LeBrun: Asking Price for Ekholm starts with 2x 1st Round Picks

[ujju2]

Would Edmonton do Ekholm for broberg a 23 2nd and a cap dump. If I was Poile I would do that

Broberg is developing really nicely, and having him mentored by Ekholm would be great, but I'd probably still do it.

 

[Hellcat]

Might explain why there is a "glut" in d-men this year

 

[Nemesis Prime]

Jeannot trade went to their melon.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Didn't they get McDonaugh for free a couple years ago, at a younger age and similar contract? I don't know if they will get the offer they are looking for.

McDonagh had largely fallen off by the time he got to the Preds. Still a competent top-4 guy but not the true #1 he once was.

 

[Siludin]

McDonagh had largely fallen off by the time he got to the Preds. Still a competent top-4 guy but not the true #1 he once was.

He was traded to the Preds after three straight Stanley Cup Finals, at a younger age than Ekholm is now, so idk how badly he had "fallen off" - he just wasn't playing any powerplay on Tampa, so his point totals weren't through the roof, but he was at least at the tier Ekholm is today.
Ekholm still plays PP2 wheras McDonaugh plays no powerplay at all, and they have similar production.

 

[HardSeiderShots]

Chychrun does put more points on the board, but he's not actually as good a player. Ekholm on that team would put up similar points. But Edmonton needs defense more.

Wasn’t really as focused on a marginal gap in quality as much as cap hit + age.

 

[Armourboy]

He was traded to the Preds after three straight Stanley Cup Finals, at a younger age than Ekholm is now, so idk how badly he had "fallen off" - he just wasn't playing any powerplay on Tampa, so his point totals weren't through the roof, but he was at least at the tier Ekholm is today.
Ekholm still plays PP2 wheras McDonaugh plays no powerplay at all, and they have similar production.

He hasn't been as good as Ekholm this season and Ekholm is the one that pulls the tougher assignments. Add to that Ekholm has played mostly with Carrier while McDonagh has been with Josi.

There is more to playing Dman than points. Ekholm's value has never come from his point total.

 

[PainForShane]

Chychrun does put more points on the board, but he's not actually as good a player. Ekholm on that team would put up similar points. But Edmonton needs defense more.

This is so wrong I'm not sure it even deserves a response. If you take away a team's offensive talent then it's harder to score points as a defenseman, not easier. And Chychrun right now is 12th in the league in points per game (0.8), ahead of guys like Brent Burns, Tyson Barrie, Heiskanen, John Carlson etc despite those guys all having much better forwards to pass to. On the other hand, Ekholm is... 95th (0.32 points per game, less than half of Chychrun).

If you want to say Ekholm is a better fit for the Oil because he's more defensively minded that's fine, I (and maybe others) would disagree but at least you might have an argument.

But, if you actually believe that Ekholm contributes even close to the same level of offense / points then you are legitimately delusional. Not sure what else to say here

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

This is so wrong I'm not sure it even deserves a response. If you take away a team's offensive talent then it's harder to score points as a defenseman, not easier. And Chychrun right now is 12th in the league in points per game (0.8), ahead of guys like Brent Burns and Tyson Barrie despite those guys all having much better forwards to pass to. On the other hand, Ekholm is... 95th (0.32 points per game, less than half of Chychrun).

If you want to say Ekholm is a better fit for the Oil because he's more defensively minded that's fine, I (and maybe others) would disagree but at least you might have an argument.

But, if you actually believe that Ekholm provides even close to the same level of offense / points then you are legitimately delusional. Not sure what else to say here

Chychrun is a nice player when he's healthy, don't get me wrong. But people are underestimating Ekholm here. It's part of his persona that he has been content to play a constrained role in the shadows of Josi. But give him top billing, he'd be seen a lot differently by everybody. I don't expect people who don't follow him to understand that, though, so I understand your objections, even though I disagree.

 

[Siludin]

He hasn't been as good as Ekholm this season and Ekholm is the one that pulls the tougher assignments. Add to that Ekholm has played mostly with Carrier while McDonagh has been with Josi.

