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
#1 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
#2 Mr common sense
February 05 2014, 10:24PM
Trash it!
11
trashes
Cheers
41
cheers

Edm media eh? Let's not forget 2 things people:

1) Gagner is over valued by edm, he actually is simply worth a 3rd or 4th liner, nothing to be alarmed at here

2) the biggest benefit in moving Gagner is that he is gone and this crutch of a skilled midget being adequate as a 2nd C is once and for all over. The Oil then have NO choice but to solve that problem

Avatar
#3 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
#4 A-Mc
February 05 2014, 09:46PM
Trash it!
23
trashes
Cheers
38
cheers

Wow if this went down as a king for gagner deal, I think we would be getting fleeced. Even if the Oilers don't retain any salary.

There is a big gap between a near 50 pt 2nd line center and a 3rd line winger that is maybe 30 pt guy.. even if he is big.

Avatar
#5 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
#7 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
#8 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
#9 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
#10 the tikk
February 05 2014, 10:07PM
Trash it!
13
trashes
Cheers
31
cheers

Just zero idea why on earth they would rush to move Gagner now, when:

- They need a helpful roster player back, which a contender would be less likely to give up

- The cap is going up in the offseason and teams will have way more flexibility for moving contracts

- His play may well improve over the last third of the season, increasing his value on the summer market

So really - why would they feel they need to make this move now?

Avatar
#11 Tuningout
February 05 2014, 09:44PM
Trash it!
13
trashes
Cheers
30
cheers

Great voice of reason ! Sometimes I wonder which management "team" shows up. The one that traded for Perron. Or the one that claimed McIntyre. I don't mind seeing Sam go. But only for an upgrade or two A level young players that could be upgrades. Too much to ask ?

Avatar
#12 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
#14 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
#15 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
#16 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
#17 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
#18 Kodiak
February 05 2014, 10:24PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Cheers
25
cheers
David S wrote:

Thank god internet pundits don't make actual NHL deals. Surely MacT isn't dumb enough to think either of Arco or Lander can really replace Gagner.

Think about it. Gagner's season was a writeoff the moment he took Kassian's stick to the face. So the only true point of reference you have for his value is last season, where 38/48 makes him an effective 65 point scorer. In other words, a legit 2LC. Yeah his D needs work, but when a guy is playing that far up the roster points count for alot. Neither Arco or Lander can step to that. MacT knows it too.

If Gagner gets traded, it'll be over the summer when we'll be able to get a realistic return for the player Gagner is, not the player you see right now.

The only true point of reference is what he's ever put up in a season, and that's 47. 65 point scorer. Hilarious. He's never been close to that. And it doesn't matter if you score 80 points if you are giving up 90 and that's Gagner's game.

This team sucks and changes need to be made. Gagner has had tons of time to learn to play in his own zone and still hasn't figured it out and most likely never will. Time to cut bait

Avatar
#19 bazmagoo
February 05 2014, 10:32PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
25
cheers

Personally I'd do Gagner for King in a heartbeat. I'm more comfortable with Arco or Ladner battling for that 2nd line centre spot than I am with Gags in there. Gagner can't/doesn't want to play defence!

This is exactly what everyone has been talking about for ages, and would shake up the team. Will Gagner do well in LA? Absolutely. Is Dwight King the type of player we need in Edmonton? Absolutely.

If you can sign Ladner and Arco to 2 year, one way deals in the offseason in the $600k range I'd be more than happy to see them battle it out for that 2nd line spot. The only thing I'd be hesitant with is eating half of Gagner's contract, that would be hard to swallow. Disagree with you on this one Willis.

Avatar
#20 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
#21 David S
February 05 2014, 10:17PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Cheers
24
cheers
Al Low wrote:

Great points but this team is terrible with Gagner as a 2nd line centre. If we get Sam Reinhart in the draft, we've got the 2nd line centre covered for years to come. Obviously, Ekblad would be ideal but if somebody else wins the lottery draft, we still get a nice consolation prize in Reinhart. Either way, whatever is needed based on the draft will be have to be addressed with an Eberle deal in the offseason.

Because Sam Reinhart will just step into the 2LC position? You're joking, right?

This folks is why the Oilers can get away with tanking for high draft picks. There's alot of fans out there that actually believe a lineup of young skilled guys and top prospects will somehow be competitive. [Note] The entire western conference begs to differ.

Our D is abysmal and all the team's progress is negated until it's addressed. Trading the pick alone or as part of a package to acquire a 1-2 D man is the only way we'll get out of this mess. We no longer have the luxury of waiting three years to see our next high pick develop. That's just a fact we all have to accept.

Avatar
#22 Say what again
February 05 2014, 10:17PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Cheers
24
cheers

I'm just not convinced Gagner has much value at all. When he's not a scoring machine (which he barely rates as even at the best of times) he provides little of value and is even a detriment. Right now he's a significant reason why we are 29th place with 19 wins. Hell, he had his detractors even before this season when he wasn't this bad.

Avatar
#23 David S
February 05 2014, 10:44PM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Cheers
24
cheers

I'm going to back out of this one because it seems like a no-win for sanity tonight.

But I'll leave you with this. If you're judging the value of Sam Gagner based on what you're seeing this year, you're doing the whole thing wrong.

Avatar
#24 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
#25 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
#26 james_dean
February 05 2014, 10:07PM
Trash it!
14
trashes
Cheers
22
cheers

DONT DO IT MAC!

Avatar
#28 Young Oil
February 05 2014, 09:53PM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Cheers
21
cheers

Good article JW, retaining half of Gagner's salary for two years would be insane, unless the return was very substantial, which is very unlikely considering the way he has played this year.

That being said, in my opinion trading Gagner would almost be addition by subtraction the way he is playing right now. If any team is willing to take that whole contract, and not send a poor contract back the other way, that's a deal worth taking. Even if it's a Clifford type coming back. Obviously a cap team like LA can't do this, so I agree that they are not the ideal trading partner.

Then, the $4.8M could potentially be put towards a center that can play at each end of the rink, like Stastny.

Avatar
#29 Kodiak
February 05 2014, 10:15PM
Trash it!
19
trashes
Cheers
21
cheers
A-Mc wrote:

Wow if this went down as a king for gagner deal, I think we would be getting fleeced. Even if the Oilers don't retain any salary.

There is a big gap between a near 50 pt 2nd line center and a 3rd line winger that is maybe 30 pt guy.. even if he is big.

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.

Avatar
#30 Taylor Gang
February 05 2014, 10:44PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
20
cheers

Meh, I'm not impressed with Gagner's play but I'd argue that Gagner is a better asset than the players mentioned. This season is a complete writeoff anyways so we should wait until the offseason.

Avatar
#31 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
#32 David S
February 05 2014, 10:08PM
Trash it!
19
trashes
Cheers
19
cheers

Thank god internet pundits don't make actual NHL deals. Surely MacT isn't dumb enough to think either of Arco or Lander can really replace Gagner.

Think about it. Gagner's season was a writeoff the moment he took Kassian's stick to the face. So the only true point of reference you have for his value is last season, where 38/48 makes him an effective 65 point scorer. In other words, a legit 2LC. Yeah his D needs work, but when a guy is playing that far up the roster points count for alot. Neither Arco or Lander can step to that. MacT knows it too.

If Gagner gets traded, it'll be over the summer when we'll be able to get a realistic return for the player Gagner is, not the player you see right now.

Avatar
#33 Al Low
February 05 2014, 10:42PM
Trash it!
15
trashes
Cheers
19
cheers

It's amazing how much Oiler fans drink the Katz Kool-Aid. Always overvaluing our players. What other idiot GM would have paid Gagner 4.8M per year? They need to cut their losses and move on. Get what you can.

Avatar
#34 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
#35 Doctor Smashy
February 06 2014, 04:21PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
19
cheers

The hate for Gagner is getting a little silly. We can all acknowledge that Gagner has had a rough year defensively but I have yet to read anything even close to convincing explaining why the Oilers are generally so bad this year...everyone. Sure our defense is weak but does that make Hall pass to no one in particular at the point? Does that make Eberle hang on to the puck forever without shooting? Does that make Yakupov inexplicably fall down while doing a routine pivot? Seriously people, PhD theses will be written on why the Oilers have been THIS bad this year. As for Gagner - the facts are these:

From the 2007 entry draft there is exactly one player who has more points than the reviled Sam Gagner - it is Patrick Kane.

There are exactly five players who have more points per game than Gagner from the 2007 draft (Hmmm, he was 6th overall pick....). They are: Patrick Kane - 0.964 pts/game Jamie Benn - 0.759 pts/game Logan Couture - 0.731 pts/game Max Pacioretty - 0.636 pts/game Jakub Voracek - 0.632 pts/game

Sam Gagner is at 0.612 pts/game

So Kane is the best, fine. Benn was a 5th round pick and Dallas picked 4 dudes ahead of him - so that makes every GM an idiot I suppose. Logan Couture has been on a GREAT team for his whole career - might have something to do with it, might not. Pacioretty is ahead of Gags on the strength of ONE good season - he's a good player but has played far fewer games...we'll see how his career looks in 10 years. Anyone who would rather have Voracek, well sure he's bigger but I'm not sure he all that much better than Gagner - tough to say because I haven't seen him play very much.

Gagner has put up the same points per game practically ever year (higher last year and lower this year by about the same amount). You can call that a lack of improvement or you can call that consistency. Who cares. He is very good player on a very bad team with alot of problems. You DO NOT trade Sam Gagner for a third line plug.

Avatar
#36 The Soup Fascist
February 05 2014, 10:08PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
18
cheers

I like these three guys but I agree, I am not sure one of these guys for Gagner at half his salary makes this team any stronger.

What is the rush? See if Gagner continues his recovery from the injury, increasing his trade value. If the Oil are bound and determined to trade him - wait until the draft, unless there is a substantially better offer on the table. Contending teams will be more likely to consider moving impact guys after the playoffs as part of a package. They won't now.

Don't move Gagner for the sake of moving him. The Oil need a good sized two way 2C or top pairing defenseman. Rather than squandering Gagner for a 3 or 4 line coke machine winger, package him up in the offseason - maybe with your 2014 pick and / or prospect - to gain something you REALLY need.

MacT you and the Oil are in a hole. Some free advice ...... STOP DIGGING!

Avatar
#37 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
#38 David S
February 05 2014, 10:36PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Cheers
17
cheers
Jonathan Willis wrote:

Is "100% correct" code for "this report from established journalists with impeccable credentials doesn't fit into my worldview and therefore I will pretend it's a fanboy fantasy?"

I'll hang up and listen.

I SO desperately want to multi-prop this.

Avatar
#39 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
#40 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
#41 Woodguy
February 05 2014, 10:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
16
cheers
Smokey wrote:

Kings had a small fiester winger/center by the name of Mike Cammalleri they dumped a few years ago when they were crap. Why would they want Sam Gagner? Why do they even need him? Who makes this stuff up?

Bob MacKenzie from TSN was the first to mention Gagner to the Kings.

Take it up with him.

Avatar
#42 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
#43 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
#46 Al Low
February 05 2014, 10:50PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Cheers
15
cheers
David S wrote:

Because Sam Reinhart will just step into the 2LC position? You're joking, right?

This folks is why the Oilers can get away with tanking for high draft picks. There's alot of fans out there that actually believe a lineup of young skilled guys and top prospects will somehow be competitive. [Note] The entire western conference begs to differ.

Our D is abysmal and all the team's progress is negated until it's addressed. Trading the pick alone or as part of a package to acquire a 1-2 D man is the only way we'll get out of this mess. We no longer have the luxury of waiting three years to see our next high pick develop. That's just a fact we all have to accept.

And staying the course with your boy Gagner's working? I'd take my chances on a guy like Reinhart over Gagner any day. Last I checked, Edmonton's not exactly going to be competing for a playoff spot for another 2 or 3 years. I'd rather have a solid 2 way guy in Reinhart in 3 years than a so-called gritty, 2LC who hasn't learned to pay D in his 7 years and occasionally puts up an 8 point game.

Avatar
#47 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
#48 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
#49 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
#50 G-Unit
February 05 2014, 10:00PM
Trash it!
19
trashes
Cheers
14
cheers

I couldn't agree more. The clambering to trade guys that aren't producing is getting old. Hemsky must go? Gagner must be traded? You should only trade to improve the club, not out of desperation to be bold. I see more bad trades coming just to be seen as bold. Don't worry MacT will use big words and these bad moves will be his alone. 1990 where have you gone?

Comments are closed for this article.