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, Sportsnet, 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
#101 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 09:39AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
15
cheers
Kodiak wrote:

Gagner and King have the same number of points this year. Where is this gap you speak of? We'd be saving some cap room and getting a physical player with size. King also hasn't been brought up in the Oilers organization so probably knows how to play in his own zone.

Addition by subtraction IMO. If the choice was Arco and King in the lineup or Gagner in the lineup I think it's a no brainer. See ya Gags.

King hasn't produced much in the NHL thus far. His point totals over the last 4 seasons: 0, 14, 10, 23 (Albeit with very little NHL games under his belt). He has 23 points this season, in 58 games but that is the best he's ever done. Sam Gagner has 23 in 46 and most of those games he spent being a useless teet due to injury. At this point the most we could ever expect out of Dwight is far from a sure thing points wise and while i would love to have him, he's not nearly as valuable as Gagner.

Also, centermen have more value than wingers.

I dont think Gagner and the Oilers are in an addition by subtraction situation. Gagner adds value to a team, he just doesnt add the value that we need the most.

King for Gagner, imo, is a big mistake and nothing you said has shed light on anything to make me think otherwise.

now, throw in someone else or even a 2nd round pick + and things change a little.

One last point: We only have 2 people to trade that will garner any kind of value back in a trade. Sam Gagner and Jordan Eberle. We can all agree that the oilers dont need more spare parts guys, even if they are small upgrades to what we have. If we're going to use these two chips in a trade, it needs to be for similar quality players coming back the other way. If Gagner gets traded for a 3rd liner, then that leaves only Ebs as a piece to land any kind of top 4 defenseman; of which we need 2 or more of.

I dont trade Gagner for spare parts.

Avatar
#102 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 09:40AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers
G-Unit wrote:

Am I the only person that was underwhelmed by Ekblad at the world juniors? He seemed to be lost on the ice against the better teams, trying to do too much. I think he looks good in a weak draft year and has been noticed since he was allowed to play underage in the OHL. Is it possible that he is a player that peaked ahead of his age group and they are quickly catching up? I would rather trade the pick for a decent number 2 d man.

Did you watch all games? instead of cherry picking the odd game?

I watched them all, and thanks to the pvr, a few times. I think he looked fantastic.

Avatar
#103 ESA10
February 06 2014, 09:40AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
11
cheers

I disagree young Willis. Gagner is losing the oilers games with his spotty defensive play.

If you could get King and Frattin from the kings then the oilers would finally have a third line and hendricks could play the 4th like he should be.

2014-15 King Gordon Frattin Hendricks Ladner Pitlick Gadzic Arcobello

To me that looks like we finally have the bottom of the roster figured out. I do agree that we would have to find a second line center but there are possibilities out there.

Avatar
#104 Jeffery
February 06 2014, 09:48AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
33
cheers

They have been moving Gagner forever They have been moving Hemsky for ever

They are going to be a playoff team for ever.

Blah Blah and Blah

Avatar
#105 TURNOVER
February 06 2014, 09:49AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
25
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.

Gagner for 1-2 D-man? That statement proves their is life on other planets.

Avatar
#106 steelymac
February 06 2014, 09:51AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
14
cheers

It looks like Spezza in Ottawa is getting some tough love from the fan base.What would it take?Now that would be a one hell of a second line center.I know im dreaming.

Avatar
#107 Gorbahchano
February 06 2014, 10:03AM
Trash it!
14
trashes
Cheers
13
cheers

Man, ON just should lay off Gagner, Christ. Why get rid of someone that we can't replace right now? Sure, Arco is great and could possibly fill the void but I'd rather have a guy with the amount of experience Gagner does. It's amazing how many times the oilers fans cry to have someone who is obviously having an off season traded. I agree that his performance of late is brutal compared to before. I'd give it time, if we trade him he'll just light is up and make the oilers look stupid for trading him like lots of past oilers have.

