Proposal: Rumors & Proposals Thread II | I Dealt The Word 'Trade' For A Thread Count. Discuss

[Soli]

Keeping it 100...0.


Continue here.

I look at Brodin like he's a cap dump for them as well. 4M and he only puts up 14 points. He's worth half that. Yakupov still has value around the league and Fayne is basically just thrown in for salary. I'd change Fayne to Pouliot easily if it got the deal done.

They had to work out a deal with the NHLPA. There were reports a while back that they were treating expansion like waivers. If so, even if the expansion draft was 1 day before a contact with a NMC expired, a team would have to protect him. But maybe they can work something out. We don't know the expansion draft rules yet. Just a lot of rumour.

McDavids Wingers

But honestly if Kovalchuk wanted to come back Chia should be all over that.

Can Radulov play center?

Let's sign Kovalchuk.

No, they would just buy out Vanek and save 4.5 million instead of taking on Yak and Fayne who make a combined 6 million. Brodin can be traded for futures or better players than Yak and Fayne if they are still up against the cap.

I guess. They might hate Vanek and the dead Cap space more then that, but either way.

Buyout cap hit of Vanek:
2016/17 - 1.5M
2017/18 - 2.5M

Mark Fayne caphit:
2016/17 - 3.625M
2017/18 - 3.625M

So the Wild lose cap space on just that swap alone. And Mark Fayne has proven that no one will take him for free. So it's not like there is value there for the Wild. And then they trade Brodin for Yakupov? Which not even the most ardent Oiler homer can think is a fair swap.

It's terrible for the Wild.

the problem there is that they had such an easy time signing Vanek because of how impressive their team and facilities were, and so he's in no mood to waive his NMC to go anywhere. That's where a good thing can become a bad thing.

It's like us and Sekera. I don't get why posters suggest trading him. He singled us out because he liked our city, team, and future so much, and so of course he signed for a little less and insisted on a NMC. He's not going anywhere for any reason. Although, I really like Sekera so I don't mind so much, but we have zero flexibility just like Minny and Vanek.

Because they get rid of Vanek? They are planning to buy him out, they would probably welcome this trade.

good point, good post. the thing that is getting overlooked by people is that, in today's NHL, you need 4 good dmen that can play 20 mins, and about 4 more that are used for the bottom pairing/depth. You only need 2 top 6 Cs; a 3rd is a luxury (a very, very nice luxury, no doubt). As Spawn said: you can get a decent 3C and get by with him. Having a good 3D is both more difficult to do and more important to have.

Im not saying 'trade RNH for Ellis' as that, admitted is probably an overpayment. but, it's not as off as some are making it out to be. A quality 3D, that can put up points, is a very valuable and important player. And dreaming of the day when RNH is Datzyukian is... dreaming.

Im not even saying trade RNH. Id rather keep him, trade Ebs and move Drai to wing, at least for half a season, anyways.

but, your Dcorp is now the most important aspect of your team, so make it a bigger priority then C depth. sorry. one trumps the other.

Sure. But why would the Wild do that? They'd just buy Vanek out and have a cap hit of 1.5M this upcoming season and 2.5M the next and if they wanted to trade Brodin trade him for something actually of value rather than a waiver player and a borderline bust.

What if we got say Vanek+Brodin and sent Fayne+Yakupov back in return? Thats the type of deal I'm thinking.

Vanek is a buyout candidate. I don't think he'd cost anything to acquire.

I kind of doubt we're going to have the cap space to add him for next season though and he's really shown a sharp decline the last couple of seasons. He reminds me of Heatley. An already slow skater has gotten slower and he just can't get to the scoring areas as well.

Click to read more...

 

[belair]

I only want Vanek if he makes $8m a year and it costs us our next 4 first round draft picks...

 

[McArthur]

Why is it I hear more and more all the time that Draisaitl is lazy? And who do we really want going forward? the rookie? or the 5 year vet with a good Q of C as a top center in a very difficult division. a guy with a very reasonable cap hit.

 

[BarDownBobo]

Got busy this afternoon at work and wasn't able to expand further on my possible desire to acquire Vanek.

