Trade Hemsky?

Jonathan Willis
May 03 2009 11:31AM

Hemsky and Sakic

Jim Matheson floated the idea in his piece this morning, with the Los Angeles Kings being the destination and a package consisting of Dustin Brown and Matt Greene being the return.

Lowetide’s opinion is here; he examines things from an organizational angle and stresses what the benefits would be before saying he doesn’t like the idea. I completely agree with him, but I thought it might be worthwhile to examine the relative offensive production of Brown and Hemsky year by year in the NHL.

Ales Hemsky at 19: 59GP – 6G – 24A – 30PTS (.51 PPG) Dustin Brown at 19: 31GP – 1G – 4A – 5PTS (.16 PPG)

Ales Hemsky at 20: 71GP – 12G – 22A – 34PTS (.48 PPG) Dustin Brown at 21: 79GP – 14G – 14A – 28PTS (.35 PPG)

Ales Hemsky at 22: 81GP – 19G – 58A – 77PTS (.95 PPG) Dustin Brown at 22: 81GP – 17G – 29A – 46PTS (.57 PPG)

Ales Hemsky at 23: 64GP – 13G – 40A – 53PTS (.83 PPG) Dustin Brown at 23: 78GP – 33G – 27A – 60PTS (.77 PPG)

Ales Hemsky at 24: 74GP – 20G – 51A – 71PTS (.96 PPG) Dustin Brown at 24: 80GP – 24G – 29A – 53PTS (.66 PPG)

Ales Hemsky at 25: 72G – 23G – 43A – 66PTS (.92 PPG)

Career Totals By Age 24

Ales Hemsky: 349GP – 70G – 195A – 265PTS (.76 PPG) Dustin Brown: 349GP – 89G – 103A – 192PTS (.55 PPG)

If the Oilers were to make that trade they’d be sending away someone who was a better point producer at age 25 than Pavel Datsyuk, Jarome Iginla, Henrik Sedin and Jason Spezza. They’d be sending away the best offensive talent on the team for a guy who once hit 60 points. It would mean that the best offensive season recorded by anyone on the team, ever, was Shawn Horcoff’s 73 point effort in 2005-06.

It would be a mistake.

74b7cedc5d8bfbe88cf071309e98d2c3
Jonathan Willis is a freelance writer. He currently works for Oilers Nation, the Edmonton Journal and Bleacher Report. He's co-written three books and worked for myriad websites, including Grantland, ESPN, The Score, and Hockey Prospectus. He was previously the founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue.
Avatar
#201 RossCreek
May 04 2009, 05:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Archaeologuy wrote:

So i dont understand how if Horc was making 1 mill for the last 2 years of his contract it would really matter because the Oilers have to count his average against the cap.

What I think he's trying to say is that if Horc had signed a deal with an additional 3 years @ 1 mil per (his example), then it would have lowered his cap hit. Then if Horc were to retire with those 3 years left, all he's missing out on is 3 mil, and the Oil wipe that cap hit off the books completely. Players that physically sign a contract after they've turned 35 would see theur cap hit remain even if they retired. (ex: Jagr signs a 2 year deal @ 5 mil cap hit; he then retires after 1 year and the Oil are stuck with a 5 mil cap hit in year 2 but no asset to speak of. Horcoff, who signed this deal well before he turns 35, would NOT count against the cap IF he retired before his 9 year deal was up. Clear?)

Avatar
#202 Lofty
May 04 2009, 05:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Ogden Brother: You cant deny that Lowe has put the Oil in a very bad spot. If you learned how to read you would notice that I clearly said that if Lowe had not abused the Oils cap for the next couple years the Oil could have had a chance to go after a UFA such as Nash.

Get a life.

If you want to try and pick on a post I suggest you read it first.

Avatar
#203 Lofty
May 04 2009, 05:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Cory Dakin:You loose the salary to spend on UFA's.

Avatar
#204 Homie
May 04 2009, 05:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

How about Hemsky, Horcoff, any Oiler defencemen, and the first rounder this year for one of Malkin or Crosby?