There is more to playing Dman than points. Ekholm's value has never come from his point total.

Isn't this specifically true of McDonagh - maybe even more so?
Also doesn't McDonagh play PK1? And if he plays with Josi wouldn't he be getting very tough assignments?

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Isn't this specifically true of McDonagh - maybe even more so?
Also doesn't McDonagh play PK1? And if he plays with Josi wouldn't he be getting very tough assignments?

I mean, we'd happily give you McDonagh if you'd rather. A lot cheaper. Make of that what you will.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I don't think that's exactly what they get unless there's retention too

But I must be crazy because I would make that trade yesterday for the Kings and a million times over before I entertain Chychrun

If they land on even less, all the better

I mean, we'd happily give you McDonagh if you'd rather. A lot cheaper. Make of that what you will.

Sold

I don't care what the price is

Give me either and swap the nameplates IDGAF

 

[PainForShane]

Chychrun is a nice player when he's healthy, don't get me wrong. But people are underestimating Ekholm here. It's part of his persona that he has been content to play a constrained role in the shadows of Josi. But give him top billing, he'd be seen a lot differently by everybody. I don't expect people who don't follow him to understand that, though, so I understand your objections, even though I disagree.

So you honestly think that Ekholm is in a similar offensive tier as Chych (ie Ekholm would have ~0.78 ppg with an expanded role on the Yotes)? That is the point I am responding to.

Also I did just notice that Chych is +8 as a first pair on Arizona (leads team in both +/- and avg TOI) while Ekholm is +0 playing second pair on a much better Nashville team. So Chych might also be better defensively or in the same defensive tier as Ekholm at least. That is a different argument though... although I think you are likely the one underestimating Chychrun here.

More context (Chychrun's point totals from this year):

And Ekholm:

 

[herzausstein]

Broberg is developing really nicely, and having him mentored by Ekholm would be great, but I'd probably still do it.

Ekholm would kindof make broberg redundant on the team but i get not wanting to send him out. If edmonton gets ekholm, they should staple bouchard with him and let them go nuts. Has worked rather nicely for carriers development as a dman.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

I don't think that's exactly what they get unless there's retention too

But I must be crazy because I would make that trade yesterday for the Kings and a million times over before I entertain Chychrun

If they land on even less, all the better



Sold

I don't care what the price is

Give me either and swap the nameplates IDGAF

I'd give you McDonagh for free, just to get his Cap hit off the ledger, if we're rebuilding anyway. Make it a 5th rounder, I don't care. There's THAT much difference between him and Ekholm.

 

[Armourboy]

Isn't this specifically true of McDonagh - maybe even more so?
Also doesn't McDonagh play PK1? And if he plays with Josi wouldn't he be getting very tough assignments?

Josi hasn't pulled the teams tougher assignments since Weber got traded. Ekholm and his partners have been pulling that duty since then. Josi hasn't even been a regular on the PK in a couple years.

Also Lauzon plays on our PK so that ain't saying much.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

So you honestly think that Ekholm is in a similar offensive tier as Chych (ie Ekholm would have ~0.78 ppg with an expanded role on the Yotes)? That is the point I am responding to.

Also I did just notice that Chych is +8 as a first pair on Arizona (leads team in both +/- and avg TOI) while Ekholm is +0 playing second pair on a much better Nashville team. So Chych might also be better defensively or in the same defensive tier as Ekholm at least. That is a different argument though... although I think you are likely the one underestimating Chychrun here.

More context (Chychrun's point totals from this year):

View attachment 659248


And Ekholm:

View attachment 659247

I think you fully missed the point. Ekholm is not utilized as an offensive defenseman. If he was, he'd put up 0.7 ppg with far better defense than Chychrun. But he's not, so you can't really go there. I get it, you don't know Ekholm and you can't see it. It's fair.

