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 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
#102 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
#103 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
#104 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
#105 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
#106 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
#107 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
#108 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
#109 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 01:37PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
2004Z06 wrote:

Why you think this guys salary is an issue is beyond me? In 2 years it will be the league minimum the way the cap is rising.

Besides, he will be traded for a pick if need be.

The Oilers have much bigger issues to deal with than how to fit Hendricks under their cap.

obviously there are bigger issues.

However Hendricks is an overpay. And every dollar off of the cap hurts as does the loss of a roster spot.

Cap inflation is not a sure thing given exchange rates and the continued softness of the US economy.

And Nashville couldn't unload him on any other team, what makes you think a year from now when he's in the AHL anyone is going to give up a pick for him?

Avatar
#110 pkam
February 06 2014, 01:55PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
Spydyr wrote:

I don't care how many points he scores. He is a career -58. Yes, plus-minus is not the best stat, but when you are minus year after year it shows something.

Getting a player back that scores less, but is constantly a plus player helps the team more.

The only 2 Oilers forwards who are + this year are Ryan Jones and Ben Eager, the next is Acton at -1. One thing for sure, they score less. I didn't know you like these 3 players so much.

Avatar
#111 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 01:56PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Truth wrote:

Gagner was 37th in points in all of the NHL last year. 18th among centers. On pace for 65 pts.

What he is not is the player he was for a month while recovering from a broken jaw that he received in the pre-season.

If he averaged out as a 50-60 point center in the NHL he is a second line center on most teams in the league.

But might as well give him up for Zach Stortini 2.0.

Please tell us which teams in the league would have Gagner as a 2C? I would guess that pretty much every team that is in the top 16 wouldn't which means that fewer than half would - IOW not "most".

And of course one needs to factor in his price tag...

Avatar
#112 Zarny
February 06 2014, 02:29PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
9
cheers
Spydyr wrote:

I don't care how many points he scores. He is a career -58. Yes, plus-minus is not the best stat, but when you are minus year after year it shows something.

Getting a player back that scores less, but is constantly a plus player helps the team more.

John Tavares is a career -43. Hopefully he never wears an Oilers jersey either I guess.

Ovechkin is currently -19 for the season. I suppose you'd be disappointed if the Oilers acquired him too?

Avatar
#113 A-Mc
February 06 2014, 04:30PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
Doctor Smashy wrote:

And for what it's worth, Zarny is owning ever Gagner-hating clown on this board today.

Agreed, and i'm glad he is. i was getting tired of repeating myself.

Avatar
#114 pkam
February 07 2014, 08:49AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Spydyr wrote:

You just compared Gagner to Tavares and Ovechkin.

Let that sink in a bit.

If you cannot tell which one does not belong with the other two, well you made everything you have ever said here irrelevant.

In case you have problem getting the message from Zarny's post, he means +/- has very little to do to a player's value. And he is responding to you trashing Gagner's poor +/-.

Kovalchuk probably has the worst career +/-. How many NHL teams would love to sign him. Did Team Russian ever left him out because of his poor +/- status?

Avatar
#115 Rod from Viking
February 05 2014, 10:25PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Jonathan Willis wrote:

In fairness, this internet pundit made it pretty clear that he wouldn't be willing to replace Gagner with Arcobello/Lander.

I was all for trading Gagner because I never liked his defensive game for the past three years, Kyle Clifford maybe could be a top 9 player possibly and could be that man in front of the net on the powerplay, he is not enough and eating a bunch of salary as well makes no sense. I like Dave Bolland for a veteran 2nd line center, what do you think?

Avatar
#116 Kodiak
February 05 2014, 10:39PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
12
cheers
David S wrote:

So you're pretty much down with trading all of our top 6 as their collective Corsi is below 50%? Right?

Our other top 6 are producing more, driving the bus more, have more potential and have had a lot less time in the NHL learning the defensive side of the game than Gagner has.

One of these things is not like the others.

Avatar
#117 Mr common sense
February 05 2014, 10:47PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
8
cheers
Jonathan Willis wrote:

Except that based on credible reports, they do. Probably because their team isn't scoring and only has a four-point gap between 'in the playoffs' and 'outside the playoffs' as a result.

This is EXACTLY what happened the year they won the cup, they couldn't score during the season, thing was Quick was on fire, not the case this year. LA's D is offensively impotent too. If I was Lombardi I wouldn't be too keen on Gagner, hence why he's low balling edm at present, which is consistent with what Friedman is reporting

Avatar
#118 Kodiak
February 05 2014, 10:53PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
8
cheers
David S wrote:

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.

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.

Avatar
#119 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
#120 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
#121 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
#122 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
#123 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
#124 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
#125 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
#126 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
#127 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
#128 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
#129 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
#130 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
#131 2004Z06
February 06 2014, 01:16PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
6
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

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

Why you think this guys salary is an issue is beyond me? In 2 years it will be the league minimum the way the cap is rising.

