HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

More Souray

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-24-2010, 06:07 PM
  #151
oilers_guy_eddie
Registered User
 
oilers_guy_eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Intolerable climate
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 10,648
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
And as for your edit, Foster, Vandermeer, and Strudwick are not #4's. Not even close.
I think that was his point: saying Doug Murray would be top-4 in Edmonton isn't exactly high praise.


As for the premise ... the Oilers aren't going to get pushed into giving up a guy like Smid just for the privilege of being rid of Souray. There's better options.

Now, if there's a hockey trade that makes sense, then sure, Smid is hardly untouchable.

Would adding something like Nick Petrecki and a 2nd offset losing Smid? I don't know. You'd need a crystal ball to know how that might turn out. But I think the Oilers would probably rather stick with a guy that they know and like, and find some other way of flushing Souray.

oilers_guy_eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 06:11 PM
  #152
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers_guy_eddie View Post
I think that was his point: saying Doug Murray would be top-4 in Edmonton isn't exactly high praise.


As for the premise ... the Oilers aren't going to get pushed into giving up a guy like Smid just for the privilege of being rid of Souray. There's better options.

Now, if there's a hockey trade that makes sense, then sure, Smid is hardly untouchable.

Would adding something like Nick Petrecki and a 2nd offset losing Smid? I don't know. You'd need a crystal ball to know how that might turn out. But I think the Oilers would probably rather stick with a guy that they know and like, and find some other way of flushing Souray.
So it's okay to praise Smid for playing #5 minutes on the Oilers and trash anyone else that could end up being a #4 on the same team. Great. All I'm trying to get going here is a hockey trade that makes sense to move Smid. You say that if there is one that makes sense, he's not untouchable. I'm trying to figure out what that would be instead of going around in circles about how he is so valued in Edmonton.

Throw something out there. That's all I'm asking here.

I also sincerely doubt that either of the three will end up #4 for the Oilers next year. So no, they're not even going to be that on the Oilers either. Murray's at least shown some competence in the role unlike those three.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 06:26 PM
  #153
Patty Ice
Best in the World
 
Patty Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: OxNard
Country: Northern Ireland
Posts: 10,062
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Patty Ice Send a message via MSN to Patty Ice
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
I didn't include Huskins in my previous post, mainly because he hardly belongs in the NHL with his skillset.
Huskins may be overpaid but he most certainly belongs in the NHL as a good bottom pairing defenceman. He was fairly productive last year.

__________________
Patty Ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 06:28 PM
  #154
voxel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 10,716
vCash: 500
As an Oilers fan and ex-Smid hater, I have to say Smid has vastly improved in the last year much like Matt Greene has over the past two.

Trading him after all that development would be stupid. He can carry the puck up-ice like Pitkanen and good old Scotty. He's big and nasty like Matt Greene was. And he stops making bone-headed chase-the-puck-carrier-behind-the-net-leaving-my-position like I still see with JMFJ and younger D-men.

He'll be as important to the Oilers as Vlasic is to the Sharks.

voxel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 06:31 PM
  #155
alx83*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by voxel View Post
and good old Scotty
Woah there, Killer....

alx83* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 06:48 PM
  #156
oilers_guy_eddie
Registered User
 
oilers_guy_eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Intolerable climate
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 10,648
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
So it's okay to praise Smid for playing #5 minutes on the Oilers and trash anyone else that could end up being a #4 on the same team. Great. All I'm trying to get going here is a hockey trade that makes sense to move Smid. You say that if there is one that makes sense, he's not untouchable. I'm trying to figure out what that would be instead of going around in circles about how he is so valued in Edmonton.

Throw something out there. That's all I'm asking here.
I'm not sure I get the premise.

It seems like you're saying the Sharks could use Souray, but because of his injury history you'd need some kind of insurance policy which is why you want Smid as well. Is that the general idea?

If it's just about insurance, why not keep Petrecki and the draft pick and just sign a serviceable veteran to a short-term contract?


If Smid is really just a #5 guy on a bad team, it wouldn't be hard to find somebody equal for the $1.35m he's due this season.

oilers_guy_eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 07:27 PM
  #157
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by voxel View Post
As an Oilers fan and ex-Smid hater, I have to say Smid has vastly improved in the last year much like Matt Greene has over the past two.

