People need to realize how much it is actually going to cost to get Schultz. Erixon was the last player to nearly leave his team with nothing and Schultz is probably considered a better prospect than he was at the time. It cost the NYR's 2 2nd rounders and Horak for Erixon and a 5th. I'm not sure the value Horak had, but he was a 5th rounder who had a much better year after being drafted. This is going to cost us more than an early 2nd rounder and/or Omark.
I am not looking at trading for Schultz, I am looking at signing him when he is a UFA on 1 July.
This is most likely how it will go.
I'd trade Gagner and a 2nd rounder for Kadri. Maybe I'd throw in a somewhat decent prospect if they add like a 3rd or 4th.
Belanger seems to be 2 games away from never being near an Oilers locker room again.
This may be silly, but what about a Belanger for Brule swap?
The first trade you are giving up a 2nd line centreman that is proven in the NHL for an unproven rookie and you want to add, no thanks.
No I don't want Brule here, we keep saying our team is too small and we want to add another small player. No thanks.
Do we really need to replace him though? I think by next year Lander/VandeVelde would be able to take care of 4th line center role and for about half the cost.
Lander and Vande Velde are cheaper but not nearly as good. They have a faceoff winning percentage of 43.3% and 40% respectively while Belanger is winning 55.3% of his. Belanger is also a much better option on the penalty kill and is probably the biggest reason our penalty kill has improved so much this year. The only penalty killing forward on this team that gets scored on less than Belanger when we are shorthanded is Jones, Belanger's partner.
Belanger is one of the best faceoffmen in the league and our best penalty killer. I wouldn't trade him away until we find a replacement.
It took us three years to fill the hole that Belanger fills. Do we want to open it again?
No we took 3 years looking for a 3rd line C. Belanger was supposed to be that guy, but he proved this year that he was a 4th line guy at this point. Luckily, Horcoff has proven that he can't be a 2nd line guy so hopefully he can be a good 3rd line C for us going forward.
I'm not married to Belanger at all. I don't think we need two guys who's only solid skill is FO ability, and Horcoff has an unmovable contract, not to mention friends in high places. So long as we can find another 4th line C(not that difficult) I'm not too concerned with losing him. And even if we can't find one, it's entirely possible Lander or Vande Velde could fill that role by next camp anyways.
Moving Belanger would still have to improve the team though. So I probably wouldn't ship him out for Brule, but he certainly wouldn't be a deal breaker in a trade for Wilson.
Do we really need to replace him though? I think by next year Lander/VandeVelde would be able to take care of 4th line center role and for about half the cost.
I also agree with the other poster suggesting C Wilson. If Gaustad does leave i can see that type of trade for sure. Also gives us a good trade chip in Gagner to either get a big top six left winger or a top 4 dman if we strike out in free agency.
Lander and VV will not have the faceoff % like Belanger does and that is a big part of the penalty kill. Wilson in my mind might be the perfect number two centreman. He has the size and skill. We don't need a 2nd line centreman to get 70 points. We need one with size that can win faceoffs, use his size in the defensive zone and get about 50-60 points and I think he can.
Harti; RNH; Eberle
Hall; Wilson; Hemsky
The top 6 is biggert and still has plenty of skill.
This way we draft Murray and both problems are solved. They say that Murray is the most NHL ready dman so give him 10 games to try it out.
Whitney; Murray
Smid; Petry
Schultz; Shultz
1. 2nd 2012 + Eager for Wilson: if NSH trades Wilson, it will be for a top four d-man with multiple years left on his contract. Suter looks unlikely to re-sign in NSH and Weber may well be right behind him with a ticket to leave town.
I don't think Wilson has enough value to bring back a top 4 D. Unless you think Paajarvi does too. But I do agree that if they can't sign Suter a D will be their priority in moving Wilson. It just might have to be Wilson+ for a top 4 D. I think Suter is going to resign though. But it all depends on how deep Nashville goes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JawandaPuck
2. Omark + Ana 2nd 2013 for J Schultz: possible, but then again Justin Schultz still may not sign. The high second would be a high price (eg, Henrik Samuelsson, Tom Wilson, Dalton Thrower, etc) for potentially zero return.
The 2nd is the Duck pick in 2013 we got for Cogs. And if the rumours are true that Schultz likes it here, we have as good a shot as any team to sign him. We can offer him a roster spot and a PP position with some talented kids that can help him increase his point totals for a better 2nd contract in two years. Not many teams are looking for a rookie to step right in on their PP, and fewer of those teams can boast our weapons up front. I think picking him up is worth the risk. He could be a great option for the right handed shot RNH needs on the point on the PP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JawandaPuck
3. draft Murray: TSN's Grant McCagg in a recent post stated, "Rumour has it the Oilers are quite interested in Reinhart. It wouldn't shock me to see them move down a couple of spots. If I had the second pick and I was Edmonton's head scout I'd take Dumba."