I would not want to give up much value to get him. I'd be looking at a deal something like Korpikoski and a conditional pick dependent on Vanek's performance. That would save Minny $4M in the cap next year and zero hit the following, which is a better result than buying him out. We would get a big right handed forward who is a proven goalscorer, which would make potentially trading Eberle a lot more palatable.

Vanek has NMC so that could be a stumbling block, but this could be one of the situations where he'd move it. He signed here once before, and if he's being threatened with a buyout this would allow him to make his full remaining salary. It'd also be a chance for him to put up some big numbers alongside some elite setup men, maybe helping him cash in once more in his career.

Hope that makes some sense to you guys.

 

[Beetle]

Reading the main boards is so depressing. No matter what is offered, it's never even close. Our productive wingers are worthless, centers (big and small) are too unproven to hold value and top 5 draft picks are apparently throw-ins. I hope GMs don't have the same narrow mindset or Chia is going to have a very hard time finding a decent Dman (or he'll get duped into another Reinhart type move). It's one thing to ask for a slight overpay, but they're not looking for fair deals. Pillage the Oilers...because screw them, right?

 

[Burnt Biscuits]

I've looked at the numbers.

Using your game range from above:
RNH : 19:28 per game
Henrik Sedin: 13:25 per game

The Sedins broke into the league on the 3rd line and played there for the first 4 years of their NHL career. Then they got a bump in ice time and offensive opportunity and their offensive production subsequently climbed. Once they were getting the type of minutes RNH has gotten from day one they were PPG+ players.

Ditto for Pavel Datsyuk. Broke onto a team that had 10 future hall of famers and was playing 13:30~ a night as a rookie. As his ice time and offensive opportunities increased so did his offensive production.

RNH broke into the league and for his entire career has been getting every single offensive opportunity with the teams best offensive players. There's no way for RNHs offensive time to increase. If anything, as McDavid and Draisaitl develop RNH will start seeing fewer and fewer offensive opportunities and more and more defensive responsibilities. That's not going to help his offensive production.

People take these exceptional situations with certain players and either don't look at the context or ignore it. And then go "see, it happened with player X, it will happen with RNH too." It doesn't work that way.

As for why I think a good #3 D is worth as much as a good #2C. I think there are fewer good defensemen in the league than there are good centermen. Just because someone plays the spot doesn't mean their suited for the spot. I think Ellis is a player who is suited for that #3 d spot.

Fact of the matter is the Sedin's didn't deserve more ice-time anyone who was watching the games saw they were exactly where they belonged when they entered the league as 20 year olds, they just slowly improved year over year, it wasn't till the year before the lock out year they started to look the part of individuals who were ready to take the mantle from the soon to be former 1st line, then they got a little more time from the lock out year in Sweden and came back looking like borderline superstars. That said the Sedins and Datsyuk weren't seeing the quality of ice-time that RNH was in terms of match-ups or defensive responsibilities (Sedin's got a monstrous o-zone bump in the year following the lockout) and these people blocking them weren't just impediments, they were challenges to be better for more ice-time and mentors a common denominator in strong hockey programs that know how to develop talent, which is aside from the team specific drills Detroit does to help maintain puck possession and have undersized skill players survive in the NHL. Datsyuk's ice-time being held back is a more fair criticism, but as I explained it can also be a benefit, when he came into the NHL at 23 he was ready to do more than what they initially gave him, but I'm not about to cry a river of tears for him having to learn from people like Yzerman and Fedorov. An ongoing theme of the Kevin Lowe era was not developing prospects correctly, his motto of just throw the kids into the fire and they will learn from it and come out the better for it hasn't worked in the NHL for years, you need a specific approach to each player, it worked pretty well for Hall, but I remember atleast 6 seperate scouts saying that RNH would be great, but he definitely needed another year of junior to bulk up, instead we had him playing a ton of minutes in the NHL with a badly damaged shoulder, while his numbers might indicate he passed the test, I don't think it was the right developmental decision. RNH also wasn't afforded all the offensive opportunities while he got the benefit of playing with Hall and Eberle a lot, Gagner got a lot of easy minutes and took a lot of offensive zone draws, whereas RNH was taking a lot of defensive responsibilities from very early on.

