Trading Sam Gagner to the Los Angeles Kings Would Likely be a Mistake

Jonathan Willis
February 05 2014 09:33PM

Everybody and their dog seems to want the Edmonton Oilers to move Sam Gagner for whatever the team can get and the sooner the better. That’s why comments by Hockey Night in Canada’s Elliotte Friedman suggesting the Los Angeles Kings had serious interest in Gagner have attracted significant attention in Edmonton.

Clifford & Nolan

Bob Stauffer of Oilers Now was asked on Wednesday’s show about the Gagner rumours. He said the return was “going to be a guy like a [Kyle] Clifford or a [Jordan] Nolan or a [Dwight] King,” and that “there’s going to be a financial component involved” in this scenario, hinting that the Oilers would be retaining salary in the deal.

Let’s look at those players. Among Kings forwards with more than 20 games played, Clifford ranks 12th in even-strength ice-time per game and Nolan ranks 13th. Neither of them kills penalties. Basically, they’re both big, young fourth-liners who contribute almost nothing beyond a physical game. The Oilers have some experience grabbing fourth-liner off high-end teams – guys like Colin Fraser and Ben Eager. Those guys looked great in Chicago, and looked terrible in Edmonton.

Would Clifford or Nolan be an upgrade on, say, Jesse Joensuu? Absolutely. Are they going to play top-nine minutes? Probably not. Nolan couldn’t score in the AHL, and Clifford had 28 points in the OHL in his draft year. They’re fourth-line guys.

If Luke Gazdic and Jesse Joensuu and Teemu Hartikainen and Lennart Petrell and Ben Eager and all the rest of the big forwards the Oilers have run through their fourth line show anything, it’s that adding a big, physical guy to the bottom of the roster doesn’t do anything to fix the problems in the top-six. So trading a guy like Gagner, who has problems but is a proven NHL scorer, for a younger version of Ben Eager or a better version of Luke Gazdic is kind of a stupid thing to do.

Dwight King

Dwight King is a better player, but he’s also a guy who had 17 points in 28 AHL games last year and had 33 in 79 AHL games two seasons ago. He has 23 points this season, playing primarily with Anze Kopitar and Jeff Carter. He’s a big (6’4”, 230 pounds), young (he turns 25 this summer) left wing that can play top-nine minutes and kill penalties and add a physical presence. If the Oilers are moving Gagner for a forward, that’s the guy who the Kings might be willing to move and who is in the same value-range.

Now, the problems. If Gagner goes, that means Edmonton is relying on a Mark Arcobello or Anton Lander to play centre on the second line. As a guy who likes both players, I’d enjoy watching that but as an NHL G.M. I wouldn’t be at all comfortable with it. Maybe Gagner needs to be replaced anyway, but moving him for King means that Edmonton now has a second-line centre slot to fill. Is it easier to add a guy like King in free agency, or a guy like Gagner? If the Oilers need a big guy who can be plugged in on the second line, they can sign a Nikolai Kulemin or David Moss in the summer. There simply aren't second-line centres available, unless they can somehow talk Paul Stastny into moving to Edmonton. 

The second problem is salary. Sam Gagner has this season and two more with a $4.8 million cap hit. King has this season and one more at $750,000. So Edmonton would need to take another contract back, and probably need to eat half of Gagner’s contract. Yes, the salary cap is going up but this is also an Oilers team that needs to add significantly on defence and on the third line; spending $2.4 million for the next two seasons so that L.A. can have a cheap Gagner seems misguided.

I like King a lot, and he’s a nice fit for Edmonton. He’s just not a nice enough fit to justify dumping Gagner and retain half his salary in the process. Toss Jake Muzzin or Tyler Toffoli in, and there might be something to think about – but it’s not likely that the Kings are going to do that. 