Not really sure why I should care more about this guys opinion than any of the scouts that have Murray as the best D in the draft. Personally I think a defensive guy like Murray is a better pairing for a more free roaming Schultz than a Dumba would be. But, I certainly wouldn't cry if we took Dumba though.
And if we're really considering trading all the way down to Reinhart territory, we'd better be picking up something very nice. Big difference between 2-3 and 7-9. But a Reinhart - Schultz pairing could be very good as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JawandaPuck
4. sign Harding: Josh Harding to EDM on July 1 is entirely possible. I think part of the reason Tambellini traded Tom Gilbert for Nick Schultz was to give a strong reason to Harding to sign in EDM. Schultz and Harding have been teammates for more than four years, and both hail from nearby Sask. (Similarly, MIN desired Gilbert because of his connection to Suter IMO -- they were the top pairing on the U of Wisconsin back in the day). The key competition for Harding will likely come from NJ which has another longtime former teammate of Harding's in Marek Zidlicky.
I agree on all points. Hopefully Brodeur decides to keep playing which will limit Harding's interest in NJ. We can offer him a legit shot at the starting spot and since he can't seem to stay healthy, Dubnyk will still get lots of games as well. I'd love to see a Harding/Dubnyk tandem next season.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockinghockey
I know he is a UFA 1 June but he still can't sign until 1 July
Fourier found in the CBA that he can be signed after June 1st, but the contract doesn't start until July 1st. I think that is what happened with Wheeler.
Plekanec is a good player but he is NOT what we need and Markov is damaged goods.
I don't think that the need to dump Horcoff is that great to give up the chance to draft a core player by trading a top 3 pick for a small center and a fairly old, oft injured defenseman. In fact, the trade is brutal the more i think about it.
It's Subban or bust if we are trading the pick to Montreal.
Couldn't agree more. BTW, If Nashville is forced to move Weber, I'm sure they'd be calling for the Oilers' pick. Weber is infinitely better than that Markov or Subban offer.
I don't think Wilson has enough value to bring back a top 4 D. Unless you think Paajarvi does too. But I do agree that if they can't sign Suter a D will be their priority in moving Wilson. It just might have to be Wilson+ for a top 4 D. I think Suter is going to resign though. But it all depends on how deep Nashville goes.
For instance, Wilson for Luke Schenn (quasi top four d-man) could work IMO. Further, NSH has some pieces they can add if there is a deficit on their side of the trade equation in a deal for a top four d-man. For instance, Wilson + Lindback.
Quote:
The 2nd is the Duck pick in 2013 we got for Cogs. And if the rumours are true that Schultz likes it here, we have as good a shot as any team to sign him. We can offer him a roster spot and a PP position with some talented kids that can help him increase his point totals for a better 2nd contract in two years. Not many teams are looking for a rookie to step right in on their PP, and fewer of those teams can boast our weapons up front. I think picking him up is worth the risk. He could be a great option for the right handed shot RNH needs on the point on the PP.
I missed the 2013 part. But either way, it should be a pretty darn good pick (the 2012 equivalent being the players I mentioned above). Bob McKenzie's opinion certainly has weight, but I think in the case of his TSN "Quiz" comment, it was more so a matter of him providing his opinion on what would be an ideal fit for Schultz, not necessarily where he thinks the latter will sign.
Personally, I think VAN has a better shot at Schultz with RHS Sami Salo heading for UFA status.
Quote:
Not really sure why I should care more about this guys opinion than any of the scouts that have Murray as the best D in the draft. Personally I think a defensive guy like Murray is a better pairing for a more free roaming Schultz than a Dumba would be. But, I certainly wouldn't cry if we took Dumba though.
And if we're really considering trading all the way down to Reinhart territory, we'd better be picking up something very nice. Big difference between 2-3 and 7-9. But a Reinhart - Schultz pairing could be very good as well.
Well he is the guy who writes the player profiles for Bob McKenzie's TSN draft rankings. Could be something to that rumour comment if not the Dumba opinion.
Also, if Stu MacGregor is sold on Reinhart, trading down should result in something very nice...possibly from MIN: seventh overall pick + Harding's rights + prospect + second rounder. (Then use in that second rndr in that deal for Justin Schultz )
Erixon was never going to be a free-agent. His options were to sign with the team that had his rights, or to go back into the draft. Therefore, he had a huge incentive to sign with a team he liked before the 1st, and the rangers had a huge incentive to trade for the rights, since if they didn't, the rangers would have to spend a draft pick IF he was even available at their pick.