Sounds a bit outlandish, but it give the Pens a first line winger, a very good second line centre, a top pairing defencemen and a good draft pick. The Oilers get a player they can actually build around.

Avatar
#205 RossCreek
May 04 2009, 06:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Archaeologuy: So... instead of the 6 year deal Horcoff signed -7.0 (age 31) -6.5 (age 32) -6.5 (age 33) -6.0 (age 34) -4.0 (age 35) -3.0 (age 36) cap hit = 5.5

he signs a 9 year deal -7.0 (age 31) -6.5 (age 32) -6.5 (age 33) -6.0 (age 34) -4.0 (age 35) -3.0 (age 36) -1.0 (age 37) -1.0 (age 38) -1.0 (age 39) cap hit = 4.0

Now he's making the assumption that Horcoff would retire early (thats a safer bet with the Wings deals as they're longer). So even say he plays an extra year (7 instead of the 6 he has in actuality) - thats a 4.0 cap hit for 7 years instead of 5.5 for 6. Then he retires with 2 years left on his deal, and the 4.0 cap hit is wiped off the books (because he signed the deal before he turned 35), and Horcoff still receives all of the $ he's going to recieve anyways.

Make sense?

Avatar
#206 RossCreek
May 04 2009, 06:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Homie wrote:

but it give the Pens a first line winger, a very good second line centre, a top pairing defencemen and a good draft pick.

Not even gonna comment on the "deal", but does the cap hits work out? I think not. The Pens would be adding 9.6 without naming a D-man (15 ish with a D-man) and they'd be subtracting 8.7 (and lose the best player in the deal who also just happens to be a top 5 in the game). Doesn't work out.

Avatar
#207 Ogden Brother
May 04 2009, 06:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RossCreek wrote:

Archaeologuy wrote: So i dont understand how if Horc was making 1 mill for the last 2 years of his contract it would really matter because the Oilers have to count his average against the cap. What I think he’s trying to say is that if Horc had signed a deal with an additional 3 years @ 1 mil per (his example), then it would have lowered his cap hit. Then if Horc were to retire with those 3 years left, all he’s missing out on is 3 mil, and the Oil wipe that cap hit off the books completely. Players that physically sign a contract after they’ve turned 35 would see theur cap hit remain even if they retired. (ex: Jagr signs a 2 year deal @ 5 mil cap hit; he then retires after 1 year and the Oil are stuck with a 5 mil cap hit in year 2 but no asset to speak of. Horcoff, who signed this deal well before he turns 35, would NOT count against the cap IF he retired before his 9 year deal was up. Clear?)

Bingo, see Lcav/Franzen/Zets/Kipper deal as examples.

Avatar
#208 Ogden Brother
May 04 2009, 06:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Lofty wrote:

@ Ogden Brother: You cant deny that Lowe has put the Oil in a very bad spot. If you learned how to read you would notice that I clearly said that if Lowe had not abused the Oils cap for the next couple years the Oil could have had a chance to go after a UFA such as Nash. Get a life. If you want to try and pick on a post I suggest you read it first.

No I read it, my point was: Cap space or not, the chances of him making it here were .0001%

Avatar
#209 Ogden Brother
May 04 2009, 06:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RossCreek wrote:

@ Archaeologuy: So… instead of the 6 year deal Horcoff signed -7.0 (age 31) -6.5 (age 32) -6.5 (age 33) -6.0 (age 34) -4.0 (age 35) -3.0 (age 36) cap hit = 5.5 he signs a 9 year deal -7.0 (age 31) -6.5 (age 32) -6.5 (age 33) -6.0 (age 34) -4.0 (age 35) -3.0 (age 36) -1.0 (age 37) -1.0 (age 38) -1.0 (age 39) cap hit = 4.0 Now he’s making the assumption that Horcoff would retire early (thats a safer bet with the Wings deals as they’re longer). So even say he plays an extra year (7 instead of the 6 he has in actuality) - thats a 4.0 cap hit for 7 years instead of 5.5 for 6. Then he retires with 2 years left on his deal, and the 4.0 cap hit is wiped off the books (because he signed the deal before he turned 35), and Horcoff still receives all of the $ he’s going to recieve anyways. Make sense?