Then I don't have a huge issue with equating #2C to #3D as being close in worth, but as I outlined previously which you did not address I don't see how Ellis is a #3 d-man it seems you just took an extreme liking to the young man. This is also does nothing to address the issue of the differing upsides of the two individuals in question. How about we make this real simple how about you just explain to me what makes Ellis better than Ekholm and why Ellis is a "#3" d-man and Ekholm isn't.

 

[Mr Positive]

Reading the main boards is so depressing. No matter what is offered, it's never even close. Our productive wingers are worthless, centers (big and small) are too unproven to hold value and top 5 draft picks are apparently throw-ins. I hope GMs don't have the same narrow mindset or Chia is going to have a very hard time finding a decent Dman (or he'll get duped into another Reinhart type move). It's one thing to ask for a slight overpay, but they're not looking for fair deals. Pillage the Oilers...because screw them, right?

fyi, I have seen quite a few reasonable posters on the mains. Like for example, there were a lot of Isle fans who didn't just rule out a basic deal of Hamonic for Eberle (although that one got way over-discussed). The obnoxious opinion is always the more noticeable one.

We also have to realize that our own guys don't have a crazy amount of value, or at least some lost value just from being here and having their stats diminished compared to what they would have been on a better team.

But like Friedman said, value isn't objective. We are usually targeting players who are not expendable to their teams (ie Faulk), and meanwhile we are offering players who were made expendable here. The fact that they are still very good players doesn't change that fact.

 

[Beetle]

fyi, I have seen quite a few reasonable posters on the mains. Like for example, there were a lot of Isle fans who didn't just rule out a basic deal of Hamonic for Eberle (although that one got way over-discussed). The obnoxious opinion is always the more noticeable one.

We also have to realize that our own guys don't have a crazy amount of value, or at least some lost value just from being here and having their stats diminished compared to what they would have been on a better team.

But like Friedman said, value isn't objective. We are usually targeting players who are not expendable to their teams (ie Faulk), and meanwhile we are offering players who were made expendable here. The fact that they are still very good players doesn't change that fact.

There are definitely some reasonable posters that don't just trash all our players, but they're drown out by the other 95%. It's almost always a dog pile. Other teams are only interested in our guys if they come at bargain bin prices (basically giving them away).

The stink of losing can hurt value, sure, but you still watch these guys play. You can get a good idea what they'd look like on a team with proper depth and vets mentoring them. And a lot of these guys are producing right now, even if they have some warts/things to learn. Is goal scoring that easy to come by these days? The Draisaitl one is especially puzzling since he just turned 20 and fits the highly coveted "Big Skilled Center" profile and started to prove he's be the real deal this past season. That kind of player is almost never available and yet he's still too much of a risk? How is this possible? Even at a slight risk, I'm taking that chance 10/10 if I was another GM. It's almost impossible to find guys like that. If we didn't have McJesus, his name wouldn't even come up. It's crazy to me.

And I get the Faulk thing. They're in the same position we were last season when we didn't want to move RNH because McDavid/Draisaitl needed sheltering. It's easy to explain that without throwing out crazy demands.

Expendable is a funny thing. Losing makes everyone expendable. Hell, some of these guys we've been talking about acquiring come from fellow basement teams. Teams that have been in the bottom 10 almost as often as we have over the past 6+ years. Somehow it hasn't hurt their value that much? Strange.

 

[harpoon]

I'm enjoying the RNH discussion going on between the proposals. Lots of good points and counter points.
Its kinda hard to follow though. Wondering if it might be better served in a different thread?

My two cents on the subject. Never been a huge fan of RNH's game. I mostly agree with what Spawn is posting on the subject. However there's a nagging thought in the back of my mind that in three years time RNH is the one guy of the lotto picks who might just turn out to be significantly better than he is right now. Something about the kid makes me feel like I might be underestimating him. The numbers Burnt Biscuits posted are certainly useful because I think they illustrate a point that's not often made in RNH's favor. People always say he takes the harder matchups and plays a responsible two way game etc, but I seldom see anyone saying that he's improving in SOG, points and goals year on year. On a team that's as rubbish as the Oilers that's no small accomplishment.

