HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

tambellini trying to move up to top 7

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-27-2009, 10:23 AM
  #26
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murica
Country: United States
Posts: 20,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfried View Post
Actually, you're wrong. There's no sense in trading within tiers because you're giving up quality to get the same kind of player. Nobody in the top 3 would have incentive to move around because you're guaranteed one of Duchene, Tavares and Hedman. Nobody in the top 7 would have a strong incentive to move around because again, you're guaranteed one of Kane, MPS, Schenn or Cowen.

The Isles new that last year's significant talent drop off occured at #6 with Filatov & Schenn. Then you had Wilson & Boedker who could've gone either way. After that you had another drop off in Bailey, Hodgson, Beach & Myers as a decently big tier. The Isles knew they were dropping talent, but their organizational depth SUCKED.

Moving a guy like Gagne or Gilbert problably isn't worth it to the Oilers. I'm also not sure that Penner is as bad a contract as everyone makes it out to be.
I think we need to see how Penner plays under Quinn before writing him off. He was pretty dreadful last year under Mac T, and will likely never be a player that utilizes his size and strength optimally.

Rabid Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 10:24 AM
  #27
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfried View Post
Actually, you're wrong. There's no sense in trading within tiers because you're giving up quality to get the same kind of player. Nobody in the top 3 would have incentive to move around because you're guaranteed one of Duchene, Tavares and Hedman. Nobody in the top 7 would have a strong incentive to move around because again, you're guaranteed one of Kane, MPS, Schenn or Cowen.
The Isles new that last year's significant talent drop off occured at #6 with Filatov & Schenn. Then you had Wilson & Boedker who could've gone either way. After that you had another drop off in Bailey, Hodgson, Beach & Myers as a decently big tier. The Isles knew they were dropping talent, but their organizational depth SUCKED.

Moving a guy like Gagne or Gilbert problably isn't worth it to the Oilers. I'm also not sure that Penner is as bad a contract as everyone makes it out to be.
Just a side bar - but if you are saying I'm wrong - please give me some proof of why that is. Just because your opinion is different than mine doesn't necessarily make me wrong.

Disagree strongly with the bolded part above. For the vast majority of us - we see those players as equivelant. Teams really get to know those guys, and with that, they potentially rate one of them significantly higher. Trades within the tiers happen because the different teams all form independant opinions of these kids, and someone ranks one fo them higher. And if you see the players ranked 4-7 as equivelant, why not take a 2nd round DP to move back from 5 to 7? If a team has a strong feeling that one of the available players is significantly better than the rest, the only way they move back is if they are somehow getting an equivelant player (potential wise) in the deal.

Also, it typically doesn't take a ton to make a trade within a tier (2nd round DP or marginal roster player). Look at the Nash/Lehtonen/J-Bo trade - no big assets moved to move from 3rd OV to 1st, because all 3 players were seen to be in the same tier. Same thing when the Pens moved up to #1 to pick MAF.

Last year, I saw Hodgson & Myers in the same tier as Wilson, Schenn & Filatov, but that's just me. I didn't see that any of them were head and shoulders better than the others in the group. That's just IMO, with limited viewing of actual gameplay and not actually meeting any of the kids.

And if Gilbert or Gagne isn't available - there is no way they get the deal done unless they can totally pull a screw-job on someone. Adding 3 nickels to get a quarter is the usual offer here on HF, but rarely works in the NHL.

Also - why do you think that Penner's got value? He's averaged less than .5 ppg, and had VERY significant issues during the year. He's getting paid like a scoring line player, given that opportunity, not producing, and not bringing anything else positive to the table.


Last edited by Beukeboom Fan: 05-27-2009 at 12:08 PM.
Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 10:31 AM
  #28
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
Yeah no. Gagner isn't moving for a pick.
If you were ATL - what would be acceptable? I thought that Gagne made sense from ATL's perspective because they would have a scoring line player who was more ready to immediately contribute than a 18 YO kid.

If I'm ATL, there's no way that I'm moving from 4 to 10 for Cogliano (or equivelant roster player) or multiple later draft picks.

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 10:35 AM
  #29
sgupca
Registered User
 
sgupca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ugotmybeef View Post
probably ask for Sam Gagner.
If MSP was off the board at the 7th pick i'd move that To Edmonton in exchange for Gagner.

sgupca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 10:37 AM
  #30
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 47,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misfit View Post
What's the feel in Phoenix regarding this pick? Is it pretty much a lock that they'll go with the best player available, or could they move it to either get some more picks, or improve their NHL roster? My guess is that all depends on who's controlling the team on draft day.
You can be almost certain that they won't move the pick for more picks. We've had six first rounders in the last three years, and could have another two, this draft, if Calgary opts to surrender this year's first rather than next year's. We've still managed to have three seconds in those three years, as well, despite sometimes trading up into the first. We have another second, this year. Plus, five years ago we used our first rounder on Martin Hanzal and our second rounder on Enver Lisin. Both players, along with the likes of Peter Mueller, Kyle Turris, Mikkel Boedker, and Viktor Tikhonov are already in the NHL and contributing, as well as getting lucky with a couple of fourth rounders in Porter and Yandle. Guys like Summers, Ross, MacLean, Ahnelov, and Kolarik aren't far behind, either. I'd say we've been pretty lucky(or good) lately, and are probably done simply stock-piling picks. If we trade down, I expect roster players coming back. Cheaper, younger roster players.

rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 10:39 AM
  #31
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabid Ranger View Post
Why don't the Oilers just stand pat and take a guy like Schroeder? He seems to be getting the Parise like shaft in his draft year.
I like the idea of just sitting at 10 myself, based on how it sounds like the draft will go. I'm not convinced Schroeder will still be there at 10, but he could well be, and if he isn't, another pretty good prospect will be. Even trading back sounds like a good possibility at this point (depending how the draft plays out, and who they like).

Tambellini said at his year end conference that EDM wants to add size, which has led some fans to conclude, rightly or wrongly, that Schroeder probably isn't who they would like to get at 10 OV.

But Tambellini also said that EDM will draft the BPA because you don't know what your needs will be by the time the player is ready. Some Oilers fans, in this case like myself, are still unsure what to think about that Tambellini comment, because although I agree with what he said and hope it to be applied going forward, we have heard comments like thatbefore only to see the Oilers draft for, what looks like, need, even in the first round or two. So it remains to be seen if Tambellini will be different from Lowe in this regard*.

* - and that's if you believe that Tambellini is the guy calling all the shots. Some fans do, some don't. It sounds like Tambellini is getting more and more control as time passes, from what I've read, but I can't say for sure how much say each guy has (Lowe, Tambellini, Prendergast, and MacGregor) has when it comes to final decisions at the draft table.

speeds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 10:48 AM
  #32
s7ark
Moderator
McDavid!!!!!!!!!!!
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
If you were ATL - what would be acceptable? I thought that Gagne made sense from ATL's perspective because they would have a scoring line player who was more ready to immediately contribute than a 18 YO kid.

If I'm ATL, there's no way that I'm moving from 4 to 10 for Cogliano (or equivelant roster player) or multiple later draft picks.
Would you trade a near sure thing future 80p C for a maybe in a draft pick while giving up a top pick in a great draft for the privilege? Daigle proved anyone can bust, even consensus 1stOAs. Gagner simply isn't on the table for a pick. If a guy like Cogliano wouldn't get Atlanta talking about moving their pick, then we'd have no interest in hearing what would. Cogliano is a great player with a very bright future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sgupca View Post
If MSP was off the board at the 7th pick i'd move that To Edmonton in exchange for Gagner.
Oh that's sweet of you. So the leafs moving up 2 spots last year costs you 2 2nds, but for us to move up 3 spots we only have to give up our best trade asset and likely future team leader? Thx for the kind offer, we may just have to pass though

s7ark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 10:51 AM
  #33
Chaos
#1
 
Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 7,910
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Chaos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabid Ranger View Post
Why don't the Oilers just stand pat and take a guy like Schroeder? He seems to be getting the Parise like shaft in his draft year.
Because hopefully Dallas will take him at #8

__________________
Chaos is always right.

-Vagrant
Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 11:02 AM
  #34
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
Just a side bar - but if you are saying I'm wrong - please give me some proof of why that as. Just because your opinion is different than mine doesn't necessarily make me wrong.

Disagree strongly with the bolded part above. For the vast majority of us - we see those players as equivelant. Teams really get to know those guys, and with that, they potentially rate one of them significantly higher. Trades within the tiers happen because the different teams all form independant opinions of these kids, and someone ranks one fo them higher. And if you see the players ranked 4-7 as equivelant, why not take a 2nd round DP to move back from 5 to 7? If a team has a strong feeling that one of the available players is significantly better than the rest, the only way they move back is if they are somehow getting an equivelant player (potential wise) in the deal.

Also, it typically doesn't take a ton to make a trade within a tier (2nd round DP or marginal roster player). Look at the Nash/Lehtonen/J-Bo trade - no big assets moved to move from 3rd OV to 1st, because all 3 players were seen to be in the same tier. Same thing when the Pens moved up to #1 to pick MAF.

Last year, I saw Hodgson & Myers in the same tier as Wilson, Schenn & Filatov, but that's just me. I didn't see that any of them were head and shoulders better than the others in the group. That's just IMO, with limited viewing of actual gameplay and not actually meeting any of the kids.

And if Gilbert or Gagne isn't available - there is no way they get the deal done unless they can totally pull a screw-job on someone. Adding 3 nickels to get a quarter is the usual offer here on HF, but rarely works in the NHL.

Also - why do you think that Penner's got value? He's averaged less than .5 ppg, and had VERY significant issues during the year. He's getting paid like a scoring line player, given that opportunity, not producing, and not bringing anything else positive to the table.
Of course there will be some incentive to move up (and a 2nd round pick is problably all it would cost)... but I don't think its enough to justify paying the price of a 2nd rounder to move up. Realistically, unless Toronto absolutely hates 1 of the guys, all 4 would be a big help. The leafs need another blue chip defenceman with some puck-moving ability, we need a potential top line centre who plays a physical game, and we need a speedy skilled top line winger. Evander Kane is somewhere in between.

Look at Phoenix, its obvious that Jared Cowen is the man they problably want. They know that the Kings aren't going to draft a d-man and the Thrashers likely aren't going to either. Worse comes to worse; they still could make very good use of a guy like Evander Kane or MPS on the wing.

There may not be a deal to be done, but Penner does problably have value because teams know what he CAN do if playing well. He had a rough year, but if he had a great year you wouldn't be able to get him for the cost of moving down 5 spots.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 11:30 AM
  #35
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murica
Country: United States
Posts: 20,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaos View Post
Because hopefully Dallas will take him at #8
Well, that could very well (and should) happen. I still think Schroeder is a top five talent, and see very little differance between he and guy like Evander Kane.

Rabid Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 11:57 AM
  #36
Chaos
#1
 
Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 7,910
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Chaos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabid Ranger View Post
Well, that could very well (and should) happen. I still think Schroeder is a top five talent, and see very little differance between he and guy like Evander Kane.
Agreed, I think people are blowing the size thing way out of proportion. He did fine in the NCAA against a bunch of guys years older and bigger than him.

Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:16 PM
  #37
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
Would you trade a near sure thing future 80p C for a maybe in a draft pick while giving up a top pick in a great draft for the privilege? Daigle proved anyone can bust, even consensus 1stOAs. Gagner simply isn't on the table for a pick. If a guy like Cogliano wouldn't get Atlanta talking about moving their pick, then we'd have no interest in hearing what would. Cogliano is a great player with a very bright future.
So you're attributing all of Gagne's struggles last year as a sophomore slump, and feel that he's 100% likely to become a 1st line center? I stated in my post that there is no way that Gagne would be required to move up from 10 to 4. His value probably on par with the 4th overall IMO.

I like what Cogs brings to the table - but I don't see how you can call him a great player. Great skater - sure. I don't think that type of player comes anywhere close to incenting a team to move down significantly in the draft.

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:23 PM
  #38
Enstrom39
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
If you were ATL - what would be acceptable? I thought that Gagne made sense from ATL's perspective because they would have a scoring line player who was more ready to immediately contribute than a 18 YO kid.

If I'm ATL, there's no way that I'm moving from 4 to 10 for Cogliano (or equivelant roster player) or multiple later draft picks.
ATL needs some top six forwards with size, their roster is rather small at F.

I would move down from 4 to 10 for Cogliano. Then again I'm pretty high on this draft class and think a team will still get a pretty fine player at #10.

Enstrom39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:26 PM
  #39
mcphllp
Dion @ 6.5=Discount
 
mcphllp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark View Post
Oh that's sweet of you. So the leafs moving up 2 spots last year costs you 2 2nds, but for us to move up 3 spots we only have to give up our best trade asset and likely future team leader? Thx for the kind offer, we may just have to pass though
Give your head a shake JA. There is no mention of the 10th going back to Toronto.

mcphllp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:29 PM
  #40
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,649
vCash: 500
probably would be a good idea for him to wait to see how the draft unfolds. Its highly likely someone in the top 7 has a different idea of who the top 7 actually includes. Perhaps Dallas is sitting on the clock with someone tambellini believes belongs in the top 7 at 8.

Overall I'd say there are 10 players that I would not be surprised at all to go in the top 7. Those include those generally listed in that group along with Schroeder, OEL and Kulikov. I believe Cowan is the most likely of the others to fall out of the top 7 due to injury concerns, especially if phoenix were to draft Kulikov.


Last edited by txomisc: 05-27-2009 at 12:38 PM.
txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:30 PM
  #41
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfried View Post
Of course there will be some incentive to move up (and a 2nd round pick is problably all it would cost)... but I don't think its enough to justify paying the price of a 2nd rounder to move up. Realistically, unless Toronto absolutely hates 1 of the guys, all 4 would be a big help. The leafs need another blue chip defenceman with some puck-moving ability, we need a potential top line centre who plays a physical game, and we need a speedy skilled top line winger. Evander Kane is somewhere in between.

Look at Phoenix, its obvious that Jared Cowen is the man they problably want. They know that the Kings aren't going to draft a d-man and the Thrashers likely aren't going to either. Worse comes to worse; they still could make very good use of a guy like Evander Kane or MPS on the wing.

There may not be a deal to be done, but Penner does problably have value because teams know what he CAN do if playing well. He had a rough year, but if he had a great year you wouldn't be able to get him for the cost of moving down 5 spots.
On Penner - why are you valuing him based on his potential when he's shown that for VERY limited period of time over the last 2 years? He's not in shape, and hasn't been nearly productive enough to justify his contract. Maybe some of the production was a coaching issue - but there's no excuse for not being in shape as a proffessional athelete.

I don't understand your point with the Yotes or Leafs. Yotes are very likely to get the guy they want at 6 (Cowan), but it's very unlikely at 10. Unless they are secretly VERY high on Shroeder/Kulikov/etc why would they move down?

The Leafs are perfectly set to likely get one of the guys they need/want. With how Burke values 2nd round DP's, why would he be moving back and miss out on those guys? Unless of course Burke's really high on one of the guys who'd be available at 10. But that seems really unlikely.

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:32 PM
  #42
SFKingshomer
Registered User
 
SFKingshomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sioux Falls
Posts: 5,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
O'Sullivan and 5th overall for the 10th overall....then again I like O'Sullivan.
Cogliano and 10 for 5 would get DL thinking but I think he'd draft Schenn.


Last edited by SFKingshomer: 05-27-2009 at 12:44 PM.
SFKingshomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:33 PM
  #43
SedinFan*
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 10,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to SedinFan*
The Oilers game plan this off season should be to increase their size up front.

They're loaded with talented youth, but not enough grit. They're also pretty slim on left wing.

SedinFan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:35 PM
  #44
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Falconer View Post
ATL needs some top six forwards with size, their roster is rather small at F.

I would move down from 4 to 10 for Cogliano. Then again I'm pretty high on this draft class and think a team will still get a pretty fine player at #10.
Not sure if you realize that Cogliano is 5-9 & about 180 pounds?

I really like him as a player, and realize that he'd be nice upgrade on ATL's roster. I just don't think he's worth dropping from Kane to Kulikov (or the like). Just my $.02

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:37 PM
  #45
Enstrom39
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
Not sure if you realize that Cogliano is 5-9 & about 180 pounds?

I really like him as a player, and realize that he'd be nice upgrade on ATL's roster. I just don't think he's worth dropping from Kane to Kulikov (or the like). Just my $.02
I thought he was bigger than that to be honest.

Enstrom39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:42 PM
  #46
seanlinden
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
On Penner - why are you valuing him based on his potential when he's shown that for VERY limited period of time over the last 2 years? He's not in shape, and hasn't been nearly productive enough to justify his contract. Maybe some of the production was a coaching issue - but there's no excuse for not being in shape as a proffessional athelete.

I don't understand your point with the Yotes or Leafs. Yotes are very likely to get the guy they want at 6 (Cowan), but it's very unlikely at 10. Unless they are secretly VERY high on Shroeder/Kulikov/etc why would they move down?

The Leafs are perfectly set to likely get one of the guys they need/want. With how Burke values 2nd round DP's, why would he be moving back and miss out on those guys? Unless of course Burke's really high on one of the guys who'd be available at 10. But that seems really unlikely.
Penner has still shown it. When making a trade, you look at what the player is likely to bring to your team. If you think you can turn Dustin Penner around; you've got yourself quite a steal.

My point is that there's little incentive to trade up for the Coyotes or Leafs.... but there is also little incentive to trade down. To get into the top 7; its going to be difficult to find the right deal as most teams are very content with their draft position unless a team overpays.

seanlinden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:43 PM
  #47
The Dayvan Cowboy
Registered Genius
 
The Dayvan Cowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,752
vCash: 500
MSP or Schenn would be nice.

Phoenix fans, what could Edmonton offer you for 6th? I know you need defence pretty badly. Is Gilbert someone you would be interested in? 1st/Gilbert/Chorney?

The Dayvan Cowboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 12:56 PM
  #48
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfried View Post
Penner has still shown it. When making a trade, you look at what the player is likely to bring to your team. If you think you can turn Dustin Penner around; you've got yourself quite a steal.

My point is that there's little incentive to trade up for the Coyotes or Leafs.... but there is also little incentive to trade down. To get into the top 7; its going to be difficult to find the right deal as most teams are very content with their draft position unless a team overpays.
Understand your point now on TOR/PHO, and agree completely. They're very unlikely to move down because they're likely going to get a VERY good player who likely wouldn't be there if they moved down to 10.

I honestly think that Penner passes through waivers right now. While he's shown flashes, he's also shown he's a headcase. With many teams having cap (or budget) issues, I just don't see teams lining up to get an out of shape 40 point producer who is making $4.25M over the next 3 years.

Of course - if someone can whip him into shape and turn him into a legit power-forward, he has very significant value. Unfortunately, I just don't know who that might be at this point.

Like it's been said - I think EDM is going to have to hope that Quinn/Renney can get a lot more out of DP than McTavish was able to.

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 01:40 PM
  #49
misfit
5-14-6-1
 
misfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of...ever
Posts: 16,064
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Discipline View Post
MSP or Schenn would be nice.

Phoenix fans, what could Edmonton offer you for 6th? I know you need defence pretty badly. Is Gilbert someone you would be interested in? 1st/Gilbert/Chorney?
Tambellini may want to move up into the top 7, but I definately don't see him giving up Gilbert to move up 4 spots in the draft, let alone he and Chorney.

Unless those /'s mean 'or', and not 'and', in which case it still doesn't make sense given that they all carry different value.

misfit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2009, 02:10 PM
  #50
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misfit View Post
Tambellini may want to move up into the top 7, but I definately don't see him giving up Gilbert to move up 4 spots in the draft, let alone he and Chorney.
I don't see it either but I also wonder why all the proposals include the 10th spot in the first place.

The Oilers have too many forwards and too many offensive defencemen. If a team is willing to move their top 7 pick anyways it would suggest they are looking for some kind of immediate payoff.

I would think that if they are shopping for a higher draft pick they may very well be doing it with roster players or existing prospects only.

copperandblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:00 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.