Avatar
#108 Cutterov
February 06 2014, 10:08AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
14
cheers

By moving Gagner this is a case of addition by subtraction.. Gagner is small, never scored more then 50 points, bad on draws, and a total defensive liability, when you watch him play he just doesn't understand who he needs to identify as the dangerous man... If I was Eakins and running practice it would be 3 on 3 down low an Gagner would be up every single time until He realizes who he needs to identify as his defensive responsability. The other issue I have is that he feels he's an elite offensive player. 4.8 mil a year for a player who has never scored 50 points in a season is a serious over pay. By adding a tough body To our bottom 6 we obtain more size and become harder to play against.

Avatar
#109 Shifty203
February 06 2014, 10:17AM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Cheers
24
cheers

Yay! Lets trade our second line center, with no one challanging for the position, for a 4th line winger, and retain half the salary! Awesome plan for keeping infinibuild going!

Avatar
#110 Old Retired Guy (A.K.A. Die-Nasty)
February 06 2014, 10:20AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
16
cheers
Jonathan Willis wrote:

Which is why trading him now is likely to be a mistake, unless you trade for another guy in a low ebb season.

Buy low, sell high.

Unfortunately, the Oilers management team has never had the courage or conviction that it takes to sell high. They are both not courageous enough and operating from a position of desperation.

Avatar
#111 Old Retired Guy (A.K.A. Die-Nasty)
February 06 2014, 10:22AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
19
cheers
Gorbahchano wrote:

Man, ON just should lay off Gagner, Christ. Why get rid of someone that we can't replace right now? Sure, Arco is great and could possibly fill the void but I'd rather have a guy with the amount of experience Gagner does. It's amazing how many times the oilers fans cry to have someone who is obviously having an off season traded. I agree that his performance of late is brutal compared to before. I'd give it time, if we trade him he'll just light is up and make the oilers look stupid for trading him like lots of past oilers have.

Fans clamouring for players to be traded at the wrong time is a direct result of the managements refusal and inability to trade said players at the right time.

Avatar
#112 Zamboni Driver
February 06 2014, 10:32AM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Cheers
41
cheers

Everyone realizes that the Edmonton Oilers are in SECOND LAST in the NHL, right?

How in the world would 'losing' Gagner make things any worse than they are????

Anyone really see him being any part of a future if this collection of losers ever starts getting borderline respectable.

and make no mistake, my friends, THAT is the goal. Borderline respectability.

Because right now, the Oilers are BELOW the New York Islanders and Florida Panthers in the standings.

and we laugh at them because they're such 'joke' organizations.

So trading Gagner would be a disaster?

Good lord, why?

Avatar
#113 DisappointedFan
February 06 2014, 10:36AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

@Shifty203

As a fellow arm-chair GM I can tell you with certainty that not all arm-chair GM's would not make for real GM's...and just because their NHL14 team has an 82-0 record doesn't mean they're ready for the big leagues!

Hence all the infini-build proposition trades out here...

Avatar
#114 Wonger
February 06 2014, 10:40AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
8
cheers
A-Mc wrote:

King hasn't produced much in the NHL thus far. His point totals over the last 4 seasons: 0, 14, 10, 23 (Albeit with very little NHL games under his belt). He has 23 points this season, in 58 games but that is the best he's ever done. Sam Gagner has 23 in 46 and most of those games he spent being a useless teet due to injury. At this point the most we could ever expect out of Dwight is far from a sure thing points wise and while i would love to have him, he's not nearly as valuable as Gagner.

Also, centermen have more value than wingers.

I dont think Gagner and the Oilers are in an addition by subtraction situation. Gagner adds value to a team, he just doesnt add the value that we need the most.

King for Gagner, imo, is a big mistake and nothing you said has shed light on anything to make me think otherwise.

now, throw in someone else or even a 2nd round pick + and things change a little.

One last point: We only have 2 people to trade that will garner any kind of value back in a trade. Sam Gagner and Jordan Eberle. We can all agree that the oilers dont need more spare parts guys, even if they are small upgrades to what we have. If we're going to use these two chips in a trade, it needs to be for similar quality players coming back the other way. If Gagner gets traded for a 3rd liner, then that leaves only Ebs as a piece to land any kind of top 4 defenseman; of which we need 2 or more of.