This year he admittedly had some role back and some injury issues and while my expectation of a 1st overall is to improve at a more rapid pace than 0.60 to 0.70 to 0.74 points per game it is still showing improvement year over year. It also shouldn't be overlooked that he was being more assertive in upping his shots per game from 1.95 to 2.23 to 2.49 shots per game and likewise his goal total went from 0.10 to 0.24 to 0.32 goals per game in successive seasons.

I keep saying the same thing, but I wonder how RNH would be evaluated if the team had even two d-men who could handle the job at the NHL level. I have a feeling all those numbers would see a significant bump. People talk about Sedins and Sakic and Datsyuk like those guys played on the worst teams in the league, with AHLers on defense. It wasn't like that.

The other thing that bothers me about trading RNH is the fact that Draisaitl imo has not proven enough at the NHL level to make RNH expendable. I'd trade him if the offer was real nice but I wouldn't be looking to move him away for a second pairing d-man.

 

[Raab]

The more I think about it the more I think Draisaitl is the guy we ship out for defensive help. If that happens I can see Chia trading down and taking Logan Brown.

 

[gordonhught]

The more I think about it the more I think Draisaitl is the guy we ship out for defensive help. If that happens I can see Chia trading down and taking Logan Brown.

Holy moly. Are you ever a contrarian.

 

[Spawn]

Fact of the matter is the Sedin's didn't deserve more ice-time anyone who was watching the games saw they were exactly where they belonged when they entered the league as 20 year olds, they just slowly improved year over year, it wasn't till the year before the lock out year they started to look the part of individuals who were ready to take the mantle from the soon to be former 1st line, then they got a little more time from the lock out year in Sweden and came back looking like borderline superstars.

The bold is something that RNH hasn't done. He hasn't shown any improvement. Earlier you suggested that 0.60 to 0.70 to 0.74 was consistent year after year improvement. But it ignores the drop from 0.84 to 0.6 after his rookie season and the drop from 0.74 to 0.62 from this year. It's easy to say a player is showing improvement year to year when you ignore that he's shown regression from one season to the next just as often.

That said the Sedins and Datsyuk weren't seeing the quality of ice-time that RNH was in terms of match-ups or defensive responsibilities (Sedin's got a monstrous o-zone bump in the year following the lockout) and these people blocking them weren't just impediments, they were challenges to be better for more ice-time and mentors a common denominator in strong hockey programs that know how to develop talent, which is aside from the team specific drills Detroit does to help maintain puck possession and have undersized skill players survive in the NHL. Datsyuk's ice-time being held back is a more fair criticism, but as I explained it can also be a benefit, when he came into the NHL at 23 he was ready to do more than what they initially gave him, but I'm not about to cry a river of tears for him having to learn from people like Yzerman and Fedorov. An ongoing theme of the Kevin Lowe era was not developing prospects correctly, his motto of just throw the kids into the fire and they will learn from it and come out the better for it hasn't worked in the NHL for years, you need a specific approach to each player, it worked pretty well for Hall, but I remember atleast 6 seperate scouts saying that RNH would be great, but he definitely needed another year of junior to bulk up, instead we had him playing a ton of minutes in the NHL with a badly damaged shoulder, while his numbers might indicate he passed the test, I don't think it was the right developmental decision.

These may all be perfectly accurate reasons as to why RNH hasn't shown the kind of development we have wanted out of him. But the fact of the matter is that he hasn't developed. Personally, I don't see that changing.

RNH also wasn't afforded all the offensive opportunities while he got the benefit of playing with Hall and Eberle a lot, Gagner got a lot of easy minutes and took a lot of offensive zone draws, whereas RNH was taking a lot of defensive responsibilities from very early on.

RNH off zone start%
2011-12: 62.5% first among forwards with min 20 games
2012-13: 52.0% 3rd among forwards behind Hall and Mike Brown (lol)
2013-14: 59% 2nd among forwards behind Yakupov
2014-15: 62.7% 3rd among forwards behind Draisaitl and Eberle

This season was the first time in his career that RNH and his line wasn't getting a heavy offensive zone push relative to the rest of the team, and when they were teammates Gagner never once had a higher offensive zone start %.

The suggestion that RNH hasn't been gifted prime offensive opportunities his entire career is a clear distortion. He's spent the vast majority of his time with Eberle, Hall or both and he's gotten very favourable zone starts. Yes, he's been asked to play tough matchups in his career, but that's the nature of being on the first line and playing with Taylor Hall.

Then I don't have a huge issue with equating #2C to #3D as being close in worth, but as I outlined previously which you did not address I don't see how Ellis is a #3 d-man it seems you just took an extreme liking to the young man. This is also does nothing to address the issue of the differing upsides of the two individuals in question. How about we make this real simple how about you just explain to me what makes Ellis better than Ekholm and why Ellis is a "#3" d-man and Ekholm isn't.

I've never suggested Ellis is better than Ekholm. I think they're both very good defenders. Nashville has one of the best top 4s in the league imo. If Ekholm was the RHD instead of Ellis I'd say go for him instead. Just a matter of fit. I think Ellis is an excellent 5v5 d-man. Moves the puck well and is a really good defender despite being undersized.

Regarding upside of the RNH and Ellis. I don't think RNHs upside is any higher than Ellis, nor do I think he's any more likely to get significantly better than Ellis is.

I maintain it would be a very fair trade and I think that the longer RNH stays in this ~55 point range, the lower his value will get around the league. Teams will stop seeing a player who they think they can help improve and start seeing a player who is what he is and all of a sudden that $6M price tag will become very prohibitive.

 

[Raab]

Holy moly. Are you ever a contrarian.

Why? I won't like it but at least it make sense why he's looking at Logan Brown. Right now it literally makes no sense. No way Brown should go at 4.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

Why? I won't like it but at least it make sense why he's looking at Logan Brown. Right now it literally makes no sense. No way Brown should go at 4.

There's zero chance Brown goes 4. I'd put money down that if we go 4 we take Tkachuk (though I personally prefer Dubois)

 

[BarDownBobo]

Why? I won't like it but at least it make sense why he's looking at Logan Brown. Right now it literally makes no sense. No way Brown should go at 4.

Brown is going to be one of the biggest risers over the next month, except to people who already have him high on their lists. A lot of people look at him and see this insane amount of untapped raw potential to go along with his huge stature. There's a good chance he goes #6 if PLD and Tkachuk go 4/5 as expected.

 

[Burnt Biscuits]

The bold is something that RNH hasn't done. He hasn't shown any improvement. Earlier you suggested that 0.60 to 0.70 to 0.74 was consistent year after year improvement. But it ignores the drop from 0.84 to 0.6 after his rookie season and the drop from 0.74 to 0.62 from this year. It's easy to say a player is showing improvement year to year when you ignore that he's shown regression from one season to the next just as often.

As I explained previously he was facing the soft parade in his first season, it was the only time he seen a negative corsi QoC in his entire career, from that point on he was facing markedly tougher competition to hold it out against him is farcical, all it shows is that in that 62 game season he was able to take advantage of the weak opponents to an extent that he hasn't been able to reproduce against stiffer competition. I'd prefer the player at 0.70 pts/per game who can take a tough match-up over the 0.84 pts/per game player who needs to be sheltered.

These may all be perfectly accurate reasons as to why RNH hasn't shown the kind of development we have wanted out of him. But the fact of the matter is that he hasn't developed. Personally, I don't see that changing.

Well I suspect we will continue to disagree here, I think he did improve and I outline why previously, it's just at a painfully slow pace for someone of his pedigree. I don't think he is so old that we can't accelerate or re-invigorate his growth as a player in the upcoming season with the correct gameplan and the correct training to make him a more dominant player along the wall and tougher to push off pucks, Zetterberg started his journey as a Wing at 22 and Datsyuk at 23 and both progressed from there and both were undersized, but developed the strength to battle through tight checking.

RNH off zone start%
2011-12: 62.5% first among forwards with min 20 games
2012-13: 52.0% 3rd among forwards behind Hall and Mike Brown (lol)
2013-14: 59% 2nd among forwards behind Yakupov
2014-15: 62.7% 3rd among forwards behind Draisaitl and Eberle

This season was the first time in his career that RNH and his line wasn't getting a heavy offensive zone push relative to the rest of the team, and when they were teammates Gagner never once had a higher offensive zone start %.

