Proposal: Lucic + Bouchard to Vancouver for Eriksson + 10th + ????

[TFHockey]

Well that's fine, but then they wouldn't be getting the 10th OA back either. I think the overall deal is relatively close. What would you say the value difference is between 10th OA this year and Bouchard? Maybe a 3rd? That is fairly close to the value difference between Lucic and Eriksson. This analysis, of course, comes down to opinion on three players who's value seems to range substantially from person to person.

That isn't the case at all. If you made any effort at all you'd see that Bouchard is a key piece for Edmonton moving forward.. and the team is trying to move forward, not constantly rebuild. Why would they give up someone they desperately need for another pick? To Edmonton 10 OA <> Bouchard.

 

[48g90a138pts]

Lucic + Bouchard to Vancouver for Eriksson + 10th + ????

Pettersson

Take your greasy paws off Bouchard Nucks fans

 

[Bettman Returnz]

Is there a reason there’s another thread for lucic to Canucks rumours/proposals? Pretty sure this could’ve been proposed under the original lucic thread.

As a Canucks fan we ain’t getting oilers first or top D prospect. We’d be lucky to swap 1st round picks and/or have a small add. These offers are getting ridiculous!

 

[Seanaconda]

I had no idea Milan Lucic is spelled Seanaconda. How can you say for certain that Looch would waive his NMC? He would risk riding the buses in the AHL if he did that. I seriously doubt Lucic would expose himself to that possibility. Perhaps he would. But neither you nor I have any inside information into Lucic's head and that would be a huge unneeded gamble for the Canucks to take on.

He asked for a trade and wants to go home ? Why wouldn't he go to seattle . If he accepts the first trade he has to agree to waive or keep his nmc . I get you don't want him but the trade contract will be dealt with

 

[Cogburn]

Great, we agree... despite it being suggested by a Canuck fan, it's not a thoughtful deal that works for either side.

I would only add that you neglected to comment on the fact that you are losing Eriksson in the deal, so you are moving from one "toxic" contract to another "toxic contract". The difference between these two toxic contracts is not Bouchard or the difference between Bouchard and 10th OA. That's what makes it a non-starter from Edmonton's perspective... and I would expect... what makes it so attractive to the OP.

Your status quo doesn't really solve your longer term concern about contracts either... unless you think the extra year makes all the difference. I can tell you from Edmonton's perspective, one year sooner expiry is still 1-2 years too late, so the damage on our side will already be done.

Both are awful deals but Erikssons has a bunch of loopholes to ditch it. The lowered salary versus his cap hit means we could, if the opportunity arises, trade him to a cap floor team (thanks to no no movement clause) or buy him out. We can expose him to Seattle in the entry draft. We can waive him, meaning a tiny chance someone claims him, but far more likely he hits Utica. Its not just the added year, it's the loss of flexibility, likely meaning we lose a better player in the expansion draft along with the potential loss of signing someone(either a UFA or resigning one of our guys). The one year, while still no where close to a positive, isn't the main reason we hate Lucics contract so much.

 

[eviohh26]

LOL this has gotta be the weirdest trade ive seen in years. 2 basement teams trying to trade the 2 worst contracts in hockey. like its gonna help either of us trading our suck to one another. lols.

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

Are the Nuck retaining $3M on Eriksson too?

To the original deal, no the Oilers do not do this.

 

[dahrougem2]

The OP listed the trade to include 10oa. So should you not respond to that? Otherwise what you said made no sense. Let me explain.

No, it's not an obligation to respond to strictly the OP's post.

 

[DFF]

Lucic value is so negative, you may need to add a top pick or top prospect like bouchard just to get rid of him

 

[settinguptheplay]

No, it's not an obligation to respond to strictly the OP's post.

That is not what I said though. You came in and bashed on a trade that no one had put forward. Basically you made something up so you could add your faux rage. Of course you can say whatever the heck you want. But when you make things up it is simply disingenuous. Or as I suspect in this case you simply misunderstood the trade that was being discussed. Hence my comment of comprehension.

If I start a thread and offer Pettersson and two 1st round picks for Drai and you come in and claim that Drai is worth way more than a single first round pick while ignoring the rest of the deal you are being disingenuous. Or if you missed the whole trade you failed to comprehend the entire deal. It is that simple. Not sure what your objection to that is other than defending your pride. Can you at least agree that the deal offered was not just Lucic and Bouchard for Eriksson? Did you miss the 10th oa part or chose to ignore it?

Ultimately it is a pointless discussion. No need to hijack a thread to continue our pissing match. Cheers.

 

[treple13]

Forget value. If you honestly think having Lucic protects your stars in any way, you're out to lunch. I'm sure Oilers fans will tell you no rough plays have happened to their stars while Lucic has been there

 

[Luck 6]

That isn't the case at all. If you made any effort at all you'd see that Bouchard is a key piece for Edmonton moving forward.. and the team is trying to move forward, not constantly rebuild. Why would they give up someone they desperately need for another pick? To Edmonton 10 OA <> Bouchard.

I imagine he is a key piece, as likely would be whoever you drafted at 10th OA this year. All I'm saying is that in a bubble, the 10th OA pick from 2018 is not terribly far off in value from the 10th OA pick in 2019. I am a big Bouchard fan, I bought his jersey at the World Juniors last year despite him being an Oilers prospect. I do think he has more value than the 10th OA this year, but I think that the difference between Eriksson and Lucic along with a small add bridges the gap.

Now, my argument is purely value based, I am not saying that the Oilers necessarily would or should make the trade. I won't pretend to understand the ins and outs of the Oilers better than their fans.