I dont trade Gagner for spare parts.

King for Gagner would be the best thing that ever happened to the Oilers!!! King- Nuge- Hall first line/ Simmonds- ????-Perron second line!!! Wooooo!

Avatar
#115 Lochenzo
February 06 2014, 10:41AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers

I'd be open to trading Sam Gagner if we were talking about Slava Voynov coming back the other way. A trade that won't happen, unfortunately.

Assuming that the Oilers make themselves into a perennial Cup contender, you look at the teams that the Oilers will have to beat to make it to the SCF. Chicago and LA are not only recent champs, they also have a young team. These guys are going to be good for a long time. I would not be thrilled about dealing Sam to Chicago and re-uniting him with Patrick Kane. Those two were lethal together in the OHL. Moving Sam to LA, does Sam find his stride and show more consistent flashes of a player that once scored 8 points in one game? If Sam moves his feet and gets to the net, he's a very good player. Being with Sutter in LA just might do wonders for Sam's game. I shudder to think that a Sam Gagner trade made in 2014 blocked off the Oilers from getting out of the Western Conference over the next decade.

Avatar
#116 S cottV
February 06 2014, 10:47AM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

Only way to showcase Gagner is to put players around him, that will push zone time forward - as much as is possible.

Gagner and Yak - together, is not good for either of them. Both require support around them to play in the offensive end. Keeping them together is sure to minimize the chances of moving Gagner, in any kind of reasonable deal.

If showcasing is an objective - the premier guys to play him with, would be Perron and Hall. Maybe send RNH a signal at the same time,to up his game by mixing up that top line.

If that can't be justified, then at least don't make Gagner look any worse than neccesary, by giving him Perron and Hemsky or Smyth and Hemsky.

Avatar
#117 Spydyr
February 06 2014, 10:58AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers
Zamboni Driver wrote:

Everyone realizes that the Edmonton Oilers are in SECOND LAST in the NHL, right?

How in the world would 'losing' Gagner make things any worse than they are????

Anyone really see him being any part of a future if this collection of losers ever starts getting borderline respectable.

and make no mistake, my friends, THAT is the goal. Borderline respectability.

Because right now, the Oilers are BELOW the New York Islanders and Florida Panthers in the standings.

and we laugh at them because they're such 'joke' organizations.

So trading Gagner would be a disaster?

Good lord, why?

IMO NOT trading Gagner before the start of next season would be a disaster.

Avatar
#118 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 11:00AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers
Wonger wrote:

King for Gagner would be the best thing that ever happened to the Oilers!!! King- Nuge- Hall first line/ Simmonds- ????-Perron second line!!! Wooooo!

I dont watch LA games that the Oilers aren't playing in, but if PIMs are even a remote indicator of a guy with grit.. King is not a gritty guy. He has 16 PIMs in 58 games this season.

Perron has 52PIMs, Yakupov has 32 PIMs, Gagner has 31PIMs, Taylor Hall has 22PIMs.

Infact if you look at the Oilers roster, in terms of PIMs, King would fit into the bottom quarter; and the kings are a team that promote tough hockey.

Yes he's big, but that's all he has. There are likely FA options that can skate on a 3rd/4th line who are just as big, and we're not losing Sam Gagner to get them.

Ultimately i would like King on the Oilers, but not if it's 1 for 1 with Gagner.

Avatar
#119 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 11:03AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers
Zamboni Driver wrote:

Everyone realizes that the Edmonton Oilers are in SECOND LAST in the NHL, right?

How in the world would 'losing' Gagner make things any worse than they are????

Anyone really see him being any part of a future if this collection of losers ever starts getting borderline respectable.

and make no mistake, my friends, THAT is the goal. Borderline respectability.

Because right now, the Oilers are BELOW the New York Islanders and Florida Panthers in the standings.

and we laugh at them because they're such 'joke' organizations.

So trading Gagner would be a disaster?

