Taylor & Tyler: Tambellini should pitch his brains out to Peter Chiarelli

Robin Brownlee
June 10 2010 09:44PM

TORONTO - APRIL 13: Edmonton Oilers GM Steve Tambellini awaits the announcement for the first overall pick during the NHL Draft Lottery Drawing at the TSN Studio April 13, 2010 in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (Photo by Abelimages / Getty Images for NHL)

It's not often a team with the second overall pick in the NHL Entry Draft has a reasonable chance to win now like the Boston Bruins do, and that's reason enough why Steve Tambellini should be all over Peter Chiarelli like a bad haircut.

But, thanks to Brian Burke and the Phil Kessel trade, the Bruins are a team that's already pretty good -- 91 points this season, 116 in 2008-09 and 94 in 2007-08 -- and a team that holds second pick in Los Angeles, right after the Oilers pick first (and take Tyler Seguin).

Given the make-up of the Bruins, who have a core of players entering or still in the prime of their careers, would Chiarelli be better off hanging on to his selection and taking Taylor Hall, as he has already suggested he might, or is it in his best interests to at least listen when Tambellini takes up residence in his ear?

If the conversation starts with Tambellini offering, say, Ales Hemsky and Gilbert Brule or Dustin Penner for his pick and a Seguin-Hall daily-double, is there reason to keep talking?

If I'm the GM of the Bruins, if I think my team might be a Stanley Cup contender with Hemsky and Penner, and if I'm willing to admit gainful employment is a consideration, the answer is yes.

Why wouldn't Chiarelli listen?

Here and now

Before you laugh off the possibility of Tambellini swinging a deal to land Seguin and Hall, ask yourself this: will the Bruins be a better team over the next two seasons with Hall in the line-up or with Hemsky and Penner? Yes? No? Not sure? If yes, might the Bruins be good enough before Hall turns 21 to win a Stanley Cup with Hemsky and Penner?

Before you trot out cliches about "mortgaging the future" and the like, remember, that kind of talk takes on a different tone if you're walking in Chiarelli's shoes, as opposed to spouting platitudes as a fan or writer.

Talk about the future is fine, but the future can be somewhat more immediate in a city like Beantown that hasn't sipped champagne from the Stanley Cup since 1972. Dale Tallon damn sure had a hand in building the Chicago Blackhawks, but he wasn't around to enjoy the parade.

Is it a longshot that Tambellini will be able to convince Chiarelli to part with this pick? Duh. Of course it is. Chiarelli will have a line up of eager suitors trying to separate him from a crack at Hall with attractive offers. Then, there's the optics of giving up a potential franchise player for a shot to win here and now -- with no guarantee it'll play out that way.

Of course, it's not nearly as hard a sell if the Bruins win something before Chiarelli starts losing bits and pieces of his roster, as is inevitable under a salary cap, and Hall becomes the stud people project him to be.

From the Oilers end of things, Tambellini won't get the answers to any of those questions unless he asks. He damn sure better -- and it should be Plan A before he settles on trying to squeeze something out of Chiarelli to lay-off Hall if he can't hit the home run.

What's to lose?

I've already written why I'd offer up Hemsky. I'm not sure he'll be here after his contract expires in two seasons, despite his candlelight dinner with owner Daryl Katz after the season ended. I'm not convinced Penner will re-sign in Edmonton, either.

So, I start this what-if scenario with them, but feel free to change or add names you think might make a deal possible. If that includes taking a hummer contract back, like that of Michael Ryder -- the Bruins already have over $46 million committed to salaries next season, so the cap is a consideration -- so be it. Tweak it however you like.

The point is, there shouldn't be anybody near untouchable on the Oilers roster, not after four straight years out of the playoffs. Tambellini isn't giving up the chance to win something in the next two or three years by parting with Hemsky, Penner, Brule or whoever.

But, if you add a combination of those names to Marc Savard, Patrice Bergeron, David Krejci, Blake Wheeler, Milan Lucic, Zdeno Chara. Johnny Boychuk and Tuukka Rask, might that put the Bruins over the top?