Schultz on the other hand has zero incentive to sign before the 1st, and teams in the running have little incentive to trade for him, since he's not going into the draft.
Now people have traded for rights to UFA's before, but unless they are star quality, established players, the rights don't cost that much.
All good points. I agree with your perspective over my previous one.
With regards to Schultz, I heard some good arguments as to why he would sign here. Apparently there is a hole in the CBA that says he only has to have 2 years of ELC. Can anyone else confirm this? If it is true, he only has 2 years to pump up his value prior to becoming an RFA and getting a much bigger pay day. He would want a very good shot to maximizing his 2 years. Edmonton's extremely thin blue line would almost guarantee him a lot of playing time. On top of that, the kids are only going to get better offensively, so our team offensive numbers would be getting better. I'm not holding my breathe, but if the 2 year ELC is true, I think we may actually have a fighting chance.
How is it that MTL ends up bottom 3 once and fire their GM before seasons end, yet EDM has finished bottom 3 Three years in a row and still have the same GM?
I am pretty convinced that Burke will be offering Schenn in order to move up to the top 2 picks. He rarely has drafting success beyond the top few picks. He made the career defining move to get Sedin at #2.
I am not convinced he trusts his scouting staff with the 6th- 8th overall pick. Would Schenn be enough to move us off the #2 pick? Would Gardner or Gunnarson be enough?
I am pretty convinced that Burke will be offering Schenn in order to move up to the top 2 picks. He rarely has drafting success beyond the top few picks. He made the career defining move to get Sedin at #2.
I am not convinced he trusts his scouting staff with the 6th- 8th overall pick. Would Schenn be enough to move us off the #2 pick? Would Gardner or Gunnarson be enough?
Gardner+Tor 1st for Edm 1st.
only one i'd do.
and then lololol come on down J shutlz....and still a good player with their pick
How is it that MTL ends up bottom 3 once and fire their GM before seasons end, yet EDM has finished bottom 3 Three years in a row and still have the same GM?
because theyre gm continues to add future liabilities. our GM is trying to unload.
For instance, Wilson for Luke Schenn (quasi top four d-man) could work IMO. Further, NSH has some pieces they can add if there is a deficit on their side of the trade equation in a deal for a top four d-man. For instance, Wilson + Lindback.
Ah fair enough, I thought you meant a legit top 4 guy. Yeah I could see a Wilson for Schenn deal happening. Especially if Lindback is offered up too. With something more coming back from the leafs of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JawandaPuck
I missed the 2013 part. But either way, it should be a pretty darn good pick (the 2012 equivalent being the players I mentioned above). Bob McKenzie's opinion certainly has weight, but I think in the case of his TSN "Quiz" comment, it was more so a matter of him providing his opinion on what would be an ideal fit for Schultz, not necessarily where he thinks the latter will sign.
Personally, I think VAN has a better shot at Schultz with RHS Sami Salo heading for UFA status.
True, but Bob McKenzie isn't the only one saying Schultz should consider Edmonton. Gregor has also spoken with agents that have said Schultz should do that. So if McKenzie and random agents are thinking it's a good idea, it's pretty likely that Schultz has heard that opinion by now. Also, even if that quiz is dated, at the very least it tells us he doesn't have a negative opinion of our city, and that may be the crack in the armor we need to finally sign a sought after free agent.
If Salo announces his retirement, you may be right. But if the Nucks don't win it all, and he wants one more kick at the can and comes back? Well, then I don't see any way Schultz could crack that PP for the minutes he'd need to put up big numbers required for a large 2nd contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JawandaPuck
Well he is the guy who writes the player profiles for Bob McKenzie's TSN draft rankings. Could be something to that rumour comment if not the Dumba opinion.
Also, if Stu MacGregor is sold on Reinhart, trading down should result in something very nice...possibly from MIN: seventh overall pick + Harding's rights + prospect + second rounder. (Then use in that second rndr in that deal for Justin Schultz )
Thanks for the info on the writer. I am really fine with any of Yakupov, Grigorenko, Murray, Dumba, or Reinhart so I won't complain if any of those guys end up Oilers at the end of June.
Not sure I'd do your trades though. Harding is a UFA, I'd want something like Brodin(and drop the 2nd + prospect coming back) if we're giving a division rival a C like Grigorenko. Also, I'd prefer to give Anaheim back their own pick next year rather than trade our pick this year for Schultz. That one isn't a dealbreaker though.
)