Trading him after all that development would be stupid. He can carry the puck up-ice like Pitkanen and good old Scotty. He's big and nasty like Matt Greene was. And he stops making bone-headed chase-the-puck-carrier-behind-the-net-leaving-my-position like I still see with JMFJ and younger D-men.

He'll be as important to the Oilers as Vlasic is to the Sharks.
Vlasic's a proven commodity right now. He's a #2 and a very good top shutdown d-man option around this league. Smid will get his first taste of 2nd pairing duties this season. That's a pretty ambitious view of the guy who is older than Vlasic and worse than him currently.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers_guy_eddie View Post
I'm not sure I get the premise.

It seems like you're saying the Sharks could use Souray, but because of his injury history you'd need some kind of insurance policy which is why you want Smid as well. Is that the general idea?

If it's just about insurance, why not keep Petrecki and the draft pick and just sign a serviceable veteran to a short-term contract?


If Smid is really just a #5 guy on a bad team, it wouldn't be hard to find somebody equal for the $1.35m he's due this season.
If the Sharks had any ability to sign a guy to play in San Jose, they wouldn't even be in the market for Souray. Boyle was traded to them. Vlasic was drafted. Huskins was traded for. Murray was drafted. Wallin was traded for. Demers was drafted. Rob Blake was the only guy they signed in the free agent market on D in quite some time...and that was because he really wasn't left with much of a choice in order to stay in California.

I never viewed Smid as just a #5 guy on a bad team. I have just said that that was what he did last year for the most part. His numbers and based on what I saw show that to be the case. And I sincerely doubt that 1.3 mil is enough to bring in a serviceable d-man to San Jose.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 07:40 PM
  #158
Jamin
Registered User
 
Jamin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I didn't say Smid was a failure. It's called a hypothetical.



His draft position is irrelevant when they weren't the one that drafted him and it was six years ago. His age and potential is what is relevant. Columbus is not in the same exact situation but have been similar and traded away a guy picked ahead of Smid. I understand the desire to keep him but it's silly that a reasonable discussion can't even be had here. He's good but he's not untouchable.
smid is the next doughty but no one can tear apart that statement because its called a hypothetical

Jamin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 07:54 PM
  #159
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamin View Post
smid is the next doughty but no one can tear apart that statement because its called a hypothetical
hahahaha...do you even know what a hypothetical statement is? lol omg that was hilarious.

What I said was he is going to be given an opportunity to prove his importance. Now if he fails at that, what importance does he bring even if he's in that spot? That's a hypothetical...not an outrageously sarcastic opinion.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 08:42 PM
  #160
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
as for your edit, Foster, Vandermeer, and Strudwick are not #4's. Not even close.
Really? You sure?

dnicks17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 08:47 PM
  #161
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Vlasic's a proven commodity right now. He's a #2 and a very good top shutdown d-man option around this league. Smid will get his first taste of 2nd pairing duties this season. That's a pretty ambitious view of the guy who is older than Vlasic and worse than him currently.
Nowhere in his post did he say Smid was as good as Vlasic. He only stated that he is as important to us as Vlasic is to you.

If you want Smid in a trade, you would have to overpay. He's at his all time highest value, and the Oilers have no reason to get rid of him.

dnicks17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 08:50 PM
  #162
Gilligans Island
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Gilligans Island's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SF/Bay Area
Posts: 5,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post

If you want Smid in a trade, you would have to overpay. He's at his all time highest value, and the Oilers have no reason to get rid of him.
How about this... can you give some parameters of what you define as overpayment? It'd be nice to see some discussion on what it would take to land Smid (if possible), along w/ Souray - of course.

Lots of squabbling on both sides. How about some discussion on what the Oilers would want for Smid?

Gilligans Island is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 08:58 PM
  #163
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,888
vCash: 500
To be honest, I wouldn't move Smid at this time. But something along the lines of an NHL ready Dman, i.e. Murray and a couple prospects that would potentially make the team next year, 1 being a Dman atleast.

I'm not too familiar with SJ prospects, but what I've heard of Petrecki, I wouldn't mind him. Also, not so sure of SJ Dman prospect depth. I wouldn't mind swapping a forward prospect of ours for an equal Dman prospect as well.

Ideally, I guess it would look like this...even though I wouldn't want to do this trade, it'd be what I consider overpayment for Smid, I guess.