Or if he refuses to retire, you've got an easy contract to:

1. Hide in the minors 2. Trade to a team with lots of cap space but little $$$ 3. Buy out

Avatar
#210 kingsblade
May 04 2009, 06:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

kingsblade wrote:

Ogden Brother wrote: You sure? Iggy/Thorton/Heatly/Spezza all signed for around 7 million, before July 1. a few months latter (on July 1) Gomez/Drury/Brier/Karya signed for 6 - 7.5 million. Beyond what arch said about this: The first group signed before the cap was announced for the following year. The second group was all signed after the cap was announced. The cap went up significantly and those guys were the lucky ones who reaped the benefits.

This is why some people are so difficult to talk to. Even when I demonstrate why your specific point has no traction you simply repeat yourself ad nauseum.

Saying it over and over doesn't make it stronger. Try a new tact.

Avatar
#211 Ogden Brother
May 04 2009, 06:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RossCreek wrote:

Homie wrote: but it give the Pens a first line winger, a very good second line centre, a top pairing defencemen and a good draft pick. Not even gonna comment on the “deal”, but does the cap hits work out? I think not. The Pens would be adding 9.6 without naming a D-man (15 ish with a D-man) and they’d be subtracting 8.7 (and lose the best player in the deal who also just happens to be a top 5 in the game). Doesn’t work out.

Something like Hemsky/Cogs/Gilbert would make a little more sense.

Avatar
#212 Ogden Brother
May 04 2009, 06:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

kingsblade wrote:

kingsblade wrote: Ogden Brother wrote: You sure? Iggy/Thorton/Heatly/Spezza all signed for around 7 million, before July 1. a few months latter (on July 1) Gomez/Drury/Brier/Karya signed for 6 - 7.5 million. Beyond what arch said about this: The first group signed before the cap was announced for the following year. The second group was all signed after the cap was announced. The cap went up significantly and those guys were the lucky ones who reaped the benefits. This is why some people are so difficult to talk to. Even when I demonstrate why your specific point has no traction you simply repeat yourself ad nauseum. Saying it over and over doesn’t make it stronger. Try a new tact.

What other attempt is even possible? If you don't understand that more teams bidding = higher prices then theirs not likely any other way to explain it.

Avatar
#213 Lofty
May 04 2009, 06:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Ogden Brother:How could we not get a guy like him? for the right price almost any player can be had. If we can clear the space in the cap it can happen. Who would have thought we would have been close to getting Hossa? We didnt get him but we were pretty close.

Avatar
#214 myteammytown
May 04 2009, 06:43PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RossCreek wrote:

@ Archaeologuy: So… instead of the 6 year deal Horcoff signed -7.0 (age 31) -6.5 (age 32) -6.5 (age 33) -6.0 (age 34) -4.0 (age 35) -3.0 (age 36) cap hit = 5.5 he signs a 9 year deal -7.0 (age 31) -6.5 (age 32) -6.5 (age 33) -6.0 (age 34) -4.0 (age 35) -3.0 (age 36) -1.0 (age 37) -1.0 (age 38) -1.0 (age 39) cap hit = 4.0 Now he’s making the assumption that Horcoff would retire early (thats a safer bet with the Wings deals as they’re longer). So even say he plays an extra year (7 instead of the 6 he has in actuality) - thats a 4.0 cap hit for 7 years instead of 5.5 for 6. Then he retires with 2 years left on his deal, and the 4.0 cap hit is wiped off the books (because he signed the deal before he turned 35), and Horcoff still receives all of the $ he’s going to recieve anyways. Make sense?

well said

Avatar
#215 Lofty
May 04 2009, 06:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I wanna know how much time Ogden brother spends on here? If your looking for a job on the nation you should probably learn to write first.

