Speculation: Jacob Markstrom to Edmonton?

viper0220

Registered User
Oct 10, 2008
8,651
3,590
I am driving to work on a very cold and snowy morning(wish I had won the Lotto Max.)

I was listening to fan 960 and they said that Oilers may take a look at Markstrom + D man (not Hanifin), the Flames would get Campbell +picks+ a prospect.
















I think this may just be speculation and that is why I put it under speculation and I have a question mark in the thread title.
 

FlameChampion

Registered User
Jul 13, 2011
13,665
15,311
No chance imo.

1) I don’t think Calgary would trade him there

2) Edmonton has limited assets to trade. I don’t see them using them to get rid of Campbell. He will be bought out in the summer.
 

viper0220

Registered User
Oct 10, 2008
8,651
3,590
No chance imo.

1) I don’t think Calgary would trade him there

2) Edmonton has limited assets to trade. I don’t see them using them to get rid of Campbell. He will be bought out in the summer.


What I thought, it felt like they were throwing out ideas.
 

Satoru Gojo

Registered User
Jan 15, 2012
4,275
5,321
Can't see Edmonton making a move for a starting goalie, they are seeking forwards and D man
 

GreeningOil

Yarpmeister
Jun 22, 2016
2,965
3,495
Saskatoon
Edmonton would have to give Calgary so much to get Markstrom & dump Campbell (as much as it would be great)

Never say never, but this one’s close
 
  • Like
Reactions: LTIR

Double Dion

Jets fan 28/06/2014
Feb 9, 2011
10,885
3,733
I am driving to work on a very cold and snowy morning(wish I had won the Lotto Max.)

I was listening to fan 960 and they said that Oilers may take a look at Markstrom + D man (not Hanifin), the Flames would get Campbell +picks+ a prospect.
















I think this may just be speculation and that is why I put it under speculation and I have a question mark in the thread title.
How many picks and prospects? Only way I move Markstrom there is if we are talking 2 1st rounders, 2 2nd rounders, Holloway and McLeod. This is factoring in 2 1sts to take Campbell. No way Edmonton does that.
 

viper0220

Registered User
Oct 10, 2008
8,651
3,590
How many picks and prospects? Only way I move Markstrom there is if we are talking 2 1st rounders, 2 2nd rounders, Holloway and McLeod. This is factoring in 2 1sts to take Campbell. No way Edmonton does that.


I don't know, the discussion was mostly about moving Markstrom.
 

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,581
29,245
Edmonton
I can’t see that happening. Certainly not right now. Maybe in the offseason but I think Edmonton sees Skinner as their guy and they’re not going to add someone to play in front of him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DingDongCharlie

SeanMoneyHands

Registered User
Apr 18, 2019
13,220
11,250
Highly doubt the Flames would trade a Vezina calibre goalie to their arched rival 3 hours north. If he's the difference and the Oilers win the cup this year, Flames ownership will never hear the end of it from Flames fans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nanuuk and kevsh

The Nuge

Some say…
Jan 26, 2011
27,421
7,484
British Columbia
No chance imo.

1) I don’t think Calgary would trade him there

2) Edmonton has limited assets to trade. I don’t see them using them to get rid of Campbell. He will be bought out in the summer.

Thats not remotely true. We don’t have our 3rd or 4th this year or 2nd in 2025, but we still have most of our upcoming picks as well as plenty of highly drafted prospects.

You’re right though that Calgary wouldn’t trade him here. Calgary has proven time and time again that making Edmonton worse is arguably as high of priority as making themselves better.
 

FlameChampion

Registered User
Jul 13, 2011
13,665
15,311
Thats not remotely true. We don’t have our 3rd or 4th this year or 2nd in 2025, but we still have most of our upcoming picks as well as plenty of highly drafted prospects.

You’re right though that Calgary wouldn’t trade him here. Calgary has proven time and time again that making Edmonton worse is arguably as high of priority as making themselves better.