Recently by Jonathan Willis

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
#51 2004Z06
February 05 2014, 10:58PM
Trash it!
35
trashes
Cheers
67
cheers

I cannot believe people are still using Gagner's "point potential" as an argument for keeping him. I ask any of you Gagner supporters to consider that for every point Gagner gets, he give up two. He does not hit, gets pushed off the puck too easily and is horrible in the face off circle. This not including his ridiculous cap hit. If Mac T can get King and a pick or prospect, it is a win.

Wow some of our fans are deluded, or have had their kool aid spiked. Maybe both?

Avatar
#52 Mr common sense
February 05 2014, 10:59PM
Trash it!
13
trashes
Cheers
28
cheers
The Soup Fascist wrote:

Your contention, as I understand it, was that only Edmonton media would think that Gagner had any cachet around the league, let alone with a Stanley Cup contender.

The fact is Friedman and Bob Mackenzie appear to be saying just that.

I apologize if that flies in the face of your notion that a team - despite their SC run two ago - that can't score to save their lives, have interest in a skilled but flawed 25 year old 50 plus point player.

I just can't believe on 47 levels, that we are still talking about Gagner. I mean do I even want to google that draft yr and see what 6ft man came after him that we could have had instead?? It's taken 7 freakin yrs to understand he is not strong and smart??? NOW finally we are mad that he can't win face offs?? NOW, not THE day the new divisions were announced we are looking at the rosters of our divisional opponents to realize our weakling boys don't match up?? Like wtf

Avatar
#53 voom04
February 05 2014, 11:03PM
Trash it!
54
trashes
Cheers
9
cheers

The only way u trade gagner is for a 1-2Dman, if you have to through in a pick/prospect so be it. U fix your defense without trading him and his defensive defiecencies disappear at least marginaly.

Avatar
#54 David S
February 05 2014, 11:08PM
Trash it!
22
trashes
Cheers
13
cheers
Kodiak wrote:

This season hasn't helped his cause but he's always been terrible in his own zone, he's not physical, he's inconsistent, he's padded stats late in seasons when the games haven't mattered. He's not a difference maker offensively but is defensively in a negative way. Yes, he can play better than he has this season but it's still not enough to have him slotted in as a 2C if we want to finish higher than 20th.

Show me any other guy in our top 6 who has the guts to do this and I'll agree Gagner (when healthy) "isn't physical" http://youtu.be/wWCidNpNcCE *drops mic*

Avatar
#55 Ham_n_Eggs
February 05 2014, 11:09PM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Cheers
26
cheers

I really hope they don't trade Gagner for another bottom 6 forward, Mitch Moroz is tracking along the same lines as King in Clifford in his draft year and draft year +1, and will likely fill the role of a big bottom 6 forward who can provide some offence. If you trade him at all, package him with a D prospect and fill some needs on the roster, not just make another move for the sake of doing it.

Avatar
#56 Rama Lama
February 05 2014, 11:12PM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers

The names mentioned for Gagner are not going to be a fit.......JW , I totally agree with your assessment.

They will not give us what we need so it is pointless. Names like Dustin Brown and Jake Muzzins would be interesting but I don't hear them in the trade rumours so often.

You are also right on the Oilers finally having some grit in the bottom six.........we do not want another one of those in light of some of the players we have in the AHL.

Avatar
#57 Kodiak
February 05 2014, 11:15PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
32
cheers

@David S

Is this your rebuttal to me saying he isn't physical? IMO being physical has nothing to do with fighting. Finishing checks, making Dmen cough up the puck, creating turnovers is being physical. That's not Gagner at all.

Avatar
#58 The Soup Fascist
February 05 2014, 11:16PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Cheers
17
cheers
Mr common sense wrote:

I just can't believe on 47 levels, that we are still talking about Gagner. I mean do I even want to google that draft yr and see what 6ft man came after him that we could have had instead?? It's taken 7 freakin yrs to understand he is not strong and smart??? NOW finally we are mad that he can't win face offs?? NOW, not THE day the new divisions were announced we are looking at the rosters of our divisional opponents to realize our weakling boys don't match up?? Like wtf

My apologies for talking about Sam Gagner in an article that is titled "Trading Sam Gagner ....".

