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.
I bet the Oilers would absolutely love to trade Gagne, but it would have to be in a deal where they got exactly what they wanted, for example any of these would probably work: a #2 center with an all around game who can put up 40-50 points with ease and maybe have a season or two of 60+ points in him. A very solid stay at home defensive defenseman a #3-4 guy. Of course the Oilers would have to add accordingly, but I just don't see Gagner as a guy they are building around.
The Oilers probably aren't looking for prospects or picks at this point, they are looking for legit players to fill their holes, a center and solid stay at home physical D who are reliable.
In other words, they probably only move him for an upgrade and if that deal isn't out there, and it probably isn't, then I would bet they just hold on to him.
There are not a lot of teams looking to add an offensive center with little defensive game who only scores in the 40's. If you are going to have a guy like that teams want him to be like Phil Kessel, Patrick Kane, etc. Sam Gagner just doesn't cut it as that type of player, where does he even play on a good team? He isn't good enough offensively to make the top 6 on most contenders and he has no defensive game to speak of that most teams would want in their bottom 6. When somebody came up with the term "tweener", they must have had Gagner in mind.
He could make a bad team a little better but he isn't going to do much for a good team and I actually doubt that the Rangers would want him at all, I don't see Torts being happy with Gagner if he had to coach him.
Lets not get ridiculous. They had basically the exact same year in production, one just missed 7 games. Stepan's PKing and age is what gives him the edge, not the fact that he scored two more ****ing points than Gagner's career high, and had essentially the same ppg. Stepan also played on a much better team and got over a half minute more per game on the PP. In fact they both had 35 points at evens despite Gagner playing in 7 less games, playing on a worse team, and Stepan having a nearly 10% ZS advantage. Stepan played slighty better competition and despite a gaudy 60%+ zonestart on one of the leagues top teams he had a negative CorsiRel (unlike Gagner). So despite Stepan scoring a whopping 4 more points in 7 more games it was Gagner who was the more effective player at evens in terms of points and advanced stats.
Another thing is Stepan's stats only improved 6 points from the year before, yet we don't hear claims of staganation. Maybe the reason Gagner hasn't broke out yet is because he's just like Stepan, a kid. This year and next are big ones for Gagner because given his age he's still more likely to break out now than anytime before this. He would have been on his ELC last season had he taken the same development path as Jordan Eberle. The fact that he survived playing on terrible teams as a player so young shouldn't be the knock on him people like to portray it as. Stepan has terrific potential but it's not fair to look so far down on Gagner when he has his own significant argument in terms of who was the better player last season.
Here you go again, spouting off Sabremetrics to once again dance around yet another fact.
Stepan in 2 SEASONS has already done what Gagner couldn't in 5.
Score 20 goals in a season and score 50 points in a season. The 20 goals came with a hurt Marian Gaborik in 2011 (worst season of his career) and the 50 points came with him playing some time with Richards, not a ton though.
You can pull up how many goals each one scored on New Years Eve after taking a defensive zone draw to the left side of their goaltender in the 3rd period with less than 10 minutes left on a power play which involved a one timer going off the post and foghorn leghorn slapping that dog in the face all you want, but your "advanced stats" which don't work in baseball and sure as hell don't work in hockey (Enstrom having a higher CORSI rating than Weber proves my point) aren't going to win you any argument or make you look any smarter.
So do yourself the favor and just stop. A bunch of skewed numbers don't mean ****. The slightly younger player with the higher ceiling is the more valuable asset.
You can pull up how many goals each one scored on New Years Eve after taking a defensive zone draw to the left side of their goaltender in the 3rd period with less than 10 minutes left on a power play which involved a one timer going off the post and foghorn leghorn slapping that dog in the face all you want, but your "advanced stats" which don't work in baseball and sure as hell don't work in hockey (Enstrom having a higher CORSI rating than Weber proves my point) aren't going to win you any argument or make you look any smarter.
Um. Actually. While it is in fact inarguably true that "higher CORSI" does not automatically mean "better" despite the desperate wishes of a few, it would benefit your argument to not dismiss that sort of thing out of hand. Enstrom is legitimately badass.
The stat's not entirely useless by itself. What's useless is how it gets abused, overused, and employed in ridiculous leaps of ill-founded logic. Blaming CORSI and related for the idiots (including some of the folks who helped develop those metrics) is like blaming the concept of recording points for why Karlsson won the Norris over Weber. Statistics do not correct for stupidity.
In this case, the relevant stupidity is comparing Stepan at 2 NHL seasons to Gagner at 5 NHL seasons, and apparently assuming Stepan's done in his development while Gagner has room to grow.
__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards
Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Gagner has not progressed in 5 seasons. It's safe to say he's a career 40 point center. If that is satisfactory for your teams 2nd line center, then so be it. But don't bash opposing teams fans when they tell you they don't have much interest in trading for him.
Gagner has not progressed in 5 seasons. It's safe to say he's a career 40 point center. If that is satisfactory for your teams 2nd line center, then so be it. But don't bash opposing teams fans when they tell you they don't have much interest in trading for him.
Remember Dubinsky having a ton of potential and becoming the next big thing in New York? No one is saying Gagner is for sure going to become a 60 point center. But to say for sure he wont and Stepan will is beyond idiotic considering there ages. The truth is they both could very well progress or plateau but we won't know for at least 2-3 seasons from now. Hence why IMO they both would have similar trade value.
FWIW as a fan of neither the NYR nor the Oilers, I don`t see that huge a difference between Stepan and Gagner. If I got to choose between the two for the same price, I`d go with Stepan, but neither one strikes me as head ande shoulders above the other and I would not go to great length to accquire either of them as a 2LC.
FWIW as a fan of neither the NYR nor the Oilers, I don`t see that huge a difference between Stepan and Gagner. If I got to choose between the two for the same price, I`d go with Stepan, but neither one strikes me as head ande shoulders above the other and I would not go to great length to accquire either of them as a 2LC.
They're both decent 2nd line centre.
What the OC is proposing is wanting Gagner to be a 3C. Gagner is not the grinder type player.
But Gagner is still a decent 2nd line centre that can put up a decent number of points and help a team offensively. Same can be said about Stepan.
But Gagner is still a decent 2nd line centre that can put up a decent number of points and help a team offensively. Same can be said about Stepan.
Huh? Why are you telling me? I said the were close. Plus I don`t have a problem with anyone employing them as their 2LC, but that I wouldn`t go to great length to get them on my team as such, becuase they are serviceable, call it decent, IDC, but hardly an upgrade for many other teams.
Um. Actually. While it is in fact inarguably true that "higher CORSI" does not automatically mean "better" despite the desperate wishes of a few, it would benefit your argument to not dismiss that sort of thing out of hand. Enstrom is legitimately badass.
So having a higher "CORSI" rating doesn't mean that you're a better player than the next, is what you just said, am I wrong?
So, therefore there is no reason to have these kind of "advanced stats" and "ratings" if they're not going to clarify anything in terms of value or skill when comparing players.
The exact same reasons that Sabremetrics DO NOT WORK in Baseball and they apparently do not work in hockey.
Quote:
The stat's not entirely useless by itself. What's useless is how it gets abused, overused, and employed in ridiculous leaps of ill-founded logic. Blaming CORSI and related for the idiots (including some of the folks who helped develop those metrics) is like blaming the concept of recording points for why Karlsson won the Norris over Weber. Statistics do not correct for stupidity.
No, Karlsson won the Norris over Weber because the Norris is SUPPOSED TO BE given to the defenseman that has the greatest impact on the game. Not who has the most points. That's why there should be a Bobby Orr trophy for top scorer amongst defenders, to separate the two. Karlsson IS who you plan your strategy around. There's no coincidence that Karlsson's play had A LOT to do with Spezza's strong season last year. Sure, you could argue it the other way as well, but if you actually watch the Sens, Karlsson controls the pace of the game in all 3 zones as good as any defender that we've seen in a LONG time.
That's why he won the Norris.
Quote:
In this case, the relevant stupidity is comparing Stepan at 2 NHL seasons to Gagner at 5 NHL seasons, and apparently assuming Stepan's done in his development while Gagner has room to grow.
My biggest problem is the excuses come out left and right for Gagner, but the same logic can't be applied to Stepan.
Remember Dubinsky having a ton of potential and becoming the next big thing in New York? No one is saying Gagner is for sure going to become a 60 point center. But to say for sure he wont and Stepan will is beyond idiotic considering there ages. The truth is they both could very well progress or plateau but we won't know for at least 2-3 seasons from now. Hence why IMO they both would have similar trade value.
Wait, so what happened to all of those threads stating that Ales Hemsky was an elite talent?
