just picked the wrong guy to stick his neck out for IMO (ie. Kessel), and overpaid for him. But the method was not too bad.
Would you guys do Gagner + 1st 2012 for Joe Pavelski + Ryan Clowe? IMO, that immediately fills two essential needs. Size in our top-six + legit centre depth + veteran forwards who can play. It also has the potential to make Edmonton feel like a more legitimate options for UFA's.
Sign 2 of Wideman/Kubina/Kuba/Jackman/Carle/Allen/Oduya (They'll be labelled as X & Y) to short term (1-2 years), high priced deals.
Petry - Smid
X (Jackman) - Y (Oduya)
Whitney - Schultz
Let Dubnyk take the reigns, and Khabi provide spot relief
Dubnyk
Khabibulin
That's a significantly better team, and i'd say we could compete for playoffs. Also, doesn't hamper us long-term as Pavelski (27) and Clowe (29) are relatively young and make very fair wage (4.0 & 3.625 million respectively)
That is a classic 1-4, 2-3 trade where the 1st overall is #1.And Gagner is #4, though SJ is doing pretty good if Gagner is #4, that 22-23year old is showing signs that he is going to break out ASAP. if San Jose misses the playoffs I could see some sort of trade like that.
The problem is would you do Hall and Gags or Nuge and Gags for Clowe and Pavelski? Or Landeskog and Gags for Clowe and Pavelski? Not me.
To get Clowe and Pavelski, the Oilers may need a 2 for 3 trade where #1-#3 for #2-#4-#5. Something where SJ gets a big youth injection Gagner + 2012 2nd + ????
next year we have Hall, RNH, Eberle, Gagner, Hartikanen, Smyth, Belanger, Horcoff, Petrell, Eager, Jones for sure with Paajarvi, Lander and a couple of others pushing for spots at forward.
Also on defense, things take a big picture change if they can draft Ryan Murray and sign J. Schultz. We become embarassing rich at defence. Smid, Petry, N. Schultz, Whitney, as your core with J Schultz, Murray, Klefbom, Teubert, and Musil all 1-2 years away.
If they sign or trade for J. Schultz then maybe they do not draft Murray but Grigorenko instead. Crazy. The big question is who do you trade to get Pavelski and Clowe are those players you trade enough to make room for both of them? How abut this question. If you get Grigorenko and trade for Pavelski, who plays #4 center? Belanger or Horcoff.
Maybe Gagner and 2012 2nd for Clowe. Draft Grigorenko and sign J Schultz and we are set.
Clowe RNH Eberle
Hall Grigorenko Hemsky
Hartikanen Belanger Smyth
Petrell Horcoff Jones
Eager +
Petry Smid
Whitney N Schultz
Sutton J Schultz
Teubert Potter
That is a playoff roster with our PP and PK performers from this season on the roster
I actually prefer to be top heavy a la Pittsburgh than say Philly. The problem with Philly is eventually, some of that talent prices themselves out of your range and you have to replace them.
With the top-heavy type set up, you have to bargain hunt in free agency, but as long as your main guys perform, your pretty well off. Hypothetically if we got Grigorenko and he worked out(ie 80p C):
Hall-RNH-Eberle
XXXX-Grigorenko-XXXX
That would be our top-6 'plan' going forward. The two XXXX's could probably be filled by Harski type players and work fine. It wouldn't be pretty, but it would be effective due to the insane level of talent. It would be kinda like the Pittsburgh model.
I'd also argue that there is a risk that Clowe's play falls off little more dramatically next year. A quick look shows that this season he's had less hits and is on pace for his lowest goal total while in the NHL. IIRC, didn't he have some questions about his footspeed too recently?
The difference between Gagner and Clowe could be miniscule(due to Gagner's age and possible development), so in the end, you could be trading Grigorenko for Pavelski straight up. At 27, he's(Pavelski) got atleast 5ish years of effective NHL play, but if Grigorenko turns out, we could giving up an 70-80P C for 7+ years after 3 years of development.
That risk to me is much too great. I love Pavelski, I really do, but to be better in the short term, to give up a potential superstar just to get into the playoffs, not contend, isn't something I would favor the club to do.
See, this is simply a difference of opinions between the two of us. I prefer having the star players and then just loading the team with depth so they don't have to carry the entire burden. A top-heavy set up leads to failure if one of those pieces doesn't perform up to standard. What's Pittsburgh without Crosby/Malkin/Staal/Letang/Fleury? Not nearly as good as Philly without Giroux/Pronger/Timmonen/Bryz. Simply my preference.
I see where you're coming from, that Clowe is slowing down. Let's say he has 3~ more years of top-level play and then he declines. By then hopefully one of Paajarvi/Hamilton/Pitlick have developed to the point that they can succumb his role and Clowe can be used as an efficient bottom-six player. Essentially Clowe is a very talented stop-gap that will allow us to develop our prospects better. That's a major reason why i'm in favour of this deal. It allows us to take our time with our prospects (ala Detroit), and lets us compete now without sacrificing the future (due to the relative youth of Pavelski/Clowe).
Saying there's a miniscule difference between Gagner and Clowe is just simply not true. I'm a Gagner fan, but we have to accept him for what he is. A streaky, under-sized, average defensively, 45~ point center who can't play wing, nor can he generate offense on his own but is a strong complimentary player. Clowe is also a complimentary player, but brings size, leadership, and a willingness to go to the hard areas that the Oilers have lacked for much too long. Did everyone see what happened in the Philly/Pens game today?* You think our team would have done that? Never. If anyone would have, it would have been Hall, and do we really want one of our most talented players being the defendant in that kind of situation?
It's not strictly for short-term gain. It's long-term gain too. Allowing our prospects/young roster players to develop naturally, and not be forced into unsuitable roles is integral to the teams long-term success. It's not all about drafting excellent players and hoping they all have a great year, and carry the team to the cup. Hockey is a team game, and requires multiple components that we don't currently have and I believe would be addressed with the trade.
See, this is simply a difference of opinions between the two of us. I prefer having the star players and then just loading the team with depth so they don't have to carry the entire burden. A top-heavy set up leads to failure if one of those pieces doesn't perform up to standard. What's Pittsburgh without Crosby/Malkin/Staal/Letang/Fleury? Not nearly as good as Philly without Giroux/Pronger/Timmonen/Bryz. Simply my preference.
I see where you're coming from, that Clowe is slowing down. Let's say he has 3~ more years of top-level play and then he declines. By then hopefully one of Paajarvi/Hamilton/Pitlick have developed to the point that they can succumb his role and Clowe can be used as an efficient bottom-six player. Essentially Clowe is a very talented stop-gap that will allow us to develop our prospects better. That's a major reason why i'm in favour of this deal. It allows us to take our time with our prospects (ala Detroit), and lets us compete now without sacrificing the future (due to the relative youth of Pavelski/Clowe).
Saying there's a miniscule difference between Gagner and Clowe is just simply not true. I'm a Gagner fan, but we have to accept him for what he is. A streaky, under-sized, average defensively, 45~ point center who can't play wing, nor can he generate offense on his own but is a strong complimentary player. Clowe is also a complimentary player, but brings size, leadership, and a willingness to go to the hard areas that the Oilers have lacked for much too long. Did everyone see what happened in the Philly/Pens game today?* You think our team would have done that? Never. If anyone would have, it would have been Hall, and do we really want one of our most talented players being the defendant in that kind of situation?
It's not strictly for short-term gain. It's long-term gain too. Allowing our prospects/young roster players to develop naturally, and not be forced into unsuitable roles is integral to the teams long-term success. It's not all about drafting excellent players and hoping they all have a great year, and carry the team to the cup. Hockey is a team game, and requires multiple components that we don't currently have and I believe would be addressed with the trade.
