Speculation: NYR-EDM Trade?

TGWL

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 28, 2011
14,964
9,693
Are Klefbom and McDonagh that far apart in value anymore?

The contract strongly favors Klefbom. Age favor Klefbom. Experience and current play, still in favor of McDonagh, but for how much longer? Klef was a solid top pair on a 103 point team and scored nearly 40 points last year. How much of a gap is there between him and McDonagh really... I mean more than reputation wise. Another season like last and I'd say they are equal... but at that point one still has years on his contract and the other is only signed for one more year.

So then the deal is Pulju and a 1st for Grabner. I think we can all see that would be a hard pass for the Oilers.

Short answer? Yes. Long answer? Yes, "add words." I like Klefbom but right now the difference is more than age and contract
 

Amazing Kreiderman

Registered User
Apr 11, 2011
44,816
40,285
Lehner, a goalie years younger than Talbot, and with a pretty good draft pedigree by goalie standards, returned the 21st pick.

Jones, also years younger than Talbot, and a prospect went to SJ for the 29th overall pick.

Talbot went to Edmonton with the 209th pick, for the 57th, 79th and 184th pick.

Both of them are years younger than Talbot. Both were traded for late 1sts, and Jones' deal included a prospect.

And don't forget the 1-year extension Talbot signed before being traded. That lowered his value as well, since Edmonton couldn't negotiate a new extension until Jan. 1st.
 

VainGretzky

Registered User
Jun 4, 2015
12,830
10,047
Lehner and Jones were both much younger, Lehner had a better pedigree and was considered to be a future star by some, and many felt San Jose overpaid for Jones. Long story short, Talbot was thought of as the "consolation prize" for teams that didn't get Lehner or Jones. Plus, after Jones and Lehner were both dealt that nearly killed the goalie market as few other teams were looking hard for one.

Shrewd GM'ing by Chiarelli in my opinion, not necessarily bad GM'ing by Sather. Slats had a piece that wasn't as in demand, and as such, he didn't get the return that those pieces did.
It was also reported Sather turned down a 1st round pick for Talbot but I suppose you're going to try and convince me you know more about this then insiders who deal with their agents lol .
 

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
36,499
10,479
Short answer? Yes. Long answer? Yes, "add words." I like Klefbom but right now the difference is more than age and contract
McDonagh has proven again and again he can carry a first pairing with an underwhelming defensive partner. Klefbom has not. Putting Klefbom with Staal, Smith Holden, Kampfer, Girardi would have been suicide. The Rangers have been successful with McDonagh doing exactly that.
 

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
36,499
10,479
It was also reported Sather turned down a 1st round pick for Talbot but I suppose you're going to try and convince me you know more about this then insiders who deal with their agents lol .
“Reported” by Eklund.

I don’t believe a first was ever on the table and the goalie market was ruined when the Sabres went off the board to trade for Lehrer because the Murrays wanted to deal with each other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haveandare

VainGretzky

Registered User
Jun 4, 2015
12,830
10,047
“Reported” by Eklund.

I don’t believe a first was ever on the table and the goalie market was ruined when the Sabres went off the board to trade for Lehrer because the Murrays wanted to deal with each other.
Ty for quoting Eklund and proving my post is correct omg
 

Roof Daddy

Registered User
Apr 1, 2008
13,116
2,259
We apparently have general consensus and are moving into the final stages, quibbling.

Strome + 2nd
for
Grabner + 4th + 7th

good enough?

I would definitely pull the trigger on that, if only to force TMac's hand and break up Connor and Drai.

I'd like to see (once Drake and Slepy are healthy):

Maroon-McDavid-Grabner
Looch-Nuge-Pulju
Caggulia-Drai-Slepy

Both Drai and McDavid need to play with more meat and potatoes type players. They start to convince themselves that they're the Harlem Globetrotters and all you get is 20 seconds of flashy passing/cycling only to result in an eventual turnover. I'm tired of watching it.
 

haveandare

Registered User
Jul 2, 2009
18,879
7,389
New York
Not sure Strome does much for NYR. Yeah, he’s a center, but not a good one as of now. Not sure it’s worth moving a 20-25 goal scorer for him.
 

Shootertooter

Registered User
Feb 20, 2016
3,676
1,487
Are Klefbom and McDonagh that far apart in value anymore?