Your ON name is meant to be ironic, right?

I am not sure revisiting the draft 7 years later and cherry picking should ofs and could ofs is particularly useful. For every Logan Couture and Ryan McDonaugh there are five Thomas Hickeys, Angelo Espositos, etc. including sadly an Alex Cherapanov. Let's leave that Monday morning QB exercise to the departed DSF, shall we?

Avatar
#59 Al Low
February 05 2014, 11:27PM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Cheers
36
cheers
David S wrote:

Show me any other guy in our top 6 who has the guts to do this and I'll agree Gagner (when healthy) "isn't physical" http://youtu.be/wWCidNpNcCE *drops mic*

Ask yourself, would any contender have Gagner in a 2LC spot? Get off his nuts, David S. He's not good enough, even on the Oilers.

Avatar
#60 Mabell
February 05 2014, 11:37PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers

I think it's best to define what the problem is - Gagner doesn't fit the required 2nd line role on this team.

That being the case if we can move him for another useful piece then do so - preferably Dwight King from the above list of moves.

Expecting Arco or Lander to fill the role is not the answer, at least not beyond the rest of this season.

Other moves will need to be made - perhaps before the trade deadline its Hemsky+ to Detroit for Sheahan or Anisimov out of Columbus over the summer.

Regardless once we've determined that the existing mix is not going to work we need to make moves to convert assets into other pieces that form part of the solution. It won't happen over night - and it won't happen in a single trade, but piece by piece I like the moves that are being taken.

A team is evolving here.

Avatar
#61 The Soup Fascist
February 05 2014, 11:46PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
8
cheers
Mabell wrote:

I think it's best to define what the problem is - Gagner doesn't fit the required 2nd line role on this team.

That being the case if we can move him for another useful piece then do so - preferably Dwight King from the above list of moves.

Expecting Arco or Lander to fill the role is not the answer, at least not beyond the rest of this season.

Other moves will need to be made - perhaps before the trade deadline its Hemsky+ to Detroit for Sheahan or Anisimov out of Columbus over the summer.

Regardless once we've determined that the existing mix is not going to work we need to make moves to convert assets into other pieces that form part of the solution. It won't happen over night - and it won't happen in a single trade, but piece by piece I like the moves that are being taken.

A team is evolving here.

Evolving or devolving?

Does adding a coke machine 3/4 line winger and eating $2.4 million of cap space help us? A bad trade is not the answer.

We agree a bigger competent two-way 2C (plus a couple of actual NHL defensemen) is necessary. I just think Gagner plus this years pick and / or a prospect is more apt to get you something tangible than the same package with a King / Clifford or Nolan.

Avatar
#62 O-Town
February 05 2014, 11:59PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers

In my opinion a Gagner trade has to involve Muzzin or else it's definitely a waste of time. My hope would be Muzzin and one of Nolan or Clifford as I think asking for King as well would be asking for too much.

My biggest question is would it be possible for the Oilers to retain 50% of Gagner's salary for part of the contract (say the remainder of this season?) or does that percentage have to be retained for the entire term?

Avatar
#63 Cynic
February 06 2014, 12:03AM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers

Oiler fan realizes that mule-head Sutter is still coaching the Kings, right? Why would Lombardi stick him with someone as hopelessly soft as Gagner?

Avatar
#64 Naky
February 06 2014, 12:23AM
Trash it!
11
trashes
Cheers
16
cheers

The Kings have a history of turning players that fans and this organization have literally run out of town into great, solid players. If they want Gagner, it's because they -know- they can make him a great, solid player while Edmonton can't. If LA could get Gagner from us, while retaining salary for only Clifford or Nolan or hell even both, it would be such a laughably one-sided deal for LA that MacT should just step down and admit that Tambellini was actually better at this thing after all.

People really need to stop undervaluing players just because you have a personal mancrush of hate on them. They're assets of varying value and a low point in a bad season does not make a career of a player.

Avatar
#65 admiralmark
February 06 2014, 12:44AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
30
cheers
voom04 wrote:

The only way u trade gagner is for a 1-2Dman, if you have to through in a pick/prospect so be it. U fix your defense without trading him and his defensive defiecencies disappear at least marginaly.

On what planet is Gagner going to Fetch you a 1st pairing D man? Have you watched him play in the last couple years(or ever)? Some of the things people say on here?!

Avatar
#66 Oilers Coffey
February 06 2014, 12:46AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
26
cheers

The Gagner era needs to close, this team needs a huge upgrade at #2C. If MacT can dump him for some size and tenacity like King &/or Nolan, that makes the Oilers that much bigger and tougher to play against. Especially in this conference. Gagners defensive liabilities and errors need to be moved! Willis didn't like the Hendricks move either, but it's about adding different elements to the team. King &/ Nolan bring different elements that the Oilers need. Land a #2C during the summer.

Avatar
#67 bwar
February 06 2014, 12:50AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
26
cheers

Eating Gagner's salary would be a mistake but moving him out of town would not. I don't see the downside to having Arcobello/Lander split the 2C duties for the rest of the season. Arco has shown he can hang and has way more heart than Gagner. Lander hasn't really had any NHL opportunities in the top 6, 5-6 game as the 2C isn't going to hurt our playoff chances and might give the team a glimpse of what sort of top end potential Lander really has.

Avatar
#68 Mason Storm
February 06 2014, 12:50AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
15
cheers

If only being a GM was as easy as it was in NHL 94. Gagner for Crosby. Pittsburgh rejects the trade offer. Force trade? Yes. Pittsburgh has traded Crosby for Gagner.

*goes back to fantasy land*

Avatar
#69 admiralmark
February 06 2014, 01:04AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
23
cheers

We need to face it. Gagner at best will get you a good 3rd liner. Thats it. Thats what he's worth in the league right now. Why? Because he has shown to NOT be a capable 2C. He also is NOT the answer for the Oilers as 2C. So what the hell are you supposed to do with him?? You gotta get rid of him and get the best you can. But the fan base is not going to be happy with the return.

The other option which I expect more and more to be how it plays out. Is he stays. The offers are going to be just that pitiful that at the end of the day MacT might just say.. you know what i'm just gonna hang onto him until "hopefully" he can get his head straight, stop crapping the bed so horrendously on the ice and raise his value a little bit? What a mess. This team does not know how to assess what they have quickly enough. And this is what they get.

Avatar
#70 Oilerz4life
February 06 2014, 01:18AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers

I think some people are missing what JW alludes to in this article, that trading Gagner may make sense in one aspect, but retaining a large portion of his salary does not in another. The NHL is a business and you can't just trade away every player you want out of town and retain half of his salary, unfortunately.

Avatar
#71 Mack Strong
February 06 2014, 01:49AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
18
cheers
voom04 wrote:

The only way u trade gagner is for a 1-2Dman, if you have to through in a pick/prospect so be it. U fix your defense without trading him and his defensive defiecencies disappear at least marginaly.

There in no team in the NHL that is going to trade their 1-2 D man for Gagner.

Classic overvaluation of our player….

The article we all read is talking about 3rd and 4th line forwards in return for Gags…..

Where did we make the jump to a 1 -2 D man??? Cuz no NHL GM is going to make that jump!!

Avatar
#72 Death Metal Nightmare
February 06 2014, 02:10AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers
2004Z06 wrote:

I cannot believe people are still using Gagner's "point potential" as an argument for keeping him. I ask any of you Gagner supporters to consider that for every point Gagner gets, he give up two. He does not hit, gets pushed off the puck too easily and is horrible in the face off circle. This not including his ridiculous cap hit. If Mac T can get King and a pick or prospect, it is a win.