That never happened, I guess? Or is Ales Hemsky not an elite talent? Mr. Point Per Game Skillset is now not a talent anywhere near the level of Marian Gaborik?
That's funny, because I swore I thought I read a lot of Oilers fans saying things like that around the time that they signed him to his current deal.
Gaborik is and always has been better then Hemsky, I could see some comparisons thrown out because of close PPG and being a bit injury prone but it stops there.
Not to mention that Gagner and Hemsky are both play makers, obvious their styles don't compliment eachothers too well, they've never had chemistry.
Put Gagner with an elite goal scoring winger and I bet he'd get more points then playing with another guy who thinks pass first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM Lundqvist
I remember hear the exact opposite, but whatever. I think my point has been made that you can't have it one way or the other.
Not really... A goal scorer is a much more suitable linemate then a play maker for a play making center.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CM Lundqvist
That's because Hemsky is an elite talent, right?
If .89 PPG since the lockout on a poor team with poor linemates isn't elite production then I don't know what is.
Before his terrible season last year he was top 10 in PPG amongst RW's since the last lockout... Amongst guys like St.Louis, Iginla, Patrick Kane...
That's alright, I guess.
You're missing the point I made. That Gagner has played with talent, so there's no excuse for him only hitting the 40 point mark so far.
Stepan had a hurt Gaborik in his rookie year, and still put up 20-20-40. In his 2nd season, there were periods of time in which Stepan and Gaborik weren't playing together and he still put up 50 points.
I'm just tired of seeing the red carpet of excuses rolled out for Gagner in every thread, yet his name pops up constantly in trade proposals on here. If you guys think he can do all of that, stop mentioning his name in every thread regarding Edmonton.
You're missing the point I made. That Gagner has played with talent, so there's no excuse for him only hitting the 40 point mark so far.
Stepan had a hurt Gaborik in his rookie year, and still put up 20-20-40. In his 2nd season, there were periods of time in which Stepan and Gaborik weren't playing together and he still put up 50 points.
I'm just tired of seeing the red carpet of excuses rolled out for Gagner in every thread, yet his name pops up constantly in trade proposals on here. If you guys think he can do all of that, stop mentioning his name in every thread regarding Edmonton.
Gagner had Andrew Cogliano and Robert Nilsson on his line in his rookie year and put up 49 in 79 games.
You act like he's played with great players his whole career. Quinn started him as the fourth line C, last season he started on the RW with Belanger playing C (who was a black hole offensively last year) and before that he played mostly with Magnus Paajarvi and Omark.
All I'm saying is if he played with a guy like Gaborik I think he would put up some more points, especially considering he's a goal scorer. With Hemsky they're both playmakers and they haven't gelled previously. I guess they'll see what happens with Yakupov on that line.
Either way, this thread is weird, NYR don't need Gagner when they have Stepan, totally redundant.
Both have to play 3/4's of the season and the avatar has to do with the winning player. Ex: I win you sport a Gagner avy, you win I sport a Stepan avy and let's make it for the duration of the play-offs. You in?
I don't know if he agreed to the bet or not, and I'm not posting this to argue which player is better than the other. I obviously love Stepan and think he's the better player because he's on the team i love and I strongly believe he has more potential than Gagner, however, Gagner is a tad underrated round these parts and I would personally eat an entire school bus full of deaf kids if Steps ever had a 6 point game let alone an 8 point game like Gags had. That said, I would like to accept your avatar bet. I think Stepan lands at least 10 more points than Gags this season and I'm a bettin' man. Not to mention i just think it would be fun. Let me know.
You're missing the point I made. That Gagner has played with talent, so there's no excuse for him only hitting the 40 point mark so far.
Stepan had a hurt Gaborik in his rookie year, and still put up 20-20-40. In his 2nd season, there were periods of time in which Stepan and Gaborik weren't playing together and he still put up 50 points.
I'm just tired of seeing the red carpet of excuses rolled out for Gagner in every thread, yet his name pops up constantly in trade proposals on here. If you guys think he can do all of that, stop mentioning his name in every thread regarding Edmonton.
I'm tired of seeing you refute reality to prove Stepan is a class above Gagner. So we all have burdens to bear.
BTW, Sabremetrics work incredibly well in baseball. Don't listen to that Clint Eastwood movie. I'll agree that these advanced stats are less useful in hockey, as it is much more of a team game where flow and momentum matter. But to dismiss them outright just leads to ignorance. Incorporate all of the facts into your outcome.
