Please, Chia, please gut this core.

[rec28]

Just because they aren't winning doesn't mean blowing it up will help. The core piece of the core isn't even playing right now. How can you say it won't work if RNH and Eberle are going to be complementary players to McDavid? They're both easily worth 6m. If you want to trade them for defense, fine, but blowing it up for the sake of change is counter productive.

This, right here, is the issue (not directed at Mc5Rings specifically, btw). A "high skill" team with 3 1st OAs and multiple first rounders on its roster should not have to look to an 18 year old rookie to lead them - regardless of his pedigree. By now, this "team" should be competitive - or at the very least, not a withering punchline - without McDavid. Christ, can you imagine if we didn't win that draft lottery? The team should just fold if it can't find it's way out of the wilderness because a rookie - A ROOKIE - happens to be out with an injury.

Everyone needs to face facts - the so-called "core" is flawed. It's. Not. Working. The point of drafting BPA year after year is not so that you can build a team out of your own draft picks, but so that you can leverage areas of strength to address areas of need by trading high value assets. For god only knows what reason, the Oilers have never done this - the name on the back of the jersey has come to mean more than the crest on the front.

As a result of being have-nots for so bloody long, this franchise along with many of its fans is absolutely terrified of "losing" a trade on paper. They'd rather hold on to shiny, sparkly assets and wallow endlessly at the bottom of the standings than trade one or two of them in a deal where the team might benefit drastically overall but - OMIGOSH - at the expense of giving up the best player in the deal!

There should be absolutely no untouchables on this dumpster fire of a team, and I include McDavid in that assessment. He alone could likely bring a return that would see the Oilers rise to a perennial contender in a relatively short period of time. But he's off-limits, because we've learned to prefer the feel of shiny trinkets on our wrists instead of winning.

********. For the time being, I am marginally confident that Chia, TMac, and Nicholson have the foresight to move past this adolescent way of thinking, but time will tell.

 

[Young Lions*]

As a result of being have-nots for so bloody long, this franchise along with many of its fans is absolutely terrified of "losing" a trade on paper. They'd rather hold on to shiny, sparkly assets and wallow endlessly at the bottom of the standings than trade one or two of them in a deal where the team might benefit drastically overall but - OMIGOSH - at the expense of giving up the best player in the deal!

Do you have any examples of a team that traded away a top player and got better as a result?

The original Kessel trade comes to mind, but that only worked out because Toronto was so bad that the first rounders that came back were both very high picks, but neither really played a major role in the team's subsequent success (that Boston made such a hash of that return later is not relevant, but it is hilarious)

The Nash trade could also qualify in the sense that Columbus went all the way from being terrible to simply mediocre.

But for the life of me, I can't think of any examples where a team traded away a top asset for a package of lesser players and improved "drastically" as a direct result.

 

[McShogun99]

This, right here, is the issue (not directed at Mc5Rings specifically, btw). A "high skill" team with 3 1st OAs and multiple first rounders on its roster should not have to look to an 18 year old rookie to lead them - regardless of his pedigree. By now, this "team" should be competitive - or at the very least, not a withering punchline - without McDavid. Christ, can you imagine if we didn't win that draft lottery? The team should just fold if it can't find it's way out of the wilderness because a rookie - A ROOKIE - happens to be out with an injury.

Everyone needs to face facts - the so-called "core" is flawed. It's. Not. Working. The point of drafting BPA year after year is not so that you can build a team out of your own draft picks, but so that you can leverage areas of strength to address areas of need by trading high value assets. For god only knows what reason, the Oilers have never done this - the name on the back of the jersey has come to mean more than the crest on the front.

As a result of being have-nots for so bloody long, this franchise along with many of its fans is absolutely terrified of "losing" a trade on paper. They'd rather hold on to shiny, sparkly assets and wallow endlessly at the bottom of the standings than trade one or two of them in a deal where the team might benefit drastically overall but - OMIGOSH - at the expense of giving up the best player in the deal!

There should be absolutely no untouchables on this dumpster fire of a team, and I include McDavid in that assessment. He alone could likely bring a return that would see the Oilers rise to a perennial contender in a relatively short period of time. But he's off-limits, because we've learned to prefer the feel of shiny trinkets on our wrists instead of winning.

********. For the time being, I am marginally confident that Chia, TMac, and Nicholson have the foresight to move past this adolescent way of thinking, but time will tell.

Even with Mcdavid and Yakupov out the team still has two other 1st OA's (Hall, RNH), a 3rd OA (Draisaitl), a 4th OA (Pouliot), a 7th OA (Nurse) and the second best forward from the 2008 draft (Eberle), they should be doing so much better by now.

 

[McDeathbyCheerios*]

Do you have any examples of a team that traded away a top player and got better as a result?

The original Kessel trade comes to mind, but that only worked out because Toronto was so bad that the first rounders that came back were both very high picks, but neither really played a major role in the team's subsequent success (that Boston made such a hash of that return later is not relevant, but it is hilarious)

The Nash trade could also qualify in the sense that Columbus went all the way from being terrible to simply mediocre.

But for the life of me, I can't think of any examples where a team traded away a top asset for a package of lesser players and improved "drastically" as a direct result.

The Gaborik trade from NY to Columbus.

The MSL trade.

For example

A Nash type trade would be great for us. I'd love to go from **** to mediocre in one trade.

 

[McRobbiezyg]

We need to trade lazy skill for grit and hard work. I'll let Chiarelli figure out the players.

 

[McDeathbyCheerios*]

Also looking at NHL history no team has been this bad this long so you can't say "a trade like that has never happened so it can't now".

Clearly we need to do something different cause staying the course has not helped in any way shape or form.

 

[Raoul Duke]

Bolded:

Well I'll be damned...fleeting moments of lucidity ARE possible on HFOilers.

Refreshing.

To the rest: Not sure I agree with all of the moves but nice to see someone (relax guys, I know there are others also) who isn't ready to frogmarch Nuge to the airport for a bottom 6 pest or middle-tier d-man.

I don't think anyone wants to trade RNH for a bottom 6 pest or middle tier D. If they do, that's crazy.

What I do see is posters who don't want to dismiss any potential option to improve the team.

I also see many posters who feel their personal favourites should be untouchable. If we can't trade RNH, Yakupov, Eberle, Hall, Klefbom, Draisaitl, Nurse or even the first, what in the world is left?

 

[Young Lions*]

Also looking at NHL history no team has been this bad this long so you can't say "a trade like that has never happened so it can't now".

Clearly we need to do something different cause staying the course has not helped in any way shape or form.

Except it takes two GMs to swing a trade and if you're the guy who decides to do something bold for the sake of doing something bold, the chances of you getting fleeced increase.

 

[McDeathbyCheerios*]

Except it takes two GMs to swing a trade and if you're the guy who decides to do something bold for the sake of doing something bold, the chances of you getting fleeced increase.

Ryan Nugent-Hopkins for Seth Jones isn't a bold move. It's a hcokey trade that gives both teams something they need.

Moving Eberle for a couple solid middle six players isn't bold, its bringing in grit
Bold would be moving Hall, Nurse and a 1st for Weber or Doughty or something.

 

[McDeathbyCheerios*]

I don't think anyone wants to trade RNH for a bottom 6 pest or middle tier D. If they do, that's crazy.

What I do see is posters who don't want to dismiss any potential option to improve the team.

I also see many posters who feel their personal favourites should be untouchable. If we can't trade RNH, Yakupov, Eberle, Hall, Klefbom, Draisaitl, Nurse or even the first, what in the world is left?

Yep. Which is why a bunch of us have Hall, McDavid, Drai, Nurse, Klefbom as untouchable. Some think Klefbom and Hall should be movable but I think having those 5 as a core is fine and leaves us enough assets to get something done.

 

[Ritchie Valens]

Sid Sixiero (sp?) went OFF on the Oilers today on the "Tim and Sid" show. Called the team garbage and called on Chiarelli and the whole organization to blow the whole team up and said the team needs to apologize to the fan base for screwing the last 6 years up. If I can find a video of it, I'll post it.

 

[I am the Liquor]

This, right here, is the issue (not directed at Mc5Rings specifically, btw). A "high skill" team with 3 1st OAs and multiple first rounders on its roster should not have to look to an 18 year old rookie to lead them - regardless of his pedigree. By now, this "team" should be competitive - or at the very least, not a withering punchline - without McDavid. Christ, can you imagine if we didn't win that draft lottery? The team should just fold if it can't find it's way out of the wilderness because a rookie - A ROOKIE - happens to be out with an injury.