Good lord, why?

Trading Sam is fine. What will make this organization better is making good trades that add value. Gagner for King isn't similar value. It's a clear mismatch in player value and ability.

Avatar
#120 Jordan Nugent-Hallkins
February 06 2014, 11:03AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers

@A-Mc

I think PIMs don't tell the whole story with the Oilers. They take a lot of stick infractions because they're not moving their feet. Plus I wouldn't be surprised if fully half of Hall's penalties were unsportsmanlikes for beaking at the ref.

Avatar
#121 Zamboni Driver
February 06 2014, 11:04AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

@Spydyr

Yeah...I mean if they did it right now they might go on a 6-game losing streak or something!

Avatar
#122 etownman
February 06 2014, 11:05AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers

If Clifford or King got the ice time in Edmonton that Gagner gets I'm sure their numbers would be ok by comparison & they would certainly bring the element of physicality which Sam doesn't! It's not always about points when you deal for players like this but when you acquire them, you have to play them! I would be good with this move!

Avatar
#123 Al77
February 06 2014, 11:05AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers

I just hope at this point if Sam is going to L.A that it is for King and not Clifford which is being reported or speculated at this moment!

Avatar
#124 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 11:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Jordan Nugent-Hallkins wrote:

I think PIMs don't tell the whole story with the Oilers. They take a lot of stick infractions because they're not moving their feet. Plus I wouldn't be surprised if fully half of Hall's penalties were unsportsmanlikes for beaking at the ref.

You're right, it's not even close to telling the whole story. But even as a remote indicator of any kind of grit, King doesnt have any.

Look at Perron as an example. Perron has the perfect grit and compete that we need, we just need more of him in bigger frames. He's sitting in 2nd for PIMs on the Oil.. Under a fighter.

Avatar
#125 Zamboni Driver
February 06 2014, 11:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
11
cheers

@A-Mc

Okay, Gagner will score more probably.

Don't you think the Oilers need something slightly different from what they have?

Because they have a LOT of the same thing.

Avatar
#126 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 11:09AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers
Al77 wrote:

I just hope at this point if Sam is going to L.A that it is for King and not Clifford which is being reported or speculated at this moment!

I'm almost angry at the prospect of a Gagner for Clifford move. Clifford is a clear 4th liner. I can't see any way that the deal makes sense for us.

Avatar
#127 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 11:11AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers
Zamboni Driver wrote:

Okay, Gagner will score more probably.

Don't you think the Oilers need something slightly different from what they have?

Because they have a LOT of the same thing.

You're right and yes i do think we need something different.

I just think the Gagner for King is a clear mismatch in value and we'd be on the losing end of it.

Maybe Gagner for king AND clifford? That looks a little better to me, but it still feels like we're getting spare parts to some degree.

Avatar
#128 tabs
February 06 2014, 11:13AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers
A-Mc wrote:

I dont watch LA games that the Oilers aren't playing in, but if PIMs are even a remote indicator of a guy with grit.. King is not a gritty guy. He has 16 PIMs in 58 games this season.

Perron has 52PIMs, Yakupov has 32 PIMs, Gagner has 31PIMs, Taylor Hall has 22PIMs.

Infact if you look at the Oilers roster, in terms of PIMs, King would fit into the bottom quarter; and the kings are a team that promote tough hockey.

Yes he's big, but that's all he has. There are likely FA options that can skate on a 3rd/4th line who are just as big, and we're not losing Sam Gagner to get them.

Ultimately i would like King on the Oilers, but not if it's 1 for 1 with Gagner.

Understand it's no longer 1 for 1 when Gagner's salary is adjusted for.

Gagner's 4.8M contract makes any deal appear like the Oilers are losing when in fact they would be better off giving Gagner away for nothing coming back (no player, no drafts, zada)

Gagner has negative value when MacT signed that contract.

Avatar
#129 Al77
February 06 2014, 11:15AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
A-Mc wrote:

I'm almost angry at the prospect of a Gagner for Clifford move. Clifford is a clear 4th liner. I can't see any way that the deal makes sense for us.