I think you might be looking at offensive zone ratio, possibly from behindthenet, I prefer stats.hockey.analysis.com which is actually the raw % of offensive zone face-offs, neutral zone face-off %, and defensive zone %. RNH was leaned on for defensive responsibilities, but his poor face-off win percentage made Gordon a better option if the play was starting in the defensive zone in pretty much every case.

For example in 2014-15 the following forwards saw more offensive zone face-offs than him: Draisaitl, Gazdic, Pakarinen, Roy, Pouliot, Eberle, Purcell, and Yakupov. link

13/14 Gagner o-zone face-off%= 35.3
13/14 RNH o-zone face-off%= 32.5
12/13 Gagner o-zone face-off%= 32.8
12/13 RNH o-zone face-off%= 30.6

In RNH's rookie season he got a higher o-zone faceoff% than any player not named Omark.

The suggestion that RNH hasn't been gifted prime offensive opportunities his entire career is a clear distortion. He's spent the vast majority of his time with Eberle, Hall or both and he's gotten very favourable zone starts. Yes, he's been asked to play tough matchups in his career, but that's the nature of being on the first line and playing with Taylor Hall.

I've never suggested Ellis is better than Ekholm. I think they're both very good defenders. Nashville has one of the best top 4s in the league imo. If Ekholm was the RHD instead of Ellis I'd say go for him instead. Just a matter of fit. I think Ellis is an excellent 5v5 d-man. Moves the puck well and is a really good defender despite being undersized.

Regarding upside of the RNH and Ellis. I don't think RNHs upside is any higher than Ellis, nor do I think he's any more likely to get significantly better than Ellis is.

I maintain it would be a very fair trade and I think that the longer RNH stays in this ~55 point range, the lower his value will get around the league. Teams will stop seeing a player who they think they can help improve and start seeing a player who is what he is and all of a sudden that $6M price tag will become very prohibitive.

I don't think we will ever see eye to eye on RNH's upside so I'll leave it be and I will acknowledge what Ellis can do for a team 5 on 5, but I don't believe he is a #3 defender cause he hasn't demonstrated that he can elevate a #5 defender to a #4 defender level, this is kind of an unfair criticism cause the overall strength of Nashville's D hasn't really forced the issue on him as of yet, but in his partnership with Ekholm the numbers indicate that Ekholm is carrying Ellis more than Ellis is carrying him. My other belief is that anyone who is going to call themselves a top 4 defender has to make a meaningful contribution to one of the 2 special teams units, where as Ellis is by and large only proven to be effective as a 5 on 5 guy.

The argument of trading RNH because there won't be enough offensive time to share and if he isn't putting up good numbers his trade value will decrease, is a fair argument, but I think this issue is quickly alleviated just by playing him with Hall & Drai (kicking Drai to the wing). I understand trying to trade him for the sake of asset value preservation, but I just disagree that RNH for Ellis actually accomplishes that goal. Recently there was an RNH + Fayne for Ellis + Jarnkrok trade thread, and Nsh fans thought we were getting the short end of stick pretty unanimously. When both Oilers and Preds fans think we are getting the short end of the stick more than likely that is exactly the case, you are the outlier here, sometimes outliers are right, but I'll stick with the consensus on this one.

 

[Spawn]

As I explained previously he was facing the soft parade in his first season, it was the only time he seen a negative corsi QoC in his entire career, from that point on he was facing markedly tougher competition to hold it out against him is farcical, all it shows is that in that 62 game season he was able to take advantage of the weak opponents to an extent that he hasn't been able to reproduce against stiffer competition. I'd prefer the player at 0.70 pts/per game who can take a tough match-up over the 0.84 pts/per game player who needs to be sheltered.


Well I suspect we will continue to disagree here, I think he did improve and I outline why previously, it's just at a painfully slow pace for someone of his pedigree. I don't think he is so old that we can't accelerate or re-invigorate his growth as a player in the upcoming season with the correct gameplan and the correct training to make him a more dominant player along the wall and tougher to push off pucks, Zetterberg started his journey as a Wing at 22 and Datsyuk at 23 and both progressed from there and both were undersized, but developed the strength to battle through tight checking.



