Bah - I got excited about the possibility because of all the speculation here, but now reading all that stuff about he and Gardiner being best buds, Burke drafting them both and trying to acquire him, and this Russo guy "guessing" Toronto, I'm all of a sudden not very optimistic at all about our chances of landing him. That's too bad.
What if we talk to him on June 22nd and he says he wants to play with Gardiner and would love to do it in Edmonton. Would you then do TOR 1st + Gardiner for 1st overall?
So maybe:
Galchenyuk, Gardiner, J Schultz
for
Yakupov
Galchenyuk wont be there, and TOR probably doesn't make that deal.
If Schultz wants to actually play in the NHL, sooner rather then later, Toronto is a terrible choice, unless they're going to get rid of a bunch of guys to create a spot for him.
Could be good news for us either way. They get Schultz they move someone.
Just saw this in my twitter feed. Someone retweeted it. Take that for what its worth.
followed by Lowetide among others.
I'd do that trade.
I am pretty sure that twitter account is Ek's so I'd take it with a grain of salt.
But I am still in favour of trading for his rights. Players like it when teams show commitment to them. In terms of value, I'm still sticking with my Omark + Ana 2nd 2013(conditional on signing) idea.
I am pretty sure that twitter account is Ek's so I'd take it with a grain of salt.
But I am still in favour of trading for his rights. Players like it when teams show commitment to them. In terms of value, I'm still sticking with my Omark + Ana 2nd 2013(conditional on signing) idea.
I am pretty sure that twitter account is Ek's so I'd take it with a grain of salt.
But I am still in favour of trading for his rights. Players like it when teams show commitment to them. In terms of value, I'm still sticking with my Omark + Ana 2nd 2013(conditional on signing) idea.
Still a waste of Assets, but if they move something to get his rights AND SIGN HIM, I'm not going to be upset.
That said, just wait until he's a UFA, the playing field is completely level in terms of contract, so it's all about where he wants to go.
I am pretty sure that twitter account is Ek's so I'd take it with a grain of salt.
But I am still in favour of trading for his rights. Players like it when teams show commitment to them. In terms of value, I'm still sticking with my Omark + Ana 2nd 2013(conditional on signing) idea.
Why are Lowetide and the pipeline show following it if its eklund...
the offer sounds good to me. lose nothing upfront, price is still low if we can sign him
Still a waste of Assets, but if they move something to get his rights AND SIGN HIM, I'm not going to be upset.
That said, just wait until he's a UFA, the playing field is completely level in terms of contract, so it's all about where he wants to go.
What asset? If we sign him it's worth it,if he doesn't sign all we lose is a headache. Omark is done here, there might be a place for him in Anaheim. A shot at locking up Schultz is worth more ,in my opinion, than any other return we'd get for him.
Maybe we're more attractive to Schultz now that Toronto is at least implied to be involved in tampering.
Not wasting much in omark...and a conditional 2nd offers no risk, great reward.
talking to him early could benefit us greatly.
Seeing as a VERY likely scenario is trading Omark FOR a pick, keeping the 2nd and signing Schultz, it's is COMPLETELY wasting assets, but as long as he is SIGNED after being traded for, then it's slightly less of a waste.
What asset? If we sign him it's worth it,if he doesn't sign all we lose is a headache. Omark is done here, there might be a place for him in Anaheim. A shot at locking up Schultz is worth more ,in my opinion, than any other return we'd get for him.
Maybe we're more attractive to Schultz now that Toronto is at least implied to be involved in tampering.
Omark and the pick, assets for the organization. This notion that You require moving something in order sign Schultz...or else, is a complete misnomer.
As I said to Koto, a VERY likely scenario is moving Omark for a pick, keeping the 2nd and still Signing Schultz, seeing as EVERY TEAM CAN ONLY OFFER HIM THE SAME THING.
Still a waste of Assets, but if they move something to get his rights AND SIGN HIM, I'm not going to be upset.
That said, just wait until he's a UFA, the playing field is completely level in terms of contract, so it's all about where he wants to go.
