To Whom It May Concern

Lowetide
November 01 2011 07:01AM

There is a growing market for inexpensive forwards who can help move the needle offensively. Detroit, Carolina and possibly Boston, with the list growing daily. Throughout the NHL, the word is out: the goalies are ahead of the snipers and teams are looking for solutions. One of those possible solutions is available via Edmonton.
 

During the RE series this past summer, I detailed why Linus Omark is a player of interest:

  •  By eye and by math he appears to be a real hockey player. A guy like Nilsson looked all world with the puck one minute and then disappeared for the rest of the game. Omark flies sorties every shift. They don't work out all of the time, but there's a tremendous amount of try. He's hard on the puck and works like a bugger. He can stickhandle in a phone booth and can beat people wide and inside. On a team with crazy skill, Omark is his own unique individual. He's his own man, very confident and skilled.

In checking last season's Oiler forwards (not exactly the '75 Habs, but they had talent), Omark scored well in an important discipline:
 

5x5/60 (behind the net) 10-11

  1. Ales Hemsky 2.88
  2. Sam Gagner 1.91
  3. Jordan Eberle 1.79
  4. Linus Omark 1.78
  5. Taylor Hall 1.78
  6. Shawn Horcoff 1.47
  7. Ryan Jones 1.38
  8. Magnus Paajarvi 1.36
  9. Andrew Cogliano 1.33

So far this season, Omark and several others can't get the ball out of the infield (Gagner, Paajarvi are also at nil 5x5). In yesterday's ask Matty, Jim Matheson wrote the following:

  • I don’t think it’s fair to write off Omark, who hasn’t done anything wrong but keeps sitting because of numbers. When Hemsky returns in a week, the Oilers will have to do something with the right-winger Omark, who has National Hockey League skill. Unless I’m reading the collective bargaining agreement incorrectly, if Omark plays 60 NHL games, he has to clear waivers to be sent to the Oklahoma City Barons. He’s was too good for the AHL last season. If they’re caring, they’ll deal him somewhere else. The Carolina Hurricanes are looking for forwards.

Matheson mentions Carolina, but there are several (Boston, Detroit, Winnipeg, etc) NHL teams looking for quality offense. Many of those clubs are cap teams, so will be scouting quality offensive players with low cap hits. Omark is making $875,000, a very reasonable contract. The Oilers don't have a lot of room to make moves with this player, he can opt out and back to Sweden should they try to send him down (he could also accept a demotion).

WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?

My opinion? Omark is perfect Hemsky insurance and the Oilers should find a way to get him back into the lineup. I understand staying the course when the team is winning, and also understand Ales Hemsky is back soon and that will mean someone coming out of the linup--a lineup that already excludes Omark.

If enough wingers have passed Omark on the depth chart, then dealing him is the prudent thing to do; he's not going to sign here to be a HS for the NHL team next year. So, with free agency ahead, what do the Oilers do? I would hope they resolve the Hemsky situation one way or another before the deadline and then trade or elevate Omark based on the Hemsky conclusion.

I don't think Omark makes it to the deadline. Some NHL team is going to acquire a player with impressive skills and a burr under his saddle. He does have some work to do, but I can see a team like Detroit teaching him the things required to stay in the lineup.

I don't think Steve Tambellini gets 100 cents on the dollar. Linus Omark is far more valuable than his original draft number.

C2a6955161684b5e3189319acfa5ebe4
Lowetide has been one of the Oilogosphere's shining lights for over a century. You can check him out here at OilersNation and at lowetide.ca. He is also the host of Lowdown with Lowetide weekday mornings 10-noon on Team 1260.
Avatar
#51 Captain Obvious
November 01 2011, 01:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'm as big an Omark fan as anyone but the Oilers can't put him into the lineup until they lose. Especially since the last game was the best game for anyone he might replace.

My biggest complaint has been that the Oilers have set him up to fail. Well what do you think is going to happen if the Oilers put Omark into a game and then they lose? He becomes the easy fall guy regardless of how he plays. Putting him into the lineup now would be a textbook case of setting someone up to fail.