 

[iCanada]

Would Edmonton do Ekholm for broberg a 23 2nd and a cap dump. If I was Poile I would do that

Stauffer threw out the following proposal; Yamamoto + Barrie / Ceci + 1st + Ried Schaefer for Ekholm + Sissons

Stauffer mentioned that Nashville nearly traded down to select both Yamamoto and Schaefer. Supposedly you had them both very high on your draft board.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Stauffer threw out the following proposal; Yamamoto + Barrie / Ceci + 1st + Ried Schaefer for Ekholm + Sissons

Stauffer mentioned that Nashville nearly traded down to select both Yamamoto and Schaefer. Supposedly you had them both very high on your draft board.

Good lord no, that's far below our asking price. We want 2 1sts for just Ekholm. Schaefer is very borderline as a "1st" right now. I wouldn't take a 1st+Schaeffer for Ekholm. Sissons is another 1st in his own right.

 

[wetcoast]

2 first round picks, eh? Chychrun looking like a steal. Would explain why Oil circled back on him

If I was the Oilers I would be in on Ekholm.

 

[PainForShane]

I think you fully missed the point. Ekholm is not utilized as an offensive defenseman. If he was, he'd put up 0.7 ppg with far better defense than Chychrun. But he's not, so you can't really go there. I get it, you don't know Ekholm and you can't see it. It's fair.

No I fully understood your point. Your point is the bolded above (which was the point I responded to in last msg). Like I said in previous post, I think that point is insane.

You're right though I don't really know Ekholm so... I mean it could be true. But, you'd think if Ek were as naturally gifted offensively as someone like Brent Burns or Barrie (that's about what 0.7ppg is), he would have eclipsed 50 points at least once by now (50 points is 0.6ppg not 0.7ppg), even if he was being used more defensively. Especially because Nashville has historically had a pretty decent top 6 forward group for most of the years Ekholm has been there.

We can disagree on this (you're right I don't see Ekholm much) but imo saying / believing Ekholm has that level of offensive quality seems incredibly homer-ish at best, at least to me

 

[Soundgarden]

The only way Ekholm gets two 1sts is if Nashville sends one of theirs back.

Lol no. Ekholm is pretty much a top pairing defenseman held back to the 2nd pairing because we have Josi. He's got none of the injury issues Chychrun does and he's got a load of playoff experience.

 

[wmupreds]

I think you fully missed the point. Ekholm is not utilized as an offensive defenseman. If he was, he'd put up 0.7 ppg with far better defense than Chychrun. But he's not, so you can't really go there. I get it, you don't know Ekholm and you can't see it. It's fair.

Ehh, I don't know. Ekholm had his day as a true two-way guy and maxed out in his true prime years as about 0.5ppg. I believe he's lost a step offensively along with his usage changing a bit. Still legitimately one of the very best defensive players in the entire NHL though.

 

[PredsV82]

We certainly arent going to give away Ekholm for anything other than a handsome return. There is no rush and you know there would be suitors again this summer.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

No I fully understood your point. Your point is the bolded above (which was the point I responded to in last msg). Like I said in previous post, I think that point is insane.

You're right though I don't really know Ekholm so... I mean it could be true. But, you'd think if Ek were as naturally gifted offensively as someone like Brent Burns or Barrie (that's what 0.7ppg is), he would have eclipsed 50 points at least once by now, even if he was used more defensively. Especially because Nashville has historically had a pretty decent top 6 forward group for most of the years Ekholm has been there.

We can disagree on this (you're right I don't see Ekholm much) but imo saying / believing Ekholm has that level of offensive quality seems incredibly homer-ish at best, at least to me

Like I said, I don't have any real issue with you taking that stance. I think you'd have to watch all his games over a decade, you'd have to get to know his personality, and how the Predators use him and Josi, and none of that is at your disposal. So I understand. It's a subtle thing. I don't expect anybody else on a random hockey message board to know that much.

One thing I do allow, however, is that at 32 Ekholm's "persona" is a little more established and core to his likely path going forward. He COULD HAVE scored 0.7 ppg in the past, used differently, but I do not expect he would now change his approach and do that at any point going forward. On a team like Edmonton, he might still get 0.5 ppg. But the leopard will not suddenly change ALL of his spots back to "what could have been" at this point. So in that sense, the much younger Chychrun would still likely outscore him. Ekholm will still be a better player, however.