Wow some of our fans are deluded, or have had their kool aid spiked. Maybe both?

i can't believe people used his "point potential" 3 seasons ago onward. everything that sucks about his game was apparent 3 years ago and everyone on this site just kept saying "HE'S ONLY ____ YEARS OLD."

people who have actual eyeballs that work in their head could see the enormous deficiencies in this dudes game ages ago and what sort of monumental physical improvements it would take for him to grow out of them.

it's not happening. the kid is a 3rd wheel anywhere in the league. he depends on others to create the game for him and rarely can he do it himself for his teammates. if you can't operate your role and are getting carried in this league YOU ARE MANURE.

he should have never got the contract he did last off-season.

now, could he be a good third wheel on a good team? sure. if the other two players carry him along so his game is elevated a little. it would be a miracle for his career.

the 4th liners for him sounds lame. but i'd expect the Oilers to make a move like that.

please make the view into the Abyss larger O' Wise Ones of the Management Team

Avatar
#73 Mack Strong
February 06 2014, 02:14AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers

In trading Gags we are left with a gaping hole at the #2 centre position.

We are just not deep at all at Centre. Love ARCO but he's not an NHL #2 Centre. Maybe not yet…..Im not sold on Lander at all…If gags is soft what do we classify Lander - he's not going to be causing any fear on the forecheck,,,

As much as I would love to see Ekblad in an Oiler Jersey…I'm starting to thing that maybe a Michael Dal Colle, Leon Draisati, Sam Bennett, or if Reinhart drops that would be our pick.

We are much deeper in the defence prospect pool than we are in the Centre prospect pool. At D we have Nurse, Klef, Gernat, Musil and Marincin is looking like he's made the leap….

Aside from Lander and ARCO we have Ewanyk, Horak, Yakimov as possible prospects at Centre…we look much better at D…shocking yes I know…the return for Gags is going to be small. Maybe we keep him at 2 or 3 Centre and hopefully the possible draft pick emerges nicely as Monahan did into a solid 2nd Center.

Hopefully D can strengthen in UFA...

We have a long way to go…..

Avatar
#74 andrewmk20
February 06 2014, 02:17AM
Trash it!
26
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

Any chance that Nashville would consider Gagner for Cullen. Cullen has 1 year left at 3.5M and despite being 37 can still skate well and plays an actual two way game. I know his offence has fallen off the past two seasons but he'd be with better offensive linemates in Edmonton than in Minnesota or Nashville.

Avatar
#75 john
February 06 2014, 02:20AM
Trash it!
21
trashes
Cheers
20
cheers

Oilers fan in Toronto here, why are all the fans in Edmonton running their players out of town? Are some of the people there stupid or what? You spent years developed Gagner, now you got Eakins screwing up the team, you blame skill forwards are not physical there? Kane and Toews in Chicago are not physical and they are plus in +/-. You need to mix and match 2 skill guys with one big guy in the line, spread out the scoring. In the 80's you had Gretzky, Kurri and Semenko and that line was killing other teams. 2 skill guys passing and shooting then the big forward go to the net and go to the boards. It's seems like anybody playing in Edmonton everyone there has a beef with, no wonder no UFA want to go there. You FANS need to grow up and doing something else there in the winter instead of chewing your team 24/7. You need a real experience coach to teach them how to win. Sending Gagner to other team is a mistake, look at Glencross (not as good as Gagner) and he's doing well in Calgary. You guys are ungrateful bunch, Gagner gave it all for Oilers last 7 years. He had no others to support him and he still produced.