*If you haven't seen it yet, here it is
I know everyone wants to be Detroit, though that's hard without 20 year of Nik Lidstrom, but I have to say to be Pittsburgh, who's both better then you and will pound your face, that would be pretty nice too.
See, this is simply a difference of opinions between the two of us. I prefer having the star players and then just loading the team with depth so they don't have to carry the entire burden. A top-heavy set up leads to failure if one of those pieces doesn't perform up to standard. What's Pittsburgh without Crosby/Malkin/Staal/Letang/Fleury? Not nearly as good as Philly without Giroux/Pronger/Timmonen/Bryz. Simply my preference.
I see where you're coming from, that Clowe is slowing down. Let's say he has 3~ more years of top-level play and then he declines. By then hopefully one of Paajarvi/Hamilton/Pitlick have developed to the point that they can succumb his role and Clowe can be used as an efficient bottom-six player. Essentially Clowe is a very talented stop-gap that will allow us to develop our prospects better. That's a major reason why i'm in favour of this deal. It allows us to take our time with our prospects (ala Detroit), and lets us compete now without sacrificing the future (due to the relative youth of Pavelski/Clowe).
Saying there's a miniscule difference between Gagner and Clowe is just simply not true. I'm a Gagner fan, but we have to accept him for what he is. A streaky, under-sized, average defensively, 45~ point center who can't play wing, nor can he generate offense on his own but is a strong complimentary player. Clowe is also a complimentary player, but brings size, leadership, and a willingness to go to the hard areas that the Oilers have lacked for much too long. Did everyone see what happened in the Philly/Pens game today?* You think our team would have done that? Never. If anyone would have, it would have been Hall, and do we really want one of our most talented players being the defendant in that kind of situation?
It's not strictly for short-term gain. It's long-term gain too. Allowing our prospects/young roster players to develop naturally, and not be forced into unsuitable roles is integral to the teams long-term success. It's not all about drafting excellent players and hoping they all have a great year, and carry the team to the cup. Hockey is a team game, and requires multiple components that we don't currently have and I believe would be addressed with the trade.
*If you haven't seen it yet, here it is
Check out Hartnell at the 5:55 mark giving it to the fan who thinks he's Hulk Hogan...fricking hilarious.
It would be nice to see our players stick up for each other like that. I think teams might think twice about going after the kids. It's not like we were playing for the playoffs for how long now. Why wouldn't the coaches instruct every player on the ice to stick up for their teammates if they get killed? I guess it's Renney though.
See, this is simply a difference of opinions between the two of us. I prefer having the star players and then just loading the team with depth so they don't have to carry the entire burden. A top-heavy set up leads to failure if one of those pieces doesn't perform up to standard. What's Pittsburgh without Crosby/Malkin/Staal/Letang/Fleury? Not nearly as good as Philly without Giroux/Pronger/Timmonen/Bryz. Simply my preference.
I see where you're coming from, that Clowe is slowing down. Let's say he has 3~ more years of top-level play and then he declines. By then hopefully one of Paajarvi/Hamilton/Pitlick have developed to the point that they can succumb his role and Clowe can be used as an efficient bottom-six player. Essentially Clowe is a very talented stop-gap that will allow us to develop our prospects better. That's a major reason why i'm in favour of this deal. It allows us to take our time with our prospects (ala Detroit), and lets us compete now without sacrificing the future (due to the relative youth of Pavelski/Clowe).
Saying there's a miniscule difference between Gagner and Clowe is just simply not true. I'm a Gagner fan, but we have to accept him for what he is. A streaky, under-sized, average defensively, 45~ point center who can't play wing, nor can he generate offense on his own but is a strong complimentary player. Clowe is also a complimentary player, but brings size, leadership, and a willingness to go to the hard areas that the Oilers have lacked for much too long. Did everyone see what happened in the Philly/Pens game today?* You think our team would have done that? Never. If anyone would have, it would have been Hall, and do we really want one of our most talented players being the defendant in that kind of situation?