If I'm Tambellini, I'm asking Chiarelli that question in Los Angeles, and I'm throwing offers at him in an attempt to get Seguin and Hall until the mini-bar is empty and he tells me to get the hell out of his room.

What's to lose?

Know your audience

There's some sharp fans out there, but there's a handful of dullards with slack jaws and walnut-sized brains in the mix who keep things interesting by providing laugh-out-loud material.

Every Sunday, Jim Matheson serves up one of the best reads anywhere with Hockey World in the Journal. Matheson, an Elmer Ferguson Award winner -- he's in the writer's wing of the Hockey Hall of Fame -- got people talking with his latest offering last weekend.

Among other things, Matheson asked if the Oilers might make a pitch for Chicago's Kris Versteeg with the 31st pick at the Entry Draft, if they might be interested in free agent defenceman John Scott and if San Jose might be interested in Sheldon Souray.

Matheson's what-ifs and speculation drew this response by somebody calling himself "Asher" over at HF Boards.

"The more I read these Matheson "speculations" the more he comes off sounding like Eklund. I've often thought a lot of Eklund rumours are created by him sitting down looking at rosters and saying things like, "Gee, Team A could really use a player like the one Team B has that might be available." And then he goes on to create a rumour. I know Matty was writing for Eklund's site a while back... maybe he picked up a few of Eklund's writing habits along the way."

Matty was writing for Eklund a while back? Uh, no. Never has. Never will. That's the wonderful thing about the interweb. Dolts can write stupid stuff that has no foundation in fact and people will read it because it's only a mouse click away, alongside legit offerings from journalists, fans and bloggers who aren't uttering nonsense and lies.

The right stuff

Hall certainly passed his drive-by to Edmonton today with flying colors, saying all the right things.

"I know how crazy this city is for hockey," Hall told reporters at Rexall Place. "I was having lunch at Joey’s and the chef came out and asked me to autograph his apron. People are recognizing me, already. I think it would be pretty cool to play here."

Part of the reason some people are pitching Seguin as a better fit for the Oilers is that he's a centre, while Hall has played primarily left wing while leading the Windsor Spitfires to two straight Memorial Cups.

"I’d be very comfortable playing centre," Hall said. "In Windsor we had a lot of true centres who were better there than on the wing, so I moved over.

"When we had injuries this year, I moved back, and I played half the year I was at centre. It’s still hockey, it’s about winning battles in the offensive zone."

Seguin will stop in Edmonton for a look-see next week.

Listen to Robin Brownlee Wednesdays and Thursdays from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. on the Jason Gregor Show on TEAM 1260.

Aceb4a1816f5fa09879a023b07d1a9b4
A sports writer since 1983, including stints at The Edmonton Journal and The Sun 1989-2007, I happily co-host the Jason Gregor Show on TSN 1260 twice a week and write when so inclined. Have the best damn lawn on the internet. Most important, I am Sam's dad. Follow me on Twitter at Robin_Brownlee. Or don't.
Avatar
#251 Archaeologuy
June 13 2010, 09:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

So you also would rather trade our first line players to move up ?

You mean the guy that is reported to be on the first plane out of town after his contract is up? Plus, this isnt a question of moving up into the top 2, you said you'd move him to get into the top 6. Uh, last time I checked Gagner was top 6 just a couple years ago.

You're willing to keep a guy that isnt going to be here in 3 years over a guy that is the 2nd best player in his draft class and is just scratching the surface of his potential at the age of 20.

Personally, I dont think the Oilers will be trading Hemsky, Penner, or Gagner at the draft; but if they trade Gagner for anything short of Boston's pick then Tambellini should be fired on the spot.

Avatar
#252 captainnapalm
June 13 2010, 10:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Forgive me for not reading 250 comments to see if this was said already, but what would happen if the Oilers picked Hall first overall, making the second pick of Seguin less attractive to the Bruins and probably more willing to deal for it?

Avatar
#253 Butters
June 13 2010, 11:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Hemsky is a good contract for the Oilers. That is to say, he is underpaid. He and his agent will be looking to make up for lost money when his contract is up. Unless the Oilers back up the money truck, his best strategy is to let the free agent market negotiate for him. If the Oilers are not prepared to overpay him they had better be prepared to trade him. Not neccessarily in June but maybe Boston bites.

Also I think the Oilers should keep their eye out for Jack Campbell. He might be the next Al Montoya mind you, but the re-build is going to need some more goalie prospects I think.

Avatar
#254 Wanyes bastard child
June 14 2010, 12:06AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

I don't mind trading gagner to move up in the draft. As long as it is in the top 6 picks.

Because no other quote would say it best...

http://www.sheep.physicsisbroken.com/Facepalm.jpg

And because it will make David S laugh ;)

Avatar
#255 David S
June 14 2010, 12:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Wanyes bastard child wrote:

Because no other quote would say it best...

http://www.sheep.physicsisbroken.com/Facepalm.jpg

And because it will make David S laugh ;)

Props to you sir!

Avatar
#256 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 07:47AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Archaeologuy

I see where your coming from. I just don't believe the reports from brownlee etc on hemsky not signing here. When is the last time mathesons rumors have been true? I think upgrading your prospects will help the rebuild. As you aware I'm not big on Gagner and he has yet to sign a long term contract. Plus other GMs will be asking for young players will potential not are spare parts

Avatar
#257 Bob Cob
June 14 2010, 08:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Heres an idea, how about a new article!!

Avatar
#258 madjam
June 14 2010, 08:54AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
David S wrote:

We sucked this year with an AHL lineup and some people still want to bring in more prospects.

*shakes head*

Meanwhile, in the real world we still have to play 82 games next year against NHL teams. Unlike internet fans the people that actually go to games and spend untold thousands for seasons seats will expect a better showing than the 09-10 trainwreck. That isn't going to happen with a bunch of 18 year-olds getting smashed into oblivion by real NHL players.

Sam is a gamer and has nowhere to go but up. I bet he hits 60 easy next year if he has Penner as a linemate for the entire year. Penner, Gagner and Hall? Dare to dream Arnold. Dare to dream.

Agreed . With 15 still unsigned i wonder what Tams will do about them before or after/during the draft ? Just how many incumbent players might be requesting trades ? Is Tams waiting to see what Gags and Cogs might fetch the RFA route before trying to sign them ?

More time keeps rolling by with no clear picture of whats happening with many veterans, or intentions/directions in draft beyond first pick . Lots of conjecture , but little content in direction they are headed .

Nice to fantasize what they might do , but i'm wondering if they're just doing the same with little to no plan in place that is /can be put into practice and not just talk ?

Matheson appears to bring out the most , but the names he's bringing out don't lead me to believe we are forming anything more than a bad bottom feeder again next season . Will Hall, Svensson and maybe Eberle/ Omark be enough to appease the Oiler fans if our goaltending and defence is still closer to the tragic side of things ?

Huge gap of balance/talent/skill between our forwards and backend , that will threaten our ability to go on offence once again .

Avatar
#259 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
June 14 2010, 09:04AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Oil_Loc8or

"I think upgrading your prospects will help the rebuild"

You fail to aknowledge that Gagner is only 3 years older then whomever they pick, and that their is a very good chance that whomever they pick is actually a downgrade.

Avatar
#260 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 09:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

You think getting a good dman is a downgrade to a second line center?

Avatar
#261 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 09:11AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Very good chance ? Facts? Gagner has yet to match his rookie year, Oilers need dman, second line centers are easy to get in trades.

Avatar
#262 The Fish
June 14 2010, 09:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Jackie Treehorn wrote:

"Today I'm talking assets? And yesterday. And whenever I've raised the subject before. How else would Tambellini pry the No. 2 pick from Chiarelli? A reacharound?"

ROFL

You are the world's biggest brown noser.