At the same time they can't trade him because he his real value and his trade value are at huge odds. And so they can't play him and they can't trade him. Well done. The bed is made

Avatar
#52 Naughty
November 01 2011, 01:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Why couldn't Jones replace Petrell on the 4th line??? Pretty similar players to me, and older so press box time would not be a huge issue, i agree he has played very well, but he has done a job jones can do, if you can play checking line against the top oposition and chip in a couple goals, you can throw out more hits and play sparatic 4th line minutes, no doubt in my mind. i would like to have a look at the following:

Kid Line

Horc-Smyth-Gags

MPS-Lander-Omark

Jones-Belanger-Eager

Press Box/Hurt - Hemmer,Pettrell,Hordichuck

When hemsky comes back and either he, or someone else gets hurt in a few games, we have options. You can also move omark MPS and gags around those 2 lines to find the best chemistry.

Avatar
#53 Naughty
November 01 2011, 01:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I await the oilers job offer...

Avatar
#54 stevezie
November 01 2011, 01:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I can't remember the last time I agreed with an article so completely. My ideal scenario would be the Oil convincing Omark to play a quick conditioning stint in the minors, in which he absolutely tears it up and they realize that they are only hurting themselves by not finding a way to get him some NHL ice-time.

@Lowetide You love country lyrics, I think we can both appreciate the relevance of the Rhodes scholar Kristofferson, "My friend you are the only one that you're screwin' when you put down what you don't understand"

Avatar
#55 David S
November 01 2011, 02:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Naughty wrote:

Why couldn't Jones replace Petrell on the 4th line??? Pretty similar players to me, and older so press box time would not be a huge issue, i agree he has played very well, but he has done a job jones can do, if you can play checking line against the top oposition and chip in a couple goals, you can throw out more hits and play sparatic 4th line minutes, no doubt in my mind. i would like to have a look at the following:

Kid Line

Horc-Smyth-Gags

MPS-Lander-Omark

Jones-Belanger-Eager

Press Box/Hurt - Hemmer,Pettrell,Hordichuck

When hemsky comes back and either he, or someone else gets hurt in a few games, we have options. You can also move omark MPS and gags around those 2 lines to find the best chemistry.

Petrell >>> Eager.

Kid Line

Horc-Smyth-Hemsky

MPS-Gagner-Omark

Jones/Petrell-Belanger-Lander(plays wing)

PB/spares - Eager, Hordichuk, Petrell

I think the call is between Jones and Petrell. Although I have to say Petrell is looking better all the time. It all depends on team strategy. Can Hemsky play a defensive role or be an offensive component of a defensively-minded checking line?

But at the end of the day (and like others have said) Omark is Hemsky insurance. Poor guy is going to be in limbo until Hemsky is either signed or dealt.

Avatar
#56 Randy
November 01 2011, 03:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

It's probably not real hard to get Omark into the lineup if they really want to. There are a few possibilities, most of which include Pettrell out and Jones dropping to the 4th line. I think the bigger issue is he is right back out of the lineup in the next couple of games when Hemsky goes in. Trading him is a reasonable option, having him just sit for a lot longer isn't. I know these decisions are not easy, but then if it was pretty much any of us could do it.

C'mon Tambo, time to step up!

Avatar
#57 D-Man
November 01 2011, 03:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

They moved him to wing because he isn't good enough at the moment to make their lineup at center. Long term he is still a center, they are just making room for him, like Seguin last year. They are keeping him up because Howson is desperate for optimism.

They need to start winning immediately and Johansen will not help them win this year. I think they would have to think carefully about a deal offering immediate help.

I've been trying to decide since about this time yesterday if I would offer Hemsky and Gagner for Johansen and a pick.

Gives us a possible future top six that looks something like:

RNH-Hall-Eberle Johansen-MPS-Omark.

Not as good today but pretty darn good tomorrow. Trying to shift strength at wing a bit towards younger healthier strength up the middle.

The other guy who's star has been unfairly fading slightly is Evander Kane. He scored 2 last night so things may be turning around, but he's been in the doghouse this season so I've been wondering what the price would be for him.

Hemsky and Gagner are somewhat proven commodities... Johansen has only played 10 games in the NHL... You're giving up way too much in that offer, unless the Columbus gives up a 1st and 2nd round pick. I would definitely like seeing Johansen in an Oilers jersey; I just don't think Columbus will ever be that desperate to trade their future...

No offense but I'm not so sure MPS or Omark are top six players... Omark hasn't really shown anything to prove that he belongs in that role on a day to day basis... He has top six skill, but no consistency... MPS is definitely a top nine player, but hasn't shown any finish and hasn't generated anything offensively... One could argue that he hasn't been given the opportunities of a Hall or RNH; but he really hasn't done anything to earn one either.

I would definitely like Evander Kane in an Oiler jersey... He's a big body and has a decent offensive upside... To get him though I think you're giving up a Gagner and maybe a 2nd round pick.. I couldn't see Winnipeg even considering dealing Kane though...

I think if Tambo is dealing any of his forwards - he's looking for defensive help. We are actually starting to see some depth in our forwards; we're still lacking profusely from a defensive standpoint.

Avatar
#58 D-Man
November 01 2011, 03:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

They moved him to wing because he isn't good enough at the moment to make their lineup at center. Long term he is still a center, they are just making room for him, like Seguin last year. They are keeping him up because Howson is desperate for optimism.

They need to start winning immediately and Johansen will not help them win this year. I think they would have to think carefully about a deal offering immediate help.

I've been trying to decide since about this time yesterday if I would offer Hemsky and Gagner for Johansen and a pick.

Gives us a possible future top six that looks something like:

RNH-Hall-Eberle Johansen-MPS-Omark.

Not as good today but pretty darn good tomorrow. Trying to shift strength at wing a bit towards younger healthier strength up the middle.

The other guy who's star has been unfairly fading slightly is Evander Kane. He scored 2 last night so things may be turning around, but he's been in the doghouse this season so I've been wondering what the price would be for him.

Sorry... Double post

Avatar
#59 D-Man
November 01 2011, 03:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Captain Obvious wrote:

I'm as big an Omark fan as anyone but the Oilers can't put him into the lineup until they lose. Especially since the last game was the best game for anyone he might replace.

My biggest complaint has been that the Oilers have set him up to fail. Well what do you think is going to happen if the Oilers put Omark into a game and then they lose? He becomes the easy fall guy regardless of how he plays. Putting him into the lineup now would be a textbook case of setting someone up to fail.

At the same time they can't trade him because he his real value and his trade value are at huge odds. And so they can't play him and they can't trade him. Well done. The bed is made

Omark has set Omark up to fail... He hasn't done anything to prove that he should be in the roster on a daily basis...

Don't get me wrong - I don't think he's done anything significantly wrong to deserve to sit for three games, but when he has played he has done nothing... 5 games and 0 points... That's not good stats for a top six forward... That means he'd have to replace either Gagner or MPS on our 3rd line (Omark is not a 4th line player either).. Gagner is coming off an injury but has produced one point. Would you put Omark in and take MPS out??

Avatar
#60 Wäx Män Riley
November 01 2011, 03:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
1983 and This Year wrote:

I think we really need to give up on the dream that is getting the Predators Captain for our spare parts which we are clearly valuing WAY too much. Gagner/Omark and Hemsky for him? Try MPS, Smid/Whitney and next year's first rounder just to have them take a long look at dealing with us.

Thank you for a bit of sense in this madhouse.

Omark is sitting out for a reason: He isn't very good. He has some flash, but that is it.

If he is supposedly Hemsky 2.0 or Hemsky Lite, then why is he sitting out when Hemsky is injured?

There is no way Preds trade their certified #1D for a healthy scratch that hasn't proven a darn thing in this league, along with a spare center, that everyone on this blog is trying to get rid of.

Nothing bothers me more than hearing "trade possibilities" that are dreamed up on Xbox 360. Omark is maybe worth a 3rd rounder... MAYBE. Add in Gagner and you MAYBE get a failing prospect and a 3rd rounder. Not an elite D.

FFS

Avatar
#61 Wäx Män Riley
November 01 2011, 03:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Or let's trade our #8 pick and Hemsky+ for the #3 pick, then we can trade the #3 and LA's #17 along with Omark and Gagner+ for the #2 pick. Then if we have to "throw Chorney in to sweeten the deal."

Nobody wants Chorney! You can't just add players to increase the little fairness bar.

FFS

Avatar
#62 Crash
November 01 2011, 03:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
David S wrote:

Petrell >>> Eager.

Kid Line

Horc-Smyth-Hemsky

MPS-Gagner-Omark

Jones/Petrell-Belanger-Lander(plays wing)

PB/spares - Eager, Hordichuk, Petrell

I think the call is between Jones and Petrell. Although I have to say Petrell is looking better all the time. It all depends on team strategy. Can Hemsky play a defensive role or be an offensive component of a defensively-minded checking line?

But at the end of the day (and like others have said) Omark is Hemsky insurance. Poor guy is going to be in limbo until Hemsky is either signed or dealt.

IMO there's zero chance that Omark can be classified as Hemsky insurance....he'll never be even close to as good as Hemsky is when he's healthy.

You ask an interesting question with regards to Hemsky playing a defensive role or to being an offensive component of a defense minded line. I don't get why so many automatically assume why Hemsky should just slide into the line with Horcoff and Smyth. IMO Jones has fit in there nicely and I see no reason to break those 3 up. They are doing a pretty good job of lining up against other teams scoring lines.

I'd like to see:

Kid Line

Smyth/Horcoff/Jones

Paajarvi/Gagner/Hemsky

Petrell/Belanger/Eager

This gives the team 2 really good scoring line options and 1 really good shutdown line as opposed to wasting Hemsky's offense while trying to shutdown the oppositions scoring line. Belanger can pick up extra minutes killing penalties and taking key faceoffs in the defensive zone or when they need a faceoff win with the extra attacker.

Just my two cents

Avatar
#63 gord962
November 01 2011, 04:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
D-Man wrote:

Omark has set Omark up to fail... He hasn't done anything to prove that he should be in the roster on a daily basis...

Don't get me wrong - I don't think he's done anything significantly wrong to deserve to sit for three games, but when he has played he has done nothing... 5 games and 0 points... That's not good stats for a top six forward... That means he'd have to replace either Gagner or MPS on our 3rd line (Omark is not a 4th line player either).. Gagner is coming off an injury but has produced one point. Would you put Omark in and take MPS out??

Considering NO ONE on the 3d line has gotten a EV point it can hardly be blamed on Omark. That line hasn't scored 5v5 since Linus has been in the pressbox either. Perhaps Belanger and MPS are the problem? Gagner's only point came on the PP so he had to get away from PRV and Belanger to register an assist. How is this Omark's fault?

Avatar
#64 TigerUnderGlass
November 01 2011, 04:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@D-Man

It's true Johansen hasn't done anything yet, but he is pretty much a future #1 center by consensus, so it's not like we would be dealing for the usual type of magic beans. His future is relatively certain, unlike that of say Teubert and Klefbom.

At this point Hemsky only gets us a first rounder and Gagner might not get that. I would probably trade 2 late firsts for Johansen.

That's how I came up with the value. I did say I wanted a pick back right? It wouldn't have to be a first, a second might be enough. Like I said, I can't decide. It seems like a slightly high price, but it's easy to see how the team could be better long term for doing it.

No offense but I'm not so sure MPS or Omark are top six players

That's why I said future possible top six. They both look like second line players to me, but the good news is that second line wingers are MUCH easier to come by than players like Johansen.

This is also where you might note the part where I state that a large part of the purpose of such a deal is to shift our strength to the middle.

To get him though I think you're giving up a Gagner and maybe a 2nd round pick.. I couldn't see Winnipeg even considering dealing Kane though...

Which is it? Will it cost Gagner and a second or will they never consider it? If the price is Gagner and a second I wouldn't hesitate.

I think if Tambo is dealing any of his forwards - he's looking for defensive help. We are actually starting to see some depth in our forwards; we're still lacking profusely from a defensive standpoint.

No kidding.

You're sort of missing the point. If you want to be successful at anything you need to be prepared to move when opportunity knocks.

If there is any chance a top tier player could be be had at a discount but they don't even ask about it because they are too focused on something else they will never build a winner. You don't overlook a chance to set yourself up at center for a decade because you're too busy looking for a number 4 defenseman.

None of this is to say that a deal is even possible - but the suggestion that even if it was they shouldn't do something because they are looking for defensemen is off base.

Avatar
#65 TigerUnderGlass
November 01 2011, 04:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Wäx Män Riley wrote:

Thank you for a bit of sense in this madhouse.

Omark is sitting out for a reason: He isn't very good. He has some flash, but that is it.

If he is supposedly Hemsky 2.0 or Hemsky Lite, then why is he sitting out when Hemsky is injured?

There is no way Preds trade their certified #1D for a healthy scratch that hasn't proven a darn thing in this league, along with a spare center, that everyone on this blog is trying to get rid of.

Nothing bothers me more than hearing "trade possibilities" that are dreamed up on Xbox 360. Omark is maybe worth a 3rd rounder... MAYBE. Add in Gagner and you MAYBE get a failing prospect and a 3rd rounder. Not an elite D.

FFS

Crazy right?

That would be like getting Pronger in his prime for Eric Brewer, Doug Lynch and Jeff Woywitka...

I haven't seen anyone yet suggest that Gagner and Omark gets you Weber. As annoying as you find "trade possibilities" your hyperbole is just as useless.

Avatar
#66 Wäx Män Riley
November 01 2011, 05:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
shanetrain wrote:

I agree with this 100%.

With the surplus of talented small guys the time is now to strike!

Any combo of Hemsky, Gagner and perhaps a young Dman for Mr Shea Weber would get this ship cruising? How could Poile resist?

I would hate to see Omark leave right now. Although older, I see Omark being a more effective player than Sam.

@ Tiger Under Glass

(sorry shanetrain)

Ya, nobody suggests trades for Weber involving Gagner. Or Omark.

In literature, hyperbole is used for effect, and I use it here to highlight the hype that Omark gets in Oil country. I have seen worse trades proposed than the fictional one I suggested.

If I remember correctly, Pronger still had to sign in Edmonton, so we traded for his rights, so I guess anything is possible. Now do you trade Hemsky and Gagner for Weber with no guarantee he signs here?

Avatar
#67 Oilcan
November 01 2011, 05:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I am a big Omark fan but also realistic in that he is not as good as us fans have hyped him up to be, yes we might not get much in a trade but its better then nothing, say what you want about Jones but he is playing very well right now. I know Omark has the flash but there is more to the NHL then that.

Omark doesn't pass Eberle or Hemsky and he does not suit the third line, I would rather have a big body like Harki in there instead and if anyone should get a chance in the top 6 it should be Paajarvi not Omark.

Omark isn't Hemsky insurance he is simple a healthy scratch that doesn't make the Oilers any tougher or better when he is in the lineup, as sad as it is because I like him that is the truth.

Avatar
#68 Wäx Män Riley
November 01 2011, 05:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

Crazy right?

That would be like getting Pronger in his prime for Eric Brewer, Doug Lynch and Jeff Woywitka...

I haven't seen anyone yet suggest that Gagner and Omark gets you Weber. As annoying as you find "trade possibilities" your hyperbole is just as useless.

Every comment on here can be considered useless as I am sure VERY FEW, if any of us here have any real input in what the team does. Even your comments, TUG.

Hindsight is 20/20 and there were people out there that, at the time, thought St. Louis wins that trade because of the quality and hype of the prospects going the other way. Easy to say now that it looks ridiculous.

Useless, I know.

Avatar
#69 VK63
November 01 2011, 05:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Omark to OKC..... makes a certain amount of sense. The oilers have invested a ton of cash into Gags and hes the guy they need to produce. His deal expires this year as does Omarks but one makes 875K one makes 2.5M.

Im not a huge gags fan but from an organizational point of view... hes the guy that needs to get something tangible going.

~and who doesnt want to see him dive into the glass and be all excited~

Avatar
#70 TigerUnderGlass
November 01 2011, 08:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Wäx Män Riley

Your responses have so little relation to what I posted that I'm not sure what to say.

Let me try again.

You expressed irritation at "trade possibilities" people have mentioned.

I, in turn, expressed equal irritation at your unfair characterization of those "trade possibilities", ie. hyperbole.

Got it?

It is somewhat obtuse/weird how you took my choice of the word "useful" literally. It's like you're begging to be offended by something and are grabbing onto random words to dispute. It's odd.

Another note - you seem to be implying that I have suggested possible trades for Weber. That has never happened.

Hindsight? Pronger was traded for the type of spare parts people are suggesting giving up for Weber. I'm trying to understand the distinction you are trying to make but what I seem to be getting out of you is that back then some people thought STL won the trade. I'm sure some people think the wrong team wins every trade but that doesn't make it so.

Lastly, Re: Pronger contract.

That contract was negotiated before the trade was made as a condition of the trade. A hint - NHL contracts don't get negotiated from start to finish in a matter of a few hours.

Avatar
#71 D-Man
November 02 2011, 10:11AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
gord962 wrote:

Considering NO ONE on the 3d line has gotten a EV point it can hardly be blamed on Omark. That line hasn't scored 5v5 since Linus has been in the pressbox either. Perhaps Belanger and MPS are the problem? Gagner's only point came on the PP so he had to get away from PRV and Belanger to register an assist. How is this Omark's fault?

You're right - MPS and Belanger haven't produced, but they've contributed in other ways... Belanger has a faceoff percentage well over 55% and MPS has been a decent forechecker... What does Omark bring to the table when he's not producing points?? Omark had five games to show something, ANYTHING - which he did not... Gagner gets a pass for now as he's coming off of an ankle injury...