I agree,but the oil have a love for these type of players,the problem is they don't target top six players in this mode I.e Simmonds,Marcus Foligno!

Avatar
#130 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 11:28AM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
ubermiguel wrote:

Dubnyk for Hendricks was overvaluing him?

get back to me in a year or so when the oil is payinghim 1.85 mill to play in the AHL.

Avatar
#131 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 11:33AM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers
A-Mc wrote:

King hasn't produced much in the NHL thus far. His point totals over the last 4 seasons: 0, 14, 10, 23 (Albeit with very little NHL games under his belt). He has 23 points this season, in 58 games but that is the best he's ever done. Sam Gagner has 23 in 46 and most of those games he spent being a useless teet due to injury. At this point the most we could ever expect out of Dwight is far from a sure thing points wise and while i would love to have him, he's not nearly as valuable as Gagner.

Also, centermen have more value than wingers.

I dont think Gagner and the Oilers are in an addition by subtraction situation. Gagner adds value to a team, he just doesnt add the value that we need the most.

King for Gagner, imo, is a big mistake and nothing you said has shed light on anything to make me think otherwise.

now, throw in someone else or even a 2nd round pick + and things change a little.

One last point: We only have 2 people to trade that will garner any kind of value back in a trade. Sam Gagner and Jordan Eberle. We can all agree that the oilers dont need more spare parts guys, even if they are small upgrades to what we have. If we're going to use these two chips in a trade, it needs to be for similar quality players coming back the other way. If Gagner gets traded for a 3rd liner, then that leaves only Ebs as a piece to land any kind of top 4 defenseman; of which we need 2 or more of.

I dont trade Gagner for spare parts.

Gagner has negative value. If the oil could just make him and his contract disappear they would be better off. So if they get "spare parts" back for very little money then it is a win for the oil.

Avatar
#132 Sal-Sational
February 06 2014, 11:34AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
11
cheers
Shifty203 wrote:

Yay! Lets trade our second line center, with no one challanging for the position, for a 4th line winger, and retain half the salary! Awesome plan for keeping infinibuild going!

He's not a 2nd line center... Arcobello did a better job (winning face-offs, Defensive zone coverage, Hit, Compete) when Gags was injured and instead of being rewared he got sent to the minors.. just count how many times Gagner turns the puck over and fails to clear the zone tonight... us Oiler fans LOVE to over value our trash.

Avatar
#133 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 11:35AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
Old Retired Guy (A.K.A. Die-Nasty) wrote:

Unfortunately, the Oilers management team has never had the courage or conviction that it takes to sell high. They are both not courageous enough and operating from a position of desperation.

exactly. Have they ever sold High? Paajarvi maybe?

Avatar
#134 Truth
February 06 2014, 11:37AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Cheers
9
cheers

Sam Gagner last season: 38 pts in 48 games

Evander Kane last season: 33 pts in 48 games

If Gagner for Clifford is the market, why don't the Oilers send Joensuu to Winnipeg for Kane? Heck, they should even retain some of Kane's salary.

Avatar
#135 Zamboni Driver
February 06 2014, 11:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@Serious Gord

...shooting against a big tall goalie with no lateral movement, but is a really nice guy that all the players and media in Albany really love.

Avatar
#136 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 11:38AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
9
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

Gagner has negative value. If the oil could just make him and his contract disappear they would be better off. So if they get "spare parts" back for very little money then it is a win for the oil.

Ya i dont agree, so there is no way we can discuss Mr Samwise.

The only problem with Sam is that he doesnt fit what this team needs badly. That's a far cry from "negative" value.

The cap is going up folks - Players like Callahan are looking to make ~7mill/yr. Gagner is NOT Callahan, but you can see how the $/value ratio is about to get ugly.

4.8 for samwise isn't a big deal and isn't preventing the team from signing good players.

Avatar
#137 tabs
February 06 2014, 11:41AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

Gagner has negative value. If the oil could just make him and his contract disappear they would be better off. So if they get "spare parts" back for very little money then it is a win for the oil.

See post #128 SG, we are both saying the same thing and until fellow posters realize the horrendously poor contract MacT signed they will forever believe that any deal struck for Gagner is poor.

Taking back part of contract in negotiation only helps sell the deal to the public.....

Avatar
#138 Lochenzo
February 06 2014, 11:57AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers

I think some of you are undervaluing secondary scoring. All Stanley Cup champs have secondary scoring. We know Sam Gagner can bring a decent amount of secondary scoring and if you have a 1st and 2nd line that can score at a decent clip, it would mask the problem of your 3rd and 4th lines not scoring.

I'd rather keep all of my trading chips until I know I have acquired a top 2 Dman. Then use what you have left to address other needs.

My priority list based upon urgency: 1) top 2 Dman 2) Goal (Scrivens?) 3) better two-way centre, hopefully with decent size. 4) size on wing.

Avatar
#139 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 12:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
9
cheers
Lochenzo wrote:

I think some of you are undervaluing secondary scoring. All Stanley Cup champs have secondary scoring. We know Sam Gagner can bring a decent amount of secondary scoring and if you have a 1st and 2nd line that can score at a decent clip, it would mask the problem of your 3rd and 4th lines not scoring.

I'd rather keep all of my trading chips until I know I have acquired a top 2 Dman. Then use what you have left to address other needs.

My priority list based upon urgency: 1) top 2 Dman 2) Goal (Scrivens?) 3) better two-way centre, hopefully with decent size. 4) size on wing.

Exactly.

And how many times has "Shuffling deck chairs" been brought up to describe Oiler trades with 3rd/4th line guys. Gagner for more deck chairs can't be part of the solution..

Avatar
#140 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 12:02PM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
A-Mc wrote:

Ya i dont agree, so there is no way we can discuss Mr Samwise.

The only problem with Sam is that he doesnt fit what this team needs badly. That's a far cry from "negative" value.

The cap is going up folks - Players like Callahan are looking to make ~7mill/yr. Gagner is NOT Callahan, but you can see how the $/value ratio is about to get ugly.

4.8 for samwise isn't a big deal and isn't preventing the team from signing good players.

He is being paid more than he is worth. There is no other team in the league that would pay as much. Thus he has negative value.

The cap is going up for everyone so cap room will continue to be an issue. Gagner is an overpay now and will continue to be one.

Avatar
#141 pkam
February 06 2014, 12:03PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

Gagner has negative value. If the oil could just make him and his contract disappear they would be better off. So if they get "spare parts" back for very little money then it is a win for the oil.

How about Stephen Weiss?

Ken Holland just signed him this offseason to a 5 year 4.9M contract to be their 2nd center.

If we can trade our negative asset Gagner straight for a 2nd center from the Wings should be a big win for us, right? Perhaps we should package a pick or a prospect just to sweeten the pot.

I know we shouldn't trust MacT but we should be able to trust Holland, right?

Avatar
#142 Tikkanese
February 06 2014, 12:03PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
10
cheers

I hate to burst people's bubbles but Arcobello is not a 2C either. He's arguably/probably an improvement over the current version of Gagner right now but won't be when Gagner returns to his old self, which is probably next year. Yes, even the "good" version of Gagner needs to play better defensively as well but that is not the point.

The Oilers' only strengths in the organization are on the Wing and the Defensemen prospects. Trading from a position of weakness(center) for another bottom 6 winger does not help in the slightest. If we want another bottom 6 winger, and I don't see why they would, we can always call up Ben Eager or Lander and throw him on the wing.

If they do trade a Center, namely Gagner, they'd be best to address an actual need, not more bottom 6 wingers. The needs are a top pairing Defenceman, a signed and starting goalie(Scrivens and Bryz are UFAs) or another Center. They'll likely have to throw in more pieces to acquire any of those but that is fine.

Also as JW stated, not much point in selling low unless you are getting something similar in return. Mike Richards has 1 goal all season and is a Center with a big contract. I'm sure the Oilers would have to sweeten the pot significantly but that is just one plausible swap. Voynov is another name I've heard in these LA rumours that would be great for the Oilers.