I think you might be looking at offensive zone ratio, possibly from behindthenet, I prefer stats.hockey.analysis.com which is actually the raw % of offensive zone face-offs, neutral zone face-off %, and defensive zone %. RNH was leaned on for defensive responsibilities, but his poor face-off win percentage made Gordon a better option if the play was starting in the defensive zone in pretty much every case.

For example in 2014-15 the following forwards saw more offensive zone face-offs than him: Draisaitl, Gazdic, Pakarinen, Roy, Pouliot, Eberle, Purcell, and Yakupov. link

13/14 Gagner o-zone face-off%= 35.3
13/14 RNH o-zone face-off%= 32.5
12/13 Gagner o-zone face-off%= 32.8
12/13 RNH o-zone face-off%= 30.6

In RNH's rookie season he got a higher o-zone faceoff% than any player not named Omark.


I don't think we will ever see eye to eye on RNH's upside so I'll leave it be and I will acknowledge what Ellis can do for a team 5 on 5, but I don't believe he is a #3 defender cause he hasn't demonstrated that he can elevate a #5 defender to a #4 defender level, this is kind of an unfair criticism cause the overall strength of Nashville's D hasn't really forced the issue on him as of yet, but in his partnership with Ekholm the numbers indicate that Ekholm is carrying Ellis more than Ellis is carrying him. My other belief is that anyone who is going to call themselves a top 4 defender has to make a meaningful contribution to one of the 2 special teams units, where as Ellis is by and large only proven to be effective as a 5 on 5 guy.

The argument of trading RNH because there won't be enough offensive time to share and if he isn't putting up good numbers his trade value will decrease, is a fair argument, but I think this issue is quickly alleviated just by playing him with Hall & Drai (kicking Drai to the wing). I understand trying to trade him for the sake of asset value preservation, but I just disagree that RNH for Ellis actually accomplishes that goal. Recently there was an RNH + Fayne for Ellis + Jarnkrok trade thread, and Nsh fans thought we were getting the short end of stick pretty unanimously. When both Oilers and Preds fans think we are getting the short end of the stick more than likely that is exactly the case, you are the outlier here, sometimes outliers are right, but I'll stick with the consensus on this one.

I think I've hit the end of debating RNH for now, especially in a rumors/proposals thread. You certainly make some valid points, and I appreciate the amount of thought and time you've put into your posts. Regardless of our stance on the topic, your post is certainly the type of discussion that makes these kinds of debates worth having. Kudos.

I sincerely hope you're right regarding RNH and this time next year you're all digging up my posts pointing out how much of an idiot I am.

 

[Burnt Biscuits]

I think I've hit the end of debating RNH for now, especially in a rumors/proposals thread. You certainly make some valid points, and I appreciate the amount of thought and time you've put into your posts. Regardless of our stance on the topic, your post is certainly the type of discussion that makes these kinds of debates worth having. Kudos.

I sincerely hope you're right regarding RNH and this time next year you're all digging up my posts pointing out how much of an idiot I am.

Nothing wrong with a little healthy debate. I'm not openly making any claims on what RNH will or won't likely accomplish next season and don't plan on rubbing it in your face if you're wrong. I just see RNH as having a lot of potential, I don't see any material flaws to his game that can't be fixed with the right combination of training and coaching, whereas my faith in Yakupov being a big time goalscorer is shot because of bad hockey IQ and I never believed Nurse had high offensive potential, because he never flashed high level hands or passing ability in the offensive zone on the numerous rushes he had each game in junior.


^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^

With regards to an unrelated topic it seems like the majority of this board is fine with moving 4th overall for Tyson Barrie at what price point would you take that deal off the table? Like for example would you still be fine with that deal if Barrie wanted $7M per year on a 7 year deal?

 

[Canovin]

Brown is going to be one of the biggest risers over the next month, except to people who already have him high on their lists. A lot of people look at him and see this insane amount of untapped raw potential to go along with his huge stature. There's a good chance he goes #6 if PLD and Tkachuk go 4/5 as expected.

