Trade Rumours and Proposals Thread Part 17: What does "bold" mean?

[joestevens29]

or you keep Forsberg as an eventual replacement in the lineup for Hemsky, and continue to let Forsberg develop and work on those holes in his game. just because the Caps gave up on him and he needs a bit of work on his game doesn't make him any less of a good prospect.

Can do what ever you want. I think the point is Hemsky is done here with a player like Forsberg you have a lot more options. Every team in the league has room for Forsberg in their system. Hemsky not so much.

 

[McDNicks17]

Yep, 25 this summer, big, plays at both ends of the ice, at worse a 20-20 player.

A 25 year old center who has had the worst defensive results among STL's centers, is under 50% on the dot and has two years until he's a UFA.

7th overall pick for 2 years of a 6'4'' Gagner basically.

 

[joestevens29]

I am fine with having Berglund on this team but we still have to move out Hemsky and Gagner. Adding one player with size and keeping all of our skilled small players doesn't help the situation out. If we get Berglund I would still move Gagner and Hemsky to up grade the defense.
Having a top 6 of:
Hall; RNH; Eberle
PRV; Berglund; Yak
I would be ok with but we would need to add some grit on the 3rd and 4th lines that can still contribute.

I'm pretty sure more than one trade is going to happen. We aren't solving all our issues with one move.

 

[joestevens29]

A 25 year old center who has had the worst defensive results among STL's centers, is under 50% on the dot and has two years until he's a UFA.

7th overall pick for 2 years of a 6'4'' Gagner basically.

A 6'4 Gagner makes this team a lot better.

 

[ponokanocker]

I am fine with having Berglund on this team but we still have to move out Hemsky and Gagner. Adding one player with size and keeping all of our skilled small players doesn't help the situation out. If we get Berglund I would still move Gagner and Hemsky to up grade the defense.
Having a top 6 of:
Hall; RNH; Eberle
PRV; Berglund; Yak
I would be ok with but we would need to add some grit on the 3rd and 4th lines that can still contribute.

I'm pretty sure more than one trade is going to happen. We aren't solving all our issues with one move.

I agree that picking up a big C for our top 6 will result in more moves. But when we were accumulating so many top 6 skilled guys in the draft, we knew this day was coming. Whether we move the #7 + for a D, or some of our current roster players to upgrade our D, it has to happen one way or another.

 

[Lewy]

You said it didn't matter what they did until they prove themselves at the NHL. You can argue that Berglund is more valuable than the 7th overall pick but to completely dismiss all prospects isn't a proper premise.

I already said that since Berglunds an RFA his value decreases. I thought we were past that already? Talking logic and using massive hyperbole don't jive. Crosby / Ovechkin were the closest to sure things as we've seen. I have heard over and over again people talking about "the deepest draft in years" year after year. #7 is never a sure thing.
The Oilers are not going to trade #7 overall for an RFA Patrick Berglund. Maybe for a Patrick Berglund that is signed for the next four years ay 3M per or some such, but not RFA.
The premise that Patrick Berglund will be a better NHL player over the next couple of years at least, still stands, I think.

 

[BowDangles]

I would like Berglund on the Oilers but if we can not find a reasonable trade for him not including this years first than I would just offer sheet him. The compensation would be a 1st rounder in 2014 and a 3rd in 2014.

If we make enough changes this offseason I would hope that the 2014 1st is a mid-late first next year...

Bob Mckenzie was on Team 1260 this morning and was saying that the Canucks "blowing up" will more than likely just be a couple buyouts and moving on with guys like Raymond and Booth.

Nothing major, the big point he made was they need to start giving younger guys bigger minutes to allow growth. The need to find a way to constantly be developing players without blowing up completely and starting over (Edmonton) or giving your vets all of the ice time and having no one to come in to replace them when they start to diminish in play (Calgary).

If and it is a big If, the Canucks are going to look to move either Kesler or Edler I would hope the Oilers jump all over it...I highly doubt they will move them to Edmonton though...Too much risk of having it bite them in the butt.

 

[McDNicks17]

A 6'4 Gagner makes this team a lot better.

Meh. Replacing Gagner with a less aggressive guy who brings basically the same things to the line-up and expecting him to make the team better or harder to play against because he's 5 or 6 inches taller is some faulty logic, imo.

 

[Lewy]

I would like Berglund on the Oilers but if we can not find a reasonable trade for him not including this years first than I would just offer sheet him. The compensation would be a 1st rounder in 2014 and a 3rd in 2014.

If we make enough changes this offseason I would hope that the 2014 1st is a mid-late first next year...