Souray
Smid
Fwd Prospect

Murray
Possibly a bottom 6 player (on second thought, not really a player that fits the mold the oilers need)
Petrecki
Prospect
Pick


Last edited by dnicks17: 07-24-2010 at 09:06 PM.
dnicks17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 09:10 PM
  #164
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
Nowhere in his post did he say Smid was as good as Vlasic. He only stated that he is as important to us as Vlasic is to you.

If you want Smid in a trade, you would have to overpay. He's at his all time highest value, and the Oilers have no reason to get rid of him.
You're right and nowhere in my post did I say such a thing. I said it's an ambitious view that he'll get to be as good as a guy that's already better while being younger. He also didn't say he is as important. He said he will be. Big difference. Smid isn't that important yet but he will get the chance to be.

As for your proposal, it's not bad and I would consider it depending on the loose ends being the names of the prospects. However, even if we get to an agreeable pair of names, Kent Huskins is still going to have to go Edmonton's way for salary purposes.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 09:15 PM
  #165
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
You're right and nowhere in my post did I say such a thing. I said it's an ambitious view that he'll get to be as good as a guy that's already better while being younger. He also didn't say he is as important. He said he will be. Big difference. Smid isn't that important yet but he will get the chance to be.

As for your proposal, it's not bad and I would consider it depending on the loose ends being the names of the prospects. However, even if we get to an agreeable pair of names, Kent Huskins is still going to have to go Edmonton's way for salary purposes.
At least we kind of agree on something. I wouldn't mind Huskins coming over too with how shallow our 3-6 D spots are.

I realise asking for Doherty too would be too much. Do you guys have any middle of the road D prospects? Someone who could turn out into a nice 3/4 Dman, in the near future.

dnicks17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 09:15 PM
  #166
Killem Dafoe
Moderator
modus operandi
 
Killem Dafoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Land of Bad Drivers
Country: United States
Posts: 14,397
vCash: 263
oh eklund said that? so hell sign with any team thats not on that list.

Killem Dafoe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 09:34 PM
  #167
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
At least we kind of agree on something. I wouldn't mind Huskins coming over too with how shallow our 3-6 D spots are.

I realise asking for Doherty too would be too much. Do you guys have any middle of the road D prospects?
We have plenty of d-men prospects. Most of them don't really have that much hype to them. It just depends on the type you'd be looking for really and how far along you'd prefer them to be. The Sharks have a few in the AHL now like Derek Joslin and Mike Moore. A few are decent that are about to make the transition from college to the AHL like Nick Schaus and Justin Braun. Some are still in school like William Wrenn. None of them have the tremendous hype that Petrecki and Doherty have currently.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:03 AM
  #168
Patty Ice
Best in the World
 
Patty Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: OxNard
Country: Northern Ireland
Posts: 10,062
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Patty Ice Send a message via MSN to Patty Ice
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
We have plenty of d-men prospects. Most of them don't really have that much hype to them. It just depends on the type you'd be looking for really and how far along you'd prefer them to be. The Sharks have a few in the AHL now like Derek Joslin and Mike Moore. A few are decent that are about to make the transition from college to the AHL like Nick Schaus and Justin Braun. Some are still in school like William Wrenn. None of them have the tremendous hype that Petrecki and Doherty have currently.
Braun will, I suspect, very soon.

Patty Ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:04 AM
  #169
Hold the Pickles
Registered User
 
Hold the Pickles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: 03-K64
Country: United States
Posts: 2,871
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
At least we kind of agree on something. I wouldn't mind Huskins coming over too with how shallow our 3-6 D spots are.

I realise asking for Doherty too would be too much. Do you guys have any middle of the road D prospects? Someone who could turn out into a nice 3/4 Dman, in the near future.
how about a 4/5? Joslin... OK so more like a possible 4.95/5

But seriously, Demers. But at his salary this year (<544k) hes not going anywhere unless he's packaged with something to get the right piece back.

Hold the Pickles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:11 AM
  #170
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 16,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
At least we kind of agree on something. I wouldn't mind Huskins coming over too with how shallow our 3-6 D spots are.

I realise asking for Doherty too would be too much. Do you guys have any middle of the road D prospects? Someone who could turn out into a nice 3/4 Dman, in the near future.
That deal seems fairly decent to me, and I would consider it as well. I was under the impression Clowe would do a lot of good in Edmonton (and hey, he's used to the cold!) and thus was trying to structure deals around that because I though it filled a need.

If not though, I'd love to keep Clowe and the proposed deal is fairly on target.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 07:34 AM
  #171
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,888
vCash: 500
So, I guess the deal would end something like:

Souray
Smid

for

Murray
Huskins
Petrecki
Mid tier prospect
1st


Ideally, the Oilers would want a big shutdown D prospect rather than Joslin (he's a offensive PMD right?), so maybe the prospect swap wouldn't happen.

As well, if the Oilers could sweeten their end enough to bring back Doherty and Petrecki, that would be the ideal situation. The Oilers already have a bunch of potential very good NHL fwds. I'd like to see them add some good D prospects.

dnicks17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 07:38 AM
  #172
dnicks17
Moderator
.
 
dnicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
That deal seems fairly decent to me, and I would consider it as well. I was under the impression Clowe would do a lot of good in Edmonton (and hey, he's used to the cold!) and thus was trying to structure deals around that because I though it filled a need.

If not though, I'd love to keep Clowe and the proposed deal is fairly on target.
I just don't see him fitting in with the rebuild or with the amount of wingers we already have. He would fit nicely on the RW on our 2nd line, but can he play RW as well?

We just don't really have room in our top 6 either, other than at center imo.

Our LW is pretty swamped with Hall, Penner, Paajarvi and our right with Hemsky, Eberle, Stortini/Jones. I can see Eberle making the team too, so we wouldn't really have a spot on our 2nd line either.

dnicks17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 09:09 AM
  #173
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 16,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
I just don't see him fitting in with the rebuild or with the amount of wingers we already have. He would fit nicely on the RW on our 2nd line, but can he play RW as well?

We just don't really have room in our top 6 either, other than at center imo.

Our LW is pretty swamped with Hall, Penner, Paajarvi and our right with Hemsky, Eberle, Stortini/Jones. I can see Eberle making the team too, so we wouldn't really have a spot on our 2nd line either.
Yes he can play either wing.

I can't speak to your wingers, but if Clowe provides no value to you, we'd happily keep him, he's a great player.

Moore is a big physical shut-down d-man. So is Murray and Petrecki, not sure why you'd want 3. Joslin has the hardest shot in the AHL, he's similar to Souray in play style actually, just younger and probably not as talented.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 11:49 AM
  #174
Patty Ice
Best in the World
 
Patty Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: OxNard
Country: Northern Ireland
Posts: 10,062
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Patty Ice Send a message via MSN to Patty Ice
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
So, I guess the deal would end something like:

Souray
Smid

for

Murray
Huskins
Petrecki
Mid tier prospect
1st


Ideally, the Oilers would want a big shutdown D prospect rather than Joslin (he's a offensive PMD right?), so maybe the prospect swap wouldn't happen.

As well, if the Oilers could sweeten their end enough to bring back Doherty and Petrecki, that would be the ideal situation. The Oilers already have a bunch of potential very good NHL fwds. I'd like to see them add some good D prospects.
Horrid deal for the Sharks. I could stomach it if it was a mid tier prospect and a 1st or Petrecki (not sure I'd be happy trading him though) but not all together. That is just ridiculous value for Smid.

I'd like him in SJ but definitely not at that cost..

Patty Ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2010, 12:24 PM
  #175
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
So, I guess the deal would end something like:

Souray
Smid

for

Murray
Huskins
Petrecki
Mid tier prospect
1st


Ideally, the Oilers would want a big shutdown D prospect rather than Joslin (he's a offensive PMD right?), so maybe the prospect swap wouldn't happen.

As well, if the Oilers could sweeten their end enough to bring back Doherty and Petrecki, that would be the ideal situation. The Oilers already have a bunch of potential very good NHL fwds. I'd like to see them add some good D prospects.
Before, you were looking for a bottom six player. What fits the mold that you're looking for there? You're also getting Petrecki already in the deal which is the big shutdown d-man prospect you're looking for. I don't see why you'd need another. I can understand not wanting Joslin with guys like Plante and Petry who are both projected to be solid two-way d-men. Joslin is capable of playing 3rd pairing if he's given the opportunity to grow into it on the job. He doesn't have the ability to woo people with spot opportunities here and there.

I think getting both Doherty and Petrecki isn't feasible. Without them, we have no shutdown prospect coming up. Even so, I doubt the Oilers will part with anything that would sweeten the pot enough to get both. You'd be looking at an Omark and taking the first off the table. Something like...

Souray, Smid, and Omark for Murray, Huskins, maybe a bottom six player, Petrecki, and Doherty.

Pinkfloyd is online now   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 03:12 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.