Avatar
#263 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
June 14 2010, 09:21AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Guys taken 4-6 from 2000 to 2005 (propbably too early to judge anyone taken later)

Klesla/Torres/Hartnell//Weiss/Kristov/Koivu//Pitkanen/Whitney/Upshall/Zherdev/Vanek/Michalek

Ladd/Wheeler/Montoya/Pouliot/Price/Brule

I don't see one superstar there

I see 2 stars in Vanek/Koivu

So thiers only 2/18 I'd take hands down over Gagner

2 complete bust (Montoya/Kristov)

Sure we might get the next Vanek/Koivu (or their defensive equivalent)but their also really good odds that we get the next Torres/Zherdev/Montoya/Kristov/Klesla.

Avatar
#264 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
June 14 2010, 09:23AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

You think getting a good dman is a downgrade to a second line center?

I think taking a 50/50 shot to get a good dman is too big of a risk to trade a "2nd line center" for.

It's like cashing in your $500,000 for a chance to win $1,000,000.

Avatar
#265 Archaeologuy
June 14 2010, 09:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

I think taking a 50/50 shot to get a good dman is too big of a risk to trade a "2nd line center" for.

It's like cashing in your $500,000 for a chance to win $1,000,000.

Especially when your "2nd line center" is only 20 years old. Since when is drafting a defenceman a lock?

Avatar
#266 madjam
June 14 2010, 09:41AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Last season our backend was our "Achilles Heel ". Oilers thought it would be just the opposit, and decided to gut that experiment only to make us even worse as it's turning out if Souray goes for little . Maybe fans did not help much by expecting too much from the talent we actually had ?

We are going into next season in a position on the backend that simply cannot be expected to compete with most/all of the backends in our division .

When players cannot reach their own goals they become disgruntled and it effects their game and mentality . No one likes to play under those conditions , not be able to please themselves , their fans , coaches or club . We need a marquee defenceman to start building upon ,as we don't have one now . To me, current players are fast losing faith in organization to get and retain any major marquee talent to build upon .

Our problems are going to manifest despite forward talent we have emerging next season , if we don't make a serious effort to make backend far more competitive than it is now !! We need a lot more than just fillins and fringe players back there - for even the likes of Souray, Viz and Grebs was not enough for last season !

Avatar
#267 David S
June 14 2010, 09:58AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

Very good chance ? Facts? Gagner has yet to match his rookie year, Oilers need dman, second line centers are easy to get in trades.

You need to look at more than points. His "underlying numbers" as the stats guys like to say have improved dramatically. This on a team full of fail.

Avatar
#268 Archaeologuy
June 14 2010, 09:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@madjam

Grebeshkov and Gilbert took a big step backwards last season. It wasnt until the last quarter of the season that Gilbert started playing like the team thought he was capable of. Smid and Souray were both injured for quite a bit last season, and that lead to Chorney and Strudwick playing way too much.

Yes, the club is going to be weak on the backend unless Tambellini makes some trades or goes after free agents. I fully expect him to fill in capable 4-6 defensemen in the summer. If the team goes to camp with Chorney in the top 6 again we're screwed.

Avatar
#269 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
June 14 2010, 10:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
madjam wrote:

Last season our backend was our "Achilles Heel ". Oilers thought it would be just the opposit, and decided to gut that experiment only to make us even worse as it's turning out if Souray goes for little . Maybe fans did not help much by expecting too much from the talent we actually had ?

We are going into next season in a position on the backend that simply cannot be expected to compete with most/all of the backends in our division .

When players cannot reach their own goals they become disgruntled and it effects their game and mentality . No one likes to play under those conditions , not be able to please themselves , their fans , coaches or club . We need a marquee defenceman to start building upon ,as we don't have one now . To me, current players are fast losing faith in organization to get and retain any major marquee talent to build upon .

Our problems are going to manifest despite forward talent we have emerging next season , if we don't make a serious effort to make backend far more competitive than it is now !! We need a lot more than just fillins and fringe players back there - for even the likes of Souray, Viz and Grebs was not enough for last season !

Theirs lots of time to address the backend. If they haven't brought in at least 1-2 2nd pairing guys by mid July, then I'll be worried.

Avatar
#270 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 10:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Archaeologuy

Did I write lock ? 20 years old has nothing to do with it since it's a rebuild. We need depth on the back end. They have built some depth upfront. I did write before that it doesn't have to be Gagner. But I feel that's what the GMs would like.