Avatar
#76 john
February 06 2014, 03:39AM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Cheers
15
cheers

MacTavish is in Toronto, some Oilers fans want David Clarkson, you know what he's been a bust in Toronto. Over paid and had a few stupid suspensions already. He's 29 and has 9 points in 37 games for Leafs, in his career he has 179 points in 463 games and -37. Sam Gagner is 24 and has 281 points in 459 games with -68, this season he has 23 points in 45 games for Oilers. Still the fans there want to run Gagner out of town, he's younger and produced more points than Clarkson. But fans want Clarkson why? Because is 3 inches taller and they are about same weight? Fans please grow up, really, you guys are ruin the team over there.

Avatar
#77 Sisyphys
February 06 2014, 05:55AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
Oilerz4life wrote:

I think some people are missing what JW alludes to in this article, that trading Gagner may make sense in one aspect, but retaining a large portion of his salary does not in another. The NHL is a business and you can't just trade away every player you want out of town and retain half of his salary, unfortunately.

Sure you can. Its not always a great idea, but it depends on how badly you want that player out of town. If they are more of a liability staying on your team, then eating some salary to get them the heck out of town isn't always a completely horrible decision.

Though frankly, I say hold onto Gagner. The offers you'll get for him will be for equally crappy players, or worse. At that point, might as well stick with the crap you know rather than trade for the crap you dont

Avatar
#78 Rdubb
February 06 2014, 06:18AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
8
cheers

"There simply aren't second-line centres available", well, sorry Johnathon, but Sam ISN'T a 2nd line centre in the NHL, and on a half decent team he'd be a 3rd line centre... The only attribute that Sam has that makes him a good 2nd line centre is his passion, now, what forces are against him; poor in the dot (very poor, 4th liners have better percentages than he does), extremely poor d-zone coverage, spends too much time watching the play instead of inserting himself into the play, his size and strength. Unfortunately, and I am not going to say that I have ever heard Johnathon say this or not, but I have heard many on the site say the exact same thing as I have above, Sam is not a centre... now why did the experiment of him playing the wing last so long? I think two, maybe three games? It's now been six or seven yrs, and it'll only hurt Sam's game in the future, these sets of coaches must get it through his head that he isn't an NHL centre man, and his all around game and stats would be much better if he played 2nd line wing minutes. Then, we'll get a big return for Sam via trade

Avatar
#79 BabyNuge'sBaby
February 06 2014, 06:58AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
9
cheers

If we can manage to get King out of LA for Gagne it needs to happen, regardless of it we have to eat some salary to make it happen. It sounds like King is underpayed any how, at $750,000/year, so really we would not be getting bad value on the asset. Lander could very easily slot in on the 2C spot, give him a real chance with decent linemates, see what we have there (can't do any worse than Gagne).

Avatar
#80 Spydyr
February 06 2014, 07:05AM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Cheers
33
cheers

"TRADING SAM GAGNER TO THE LOS ANGELES KINGS WOULD LIKELY BE A MISTAKE"

Yes, for LA, says anyone with a hockey IQ that has watched Gagner play.

Avatar
#81 Show me da Money
February 06 2014, 07:06AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
8
cheers

I think Gagner is gone before the end of the season. With his no trade clause coming into effect can anyone convince me that MacT wants to have him around for two more years taking up a roster spot?

JW, if your only two choices are worse and worser which one do you pick?

Avatar
#82 K_Mart
February 06 2014, 07:09AM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Cheers
9
cheers

He had a really solid season last year and when he broke his jaw this year Strudwick said it would ruin Gagner's entire year, as he had a similar injury once before and said it ruined the rest of the season.

He was slurping everything through a straw and then he came back too early. His value is at a career low, leave it to Oiler fans to promote selling low.

He should have been dealt during the off season after his great lockout season. Now is the worst time. Give him the rest of this season, the off season, and a few months next year to get his game back (provided he doesn't get injured again) then trade him.

He'll never be a good fit for the Oilers but trading him now is dumb.

The only player the Oilers have who's value is higher around the league than it is to the Oilers is Perron. If you want to get something good you have to move something good. Sell high, not low. Move Perron, his value will almost certainly go down after next season.

Avatar
#83 BabyNuge's_Baby
February 06 2014, 07:15AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

@Al Low

What you are saying makes sense, bit Reihhart is not the right prospect to be targeting, he is way too small. There are ither , bigger centers in the top ten we could take. Time to draft based on organizational need rather than best player available, Yak was a mistake and we should learn from it.

Avatar
#84 RexHolez
February 06 2014, 07:35AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
17
cheers

I don't care who they trade for what. Just stop being such a pathetic hockey team already, I can't take it anymore

Avatar
#85 BingBong
February 06 2014, 07:39AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers

I don't understand how anybody could watch Gagner play, know what his contract is, and then say a "Gagner for King" trade would be a mistake.

I'm no GM, but I'd bet a lot of money that Gagner has very little value around the league.

Avatar
#86 wintoon
February 06 2014, 07:50AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
11
cheers

Gagner has been in the NHL for seven years. He does not, however, have seven years experience. He has one year of experience seven times. In short, he has not learned what it takes to be a competent 2C.

Aside from the faults others have recorded, Gagner plays cutesy, with drop passes, taking the easy way, trying to make clever passes etc. Unfortunately this is contagious and now players like Eberle are doing the same thing.

It is very important to move Gagner ASAP and for whatever MacT can get for him. The move will send a message to all our young guys that you have to play a hard smart hockey or you are history, regardless of draft pedigree.

This is a major key to improving this team and the sooner it begins, the sooner we will see some results.

Avatar
#87 camdog
February 06 2014, 07:58AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
Jonathan Willis wrote:

Because they had a stretch where they scored three goals in six games.

As for who makes it up, that would be Dean Lombardi, unless you think Elliotte Friedman was lying through his teeth.

Dean Lombardi, is that the same guy that got into that nasty fight with the Oilers a few years back?

A few years back Lombardi got all hot and bothered over Hemsky and ended up with Penner. This season the talk will be Gags and they will end up with Hemsky. Of course that's if they can't get anybody else first.

Seen this soap opera once before...

Avatar
#88 CMG30
February 06 2014, 08:00AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers

Despite his faults, Gagner is a top 6 player. That means the Oil need a top 6 coming back. They need to enter the 'build' phase of the rebuild so the days of shipping out legitimate NHL talent for bits and pieces and prospects needs to come to an end. Ideally, the Oil trade Gagner and a prospect and a pick and have the best player in the trade coming back this way.

Avatar
#89 Newj
February 06 2014, 08:02AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers
Kodiak wrote:

Is this your rebuttal to me saying he isn't physical? IMO being physical has nothing to do with fighting. Finishing checks, making Dmen cough up the puck, creating turnovers is being physical. That's not Gagner at all.

What's next from Dave?...probably a video from his 8 pt game.

Time to move away from being the worst GA team in the league. Time to move Sam.

Although I do wonder how Sam will do in Sutter's world of back pressure and finishing checks?

Avatar
#90 Tim in Kelowna
February 06 2014, 08:31AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

For once I agree with JW, at least on one point. I like Clifford and Nolan, and they have more upside than Willis suggests, but a team weak down the middle trading their 2nd line centre for a winger makes no sense.

Avatar
#91 Spydyr
February 06 2014, 08:32AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
Newj wrote:

What's next from Dave?...probably a video from his 8 pt game.

Time to move away from being the worst GA team in the league. Time to move Sam.

Although I do wonder how Sam will do in Sutter's world of back pressure and finishing checks?

You mentioned Gagner back pressure and finishing checks in the same sentence.

Avatar
#92 j
February 06 2014, 08:45AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
camdog wrote:

Dean Lombardi, is that the same guy that got into that nasty fight with the Oilers a few years back?

A few years back Lombardi got all hot and bothered over Hemsky and ended up with Penner. This season the talk will be Gags and they will end up with Hemsky. Of course that's if they can't get anybody else first.

