HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Edm <> Bos (Hemsky & Tor 1st)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-17-2010, 07:38 PM
  #1
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Edm <> Bos (Hemsky & Tor 1st)

I'd hate to see Hemsky leave, but I'd also like to see him have some success (not to mention the fact that he will very likely be on to his next and more expensive contract before the Oilers become a contender). What about something along these lines?


Hemsky + Edm 2011 1st

for

Wheeler + Tor 2010 1st


Add smaller pieces to either as required to even it up...


To my uneducated eye it seems to make some sense for both teams. Boston gets an immediate upgrade on the RW & Hemsky would help push them over the top into a true contender in the near term. Additionally, the Oil will likely suck again next season (especially w/o Hemsky), so the 2011 1st could easily turn out to be a top 5.

The Oilers get the chance to draft 2 of the Hall/Seguin/Fowler trio, and add some size to the RW that is both skilled and 3 years closer to the rebuilt Oilers core.

rec28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 07:43 PM
  #2
Valic
BOOOOOOOOOO
 
Valic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,761
vCash: 500
Do you people not realize that trading our first next year is completely asinine? No rebuilding team should ever trade their first round pick especially when they are far and away the worst team in the NHL.


Toronto first this year could = Edmonton first next year
Hemsky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wheeler.



See how this has the potential to set us back even further?

Valic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 07:48 PM
  #3
SlowFreshOil*
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: South
Posts: 2,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valic View Post
Do you people not realize that trading our first next year is completely asinine? No rebuilding team should ever trade their first round pick especially when they are far and away the worst team in the NHL.


Toronto first this year could = Edmonton first next year
Hemsky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wheeler.



See how this has the potential to set us back even further?
The logic behind trading next year's pick, is the draft is pretty weak from all accounts.

I'm not saying I'm for a trade like this, just explaining the reasons behind trading next year's pick for this year's.

SlowFreshOil* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 07:52 PM
  #4
alphahelix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,312
vCash: 500
Hemsky is so much better than Wheeler that I'm not sure why the hell we would be trading them a 1st. They are probably not interested in moving the pick, but if they are I would think we would be building a package around Penner, not Hemsky.

alphahelix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 07:55 PM
  #5
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowFreshOil View Post
The logic behind trading next year's pick, is the draft is pretty weak from all accounts.

I'm not saying I'm for a trade like this, just explaining the reasons behind trading next year's pick for this year's.
That's one side of it - the other side is that it's a "devil you know" type of scenario. We know the Tor pick will be top 2/3 (maybe the Oil revert to form and pick 10-20 next season) and Hall/Seguin/Fowler are all known quantities right now (insofar as an 18 year old draft pick can be a known quantity).

rec28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 07:56 PM
  #6
I am the Liquor
finger sniffer
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,042
vCash: 448
Hemsky isnt going anywhere. Why would we trade our best player?

I am the Liquor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 07:58 PM
  #7
alphahelix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,312
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rec28 View Post
That's one side of it - the other side is that it's a "devil you know" type of scenario. We know the Tor pick will be top 2/3 (maybe the Oil revert to form and pick 10-20 next season) and Hall/Seguin/Fowler are all known quantities right now (insofar as an 18 year old draft pick can be a known quantity).
Or we could be trading Larsson for Fowler, putting us in the cannon of all-time worst-ever franchise-shattering trades.


It may be possible to understand the rationalte for a pickswap, but not with Hemsky included in the deal. Provides for a significant possibility of a lose-lose scenario.

alphahelix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 07:58 PM
  #8
Roamin
Registered User
 
Roamin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,413
vCash: 500
The Oilers should not trade any picks at all.
period.

Hemsky + Cogs + someone like Stone or JFJ or both even.
for
Wheeler + TO's 1st pick.

makes more sense from Oilers point of view.
I don't know if Boston still would do the deal, but since they need scoring maybe adding Hemsky is a good step for them. but then again, so would drafting Hall.

Roamin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:01 PM
  #9
Orochimaru
Ten Thousand Snakes
 
Orochimaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Konohagakure
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rec28 View Post
I'd hate to see Hemsky leave, but I'd also like to see him have some success (not to mention the fact that he will very likely be on to his next and more expensive contract before the Oilers become a contender). What about something along these lines?


Hemsky + Edm 2011 1st

for

Wheeler + Tor 2010 1st


Add smaller pieces to either as required to even it up...


To my uneducated eye it seems to make some sense for both teams. Boston gets an immediate upgrade on the RW & Hemsky would help push them over the top into a true contender in the near term. Additionally, the Oil will likely suck again next season (especially w/o Hemsky), so the 2011 1st could easily turn out to be a top 5.

The Oilers get the chance to draft 2 of the Hall/Seguin/Fowler trio, and add some size to the RW that is both skilled and 3 years closer to the rebuilt Oilers core.
Salary cap.

Orochimaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:05 PM
  #10
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
Hemsky is so much better than Wheeler that I'm not sure why the hell we would be trading them a 1st. They are probably not interested in moving the pick, but if they are I would think we would be building a package around Penner, not Hemsky.
If Penner would get BOS to pull the trigger, I would much prefer that over Hemsky, of course, but I can't see that happening.