Avatar
#271 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
June 14 2010, 10:21AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

Did I write lock ? 20 years old has nothing to do with it since it's a rebuild. We need depth on the back end. They have built some depth upfront. I did write before that it doesn't have to be Gagner. But I feel that's what the GMs would like.

How does 20 years old have nothing to do with it? 20 has everything to do with it.

I think the issue people have is trading one of the few knowns we have for another unknown.

I agree that we need to shift some assets from the forwards to the defense, and would have no issues trading Gagner for his defensive equivalant... say an under 25 dman that's already proven to be a 2nd pairing guy, that still has the potential upside and pedigree to be a first pairing guy. (Jack Johnson for example)

Avatar
#272 Archaeologuy
June 14 2010, 10:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@Oil_Loc8or

I think you're missing the point completely.

Gagner is the best young player on the team. There is no rebuilding if you're giving up your best young players for 6th overall picks. Yes, I know you said it doesnt HAVE TO BE Gagner, but that statement still means you think it's acceptable to move him for the 6th.

They have depth upfront because the youth movement is being lead by Gagner. The Oilers dont have depth in the middle. They do though have 4 prospects at defence in the AHL in Petry, Plante, Peckham, and Chorney. So from where I sit, they need Gagner a lot more than another defenceman who will take at least 3 years to develop.

Avatar
#273 cableguy - 2nd Tier Fan
June 14 2010, 10:41AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Archaeologuy wrote:

I think you're missing the point completely.

Gagner is the best young player on the team. There is no rebuilding if you're giving up your best young players for 6th overall picks. Yes, I know you said it doesnt HAVE TO BE Gagner, but that statement still means you think it's acceptable to move him for the 6th.

They have depth upfront because the youth movement is being lead by Gagner. The Oilers dont have depth in the middle. They do though have 4 prospects at defence in the AHL in Petry, Plante, Peckham, and Chorney. So from where I sit, they need Gagner a lot more than another defenceman who will take at least 3 years to develop.

you are so sexy when you are right

***squeeee***

Avatar
#274 VMR
June 14 2010, 11:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

Agreed. Drafting a defenceman wont help the team this year or even in the next 2 or 3 years most likely. Look at Keith in Chicago he was with the team for years before he developed into one of the best players. If we are looking at what the team needs right now then yes defencemen is probably the top priority. The draft table is not where you will get that help. If we're looking for 3 or 4 years down the road then maybe but it's harder to pick who they will be by that time.

Avatar
#275 Jackie Treehorn
June 14 2010, 11:31AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
The Fish wrote:

You are the world's biggest brown noser.

sorry fish, but i thought it was funny.

oh.... you are the world biggest negative nancy

Avatar
#276 Tapdog
June 14 2010, 11:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Jamie wrote:

If I am Tambellini, when Chiarelli finally tells me to bugger off and leave me alone I get on the phone to Scott Howson and target that #4 pick. Columbus definitely is in win now mode and it sounds like the pick is in play, and there is a trade history as well.

If you can get the #4, then you could try to use that to entice Chiarelli to drop down. If Boston is high on one of the defencemen in that next group and we have taken who they want out of Tyler/Taylor then they may be more likely want to deal. Would Riley Nash and a second work?

If Boston really wants to pick at #2 then we take a defenceman that fits in with our core.

Any thought Robin on what Columbus would be looking at and if we would have any parts that may fit?

You are on the right track Jamie! For the Oilers to make a trade with Boston for the #2 pick, this is what it will take to get it closer to completion. I would assume the Bruins will be happy to drop back a couple of slots to get a D-man, if the Oilers are to take Hall.

I would like to see the Oil get both picks too but to offer up Hemsky, Penner and what not is all payroll to the Bruins! Something they cannot take on. Sure, you can offer to take back their crap but does this really make you stronger, by tying up cap space?

Avatar
#277 the Fish's Employer
June 14 2010, 11:47AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I pay the fish to piss people off!!!