The contract strongly favors Klefbom. Age favor Klefbom. Experience and current play, still in favor of McDonagh, but for how much longer? Klef was a solid top pair on a 103 point team and scored nearly 40 points last year. How much of a gap is there between him and McDonagh really... I mean more than reputation wise. Another season like last and I'd say they are equal... but at that point one still has years on his contract and the other is only signed for one more year.

So then the deal is Pulju and a 1st for Grabner. I think we can all see that would be a hard pass for the Oilers.
My thinking is that McD was paired with a traffic cone last season and still was solid. Is Klef that solid to be the #1 guy? I like him.

Regarding the proposal, I'm not high on Pulj at all. He certainly is not the center piece but an intriguing potentially rewarding addition. I question his value. Maybe my ask of another pick is unrealistic but I was basing it partly on that. You know exactly what you are getting in the deal. The Rangers might not and if they are moving their #1 defender and a 25+ goal speedster they should absolutely should have a clear idea of value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ori

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
27,572
3,656
Da Big Apple
Not sure Strome does much for NYR. Yeah, he’s a center, but not a good one as of now. Not sure it’s worth moving a 20-25 goal scorer for him.
A fair question, haveandare.
Is Strome the best currency we get in this return?
Also, don't fall into the win now trap.
If no upside on Strome, that's one thing.
If we can buy low and then improve his game, then we have good asset for use or resell at higher price than value of what was paid.

Also, multiple variations being discussed, but I am adamant about a 2nd being included, even if NY adds. That is significant.
 

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,328
4,513
Short answer? Yes. Long answer? Yes, "add words." I like Klefbom but right now the difference is more than age and contract
I agree with that... and I said exactly that... that McDonagh is the better player now. But the fact is the age and contract strongly favor Klefbom and thus it is arguable that the gap closes enough to entertain a 1for1-plus-small-add hockey trade.

After all, looking at last season alone, Klef's breakout after an injured 2015/16. The guys were 4 apart in points (so equal) and Klef played 22 vs McDonagh 23 minutes in all situations. Klef a #2 on the top pair (though some argued #1) and McD definitely a #1. The gap is not huge... that's the point.

The gap is definitely not Pulju large.

And Grabner is definitely not worth a 1st.

So add that up and you'll understand my point.

Trade Value Wise in Response to the Proposal:

Klef < or = McDonagh
Pulju >>>>> nothing
1st >>> Grabner
 

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,328
4,513
My thinking is that McD was paired with a traffic cone last season and still was solid. Is Klef that solid to be the #1 guy? I like him.

Regarding the proposal, I'm not high on Pulj at all. He certainly is not the center piece but an intriguing potentially rewarding addition. I question his value. Maybe my ask of another pick is unrealistic but I was basing it partly on that. You know exactly what you are getting in the deal. The Rangers might not and if they are moving their #1 defender and a 25+ goal speedster they should absolutely should have a clear idea of value.

yeah, I understand that rationale, but the value is way off. Oilers just drafted Pulju 4th overall 15 months ago. He's not a throw in and they would still value him much higher than their 1st this year.

Earlier in this thread the agreed price for Grabner was ~roughly a 2nd.

You are asking for roughly 4X the price for Grabner... to compensate for a small delta in value between 1.5 years of McD vs 5.5 years (FIVE!) more of Klefbom at 4.167M. Some would argue Klef was our #1 last year... and we were a good team. I say he's much more suited as a high-end #2 at this stage in his career... but NYR would be getting him locked up at a pittance through his prime years. That alone would make them think about it if cap is at all in their consideration.

It makes zero sense for Edmonton. NYR takes a calculated short term risk on Klef for a near certain long term gain (caps and contracts considered) and get a 1st and a top prospect on top.
 

Shootertooter

Registered User
Feb 20, 2016
3,676
1,487
yeah, I understand that rationale, but the value is way off. Oilers just drafted Pulju 4th overall 15 months ago. He's not a throw in and they would still value him much higher than their 1st this year.

Earlier in this thread the agreed price for Grabner was ~roughly a 2nd.

You are asking for roughly 4X the price for Grabner... to compensate for a small delta in value between 1.5 years of McD vs 5.5 years (FIVE!) more of Klefbom at 4.167M. Some would argue Klef was our #1 last year... and we were a good team. I say he's much more suited as a high-end #2 at this stage in his career... but NYR would be getting him locked up at a pittance through his prime years. That alone would make them think about it if cap is at all in their consideration.