Seen this soap opera once before...

"...and ended up with Penner."

And won the Cup. I agree - Lombardi has played this game before. Much better than we have. He has fleeced the Oil for Stoll, Greene, Penner to date.

Gagner has value in this league. Every other GM is aware of how poor the team is currently performing and the lack of defensive structure. Sam is 24 years old and has the second highest point total of his draft class. This alone has value. The question is how to maximize this value. I can't see the Oil winning any exchange at this point unless the desperation out there starts to ramp up. There are some teams that are in 'win now' mode so you never know what they are willing to sacrifice but we have to keep a poker face through to the last minute. I think MacT has done a great job on this front. He hasn't mentioned Gagner's name at all.

Avatar
#93 Newj
February 06 2014, 08:53AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Spydyr wrote:

You mentioned Gagner back pressure and finishing checks in the same sentence.

Yup & I'm sure there's video out there to prove it.

It sure as heck wont come from the 3-0 win over SJ. He was atrocious in that game (IMO) Probably got 3rd star from SNET though.

Avatar
#94 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 09:00AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers

First let's get some facts agreed upon:

Signing gagner was a big mistake by MacT.

Trading gagner - like trading Horcoff - gets this mistake out of view and thus remarkably out of the memories of many oilers fans.

MacT overvalues many of his assets - none more so than gagner (hemsky and dubnyk aren't far behind). Thus he will struggle to move him.

As for the return from LA; gagner could indeed work out better there than he does here because of the supporting cast he would be with in LA being able to cover his manifold deficiencies. Ditto the players the oil might get in return. Scoring stats simply don't tell the whole story.

In sum, gagner has negative value. That means the oil will get negative value back or have to carry a big chunk of his salary for the rest its term. And he is not the only negative value player that this team has...

Avatar
#95 Puck JammeR!
February 06 2014, 09:02AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers

gagner for stoll and greene

Avatar
#96 oilfanincalgary
February 06 2014, 09:09AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

if we keep Gags we have a gaping hole at #2 centre.addition by subtraction. take anything you can get. The team gets better as soon as he is not on the roster.

Avatar
#97 oprah sucks
February 06 2014, 09:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

everyone talks about kings limited cap space and the possibility of oilers getting muzzin. well take one look at his contract and it doesnt take a genius to figure out that muzzin isnt goin anywhere. one very possible candidate for the oilers would be and is mat green because of his contract status and he is due for a raise in salary which la does not want to deal with and possibly lose green for nothing.

Avatar
#98 Jordan Nugent-Hallkins
February 06 2014, 09:13AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers

St Louis draws in for Stamkos. Glad the old guy gets one last Olympics, leaving him off the team was a mistake to begin with.

Avatar
#99 BingBong
February 06 2014, 09:16AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

And for those saying we won't have a 2nd line center if we trade Gagner, why can't Arcabello just take his place? Similar offensive production this year, much better defensively, harder worker, much cheaper contract, etc.

I'm guessing Eakins wants Arco there anyway.

Avatar
#100 ubermiguel
February 06 2014, 09:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

First let's get some facts agreed upon:

Signing gagner was a big mistake by MacT.

Trading gagner - like trading Horcoff - gets this mistake out of view and thus remarkably out of the memories of many oilers fans.

MacT overvalues many of his assets - none more so than gagner (hemsky and dubnyk aren't far behind). Thus he will struggle to move him.

As for the return from LA; gagner could indeed work out better there than he does here because of the supporting cast he would be with in LA being able to cover his manifold deficiencies. Ditto the players the oil might get in return. Scoring stats simply don't tell the whole story.

In sum, gagner has negative value. That means the oil will get negative value back or have to carry a big chunk of his salary for the rest its term. And he is not the only negative value player that this team has...

Dubnyk for Hendricks was overvaluing him?

Comments are closed for this article.