Avatar
#278 David S
June 14 2010, 12:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Archaeologuy wrote:

I think you're missing the point completely.

Gagner is the best young player on the team. There is no rebuilding if you're giving up your best young players for 6th overall picks. Yes, I know you said it doesnt HAVE TO BE Gagner, but that statement still means you think it's acceptable to move him for the 6th.

They have depth upfront because the youth movement is being lead by Gagner. The Oilers dont have depth in the middle. They do though have 4 prospects at defence in the AHL in Petry, Plante, Peckham, and Chorney. So from where I sit, they need Gagner a lot more than another defenceman who will take at least 3 years to develop.

Props for that one brief moment of clarity.

Avatar
#279 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
June 14 2010, 12:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Tapdog wrote:

You are on the right track Jamie! For the Oilers to make a trade with Boston for the #2 pick, this is what it will take to get it closer to completion. I would assume the Bruins will be happy to drop back a couple of slots to get a D-man, if the Oilers are to take Hall.

I would like to see the Oil get both picks too but to offer up Hemsky, Penner and what not is all payroll to the Bruins! Something they cannot take on. Sure, you can offer to take back their crap but does this really make you stronger, by tying up cap space?

Absolutely, it does. What's wrong with taking on a short-term cap liability if it stocks up the prospect pool? We're not in Chicago - we're not in a situation where we've got 3 or 4 world-class superstars who are all looking for raises in the same contract year.

The Oil have a ton of cap space to play with, and that's a trade-able commodity just like prospects or roster bodies.

Avatar
#280 The Fish
June 14 2010, 01:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Jackie Treehorn wrote:

sorry fish, but i thought it was funny.

oh.... you are the world biggest negative nancy

I just think there is a little too much a$$ kissing going on in here.

Avatar
#281 Hemmertime
June 14 2010, 01:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
The Fish wrote:

I just think there is a little too much a$$ kissing going on in here.

Translation: This isn't like other internet boards where people argue for the hell of it

Avatar
#282 David S
June 14 2010, 02:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Hemmertime wrote:

Translation: This isn't like other internet boards where people argue for the hell of it

~This isn't like other internet boards where people argue for the hell of it~

Fixed.

Avatar
#283 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 02:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Archaeologuy

When you wrote those names of the defence man did you think they are all NHL caliber dman ? I don't. You think a guy like Gagner isn't replaceble I think he is. Also I wrote in the top 6 not the 6th pick. I'd take brule over gagner from last season. Now go ahead write back on how Gagner has played more NHL games etc.

Avatar
#284 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
June 14 2010, 02:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

When you wrote those names of the defence man did you think they are all NHL caliber dman ? I don't. You think a guy like Gagner isn't replaceble I think he is. Also I wrote in the top 6 not the 6th pick. I'd take brule over gagner from last season. Now go ahead write back on how Gagner has played more NHL games etc.

You keep ignoring the key point. Trading proven commodity (assuming you've got his rights long term) for unproven commodities is poor asset managment.

Avatar
#285 Archaeologuy
June 14 2010, 02:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

When you wrote those names of the defence man did you think they are all NHL caliber dman ? I don't. You think a guy like Gagner isn't replaceble I think he is. Also I wrote in the top 6 not the 6th pick. I'd take brule over gagner from last season. Now go ahead write back on how Gagner has played more NHL games etc.

So the crux of your argument here is that the 6th overall pick is going to be an NHL calibre defenseman; Something you cannot possibly be sure about.

The 4 guys I mentioned have been honing their skills in the minors and college, Chorney even had time in the NHL this year, and they arent ready. But you're saying the 6th overall pick this year will not only be ready but be comparable in value to a 20 year old centre who has moved from the 4th to the 1st line in 3 years?

Take a time out and think about this for a bit.

You dont have to pick Brule over Gagner, and you shouldnt even if you had to. You can have both. You do not need to get rid of either. You SHOULDNT get rid of either. Rebuilding = Stockpiling youth, not recycling youth.

Avatar
#286 Tapdog
June 14 2010, 02:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things wrote:

Absolutely, it does. What's wrong with taking on a short-term cap liability if it stocks up the prospect pool? We're not in Chicago - we're not in a situation where we've got 3 or 4 world-class superstars who are all looking for raises in the same contract year.

The Oil have a ton of cap space to play with, and that's a trade-able commodity just like prospects or roster bodies.

I think you are missing my point!

Why take on "Cap" if it can be avoided! Make a deal sending player, prospects and/or picks to Columbus for the #4 pick, use that pick to tempt Boston on the #2.

Using Cap Geeks numbers the Oil have $14,248,333. of cap space. Seeing that 3.85 of that will be used up signing Hall or Seguin leaving you $10,398,333. You have 8 forwards, 5 defensemen and 1 goalie under contract!.

Spend away my friend and see how much you have left!

I know there is salary to be moved out still but it certainly means there is salary coming back, ie: Souray!

Avatar
#287 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 03:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Archaeologuy wrote:

So the crux of your argument here is that the 6th overall pick is going to be an NHL calibre defenseman; Something you cannot possibly be sure about.

The 4 guys I mentioned have been honing their skills in the minors and college, Chorney even had time in the NHL this year, and they arent ready. But you're saying the 6th overall pick this year will not only be ready but be comparable in value to a 20 year old centre who has moved from the 4th to the 1st line in 3 years?

Take a time out and think about this for a bit.

You dont have to pick Brule over Gagner, and you shouldnt even if you had to. You can have both. You do not need to get rid of either. You SHOULDNT get rid of either. Rebuilding = Stockpiling youth, not recycling youth.

I wrote in the top 6 not the 6th overall pick. Yeah chorney is played really good. I see you took the time to list our dman but not forwards since we have more depth at forward. It's not possible that a player picked in the top 6 gets as good as Gagner ? You would rather trade proven top 6 forwards in hemsky and penner ? Cause brownlee and mathesons wrote articles about what they guess will happen three years down the road.

Avatar
#288 Archaeologuy
June 14 2010, 03:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

I wrote in the top 6 not the 6th overall pick. Yeah chorney is played really good. I see you took the time to list our dman but not forwards since we have more depth at forward. It's not possible that a player picked in the top 6 gets as good as Gagner ? You would rather trade proven top 6 forwards in hemsky and penner ? Cause brownlee and mathesons wrote articles about what they guess will happen three years down the road.

The talk of trading either Penner or Hemsky begins and ends with the 2nd pick overall. After #2 its over.

And since we're talking about our wicked depth at forward, please list all our centremen by depth. All of them, and please stick to centrement that actually play that position.

If #2 overall is off the table then I would prefer to keep both Penner and Hemsky. My hope would be that the influx of talented wingers convinces at least one of them to sign another contract with us.

Avatar
#289 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 03:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

You keep ignoring the key point. Trading proven commodity (assuming you've got his rights long term) for unproven commodities is poor asset managment.

Most trades involving draft picks involve proven commodity. Also you think Gagner is a point a game player. May be if robin wrote a article on how Gagner won't resign long term you would agree. If we are rebuilding it's going to take time and tough choices to make the team better. I understand we don't have much depth at center but Sam hasn't been exactly that good on the faceoffs dot

Avatar
#290 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 03:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Archaeologuy

I was talking about the top two dman in the draft. You think our dman in the system are equal to them ? Centers that win draws or a guy that takes faceoffs?

Avatar
#291 Archaeologuy
June 14 2010, 03:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Oil_Loc8or

The top 2 dmen in the draft would mean top 4, not top 6. No, I dont think our guys in the system are equal to them, I also dont think the top 2 are greater than Gagner. The Oilers dont need defencemen nearly as much as they need centres, and they dont need defencemen at the expense of the young centres we DO have.

Avatar
#292 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
June 14 2010, 03:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

Most trades involving draft picks involve proven commodity. Also you think Gagner is a point a game player. May be if robin wrote a article on how Gagner won't resign long term you would agree. If we are rebuilding it's going to take time and tough choices to make the team better. I understand we don't have much depth at center but Sam hasn't been exactly that good on the faceoffs dot

You keep bringing up the same points that have already been addressed.