I'm usually the guy who sticks to the "bird in the hand" philosophy, but I really think the Oilers need a real reboot, and if an overpay involving Hemsky is required to do that, I'm all ears. Part of how I look at this is the fact that the Oilers will very likely not have a lot of success for ~3 years, so given that assumption, what brings us the best return at the end of that 3 year window:

Hall | Seguin + Hemsky

or

Hall + Seguin + Wheeler


I think its conceivable that it's the latter, not the former.

rec28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:09 PM
  #11
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
Or we could be trading Larsson for Fowler, putting us in the cannon of all-time worst-ever franchise-shattering trades.


It may be possible to understand the rationalte for a pickswap, but not with Hemsky included in the deal. Provides for a significant possibility of a lose-lose scenario.
See, I see that as analysis paralysis, and I'm naturally averse to it. If you can define an actual opportunity cost then act accordingly, but if it's only a maybe, sorta, potential opportunity cost, then it shouldn't be driving the decision.

rec28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:09 PM
  #12
Delta Cubes
Registered User
 
Delta Cubes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,453
vCash: 500
Penner + Cogliano/a prospect + 2nd round pick for Salary dump + TO 1st rounder?

Delta Cubes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:12 PM
  #13
alphahelix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,312
vCash: 500
but you're talking about Hemsky + Larsson for Wheeler + Fowler (potentially) , by all accounts a total steamrolling of epic proportions.

It would be nice to have both Seguin and Hall but it probably isn't going to happen.

If we wanted to put Hemsky on the trade block with his current contract I'm sure there would be significant interest around the league. Our first in 2011 is probably looking pretty valuable to a lot of GM's as well.

I'd say we're better off staying the course, except the injection of Hemsky next season for "free", as it were, is probably going to vault us up a few notches.

If this trade is Hemsky for Boston's TO 1st, then it starts making some sense.

alphahelix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:13 PM
  #14
Copperhead
Registered User
 
Copperhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,742
vCash: 500
I find it highly unlikely Boston trades their pick. Their biggest concern is the cap so unless it is young cheap talent comin back it wouldn't make sense.

They also have a playmaker in Savard already. They need a goal scorer. Hemsky isn't one.

Perhaps a package centered around Eberle might entice them. But who thinks moving him is a good idea?

Copperhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:14 PM
  #15
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yummy Snack View Post
Salary cap.
BOS has quite a few 10-11 UFAs (and RFAs) that could come off the cap if they wanted to make room.

http://www.nhlnumbers.com/overview.p...OS&season=0910

rec28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:15 PM
  #16
alphahelix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,312
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rec28 View Post
See, I see that as analysis paralysis, and I'm naturally averse to it. If you can define an actual opportunity cost then act accordingly, but if it's only a maybe, sorta, potential opportunity cost, then it shouldn't be driving the decision.
Sorry, but this is complete and utter hypocrisy. You're letting the maybe, sorta, potential of this pick winding up as 2nd overall and not 3rd or 4th drive your proposal.

And if you don't at least try to take the positioning of next years 1st round pick into consideration before sending it away then you're absolutely crazy. There is currently a lot less reason to believe that it will be a late pick than to believe it will be an early pick.

You don't make trades that potentially crush your future unless you're Mike Milbury. You're gambling. I'm intervening with a vision of the future that would see you jobless were you an actual GM.

alphahelix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:16 PM
  #17
Mark Stuart*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,380
vCash: 500
Boston says no.

Wheeler and Bostons pick for Hemsky

Mark Stuart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:18 PM
  #18
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
but you're talking about Hemsky + Larsson for Wheeler + Fowler (potentially) , by all accounts a total steamrolling of epic proportions.

It would be nice to have both Seguin and Hall but it probably isn't going to happen.

If we wanted to put Hemsky on the trade block with his current contract I'm sure there would be significant interest around the league. Our first in 2011 is probably looking pretty valuable to a lot of GM's as well.

I'd say we're better off staying the course, except the injection of Hemsky next season for "free", as it were, is probably going to vault us up a few notches.

If this trade is Hemsky for Boston's TO 1st, then it starts making some sense.
If you're going to add (potentially) to Fowler, you have to add it to Larsson as well. Regardless, this deal would obviously be contingent on the lottery results - I would submit that our goal should be to acquire the 2nd of the top 2 draft picks by almost any means necessary.

rec28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:24 PM
  #19
alphahelix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,312
vCash: 500
adding the other top pick (remember we could still wind up with the 2nd and be hunting for the 1st via trade) would be a big deal, but patience is a virtue and if Boston isn't willing to let the other pick go for a reasonable price we might easily be better served by packaging up Hemsky with our 1st next year and moving from 4th to 2nd or 5th to 3rd, --- I'm not trying to predict the future, but you have to consider what, why and when if you're talking about moving your teams top assets. Nothing has more value than our 1st rounders and Hemsky on this team at the moment. -- Except MAYBE Gagner to the right GM, but hell he was mentioned in another proposal on this board as well.