Avatar
#216 David S
May 04 2009, 06:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

You know, it's too bad the Team 1260 takes so long to put up podcasts because Gregor had Brownlee on today discussing this very topic. I only heard the last ten mintes or so, but it sounded like they were really getting into it. By the time the podcast is posted, you guys will be onto figuring out how we can package Moreau and Staios for Malkin and a first round pick. ;)

Avatar
#217 David S
May 04 2009, 06:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

"minutes" *cringe*

Avatar
#218 RossCreek
May 04 2009, 08:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ David S: Both basically said they would move Hemsky in the right deal. Gregor's more hesitant to move him and said he wouldn't make this particular deal (Hemsky for Brown & Greene). Brownlee not only said this proposal "has legs" as far as he's concerned, but that he's make the deal. Will Fraser agreed with Robin, and both said that getting Matt Greene back (as he's the type of D the Oil lack) tips the scales too much not too make the deal. The opinions on this subject vary greatly, not only on here but also on Gregor's show among callers * emailers. Now your caught up.

Personally, I've stated its worth taking a longer look at it before outright dismissing it. I think if the packages on either side could be slightly altered (by adding more components to the deal, but keeping those 3 names involved), its a deal that would be too hard not too make for me. Keep in mind, local fans often seem to really, really overvalue some talents of the local teams (not just in Edmonton), and don't know nearly enough about the player(s) being proposed coming in (aside from what the stats column tells u). People that outright dismiss the deal as stupid or retarded obviously have a slight positive bias toward Hemsky and/or a slight negative bias toward Brown. He's definately a talent.

Not sure their quite comparibles statistically speaking, but it would be like saying Paul Kariya or Keith Tkachuk (off the top of my head, thats just what flew in - there's probably a better example).

Avatar
#219 kingsblade
May 04 2009, 08:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother wrote:

What other attempt is even possible? If you don’t understand that more teams bidding = higher prices then theirs not likely any other way to explain it.

What you don't understand is that I don't disagree with your basic premise. All I did was explain why one particular argument made was no good and you got defensive and decided to repeat yourself.

That being said, here are some fairly valid reasons why waiting until after July 1 does not automatically = more money, regardless of your enthusiasm for telling us that it does:.

1. Most players have agents whose job is to make sure their players get at least market value. If a team is offering a guy 5 and his agent thinks he can get 6.5 then the guy is never signing for 5 unless he has a personal reason to do so, like not wanting to leave a team he likes. Agents also have very very personal motives behind pushing for free agency as well because they get all of their money for the entire contract up front.

Most people drastically underestimate the importance of agents in the process.

2. There are not 30 teams bidding. The number of teams bidding is limited to those who need that player and those who can afford that player. Rarely do players get true offers from more than 4 or 5 teams. This point in combination with the first makes it easier for agents to know what their players can get on the market.

3. There are other factors, such as the changing cap values. The deals need ot be taken in context or your generalization has no meaning. Lets look at Ryan Smythe. He got more as a UFA than he was offered previously by the Oilers. Why? Not because of a bidding war, he got more because the cap when up more than expected and now teams could make room to pay him 6.25. Remember Lowe's admission that he would have signed him if he knew how much the cap was going up?

What happens if the cap goes down? I will guarantee you that if the cap goes down significantly that there will be free agents this year who turned down contracts from their current team only to find out that they are not going to get that much on the market.

4. Teams do not operate in a vacuum. GMs know what their player is likely to get as a free agent and if he wants to keep him then he will have to pay it to him, unless he can convince the player that a discount is in order. Without the discount he only time players get more money as a free agent is either when the cap goes up or when the GM wont offer market value because he can't or doesn't want to.

That's what I've got right now without actually putting any though into it, but my point is that you cannot generalize like that. As I said before, I actually do agree that contracts tend to go up after July 1, but not at all because of your magnificently generalized theory of more teams bidding = more money. I also do not necessarily agree that the trend we are talking about applies this season.

This is the part where you tell me again how I "don't understand" and repeat yourself some more.

Avatar
#220 kingsblade
May 04 2009, 08:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RossCreek wrote:

People that outright dismiss the deal as stupid or retarded obviously have a slight positive bias toward Hemsky and/or a slight negative bias toward Brown. He’s definately a talent.

That isn't exactly the most even-handed way to tell people they don't know what they are talking about because of their biases.

Why is it so impossible to assess the situation and decide it is a bad trade without an "obvious" bias?

I love how thinking differently than you is so wrong that it must obviously be biased.

Avatar
#221 RossCreek
May 04 2009, 08:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ kingsblade: I guess my point is that if people like Robin Brownlee or Jim Matheson think this could make some sense, then it shouldn't be dismissed so easily. That is not to say that they (or any other media member) know all, but I think they'd have a better "pulse" on things than most of us.

For the record, I never said that I would definately make the deal. I just said I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it because it would require some more thought. Is it close? Yes. Some people have argued why would LA move Brown for Hemsky straight up, nevermind Brown & Greene both for Hemsky. Would I make the deal? Maybe. It's worth talking/thinking about.

Never did I say that

thinking differently than me is so wrong that it must obviously be biased.
Avatar
#222 heavyd
May 04 2009, 09:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

What's Hemsky worth to other teams?

Avatar
#223 Homie
May 04 2009, 09:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RossCreek wrote:

Not even gonna comment on the “deal”, but does the cap hits work out? I think not. The Pens would be adding 9.6 without naming a D-man (15 ish with a D-man) and they’d be subtracting 8.7 (and lose the best player in the deal who also just happens to be a top 5 in the game). Doesn’t work out.

Why? The Pens have a pile of cap room next year. Not every trade needs to be equal on both sides in terms of cap space, especially when one side is getting more players than the other. If the d-man is one of Gilbert/Grebs, the cap hit is far less than 15.

I just can't see the Crosby/Malkin thing working out long term due to egos, similarity of skillsets, etc. At some point they will trade one of them for someone who can check and score a bit.

Avatar
#224 RossCreek
May 04 2009, 09:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Homie wrote:

the cap hit is far less than 15.

If you call 13.6 far less. Homie wrote:

Why? The Pens have a pile of cap room next year.

How? - 46.835 committed to 14 players for next season. - Malkin jumps from 3.8342 this past season to 8.7 next season. - Staal jumps from 2.2 to 4.0.

They don't have piles of cap room.

Avatar
#225 Ogden Brother
May 04 2009, 09:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Lofty wrote:

I wanna know how much time Ogden brother spends on here? If your looking for a job on the nation you should probably learn to write first.

Ha-ha, Cranky little guy.

Avatar
#226 Ogden Brother
May 04 2009, 10:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ kingsblade:

Obviously their are exceptions to every rule, but the spirit of the debate was that you typically get your own players cheaper then you attract new players.

Avatar
#227 Archaeologuy
May 04 2009, 10:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother wrote:

Obviously their are exceptions to every rule, but the spirit of the debate was that you typically get your own players cheaper then you attract new players.

And we are right back to "except for the Oilers"

Avatar
#228 Ogden Brother
May 04 2009, 11:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Archaeologuy wrote:

Ogden Brother wrote: Obviously their are exceptions to every rule, but the spirit of the debate was that you typically get your own players cheaper then you attract new players. And we are right back to “except for the Oilers”

You ask who was doing it:

"Really? which teams are re-signing their best players for well below market value? Because the Oilers arent."

I answerd.

Consider it a premium the team has to pay for being the (one of?) least desirable places to play.

Avatar
#229 Archaeologuy
May 04 2009, 11:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

ugh. I dont remember how we got to this, but it all started because some clown at the Journal came up with a hair-brained plan to get rid of the best player on the team and in return the Oilers would get a 2nd tier offensive talent and a 2nd pairing defenseman. And despite the fact that the Oilers have plenty of second tier talent and an abundance of defensemen people like Brownlee think its a wicked great idea. Why? No one is certain, but there are obviously people who are upset at Hemsky for not being good enough to single handedly carry the team to the promised land. I wont argue about contracts anymore except to say that Hemsky's is hands down the best on the team and anyone willing to move it to get an obvious downgrade in production and talent is dead wrong.

Avatar
#230 Jonathan Willis
May 05 2009, 12:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Archaeologuy wrote:

it all started because some clown at the Journal came up with a hair-brained plan to get rid of the best player on the team and in return the Oilers would get a 2nd tier offensive talent and a 2nd pairing defenseman.