Avatar
#293 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 04:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Archaeologuy wrote:

The top 2 dmen in the draft would mean top 4, not top 6. No, I dont think our guys in the system are equal to them, I also dont think the top 2 are greater than Gagner. The Oilers dont need defencemen nearly as much as they need centres, and they dont need defencemen at the expense of the young centres we DO have.

We don't know the draft order. It's also possible if the GM feels like you do we get even more on return. I also think it's possible for any forward draft in the top 6 this year could ,COULD put up 50 points after three years in the NHL.

Avatar
#294 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 04:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

Who addressed ? You ok. You think Sam in a proven player and none of the guys drafted in the top 6 will ever be as good as as him. He will get 90 points in a year. And is improving and have stats to show it. You think we have good depth on the dline.

Avatar
#295 Archaeologuy
June 14 2010, 04:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

We don't know the draft order. It's also possible if the GM feels like you do we get even more on return. I also think it's possible for any forward draft in the top 6 this year could ,COULD put up 50 points after three years in the NHL.

Do you really think a goalie is going in the top 5 this year?

After Hall and Seguin the best players are defensemen. I will wager money that the order goes F F D D.

I also expect Hall or Seguin to put up more than 50 points in 3 years.

Avatar
#296 Oil Kings 'n' Pretty Things
June 14 2010, 04:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Tapdog wrote:

I think you are missing my point!

Why take on "Cap" if it can be avoided! Make a deal sending player, prospects and/or picks to Columbus for the #4 pick, use that pick to tempt Boston on the #2.

Using Cap Geeks numbers the Oil have $14,248,333. of cap space. Seeing that 3.85 of that will be used up signing Hall or Seguin leaving you $10,398,333. You have 8 forwards, 5 defensemen and 1 goalie under contract!.

Spend away my friend and see how much you have left!

I know there is salary to be moved out still but it certainly means there is salary coming back, ie: Souray!

If you're talking 1 or 2 roster players packing their bags in exchange for the pick, that could free up up to 8MM/yr, plus potential buy-outs in O'Sullivan and Moreau. Consider the fact that they could have had an entire 3rd line for 5MM/yr at the free agent deadline last summer, and I don't think the Oil are as strapped as you think they are.

Avatar
#297 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
June 14 2010, 05:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

Who addressed ? You ok. You think Sam in a proven player and none of the guys drafted in the top 6 will ever be as good as as him. He will get 90 points in a year. And is improving and have stats to show it. You think we have good depth on the dline.

I've showed you the caliber of player that typically gets picked in the 4/5/6 slot. I've shown that theirs a pretty good chance we will be downgrading what we already have.... with very small odds that we get someone substantially better. That is all that matters, but you chose to constantly ignore it.

Avatar
#298 Oil_Loc8or
June 14 2010, 06:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

You listed forwards. I'm talking about getting a good dman. I know we need more centers but feel we should get some dman this draft if they are better then the next bunch. Also I said top 6 which includes the second pick. I think the oilers have as many crappy centers as crappy dman. If Gagner was a bonified number 1 guy I wouldn't think about the trade.

Avatar
#299 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
June 14 2010, 09:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

You listed forwards. I'm talking about getting a good dman. I know we need more centers but feel we should get some dman this draft if they are better then the next bunch. Also I said top 6 which includes the second pick. I think the oilers have as many crappy centers as crappy dman. If Gagner was a bonified number 1 guy I wouldn't think about the trade.

I listed every player taken in the 4/5/6 slot between 2000 and 2005, Dmen included.

Avatar
#300 STEVE D
June 19 2010, 08:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

is this writer on hard drugs.....hemsky for the number 2.....I wouldnt even let my son do that on his VIDEO GAME.........so what your really saying is the bruins traded phil kessel for hemsky.....the oilers came in LAST PLACE ...who wants ANYONE on your roster..do you write these articles to try and make the oiler fans dream.....GET REAL...oilers take hall bruins take seguin....BOTH TEAMS get a future hopefully great player...is there any credibility in edmonton

Comments are closed for this article.