Value of: Brent Burns to Edmonton

[SephF]

Originally Posted by the8bandarmadillo

Why? Pajaarvi hasn't proven squat and I wouldn't be surprised if he is nothing more than a 3rd liner.

Well he's proven more in the NHL than Coyle...

15 goal 35 pt rookie year with bottom 6 minutes and lead the entire team in zone start / finish.

I personally think Coyle will be better but we'll have to wait and see!

[PuckInTheNards]

Paajarvi had 2 goals in 41 games last season. His value is not close to Coyle's.

[Clowe Me]

Unless one of Hall, Eberle, Yakupov, or Nugent-Hopkins are on the table, no dice.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by PuckInTheNards

Paajarvi had 2 goals in 41 games last season. His value is not close to Coyle's.

Sophmore slump.

[PuckInTheNards]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Sophmore slump.

That's what I said about Sheppard, too.

[CSimpson18]

Might as well lock this one up. It has taken the completely predictable path of people asking for Eberle/Hall/RNH for a far less valuable asset. We're done here.

[Arrch]

Originally Posted by CSimpson18

Might as well lock this one up. It has taken the completely predictable path of people asking for Eberle/Hall/RNH for a far less valuable asset. We're done here.

Might as well lock this one up. It has taken the completely predictable path of people offering scrap for good players. We're done here.

[Mafoofoo]

Originally Posted by CSimpson18

Might as well lock this one up. It has taken the completely predictable path of people asking for Eberle/Hall/RNH for a far less valuable asset. We're done here.

Because every team is obligated to give Edmonton their great players for scraps.

[CSimpson18]

Originally Posted by Mafoofoo

Because every team is obligated to give Edmonton their great players for scraps.

Because everything Edmonton has other than their top 5 are scraps.

[hohosaregood]

Originally Posted by CSimpson18

Because everything Edmonton has other than their top 5 are scraps.

If you want a good #1 quality defenseman, you really have to give something that has equal value in your franchise. If you only want to give up scraps for a #1 defenseman then you won't be getting a good #1 defenseman.

[FanHabtic]

Originally Posted by CSimpson18

Because everything Edmonton has other than their top 5 are scraps.

By scraps we are referring to a sum of players who's individual value is far less than the top-pairing d-man that is coming in return. Quantity for quality won't cut it when attempting to acquire a top-pairing d-man.

[WTFetus]

Originally Posted by CSimpson18

Because everything Edmonton has other than their top 5 are scraps.

Glad we agree.

Quantity =/= quality.

[caley]

A little suggestion for ''Value Of" threads. If a team recently (read in the past 2-3 years) made a major move to acquire a player, and gave up a Top 6 player, the previous year's 1st rounder and this year's first rounder to get said player, and you ask for the value of this player. Don't get mad when people suggest it would take as good or better of a package they previously used to get said player.

So, San Jose mortgages the future by giving up their best prospect (Coyle), a 1st/2nd line winger (Setoguchi) and their first round pick, then wants to turn around a dump the player for a lesser package? Come on, guys!