Bob Mckenzie was on Team 1260 this morning and was saying that the Canucks "blowing up" will more than likely just be a couple buyouts and moving on with guys like Raymond and Booth.

Nothing major, the big point he made was they need to start giving younger guys bigger minutes to allow growth. The need to find a way to constantly be developing players without blowing up completely and starting over (Edmonton) or giving your vets all of the ice time and having no one to come in to replace them when they start to diminish in play (Calgary).

If and it is a big If, the Canucks are going to look to move either Kesler or Edler I would hope the Oilers jump all over it...I highly doubt they will move them to Edmonton though...Too much risk of having it bite them in the butt.

Yup. Are we thinking that the Canucks will be desperate enough over the offseason that they will trade top players within Division going into next year? Doubtful, I think.

 

[Lewy]

Meh. Replacing Gagner with a less aggressive guy who brings basically the same things to the line-up and expecting him to make the team better or harder to play against because he's 5 or 6 inches taller is some faulty logic, imo.

+ Defensive Responsibilty, I think, in the case of Berglund. You're right though, simply adding Patrick Berglund and nothing else doesn't make the Oilers a better team next year.

 

[BowDangles]

Another thing is Edmonton's two biggest needs are high end Dmen and a centre man.

With Nuge's injury I think getting a centre man is more important than before but still not as critical as getting D men.

RNH's injury leads me to think that Gagner will not be traded until Nuge is back unless it is for an upgrade at C.

The difference Edler and Kelser would make to this team is night and day...


What about a Gagner, 7thOV and a prospect for Kesler?

Similar to the package that got Jordan Staal or Jeff Carter.

If Vancouver values MPS more than Gagner you can add MPS instead..

 

[joestevens29]

I already said that since Berglunds an RFA his value decreases. I thought we were past that already? Talking logic and using massive hyperbole don't jive. Crosby / Ovechkin were the closest to sure things as we've seen. I have heard over and over again people talking about "the deepest draft in years" year after year. #7 is never a sure thing.
The Oilers are not going to trade #7 overall for an RFA Patrick Berglund. Maybe for a Patrick Berglund that is signed for the next four years ay 3M per or some such, but not RFA.
The premise that Patrick Berglund will be a better NHL player over the next couple of years at least, still stands, I think.

When did being a RFA decrease someone's value?

 

[joestevens29]

I agree that picking up a big C for our top 6 will result in more moves. But when we were accumulating so many top 6 skilled guys in the draft, we knew this day was coming. Whether we move the #7 + for a D, or some of our current roster players to upgrade our D, it has to happen one way or another.

Who's to say 7th for Berglund and then shortly after Gagner for a d-man?

 

[McDNicks17]

+ Defensive Responsibilty, I think, in the case of Berglund. You're right though, simply adding Patrick Berglund and nothing else doesn't make the Oilers a better team next year.

Berglund has had the worst even strength defensive results among STL's centers the last two seasons.

I don't know if you could say he's an above average defensive player, especially if he gets away from Hitchcock's team/system.

 

[Lewy]

When did being a RFA decrease someone's value?

Like someone said before, Offer sheet. Assuming (I'm hoping most of us are thinking this), that the Oilers are going to be better next season. Next years first won't be as high as this years. That way you can still draft high, get the draft player and Berglund. It decreases his value from an Oilers perspective certainly.
"Just win baby." - Al Davis

 

[MinnesotaFats]

Trading the 7th overall pick for an average player like Berglund just screams desperation to be a little better in the present.

It's trades like that that keep you in Atlanta Thrasher territory.

Yeah, and drafting in the top 10 for 4 years straight while failing to address holes on the team has kept us in Edmonton Oilers territory (which is FAR worse than Thrahsers/Jets) territory.

I'm certainly not saying that Berglund is the answer as there are likely a couple better options out there, but if MacT were to turn down an offer like that, I'd be pissed. You don't turn down an established young player that addresses some team needs to roll the dice on a 7th overall pick that is likely 2-3 years away from the league or making an impact with this team.

Acquiring Berglund also lets you move Gagner for defensive help. Say he could land you a guy like Kulikov or Gardiner+. I'll take Berglund and an Dman over Gagner and a crapshoot.

Folks here are far too enamoured with draft picks. Picks are great, but if you've got a choice between a solid, established NHL talent and gambling on a pick, you take the former. Which is exactly why STL wouldnt pull the trigger on a deal like that.