It's not strictly for short-term gain. It's long-term gain too. Allowing our prospects/young roster players to develop naturally, and not be forced into unsuitable roles is integral to the teams long-term success. It's not all about drafting excellent players and hoping they all have a great year, and carry the team to the cup. Hockey is a team game, and requires multiple components that we don't currently have and I believe would be addressed with the trade.
Agreed it's philosophical differences.
I think though while what you say regarding developing our players has merit, I just don't want to sacrifice a guy like Grigorenko/Galchenyuk/Murray to do it. I feel there maybe cheaper alternatives that could do a similar role to Clowe.
I say Clowe and Gagner will have similar outputs due to the reason that, while Clowe is slowing down, I think Gagner may develop a bit more to, and in that sense, his decline and Gagner's rise as a player would cancel each other out.
The development issue can be addressed through free agency, but it shouldn't cost us a potential 80p C to do it. If you want long term development, just fill the spots with vets via free agency then prospects. They may not have the same output as Clowe + Pavs, but if they can do a similar job, while sheltering our prospects, I think that's a win.
Lastly, funny you should mention the Pittsburgh and Philly ending. I'd argue the reason they can do that is because they are top heavy. Pittsburgh dresses as enforcer on their D core, Asham, Cooke, and guys like Vitale and Kennedy in their bottom six. While some have developed into nice niche players(Kennedy), a lot of these guys are crash and bangers.
Going to the Philly route, you can't exactly do that because it requires 2-3 lines to pull their weight offensively.
__________________ <-- Credit goes to The Nemesis.
On another note, if Brendan Morrow is by chance available (as rumors said he was in TDD), and he was willing to come here (NTC), would we have any interest?
The guy has really struggled this season. He's sitting at 25p (10g) in 54 games.
He still has 123 hits in those 54 games.
He's also a good leader from reports, good on the boards and good defensively.
On another note, if Brendan Morrow is by chance available (as rumors said he was in TDD), and he was willing to come here (NTC), would we have any interest?
The guy has really struggled this season. He's sitting at 25p (10g) in 54 games.
He still has 123 hits in those 54 games.
He's also a good leader from reports, good on the boards and good defensively.
Definitely.
We need veterans, competent ones and players that hit and play hard.
He can fill in on our 3rd line or spot in on the first line with the kids.
On another note, if Brendan Morrow is by chance available (as rumors said he was in TDD), and he was willing to come here (NTC), would we have any interest?
The guy has really struggled this season. He's sitting at 25p (10g) in 54 games.
He still has 123 hits in those 54 games.
He's also a good leader from reports, good on the boards and good defensively.
Replace J.Schultz with a UFA if he decides to go elsewhere. They'll obviously pursue some free agent defensemen, like Wideman, but I'd rather have J. Schultz.
Belanger can go far away. Potter claimed on waivers or sent to OKC.
Not sure about Hartikainen and Paajarvi's spots, but I do like Paajarvi on the right side and with Lander.
Last edited by smokersarejokers: 04-01-2012 at 08:22 PM.
I love the idea of trading for Brendan Morrow. Like dnicks said, he's the ideal LW for Nuge and Ebs. He's been playing with Fiddler and Burish for most of the season which is a big reason for his lack of production. Has 1 year left on his deal, has struggled this year and is getting limited ice time. I'm sure we could get him for a good deal this summer. Tambo's lack of agression will likely result in nothing unfortunately.
EDIT - Just went on the Stars board to see if anything has been said about Morrow and with the comments posted in there it seems like they could care less if he was gone this summer. Saw a few comments about Robidas as well. Both are guys I would welome here.
Check out Hartnell at the 5:55 mark giving it to the fan who thinks he's Hulk Hogan...fricking hilarious.
<-- Credit goes to The Nemesis.