That's assuming that it originated in Matheson's brain and he didn't pick it up from someone else - not a leap I'd care to make at this point.

Avatar
#231 Ogden Brother
May 05 2009, 08:49AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Jonathan Willis wrote:

Archaeologuy wrote: it all started because some clown at the Journal came up with a hair-brained plan to get rid of the best player on the team and in return the Oilers would get a 2nd tier offensive talent and a 2nd pairing defenseman. That’s assuming that it originated in Matheson’s brain and he didn’t pick it up from someone else - not a leap I’d care to make at this point.

You know the more I look at it, the better the deal looks. Talking about contracts, Browns is a slick deal as well. 2 extra seasons at almost a million below Hemsky.

ie 5 more years at 3.2

vs

3 more years at 4.1 and then 2 years at 6.5?

I'd like to sweeten the deal a little further ie either dump some "bad salary" or swap firsts as well (or something like that).

Avatar
#232 Chris
May 05 2009, 08:54AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RossCreek wrote:

What I think he’s trying to say is that if Horc had signed a deal with an additional 3 years @ 1 mil per (his example), then it would have lowered his cap hit. Then if Horc were to retire with those 3 years left, all he’s missing out on is 3 mil, and the Oil wipe that cap hit off the books completely. Players that physically sign a contract after they’ve turned 35 would see theur cap hit remain even if they retired.

I was listening to Stauffer on the Team when the story of Horcoff's contract extension broke. Horcoff came on the show and made it very clear that he didn't consider this extension with the Olers to be his LAST contract. Stauffer asked Horc (the Oilers NHLPA palyers Rep) why he didn't test free agency... Horc said he may go that route "next contract".

Avatar
#233 Archaeologuy
May 05 2009, 08:55AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Jonathan Willis: I heard Brownlee yesterday say that he asked Matheson if there was anything to the story, but Matheson told him there wasnt, it was just him floating stuff out there.

I cant imagine why the Oilers would make the trade, there would have to be so many more offers for Ales Hemsky that would make more sense.

Avatar
#234 Jonathan Willis
May 05 2009, 11:00AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Archaeologuy wrote:

I heard Brownlee yesterday say that he asked Matheson if there was anything to the story, but Matheson told him there wasnt, it was just him floating stuff out there.

Thanks; somehow I missed that.

Avatar
#235 Chris
May 05 2009, 01:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

The other night Rob Brown chatted with Tencer about Matheson's proposal... Rob seemed to think such a trade would be a bad deal for L.A....

As a fan I always find it difficult to be objective. Hemsky is a good Oiler... I like the Oilers...therfore I like Hemsky. I would hate for the Oilers to lose Hemmer's talent; but I sure like the way Dustin Brown plays the game.

Avatar
#236 Ogden Brother
May 05 2009, 01:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

The other night Rob Brown chatted with Tencer about Matheson’s proposal… Rob seemed to think such a trade would be a bad deal for L.A…. As a fan I always find it difficult to be objective. Hemsky is a good Oiler… I like the Oilers…therfore I like Hemsky. I would hate for the Oilers to lose Hemmer’s talent; but I sure like the way Dustin Brown plays the game.

Brown would be a fan fav here within a couple of games.

I bet Kings fans would be wondering why they'd trade their 24 year old captain locked up for 5 more years on a sweet heart 3.2 contract for a flaky Euro that doesn't hit and loses the puck on a regular basis.

Avatar
#237 Archaeologuy
May 05 2009, 01:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother wrote:

24 year old captain locked up for 5 more years on a sweet heart 3.2 contract for a flaky Euro that doesn’t hit and loses the puck on a regular basis.

until they realise that Flaky euro can take more of a beating than any other high end forward on the team and can put up nearly a point a game without anyone's help.

Avatar
#238 Ogden Brother
May 05 2009, 02:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Archaeologuy wrote:

Ogden Brother wrote: 24 year old captain locked up for 5 more years on a sweet heart 3.2 contract for a flaky Euro that doesn’t hit and loses the puck on a regular basis. until they realise that Flaky euro can take more of a beating than any other high end forward on the team and can put up nearly a point a game without anyone’s help.