Edmonton has the assets to move Campbell if they want. (It does depend what the cost to dump Campbell - but I am assuming its the equivalent of 2 1sts). But I don’t think they really have the assets to dump Campbell and make a major trade. Its one or the other with some other minor moves. That’s more what I meant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hn777

tkb81

Registered User
Mar 15, 2009
741
599
You’re right though that Calgary wouldn’t trade him here. Calgary has proven time and time again that making Edmonton worse is arguably as high of priority as making themselves better.
as it should be .. haha
 

The Nuge

Some say…
Jan 26, 2011
27,421
7,484
British Columbia
Edmonton has the assets to move Campbell if they want. (It does depend what the cost to dump Campbell - but I am assuming its the equivalent of 2 1sts). But I don’t think they really have the assets to dump Campbell and make a major trade. Its one or the other with some other minor moves. That’s more what I meant.

I still don’t agree. If you look at the next 2 drafts and take out say a 1st and Broberg to dump Campbell, you can still use a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, Bourgault, Akey, Rodrigue, Kemp, etc.

Holland moved out 2 1sts last year for Ekholm and it was a massive home run. I can’t see him being scared to spend if it’s the right move
 

Three On Zero

Deranged Oreo Dolphin Parking Instructor
Sponsor
Oct 9, 2012
28,597
25,001
Edmonton has limited valuable assets to get Marky + dump Campbell

Also they didn’t take the 1st offered for Tanev, so why would they trade other assets to them? And Holland said he is fine with his current goalie tandem
 

FlameChampion

Registered User
Jul 13, 2011
13,665
15,311
I still don’t agree. If you look at the next 2 drafts and take out say a 1st and Broberg to dump Campbell, you can still use a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, Bourgault, Akey, Rodrigue, Kemp, etc.

Holland moved out 2 1sts last year for Ekholm and it was a massive home run. I can’t see him being scared to spend if it’s the right move
Fair enough
 

Bourne Endeavor

Registered User
Apr 6, 2009
37,822
6,146
Montreal, Quebec
Doesn't really make much sense. Skinner largely looks to have figured things out and there's no chance in hell Calgary's taking Campbell back unless Edmonton wants to dump a plethora of picks and good prospects on their lap. Which I doubt they do.

You also have to factor in Markstrom has a full NMC and already snubbed Edmonton once. Sure, they're a much better team now than they were when he was a UFA but considering he doesn't seem thrilled about getting trade to begin with, I imagine he'd want a more fresh look than driving up the road.
 

ManofSteel55

Registered User
Aug 15, 2013
32,163
12,311
Sylvan Lake, Alberta
I am driving to work on a very cold and snowy morning(wish I had won the Lotto Max.)

I was listening to fan 960 and they said that Oilers may take a look at Markstrom + D man (not Hanifin), the Flames would get Campbell +picks+ a prospect.
















I think this may just be speculation and that is why I put it under speculation and I have a question mark in the thread title.
1) Ken Holland has expressed confidence in Stuart Skinner as his number one and Cal Pickard as his number two, for better or worse, so having interest in Markstrom is - unlikely at best, from the Oilers side, even if the deal would make the team stronger

2) Calgary is unlikely to trade such a key player to one of their rivals. They just proved that they will take a package from a non-rival over a major rival through the Tanev deal, where both Vancouver and Edmonton had expressed interest.

3) Any deal involving Campbell going the other way is unlikely - I can't imagine Calgary would be in a hurry to take on Edmonton's problem contract.

4) Priorities. While Edmonton could be stronger in net, Skinner and Pickard have been playing well. I would like some insurance back there, and Markstrom would be a big win for Edmonton, depending on the cost, but right now, the Oilers should be focussing more on finding upgrades at (in order, in my opinion):
- right defense
- 3rd line centre
- 2nd line winger
- possibly 4C
Plus, adding another depth defenseman to be an insurance policy against injury would be smart. There's just too many priorities to do a deal for a starting goalie right now, unless its for a good deal - which it won't be.
 

Hobnobs

Pinko
Nov 29, 2011
8,912
2,269
Its going to be extremely expensive to a) get Markström and b) dump Campbell and to a historical rival none the less... plus Oilers seem to have confidence in Skinner so don't see them being that interested...

So what would it take? I'm guessing at least

From Oilers:
1st 24
1st 25
1st 26
2nd 24
Bourgeault
Lavoie
Campbell

From Flames:

Markström
 

Canovin

1% is the new 11.5%
Oct 27, 2010
17,484
8,256
780
Markstrom finally realizing he doesn't have many elite years left in the NHL and his best chance is with the Oilers
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Nanuuk

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad