Proposal: (EMD) - [TOR) - Larson for Nylander (Shakened Not Stireed)

Montecristo

Registered User
Jul 29, 2012
6,921
2,146
The hell we do.

We paid a premium for Larsson because we had a desperate need. Also because Chia is an idiot.

We’re not moving Larsson for a significantly worse player than Hall, which covers both Nylander and Backes.

Fair enough. If you’re looking for better than nylander then I assume you have 0 interest in moving larsson. So why even join in?
 

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,570
29,200
Edmonton
Fair enough. If you’re looking for better than nylander then I assume you have 0 interest in moving larsson. So why even join in?

Because if you’re looking at Edmonton’s roster and concluding what they need is less reliable top four defencemen, particularly RHD, that needs to be corrected.

Trading Larsson leaves us with the following defencemen that play the right side:

Russell
Benning
Ethan Bear

Other rookies and prospects.

Tell me, does trading Larsson for a winger not known for his defence or a centre that would be 3rd in the pecking order here seem like a winning strategy?

‘Edmonton allowed 260 goals and has a pile of dicks at RHD outside Larsson. Clearly they need to move Larsson for a declining near-34 year old with a bad contract or a water bug winger’. - person bad at identifying hockey team needs.
 

Ragdoll

Registered User
Feb 15, 2018
1,196
1,621
Was this thread just made to piss both fan bases off? Close this shit..

Why would TOR trade one of their star wingers for something they're not entirely desperate for, there are other and cheaper ways to shore their defense.
Why are the Oilers trading away D? Our defence is still a work in progress and you want to trade away one of our most consistent ones? Oilers aren't that desperate for a winger, same thing as Toronto. There are cheaper alternatives out there that would get the job done.
 

Montecristo

Registered User
Jul 29, 2012
6,921
2,146
Because if you’re looking at Edmonton’s roster and concluding what they need is less reliable top four defencemen, particularly RHD, that needs to be corrected.

Trading Larsson leaves us with the following defencemen that play the right side:

Russell
Benning
Ethan Bear

Other rookies and prospects.

Tell me, does trading Larsson for a winger not known for his defence or a centre that would be 3rd in the pecking order here seem like a winning strategy?

‘Edmonton allowed 260 goals and has a pile of dicks at RHD outside Larsson. Clearly they need to move Larsson for a declining near-34 year old with a bad contract or a water bug winger’. - person bad at identifying hockey team needs.

Kevan Miller and Danton heinen for puljujarvi and a 2nd. Top 4 RD, top 9 LW. Boston adds a high 2nd and the rick Nash’s replacement. Oilers get a strong dman who plays on the right side and a rookie coming off of a 47 point season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HockeyAnalystGenius

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,570
29,200
Edmonton
Kevan Miller and Danton heinen for puljujarvi and a 2nd. Top 4 RD, top 9 LW. Boston adds a high 2nd and the rick Nash’s replacement. Oilers get a strong dman who plays on the right side and a rookie coming off of a 47 point season.

Miller is just ok. Would much prefer trying to work something out for Krug.

Definitely better than your Larsson deal...
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad