Cloned
Begging for Bega
- Aug 25, 2003
- 79,236
- 64,634
Player Discussion Darnell Nurse
- Thread starter Da McBomb
- Start date
The Nuge
Some say…
So if the best offer you can get is a 35 year old like Weber or Suter or a low end #2 like Muzzin or Pesce, you’d do that trade?
Bryanbryoil
Pray For Ukraine
- Sep 13, 2004
- 86,154
- 34,461
I would rather move all 3 of them if we had replacements.
None of them are worth a damn offensively, none of them are elite defensive players and they all have a cap hit of $4 million+
Bryanbryoil
Pray For Ukraine
- Sep 13, 2004
- 86,154
- 34,461
Good question. Ideally Bouchard and Broberg, but throwing either into the top 4 next season without a back up plan would be asking for problems.
GretzkytoKurri9917
"LIVE LONG AND PROSPER"
Huge overpay, Nurse is a career 2nd pairing defenceman.
Time to move on from Nurse if he wants 6 million.
Todd from Leduc
Connor “The Next Great One” McDavid
Not a fan of Darnell’s Lays Chips commercial cameo as it keeps reminding me we were done in 4 games in what should have been a Cinderella waltz to the Cup.
Sempiternal
Registered User
- Jul 5, 2014
- 3,460
- 1,944
Not that much in common. Petry has far better hockey IQ.
Nurse just can’t read plays all that well and his decision making is suspect.
Great physical tools but can’t take full advantage of them because he doesn’t think the game well enough.
It's pretty crazy isn't it.
Chabot would be on Team Canada's top pairing right now if the Olympics started today, and he's McDavid's age and a 18th overall draft pick. Would LOVE to knock one of those picks out of the park at some point. Fact of the matter is this team hasn't drafted a top pairing defenceman since...uh...Erik Gustafsson! He's borderline, so let's keep on looking...
Jeff Petry 15 years ago, but is he really a top pairing guy? No, he's playing 2nd pairing. He would be our best defenceman currently, but he ain't a top 30 defenceman league wide.
The only one I can see is Paul Coffey, 40 years ago. Guess you might have to include Kevin Lowe in there too, 41 years ago. Definitely been a while since we were able to draft a first pairing guy.
Then you have Ottawa who have drafted Chabot, Karlsson, Berard in the last 28 years for example.
Larsson definitely needs to go, but also has some value as a trade asset. A solid stay at home D who can thrive as a second pairing guy for a season in a trade sending salary the other way. Hopefully this off-season. Hopefully Broberg-Bouchard could be eased into second pairing minutes. Maybe around the time of the Christmas break?
One of Klefbom/Nurse should go after 20-21. Take the year to see which of Klefbom and Nurse goes next off-season. Both would have some trade value in the summer of 2021 off-season.
Need to create room for Broberg and Bouchard to both spend all of 2020-21 on the team. Probably best in the bottom pairing role to start.
2020-21 Defence
Klefbom - Bear
Nurse - Jones (Or Benning or Russell)
Broberg - Bouchard
Between Russell, Benning and Jones I think one of them should be able to step up and play second pairing to start the season. I would move Russell if possible by trade, but don't think that would be easy.
I think it is best for Broberg to play here, if not the AHL next season. He has clearly proven he has surpassed what he can learn in the SHL.
The off-season next year completes the transformation. Larsson and Russell are definitely off the books. One of Klefbom and Nurse being gone is the major move required. Here's my proposed lineup guessing that the Oilers go with the better cap decision in moving Nurse and keeping Klefbom.
2021-22 Defence
Broberg-Bouchard
Klefbom -Bear
Jones - Benning
Matt Benning is the most changeable part of that scenario. Easy enough to replace in a pinch. Klefbom or Nurse will still be valuable trade pieces.
Last edited by a moderator:
Imo financially it makes much more sense to move Nurse. Nurse is already making too much money and is only going to ask for more after this coming season. Klefbom is still cap friendly for 3 more seasons.
I think Klefbom moved to a second line with powerplay time taken away and given to Bouchard for example would probably help him be better 5v5. That means we need to find a guy to push above him however.
You are also way to optimistic if you think Broberg and Bouchard will be ready for top pairing duty that quick.
Maybe, but I think it is a reasonable bet and a relatively easy fix.
Move out Nurse because the money Nurse will be asking for will go a long way towards a 1D. Nurse at $5.6 million on a short term was a reasonable signing. Actually looks quite good now. We didn't commit long-term to a player who will likely earn more as a UFA than the team is willing to pay.