And that's the misconseptions of fan perception... just they would likely be underating Hemsky and overated Brown, we are likely overating Hemsky and underating Brown.

Avatar
#239 Chris
May 05 2009, 02:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Archaeologuy: Sorry I with Ogden Brother on this one... Hemsky may have more talent than Dustin Brown... but it's pretty telling when a hockey guy like Rod Brown (Who gets paid by the Oilers to do PPV analysis) thinks the proposed deal would be bad for L.A. Dustin brings something to the ice EVERY shift...and that makes the whole team better.

Avatar
#240 HockeyBuff
May 05 2009, 03:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Ogden Brother: Hemsky plays riskier then he should and is not scared of the rough stuff. Also he has the best hands on the team and to say he loses the puck all the time is crazy talk.

Avatar
#241 Archaeologuy
May 05 2009, 03:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Chris: Its bad for both teams, Greene is one of the FEW plus players on the Kings and is all kinds of tough. Brown is big energy, big heart, and middle talent.

Hemsky is an elite point producer (40th in NHL for points per game) on a team that has no other elite forwrads.

Oilers lose the only consistently good offensive Forward on the team and gain a second tier talent who has only put up ok points while playing with Kopitar and Frolov.

Kings lose their Captain and Asst Captain; A forward who brings physicality every night and their toughest most responsible Dman, and they gain another skilled forward that they dont need considering they have Kopitar and Frolov.

So the trade is done now and the Kings lose the heart and soul that drove the team (right into the ground might I add), and the Oilers are now even less capable of scoring. Brown scored 25ish goals playing with Kopitar and Frolov, now his linemates are Horcoff and Penner. Does he even hit 20?

Bad deal. Is Hemsky over-rated? Maybe, but I'll take his near point per game over Brown's physicality.

Avatar
#242 Ogden Brother
May 05 2009, 03:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ HockeyBuff:

I was speaking as a Kings fan.

Avatar
#243 Archaeologuy
May 05 2009, 03:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

What I cant believe is that people are even considering the move because Hemsky was literally the lone bright spot at the forward position all year. There are SO MANY other areas to improve upon that it is ridiculous. Is O'Sullivan and his 2.9 mill contract going to be here? Will Horc continue to drag the top line down? Can Penner react better under a coach that doesnt hate his consistent goal scoring? Whats happening with Nilsson? Who will Centre the 3rd line? Will the kids naturally improve?

People's memories are so fickle. Hemsky put up 9 points in the last 10 games while the Oilers were trying to make the playoffs but the rest of the team disappears and HE is the one fans are turning on. Everyone wants to blame the guy who wanted to be the go to guy for not producing when it mattered, except HE DID. The problem was no matter how many times he fed Horc the puck, IT WAS HORC BEING FED THE PUCK. Hemsky was almost a point a game playing with a guy who earned the nickname Whifcoff for Puck's sake. Consider where your Ire ought to be directed, because it shouldnt be towards the best player on the team.

Avatar
#244 HockeyBuff
May 05 2009, 03:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Archaeologuy: I agree. Get Hemmer some help. I will add that Roli was a bright spot the last half of the year and without him we would be getting Tavares first in the draft. Damn you Roli!! (in hindsight)

Avatar
#245 Ogden Brother
May 05 2009, 03:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Archaeologuy:

No one is turning on him, but for the right deal, everyone is (or should be) available.

Avatar
#246 Archaeologuy
May 05 2009, 03:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Ogden Brother: This isnt even CLOSE to being the right deal for Hemsky, though i agree with your premise.

Avatar
#247 Jonathan Willis
May 05 2009, 04:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

Hemsky may have more talent than Dustin Brown… but it’s pretty telling when a hockey guy like Rod Brown (Who gets paid by the Oilers to do PPV analysis) thinks the proposed deal would be bad for L.A.

You know Mike Milbury is way ahead of Rob Brown in the analysis world, right? Well, once upon a time he thought that Luongo and Jokinen for Parrish and Kvasha would be GOOD for the Islanders...

Point being that just because the talking head said it doesn't mean it's true.

Comments are closed for this article.