Avatar
#72 D-Man
November 02 2011, 10:19AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

It's true Johansen hasn't done anything yet, but he is pretty much a future #1 center by consensus, so it's not like we would be dealing for the usual type of magic beans. His future is relatively certain, unlike that of say Teubert and Klefbom.

At this point Hemsky only gets us a first rounder and Gagner might not get that. I would probably trade 2 late firsts for Johansen.

That's how I came up with the value. I did say I wanted a pick back right? It wouldn't have to be a first, a second might be enough. Like I said, I can't decide. It seems like a slightly high price, but it's easy to see how the team could be better long term for doing it.

No offense but I'm not so sure MPS or Omark are top six players

That's why I said future possible top six. They both look like second line players to me, but the good news is that second line wingers are MUCH easier to come by than players like Johansen.

This is also where you might note the part where I state that a large part of the purpose of such a deal is to shift our strength to the middle.

To get him though I think you're giving up a Gagner and maybe a 2nd round pick.. I couldn't see Winnipeg even considering dealing Kane though...

Which is it? Will it cost Gagner and a second or will they never consider it? If the price is Gagner and a second I wouldn't hesitate.

I think if Tambo is dealing any of his forwards - he's looking for defensive help. We are actually starting to see some depth in our forwards; we're still lacking profusely from a defensive standpoint.

No kidding.

You're sort of missing the point. If you want to be successful at anything you need to be prepared to move when opportunity knocks.

If there is any chance a top tier player could be be had at a discount but they don't even ask about it because they are too focused on something else they will never build a winner. You don't overlook a chance to set yourself up at center for a decade because you're too busy looking for a number 4 defenseman.

None of this is to say that a deal is even possible - but the suggestion that even if it was they shouldn't do something because they are looking for defensemen is off base.

I agree with you that you need to jump at the chance should opportunity knock... Unfortunately, Johansen and Kane will NEVER come to our door unless a) Tambo gives up the farm or b) either team's GM pulls a Sutter moment... Neither are likely to happen...

I throw out speculations on what I would offer if I were the GM and Columbus or Winnipeg approached me with those players... Reality though would dictate that Johansen and Kane are about as touchable as Hall or RNH to us. IF teams are looking to Edmonton for a trade - they're shopping around what we NEED (as in a defensemen). Don't get me wrong - I'm sure Tambo would ask Winnipeg if they were looking at Hemsky to include Kane in the deal; but honestly, if you were Winnipeg - why would you even consider dealing away your future??

Avatar
#73 Wäx Män Riley
November 02 2011, 03:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

Your responses have so little relation to what I posted that I'm not sure what to say.

Let me try again.

You expressed irritation at "trade possibilities" people have mentioned.

I, in turn, expressed equal irritation at your unfair characterization of those "trade possibilities", ie. hyperbole.

Got it?

It is somewhat obtuse/weird how you took my choice of the word "useful" literally. It's like you're begging to be offended by something and are grabbing onto random words to dispute. It's odd.

Another note - you seem to be implying that I have suggested possible trades for Weber. That has never happened.

Hindsight? Pronger was traded for the type of spare parts people are suggesting giving up for Weber. I'm trying to understand the distinction you are trying to make but what I seem to be getting out of you is that back then some people thought STL won the trade. I'm sure some people think the wrong team wins every trade but that doesn't make it so.

Lastly, Re: Pronger contract.

That contract was negotiated before the trade was made as a condition of the trade. A hint - NHL contracts don't get negotiated from start to finish in a matter of a few hours.

Your responses seem to always have a smarmy, smart-ass, know-it-all connotation to it, so if I take offense to you saying my opinions are useless, it is because it is offensive.

I have never said you have suggested any trades. You took my opinion about something that has nothing to do with you, and seem to apply it to yourself.

Re: Pronger.

Yes, some people thought it was a bad trade on Edmonton's part, and I gave a quick explanation why. If you don't agree, fine. I'm sure you won't agree with all of my opinions.

Also, thank you for breaking down this internet pissing contest for me. In text, tone of voice and underlying meaning rarely come through clearly, so if you say "useless" expect people to read "useless."

Got it?

Avatar
#74 Wäx Män Riley
November 02 2011, 04:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@TigerUnderGlass

Also,

My dad could beat up your dad.

Comments are closed for this article.