Nurse can be moved at any point a deal for a goalie, top six winger or even a better fit for our needs on D comes up. That might allow for a better fit for the top pair to give Broberg-Bouchard an extra year to adjust.
Expecting guys who aren't even NHL ready NOW to be top pairing defenders a year from now is not a reasonable bet. If we had a legit top pairing vet, than you could reasonably say you could put one of them on the top pairing with them to help. But both to be top pairing guys a full season from now when they have a combined what...8 NHL games? That's entirely unreasonable
oilexport
Registered User
- Aug 29, 2010
- 2,019
- 624
Lowe was never a top pairing guy. It's a joke that he is going to the hall. What a circus.
That's why you hold onto Klefbom and Nurse for 2020-21. Evaluate where the team is at.
I went with keeping Klefbom. You could play Klefbom - Bouchard as a transition to the first pairing.
The first pairing of the future is Broberg-Bouchard. Keeping Klefbom on the team is a backup plan for how long that transition takes.
My first pair for 2020-21 was Klefbom - Bear with Broberg - Bouchard finishing the season as the second pair. Ideally I would like to see those pairings switch. If 2021-22 is too soon. So be it.
Klefbom - Bear as an interim first pairing is a solid plan to transition to Broberg - Bouchard in an era with a flat cap. Not ideal for next year, but it is reasonable. No need to make a pricey commitment to a top UFA 1D.
Nurse is at the top end of salary with that $5.6M of his kicking in. With the new landscape it is probably time for him to go. Preferable to hold onto him for one more season to see how the development of Bouchard and Broberg progresses. However, if the right deal comes along this off-season take it.
I'm trying not to put too much stock on 4 games after a 4 month break where he looked bad.
Logistically speaking, we simply need a top end defender who can play hard minutes locking things down protecting a 1 goal lead with 5mins left while also being a threat to score to prevent offensive cheating.
Nurse, Klef, and Lars are not "that guy".
Lars is likely gone sooner or later.
But I'm not sure I'm eager to throw Nurse away for nothing, like we did Petry and Jultz.
He's only 25.
Aceboogie
Registered User
- Aug 25, 2012
- 32,649
- 3,896
Nurse would have value in a trade, Jultz and Petry were delat for nothing. The Petry trade might be worse than the Hall trade. And hell, at the time of trade, P{etry had shown to be better than Nurse is now
Aceboogie
Registered User
- Aug 25, 2012
- 32,649
- 3,896
The best time to trade Nurse was last offseason when his value was still sky high. The next best time to deal him is this offseason.
I was saying it last offseason, but he aint going to get much better. He is what he is, a #4 D with flaws and will always leaving wanting more. However, due to his size, his draft position and this widely held notion D take 600 games to develop, he still has good value league wide. The gap between his trade value and on ice value is vast. Its oo vast not to take advantage of.
I like Nurse as a D, but if he could fetch you a Nylander or be included in a package for a legit top pairing D- you pull the trigger. Every year his value will just decrease. And as we saw with his bridge deal, he values himself as a top pairing D
I was saying it last offseason, but he aint going to get much better. He is what he is, a #4 D with flaws and will always leaving wanting more. However, due to his size, his draft position and this widely held notion D take 600 games to develop, he still has good value league wide. The gap between his trade value and on ice value is vast. Its oo vast not to take advantage of.
I like Nurse as a D, but if he could fetch you a Nylander or be included in a package for a legit top pairing D- you pull the trigger. Every year his value will just decrease. And as we saw with his bridge deal, he values himself as a top pairing D
That's a bit much. Nurse has far more trade value than a second and a conditional fifth like we got for Petry. Or the third the Oilers got for Schultz.
Nurse should return a roster player. Will likely need to in order to make salary work. A top six winger or part of a package that returns us help in net. Those are all the type of trades in which you trade Nurse.
I would be ok with keeping Nurse for two more seasons if that part of the best plan for developing Broberg and Bouchard. But there is no way the team can afford to keep him when he becomes a UFA.
McDNicks17
Moderator
It's kind of tough to not pay him like a top pairing defenseman when they play him like they do.
Good luck getting an agent to agree to #3/4D money when only one player in the entire league(Chabot) played more even strength minutes than him.
I can agree with that. I'd only be willing to trade Nurse for a known quantity.
But Larsson is a UFA next season. I don't see him staying.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Speculation: Offseason coaching thread: Should they stay or should they go?
- Latest: MetalheadPenguinsFan
-
-
-
-
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
Stanley Cup 2024 Stanley Cup Champion - ONLY BET ONE TEAMWagers: 13Staked: $16,904.00Event closes- Updated:
-