Avatar
#143 Mack Stong
February 06 2014, 12:03PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers

Gagner for Kyle Clifford alone is undervaluing on our end.

Gagner for Dwight King is more of an even trade. Both are around the same age, both are producing the same in points granted Gagner has scored the same in points in less games.

If Clifford is the only option then adding Trevor Lewis seems to balance the trade out.

If this is our only option, and if this is the only team putting an offer forward…then King is a more even trade…but Lewis and Clifford is tolerable….

Avatar
#144 michael
February 06 2014, 12:22PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

Mark Spector states that we need to be realistic in our expectations on the return for Sam Gagner.

I'd say that LA has to be realistic what they are offering.

Kyle Clifford? and a 3rd? Not on MacT's watch.I like to get kissed before I get screwed. But wow isn't a trade suppose to be good for both parties?

If what is rumored is the deal.I'd rather do nothing.Stick with the devil you know I say.

Avatar
#145 Ryan14
February 06 2014, 12:39PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

Gagner isn't the player that the Oilers and media want him to be or think he is.

His best season (2011-12) had him 43rd amongst centers in points with 47, tied with Tyler Bozak (the same Tyler Bozak that is considered by many to be grossly overpaid at 4.2), Frans Nielsen and Kyle Wellwood. Kyle Brodziak and Derek Roy were three points back of Gagner.

Gagner is a slightly above average point producer, below average face off man and has below average defensive ability.

If he was putting up 55, 65 points, then you could argue that he is worth more. As it stands now, with his current (and career) production levels, his inability to play anywhere that is not in the offensive zone, and poor face-off ability, the value for him is not that high. Add in his near $5 million cap hit and his inability to remain consistent at any degree, and his value diminishes even more.

He is what he is.

Avatar
#146 Mike
February 06 2014, 12:46PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

Gagner only has value to a select few teams, his contract is too high, he is a deeply flawed center (who can't take draws, and can't defend). The Oilers will be much better off drafting a larger body for center next year, or finding one through another trade. This means Gagner has to be moved. We aren't dealing from a position of any strength, if anything, Gagner has negative value as he is overpaid for what he does, and will be for some years moving forward.

Avatar
#147 Ed in Edmonton
February 06 2014, 12:54PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

The King's deal might might be as good as it gets for Gags. The Kings are desperate for scoring and might be forced into doing something they wouldn't normally.

The oil fans and media often over value the Oilers players. The fans are fans and is understandable. However, the media should now better, thay are supposed to have some expertise in these matters. How many in the media heralded Hemsky at 5 million year as a good deal?

Gagner is a marginal 2C (because he is too small and too defensively weak to be played at 3C) getting paid way above his ability. He is exactly what the Oil need to rid themselves of.

Avatar
#148 Zarny
February 06 2014, 01:03PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers

Good grief, drivel about "addition by subtraction".

Sorry but when you take a guy who has averaged 50 pts over 82 games and was on pace for 65 pts last year before ever hitting his prime off a team you are adding nothing.

Merely suggesting it is beyond stupid.

Avatar
#149 Mike
February 06 2014, 01:07PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers

"Good grief, drivel about "addition by subtraction".

Sorry but when you take a guy who has averaged 50 pts over 82 games and was on pace for 65 pts last year before ever hitting his prime off a team you are adding nothing."

How many points did he give away during this period? How many draws did he lose? He is a small body on a team full of small bodies, we need a large or physical 2nd line center.

Between some big bodies on LA he "might" be OK (albeit an expensive OK, not one I would give up a decent asset for), but on the Oilers he is a very poor fit. We were just as good with Arcobello but had $4 to $5million more cap space.

Avatar
#150 Zarny
February 06 2014, 01:08PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

Gagner has negative value. If the oil could just make him and his contract disappear they would be better off. So if they get "spare parts" back for very little money then it is a win for the oil.

Negative value?

That's possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Comments are closed for this article.