 

[McDoused]

I already said that since Berglunds an RFA his value decreases. I thought we were past that already? Talking logic and using massive hyperbole don't jive. Crosby / Ovechkin were the closest to sure things as we've seen. I have heard over and over again people talking about "the deepest draft in years" year after year. #7 is never a sure thing.
The Oilers are not going to trade #7 overall for an RFA Patrick Berglund. Maybe for a Patrick Berglund that is signed for the next four years ay 3M per or some such, but not RFA.
The premise that Patrick Berglund will be a better NHL player over the next couple of years at least, still stands, I think.

The premise isn't that Berglund is going to be better than a Monahan/Lindholm, that's the conclusion or statement. The premise is the logic you use to defend that statement. In this case the premise was "It doesn't matter until they prove themselves". I said that the premise was wrong because it excludes all prospects as they all need to prove thing at the NHL level.

Rather, I would say that the likelihood of the particular (Monahan/Lindholm) developing into a second line center that doesn't surpass Berglund to be very unlikely.

 

[Lewy]

The premise isn't that Berglund is going to be better than a Monahan/Lindholm, that's the conclusion or statement. The premise is the logic you use to defend that statement. In this case the premise was "It doesn't matter until they prove themselves". I said that the premise was wrong because it excludes all prospects as they all need to prove thing at the NHL level.

Rather, I would say that the likelihood of the particular (Monahan/Lindholm) developing into a second line center that doesn't surpass Berglund to be very unlikely.

I think your expectations are a bit high, but, fair enough. I shouldn't make such absolutist statements, pedigree certainly counts for something, but it isn't everything.

 

[joestevens29]

Like someone said before, Offer sheet. Assuming (I'm hoping most of us are thinking this), that the Oilers are going to be better next season. Next years first won't be as high as this years. That way you can still draft high, get the draft player and Berglund. It decreases his value from an Oilers perspective certainly.
"Just win baby." - Al Davis

I don't think an offer sheet is the answer. Overpaying($$$) for a guy doesn't seem to be the right move.

 

[Lewy]

I don't think an offer sheet is the answer. Overpaying($$$) for a guy doesn't seem to be the right move.

Yea, I certainly considered this. He would have to be making more than Gagner, and Looking at the history that doesn't make sense.

 

[McDoused]

I think your expectations are a bit high, but, fair enough. I shouldn't make such absolutist statements, pedigree certainly counts for something, but it isn't everything.

Sorry for sounding like a ******. I want to win just as much as you do. I'm all for grabbing Berglund and think dealing next years pick would be awesome. They are in cap hell and the pick wouldn't be as high. It's a move in which we would deal from a position of strength.

Hall-RNH-Eberle
Nichuskin-Berglund-Yakupov

That's a hell of a top 6 for several years to come and we can move Hemsky/Gagner for other assets.

 

[McDNicks17]

Yeah, and drafting in the top 10 for 4 years straight while failing to address holes on the team has kept us in Edmonton Oilers territory (which is FAR worse than Thrahsers/Jets) territory.

I'm certainly not saying that Berglund is the answer as there are likely a couple better options out there, but if MacT were to turn down an offer like that, I'd be pissed. You don't turn down an established young player that addresses some team needs to roll the dice on a 7th overall pick that is likely 2-3 years away from the league or making an impact with this team.

Acquiring Berglund also lets you move Gagner for defensive help. Say he could land you a guy like Kulikov or Gardiner+. I'll take Berglund and an Dman over Gagner and a crapshoot.

Folks here are far too enamoured with draft picks. Picks are great, but if you've got a choice between a solid, established NHL talent and gambling on a pick, you take the former. Which is exactly why STL wouldnt pull the trigger on a deal like that.

The only team need Berglund fills is height.

That's not the type of need I trade a 7th overall pick for.


I'm all for trading the pick if it makes sense.

Trading it for Berglund doesn't make any sense, imo.

 

[Conkanen*]

Berglund has had the worst even strength defensive results among STL's centers the last two seasons.

I don't know if you could say he's an above average defensive player, especially if he gets away from Hitchcock's team/system.

Just curious as to what metrics you are using to measure this?

 

[McDNicks17]

Just curious as to what metrics you are using to measure this?

Just GA/60.

 

[Lewy]

Sorry for sounding like a ******. I want to win just as much as you do. I'm all for grabbing Berglund and think dealing next years pick would be awesome. They are in cap hell and the pick wouldn't be as high. It's a move in which we would deal from a position of strength.

Hall-RNH-Eberle
Nichuskin-Berglund-Yakupov

That's a hell of a top 6 for several years to come and we can move Hemsky/Gagner for other assets.

God Nichuskin looks like a player, but, I've got a baad feeling about him. Similar to my bad feelings about Semin, who it turns out is awesome.