You don't ship out your best pieces unless you're certain that everything adds up.

alphahelix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:24 PM
  #20
copperandblue897
Registered User
 
copperandblue897's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 795
vCash: 500
Wheeler probably does not stay after his contract. Just saying he did screw Phoenix over even after offering him a max entry contract. So essentially in most of the trades above we get Seguin>1st next year most likely yes, but Hemsky>Wheeler and at least we will have a chance to resign Hemsky if we surround him with young talented players he might want to stay around.

copperandblue897 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:25 PM
  #21
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
Sorry, but this is complete and utter hypocrisy. You're letting the maybe, sorta, potential of this pick winding up as 2nd overall and not 3rd or 4th drive your proposal.
See my follow-on post. This would be contingent upon the results of the draft lottery - it would be 2nd (or potentially 3rd if another attractive asset was thrown in) or nothing (hell, maybe the deal wouldn't be with BOS at all). It was an assumption on my part, but I should have stated that at the beginning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
And if you don't at least try to take the positioning of next years 1st round pick into consideration before sending it away then you're absolutely crazy. There is currently a lot less reason to believe that it will be a late pick than to believe it will be an early pick.
Right, but we'd trading (amongst other things) for the certainty of a top 2 pick vs. the uncertainty of next year's draft position.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
You don't make trades that potentially crush your future unless you're Mike Milbury. You're gambling. I'm intervening with a vision of the future that would see you jobless were you an actual GM.
Yeah, you're getting a bit hysterical here - "crush your future"? Please...

rec28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:29 PM
  #22
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Stuart View Post
Boston says no.

Wheeler and Bostons pick for Hemsky

Yeah, even I admit this is a drastic overpay for the TOR 1st...

rec28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:33 PM
  #23
alphahelix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,312
vCash: 500
If we move Hemsky for Wheeler (potentially = nothing long-term) and Larsson for Fowler that could definitely shatter the future of the team... It could mean bottom-feeding for a lot of years, and we've seen what happens in Edmonton in the past when the team sucks long-term and upper management/ownership is proven handicapped.

Its not hysterical to think that moving 2 of our most valuable pieces for what could amount to nothing could crush this team.

Of course that is a sort of worst-case scenario, and I said that before you indicated that this would be contingent upon the pick we're dealing for being the 2nd Overall. Of course, there is a strong possibility that we are not dealing with Boston in that instance, so the premature fleshing-out of this deal is misdirection at best.

Based on what you've said, the proposal should read something more along the lines of Hemsky + 2011 1st for 2nd overall + mediocre young player from whatever team happens to wind up with that pick.

alphahelix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:34 PM
  #24
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
adding the other top pick (remember we could still wind up with the 2nd and be hunting for the 1st via trade) would be a big deal, but patience is a virtue and if Boston isn't willing to let the other pick go for a reasonable price we might easily be better served by packaging up Hemsky with our 1st next year and moving from 4th to 2nd or 5th to 3rd, --- I'm not trying to predict the future, but you have to consider what, why and when if you're talking about moving your teams top assets. Nothing has more value than our 1st rounders and Hemsky on this team at the moment. -- Except MAYBE Gagner to the right GM, but hell he was mentioned in another proposal on this board as well.

You don't ship out your best pieces unless you're certain that everything adds up.
How do you rationalize this statement with the argument you are making against my proposal? You wouldn't consider trading Hemsky + an uncertain 1st rounder for a top 2 pick + Wheeler, but you would consider trading Hemsky plus a certain 1st rounder for a marginal improvement in draft position?

rec28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2010, 08:40 PM
  #25
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,018
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
If we move Hemsky for Wheeler (potentially = nothing long-term) and Larsson for Fowler that could definitely shatter the future of the team... It could mean bottom-feeding for a lot of years, and we've seen what happens in Edmonton in the past when the team sucks long-term and upper management/ownership is proven handicapped.
Hemsky is UFA in 2(?) years
Wheeler would be RFA in 2 years [Edit - oops, Wheeler is an RFA now. Hmmm...]

There is a potential for nothing there, but it's not on the side you think.


Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
Its not hysterical to think that moving 2 of our most valuable pieces for what could amount to nothing could crush this team.
I don't buy it - more than a year out, a draft pick is nothing more than a magic bean.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
Of course that is a sort of worst-case scenario, and I said that before you indicated that this would be contingent upon the pick we're dealing for being the 2nd Overall. Of course, there is a strong possibility that we are not dealing with Boston in that instance, so the premature fleshing-out of this deal is misdirection at best.
Meh - the TOR pick is currently #2, so it only makes sense to propose something with Boston.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alphahelix View Post
Based on what you've said, the proposal should read something more along the lines of Hemsky + 2011 1st for 2nd overall + mediocre young player from whatever team happens to wind up with that pick.
That's fair, but I think Wheeler is better than mediocre.

rec28 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 12:40 PM.

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.