Omark doesn't have a future here anyway so losing him isn't a big deal and he's the only asset we give up, unless we get Justin to sign.
In terms of waiting for him to hit UFA, we could, but then we're competing with NYR, Vancouver and TO, all of who have been rumoured to be on his shortlist. If we picked up exclusive negotiating rights, we would get his undivided attention for a bit which might nudge his choice in our favour.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koto
Why are Lowetide and the pipeline show following it if its eklund...
the offer sounds good to me. lose nothing upfront, price is still low if we can sign him
Just something I had seen in passing, but I very well could be wrong and Guy, Dean, and LT could know something about this twitter account than I don't. It doesn't seem fairly Oilers centric, so perhaps I am wrong.
It certainly would be nice if it was accurate, I just try not to get my hopes up from unknown twitter accounts. Any of us could use the better thoughts, and opinions from HF and put together a fairly believable insider twitter account.
Seeing as a VERY likely scenario is trading Omark FOR a pick, keeping the 2nd and signing Schultz, it's is COMPLETELY wasting assets, but as long as he is SIGNED after being traded for, then it's slightly less of a waste.
And if Schultz doesn't have a clear cut favorite team yet wouldn't it be a good idea to show him that we want him here badly and that we gave up assets because of how good of a fit we believe that he'll be for us?
__________________ Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Omark doesn't have a future here anyway so losing him isn't a big deal and he's the only asset we give up, unless we get Justin to sign.
Yes, giving something away for nothing is the best way to treat that thing. Or just "give away" Omark for something else, and then just sign Schultz, simple and effective. Also, realistic.
Quote:
In terms of waiting for him to hit UFA, we could, but then we're competing with NYR, Vancouver and TO, all of who have been rumoured to be on his shortlist. If we picked up exclusive negotiating rights, we would get his undivided attention for a bit which might nudge his choice in our favour.
And who cares? Seriously, who cares who's on the "short list" The playing field as far as the contract he can sign is utterly and completely level, so in the end it's about where Justin Schultz WANTS TO GO. If your team isn't on his radar, throwing assets away to that end won't change that. Not sure what's hard to follow about this reality.
I am pretty sure that twitter account is Ek's so I'd take it with a grain of salt.
Are we sure it's Eklund? I'm not saying the twitter account is accurate or legit or anything, but here is what he tweeted about Eklund earlier in the year:
Entertainment factor and maybe to see what Eklund's "borrowing" from him.
I think that and at least when someone asks you what you think of the Horcoff for Getzlaf rumor you can tell that person to stop being dumb and quite following Eklund.
And if Schultz doesn't have a clear cut favorite team yet wouldn't it be a good idea to show him that we want him here badly and that we gave up assets because of how good of a fit we believe that he'll be for us?
LOL not, good god.
If he doesn't have have a "favorite team", but can only Sign with Anaheim right now, how does trying to shoehorn him into making your team his "favorite" going to work with a trade?
If he wants to be an *insert team* he will be that regardless of any trade.
Also ask yourselves this, if he hasn't already decided, what can Edmonton SERIOUSLY offer that Anaheim can't, whether you trade for him or not?
If he doesn't have have a "favorite team", but can only Sign with Anaheim right now, how does trying to shoehorn him into making your team his "favorite" going to work with a trade?
If he wants to be an *insert team* he will be that regardless of any trade.
I'm saying that he probably has a few teams on his radar and we are one of them, I have heard this from 3 different sources at this point. So let's say that he likes 3 different teams but he's still up in the air about it, we acquire his rights, make a full court press, bring him in to meet our kids, etc. That wouldn't give us the upper hand?
If we trade for his rights and he walks on July 1st then crap on management, but if we trade for his rights and keep Burke and Gillis out of his ear in the interim I like our chances and IMO if he does sign it would be a huge win for the team.
Are we sure it's Eklund? I'm not saying the twitter account is accurate or legit or anything, but here is what he tweeted about Eklund earlier in the year:
<-- Credit goes to The Nemesis.
