Proposal: If Edmonton offered to trade McDavid to Chicago for Bedard++ Does Chicago accept, or do they keep Bedard?

[Stephen]

With Bedard any team including the Oilers would have a brighter future as there's plenty of time to put together a winning team. With McDavid they have three more chances left, after that they have no pieces for a rebuild.

Nobody knows how good Bedard will be precisely and how fast he gets up to speed in the NHL.

 

[HawksDub89]

You probably keep the guy on an ELC and on a better timeline that is more in sync with when you expect to compete.

This.

The timeline doesn’t work for Chicago. Makes them too good for a lottery pick. But not good enough for a cup.

Basically the Nashville Predators hell chamber that they’ll be stuck in.

 

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaa]

Edmonton would never trade McDavid for an unproven player. That would be the dumbest move in NHL history, by a wide margin. It would make the Gretzky trade look brilliant.

Imagine, you trade McDavid for Bedard, who in his third game gets crushed because he is so small, and he then develops concussion issues and retires at 20. Meanwhile McDavid wins four more Hart Trophies and seven more Art Rosses.

I understand the scenario is for fun, but it is too far fetched to even seriously consider.

 

[Boxscore]

Yes the Blackhawks trade the 1st overall for McDavid. The tricky part is... what is the "++" involved? If it's players like Jones, Korchinski, Reichel or Nazar, the Hawks pass.

Remember when Lafreniere was supposed to be the next megastar? Now, while I'm certain that Bedard will be an elite player, what IF he only ends up being Kaprizov-esque... still a superstar... but if you would not trade Kaprizov for a proven McDavid, you shouldn't be employed in the NHL.

 

[hamzarocks]

This site is called Hockeys Future

I will never take a guy in the NHL over a prospect, the NHLer is a depreciating asset. The prospect has potential and will only appreciate in value





Really though both team say no for the timeline they are at

 

[WTRiley]

Chicago is years away from competing. McDavid would be well into his 30's by that point. Bedard will be young still when they are ready. And they get Bedard's ELC years over McDavid's cap hit.

So...Chicago says no.

Timeline wise you're correct, but with regards to money - they aren't paying anyone else anyway.

 

[Thechozen1]

While McDavid is the better player, there’s no way they convince him to stay beyond his current contract with a scorched earth roster. So for that reason, Chicago sticks with Bedard

 

[Crunchrulz]

No way. Chicago built their roster to tank this season in the hopes of getting Bedard, which they accomplished. Chicago media is going to make him the darling of the city.

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

Keep Bedard 100%. He'll be the best player in the league at some point, and that timeline is much more in line with when Chicago is likely ready to be a cup contender again compared to McDavid.


Factor in the contract status, the ++ factor, etc. and its a no brainer.

 

[John Mandalorian]

Edmonton has had several years to build around him. Chicago is supposed to do it how quickly starting from scratch?

 

[Hockeyholic]

McDavid would be going to a team that is worse than Edmonton ever was. McDavid's decline will also (likely) occur in a few years due to decrease in speed.

Bedard will be winning Hart trophies and Art Rosses.

If McDavid were 22 or 23 and signed for 8 more years, Chicago would say yes.

 

[um]

Yes they do it, then they turn around and trade McDavid for a kings ransom. They’d be able to accommodate any Cap problems as well.

McDavid is the most valuable asset in the NHL, cmon people.

 

[Hamilton Bulldogs]

What horrendous act did mcdavid commit in a past life to go from the Oilers to the Blackhawks? Someone get this poor bastard a team to play with

 

[Kshahdoo]

Stupid thread. There is about -1000% chance McDavid will agree to go to a rebuilding team. He needs cups. At least one. So he will agree to be traded to Carolina for sure. To Chicago? Never.