Everyone needs to face facts - the so-called "core" is flawed. It's. Not. Working. The point of drafting BPA year after year is not so that you can build a team out of your own draft picks, but so that you can leverage areas of strength to address areas of need by trading high value assets. For god only knows what reason, the Oilers have never done this - the name on the back of the jersey has come to mean more than the crest on the front.

As a result of being have-nots for so bloody long, this franchise along with many of its fans is absolutely terrified of "losing" a trade on paper. They'd rather hold on to shiny, sparkly assets and wallow endlessly at the bottom of the standings than trade one or two of them in a deal where the team might benefit drastically overall but - OMIGOSH - at the expense of giving up the best player in the deal!

There should be absolutely no untouchables on this dumpster fire of a team, and I include McDavid in that assessment. He alone could likely bring a return that would see the Oilers rise to a perennial contender in a relatively short period of time. But he's off-limits, because we've learned to prefer the feel of shiny trinkets on our wrists instead of winning.


********. For the time being, I am marginally confident that Chia, TMac, and Nicholson have the foresight to move past this adolescent way of thinking, but time will tell.

Great post. Thanks for that.

Do you have any examples of a team that traded away a top player and got better as a result?

The original Kessel trade comes to mind, but that only worked out because Toronto was so bad that the first rounders that came back were both very high picks, but neither really played a major role in the team's subsequent success (that Boston made such a hash of that return later is not relevant, but it is hilarious)

The Nash trade could also qualify in the sense that Columbus went all the way from being terrible to simply mediocre.

But for the life of me, I can't think of any examples where a team traded away a top asset for a package of lesser players and improved "drastically" as a direct result.

Quebec Nordiques/ Colorado Avalanche- Eric Lindros- went from basement to winning cups in short order.

Boston Bruins traded Phil Esposito for Jean Ratelle and got quite a bit better.

 

[Faelko]

Great post. Thanks for that.




Quebec Nordiques/ Colorado Avalanche- Eric Lindros- went from basement to winning cups in short order.

Boston Bruins traded Phil Esposito for Jean Ratelle and got quite a bit better.

On top of that, the Nordiques drafted Sundin, Nolan and Lindros 1st overall and traded ALL of them.

 

[McDeathbyCheerios*]

Sid Sixiero (sp?) went OFF on the Oilers today on the "Tim and Sid" show. Called the team garbage and called on Chiarelli and the whole organization to blow the whole team up and said the team needs to apologize to the fan base for screwing the last 6 years up. If I can find a video of it, I'll post it.

Please no. I hate Tim and Sid

 

[belair]

On top of that, the Nordiques drafted Sundin, Nolan and Lindros 1st overall and traded ALL of them.

And won Stanley Cups with HOF defensemen Rob Blake and Ray Bourque and one of the greatest all-time goaltenders in Patrick Roy.

You win championships with good players. It doesn't matter how you got them.

 

[Raab]

Do you have any examples of a team that traded away a top player and got better as a result?

The original Kessel trade comes to mind, but that only worked out because Toronto was so bad that the first rounders that came back were both very high picks, but neither really played a major role in the team's subsequent success (that Boston made such a hash of that return later is not relevant, but it is hilarious)

The Nash trade could also qualify in the sense that Columbus went all the way from being terrible to simply mediocre.

But for the life of me, I can't think of any examples where a team traded away a top asset for a package of lesser players and improved "drastically" as a direct result.

The Nordiques and Lindros is the big one that stands out.

 

[Young Lions*]

The Nordiques and Lindros is the big one that stands out.

That trade and the other firsts they dealt didn't do much for them in the near term (with the exception of Forsberg). They did parlay a bunch of those assets they acquired into other trades, including Patrick Roy (who wouldn't have been traded there if the team hadn't relocated). Suffice to say: that's a bit of a reach.

 

[Mc5RingsAndABeer]

This, right here, is the issue (not directed at Mc5Rings specifically, btw). A "high skill" team with 3 1st OAs and multiple first rounders on its roster should not have to look to an 18 year old rookie to lead them - regardless of his pedigree. By now, this "team" should be competitive - or at the very least, not a withering punchline - without McDavid. Christ, can you imagine if we didn't win that draft lottery? The team should just fold if it can't find it's way out of the wilderness because a rookie - A ROOKIE - happens to be out with an injury.

Everyone needs to face facts - the so-called "core" is flawed. It's. Not. Working. The point of drafting BPA year after year is not so that you can build a team out of your own draft picks, but so that you can leverage areas of strength to address areas of need by trading high value assets. For god only knows what reason, the Oilers have never done this - the name on the back of the jersey has come to mean more than the crest on the front.

As a result of being have-nots for so bloody long, this franchise along with many of its fans is absolutely terrified of "losing" a trade on paper. They'd rather hold on to shiny, sparkly assets and wallow endlessly at the bottom of the standings than trade one or two of them in a deal where the team might benefit drastically overall but - OMIGOSH - at the expense of giving up the best player in the deal!

There should be absolutely no untouchables on this dumpster fire of a team, and I include McDavid in that assessment. He alone could likely bring a return that would see the Oilers rise to a perennial contender in a relatively short period of time. But he's off-limits, because we've learned to prefer the feel of shiny trinkets on our wrists instead of winning.

********. For the time being, I am marginally confident that Chia, TMac, and Nicholson have the foresight to move past this adolescent way of thinking, but time will tell.

If McDavid didn't exist then I'd be in full agreement with you. The current core minus McDavid likely won't be able to ever get it done at the NHL level. However, having a generational talent in McDavid makes a huge difference to the team's goals going forward. It doesn't matter that he's a rookie. He's already a top player in the league, IMO. We have to adjust our vision accordingly. RNH and Ebs likely won't ever be able to carry a team on the top line. They no longer have to. They're complementary players at this point...and they're both worth their $6m contracts, IMO.

I agree with everything you said about BPA. Trading is essential to recoup the value of the pick while still addressing team needs. We haven't done that at all.

Strongly disagree with McDavid being available. Trading quality for quantity has never worked like that. There's no rebuilding team with enough value for a McDavid trade to work.

 

[Bangers]

Do you have any examples of a team that traded away a top player and got better as a result?

The original Kessel trade comes to mind, but that only worked out because Toronto was so bad that the first rounders that came back were both very high picks, but neither really played a major role in the team's subsequent success (that Boston made such a hash of that return later is not relevant, but it is hilarious)

The Nash trade could also qualify in the sense that Columbus went all the way from being terrible to simply mediocre.

But for the life of me, I can't think of any examples where a team traded away a top asset for a package of lesser players and improved "drastically" as a direct result.

Nordiques/Avs traded away all of their 1st overalls and became a force for a decade (although it could be argued that Forsberg was better than Lindros).

Edit: nevermind. Others have already mentioned this.

 

[teeder333*]

I have watched the Oilers a lot this year and I have to say its remarkable how bad they appear to be. Remarkably bad. Actually tough to watch.

 

[King1s]

6m goldenboy on pace for 19points and -70 rating and being rewarded for his pathetic perfomance with 1st line duty....

Yet people here want Yakupov gone?

 

[Senor Catface]

6m goldenboy on pace for 19points and -70 rating and being rewarded for his pathetic perfomance with 1st line duty....

Yet people here want Yakupov gone?

Use pace all you want, but it's incredibly disingenuous.

Eberle won't finish with 19 points and he won't end up being -70 so what's the point?

 

[Gambl0r83*]

I have watched the Oilers a lot this year and I have to say its remarkable how bad they appear to be. Remarkably bad. Actually tough to watch.

Troll alert
Get out, noob

 

[Fourier]

The Nordiques and Lindros is the big one that stands out.

Though to be fair the trade worked out because Forsberg became one of his generations best players. NO one expected that at the time of the deal. Had the deal been one of Scott Lachance, Aaron Ward, Alex Stoyanov or Richard Matvichuk instead it might not have worked out as well.

Historically, the team getting the best player wins the vast majority of the trades.

 

[Up the Irons]

Bolded:

Well I'll be damned...fleeting moments of lucidity ARE possible on HFOilers.

Refreshing.

To the rest: Not sure I agree with all of the moves but nice to see someone (relax guys, I know there are others also) who isn't ready to frogmarch Nuge to the airport for a bottom 6 pest or middle-tier d-man.

who's saying that?

this is a 30th placed team. that means they're really, really bad. this is a team game, therefore, just adding McDavid will not move them up enough.

no chance RNH is untouchable. If he is, Chia is an idiot. An average, non-physical, 2C, that isn't overly offensive should never be untouchable. And don't even dream telling me he is anything more than that.