It makes zero sense for Edmonton. NYR takes a calculated short term risk on Klef for a near certain long term gain (caps and contracts considered) and get a 1st and a top prospect on top.


Maybe the value on Grabs is off. You have a guy on pace for another 25+ goal season. That has to be worth a first.

So you have :
McD- Klef+ add make that Pulj
The Rangers add a second to even that out.
Grabs-1st


McD, Grabs, 2nd to the Oilers

For

Klef, Pulj and a 1st
 

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,328
4,513
Maybe the value on Grabs is off. You have a guy on pace for another 25+ goal season. That has to be worth a first.

So you have :
McD- Klef+ add make that Pulj
The Rangers add a second to even that out.
Grabs-1st


McD, Grabs, 2nd to the Oilers

For

Klef, Pulj and a 1st

Oilers pass hard and negotiate around Grabner for a pick and a prospect or some combo thereof

McD for Klef is a win for the Oilers for 1.5 years. After that they need to resign him when our cap will be constrained. Versus keeping a solid young #2, possibly future #1 who is signed until the end of 2023 for 4.167M. It's possibly the best contract in the league during that timeframe. On that basis, McD for Klef makes zero sense for the Oilers.
 

TGWL

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 28, 2011
14,964
9,693
I agree with that... and I said exactly that... that McDonagh is the better player now. But the fact is the age and contract strongly favor Klefbom and thus it is arguable that the gap closes enough to entertain a 1for1-plus-small-add hockey trade.

After all, looking at last season alone, Klef's breakout after an injured 2015/16. The guys were 4 apart in points (so equal) and Klef played 22 vs McDonagh 23 minutes in all situations. Klef a #2 on the top pair (though some argued #1) and McD definitely a #1. The gap is not huge... that's the point.

The gap is definitely not Pulju large.

And Grabner is definitely not worth a 1st.

So add that up and you'll understand my point.

Trade Value Wise in Response to the Proposal:

Klef < or = McDonagh
Pulju >>>>> nothing
1st >>> Grabner

No, the add is probably not Puljujarvi. I'd imagine the first is valued a lot less than Puljujarvi for the Oilers. Well, unless they find themselves with a real chance of a top 5 pick, but I think Oilers will start pulling away from the bottom eventually, especially if they added McDonagh and Grabner. If we're trading both, I'd want Klef, 1st and middle prospect. Grabner is easily worth a 2nd plus middle prospect and McDonagh is worth more than Klef, so upgrading the 2nd to a first is something I'd be looking at. Does this work for Oilers? Maybe not, especially if you view the season as a disappointment and don't expect anything to get better, in which case losing the first would be awful.
 

ManofSteel55

Registered User
Aug 15, 2013
31,864
11,992
Sylvan Lake, Alberta
It was also reported Sather turned down a 1st round pick for Talbot but I suppose you're going to try and convince me you know more about this then insiders who deal with their agents lol .
If a first was on the table then Slats would have made the move. That was his asking price. Who "reported" that he turned a first down? Was it someone reputable? I don't think it was any of the guys I trust, I would have remembered that. Perhaps you are remembering speculation as a report?
 

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,328
4,513
No, the add is probably not Puljujarvi. I'd imagine the first is valued a lot less than Puljujarvi for the Oilers. Well, unless they find themselves with a real chance of a top 5 pick, but I think Oilers will start pulling away from the bottom eventually, especially if they added McDonagh and Grabner. If we're trading both, I'd want Klef, 1st and middle prospect. Grabner is easily worth a 2nd plus middle prospect and McDonagh is worth more than Klef, so upgrading the 2nd to a first is something I'd be looking at. Does this work for Oilers? Maybe not, especially if you view the season as a disappointment and don't expect anything to get better, in which case losing the first would be awful.

That's a very fair proposal.

But for the contracts alone I don't think we could do it. Others may have a different view on it though.

I think (after Drai & McD) the biggest value we have in our franchise is Larsson, Klef (and soon to be Nurse) all locked up at reasonable value. As they mature it opens up a longer window for us.

If we went McD for Klef, we put ourselves in a 1 and done sort of situation.

For the record I think McD is definitely a top 15 #1D. I'd just want him for more than 1.5 years and I don't think we'd have the $7.5M+ that it will take, at least not at the expense of significant depth.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->