This PLD and Brown sounds like a Risto and Nurse scenario where Nurse was a late riser in the draft. Instead of us going with the safe pick elite prospect, we went for the guy with insane raw talent. I think this time around we should hope for the safe pick.

 

[Burnt Biscuits]

There's zero chance Brown goes 4. I'd put money down that if we go 4 we take Tkachuk (though I personally prefer Dubois)

If we traded that pick to Calgary it wouldn't surprise me if Burke + Treliving took Brown, there were strong rumors in the 2013 draft that they were considering taking Nick Ritchie over Sam Bennett and I think from an organizational stand point they are happy with their general skill level and want to prioritize size now more heavily. I could see Tkachuk also being interesting for Calgary as well just because he plays a bit dirty at times.

 

[Fourier]

If we traded that pick to Calgary it wouldn't surprise me if Burke + Treliving took Brown, there were strong rumors in the 2013 draft that they were considering taking Nick Ritchie over Sam Bennett and I think from an organizational stand point they are happy with their general skill level and want to prioritize size now more heavily. I could see Tkachuk also being interesting for Calgary as well just because he plays a bit dirty at times.

I think Brown ends up in Calgary as well.

 

[CornKicker]

Got busy this afternoon at work and wasn't able to expand further on my possible desire to acquire Vanek.

I would not want to give up much value to get him. I'd be looking at a deal something like Korpikoski and a conditional pick dependent on Vanek's performance. That would save Minny $4M in the cap next year and zero hit the following, which is a better result than buying him out. We would get a big right handed forward who is a proven goalscorer, which would make potentially trading Eberle a lot more palatable.

Vanek has NMC so that could be a stumbling block, but this could be one of the situations where he'd move it. He signed here once before, and if he's being threatened with a buyout this would allow him to make his full remaining salary. It'd also be a chance for him to put up some big numbers alongside some elite setup men, maybe helping him cash in once more in his career.

Hope that makes some sense to you guys.

if he gets bought out he gets all his money in one lump sum and he gets to be a UFA and take money from someone else too. its in his best interest to get bought out.

 

[Mcnotloilersfan]

Just over 5 weeks until the draft. Just over 6 weeks until free agency begins.

In 7 weeks, we should have a good idea of what this team is going to look like next year.

In 5 weeks or less, we could be saying goodbye to some beloved players like Nuge or Eberle

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

Reading the main boards is so depressing. No matter what is offered, it's never even close. Our productive wingers are worthless, centers (big and small) are too unproven to hold value and top 5 draft picks are apparently throw-ins. I hope GMs don't have the same narrow mindset or Chia is going to have a very hard time finding a decent Dman (or he'll get duped into another Reinhart type move). It's one thing to ask for a slight overpay, but they're not looking for fair deals. Pillage the Oilers...because screw them, right?

Agreed.

I think part of it is that no one wants to trade their defenders. I know a lot of people wanted to keep Petry instead of dealing him for a 3rd.

*crying game intermission*

But in the instances where teams are balking at 1 for 1 deals and are asking for adds I think I'd want to know who we are bidding against and what those offers are.

 

[oilcountry17]

trade hall and Eberle for Faulk Skinner (retain .75 mil)
sign Erickson 6 x 6
Fayne (33% retained) for Shaw sign for 3 x 2.75
Korp 50% for 5th
sign Kevan Miller
Trade the 4th oal and 3 round pick for Arizona 7th and Stone (draft the big center Brown)

Marron(1.5) Mcdavid (3.8) Erickson (6)
Skinner (5) Nuge (6) Drai (2.9)
Pouliot (4) Shaw (2.75) Yak (2.5)
Hendi (1.85) Letestu (1.8) kass (1.8)
Lander (1) Pak (1.2)
forward 42.1 m

Klef(4.167) Faulk (4.83)
Sekera (5.5) Stone (1.15)
Davidson(1.4) Miller (1.4)
pardy or gryba (1)
Ference LTIR
def 19.45


Talbot(4.166)
Brossoit(.75)
goal 4.92
66.5 mil plus 2.5 retained is 69m I assumed Mcdavid would hit max Bonus and Drai would miss one Bonus
Develop Reinhardt and Nurse for this season in the Ahl