Besides, he will be traded for a pick if need be.

The Oilers have much bigger issues to deal with than how to fit Hendricks under their cap.

Avatar
#132 David S
February 06 2014, 02:02PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

Negative Value is not a difficult concept. If they are delivering less than they are getting paid - they have negative value.

Could the oil - if they had the 5 mill and the roster spot - find a better player than gagner? Given time - absolutely.

Comparing Getzlaf to Gagner via just points is ridiculous and does little to enlighten the discussion.

So by that logic MacT should have dumped RNH when he was recovering from his shoulder injury - because he wasn't performing up to his contract. Nevermind the whole "coming back from surgery/needs time to get back to 100%" crap, right?

Avatar
#133 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 02:18PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Cowbell_Feva wrote:

This could be a classic case of an Oiler going elsewhere and becoming grabbing a Cup ring. Gagner could be one of the best producing 2nd line centers in the league if the Kings play him with some of their big dogs. It's something he doesn't have here in Edmonton.

Saying that, his numbers are what they are, and his faceoffs and defensive ineptitudes are very real, so to my mind, no matter what, the Oilers may lose the trade due to the fact that he is almost guaranteed to do better in LA.

However, gaining a big body (I would hope for Toffoli or King) that could play top 6 in Edmonton would very quickly change the whole dynamic of the Oilers forwards. No more would opposition defenseman have the luxury of easily pushing the small kids around and not have a net presence, outside the 4th line. Intangibles that win hockey games.

Definetly not a solution to the defensive issues, but a good start in my opinion. P.S. Kyle Clifford was a guy I wish the Oilers would have pursued a lot harder as a Free Agent this past summer. He signed for just over $1 mill/per. To trade Gagner for him just doesn't make sense, when you could have had him for as little as he signed for in L.A.

Hope MacT knows what he's doing.

Well put.

Unfortunately I don't think MacT has a clue. Certainly the evidence thus far is strongly in my favour.

Avatar
#134 Zarny
February 06 2014, 02:22PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
8
cheers
Serious Gord wrote:

Negative Value is not a difficult concept. If they are delivering less than they are getting paid - they have negative value.

Could the oil - if they had the 5 mill and the roster spot - find a better player than gagner? Given time - absolutely.

Comparing Getzlaf to Gagner via just points is ridiculous and does little to enlighten the discussion.

I wasn't trying to compare or suggest Gagner and Getzlaf were similar players or had similar value.

Simply pointing out that players have up years and down years. 2 years ago Getzlaf only had 57 pt in 82 games. This year he's sitting at 64 pt in 55 games.

Was Getzlaf worthless or did he have "negative value" 2 years ago? No.

And sorry but I don't agree with your definition of "negative value". I think that concept is actually quite silly.

Avatar
#135 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 03:11PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers
Truth wrote:

2nd line C's

Anaheim - Mathieu Perrault

Buffalo - Cody Hodgson

Calgary - Sean Monohan/Matt Stajan

Chicago - Michael Handzus

Columbus - Artem Anisimov

Dallas - Cody Eakin

Florida - Nick Bjustad

Minnesota - Charlie Coyle (1st) Granlund (2)

Montreal - David Desharnais

Nashville - David Legwand

New Jersey - Travis Zajac

NYI - Frans Nielsen (career year)

Philadelphia - Brayden Schenn

Phoenix - Martin Hanzal

Toronto - Bozak/Kadri

Washington - Casey Wellman

Winnipeg - Mark Scheifele

I have not included the obvious ones (Det, Pit,LA) because Gagner would not be a 2C there, but you can make the case that a healthy Gagner is a better player than all of the above.

Better than hanzal, bozak, Monahan legwand handzus? Really?

Avatar
#136 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 03:13PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Rod from Viking wrote:

Gord, I usually agree but not this time, this team needs some gritty players that will protect the skill guys and hold others accountable until the Mitch Moroz/Kyle Chase/Darnell Nurse get here, is it not ideal and neither is the Ference contract but it is essential to building a "team".

He will be a distant memory but still drawing a paycheck oct '15.

Avatar
#137 Old Retired Guy (A.K.A. Die-Nasty)
February 06 2014, 03:32PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
4
cheers

I would take Monohan, Anisimov, Granlund, Desharnais, Zajac, Neisen,Kadri, and Scheifele over Gagner today.

I would take a couple more if they weren't so old.

I'd even take a few of the old guys like Legwand if you threw in a second rounder.

But I understand that there is a huge range of valuation for Gagner in the Oilers fan base. So it's just opinions which is fine. I'm not even that familiar with several guys on the list, like Bjugstad, Eakin, Coyle, Wellman.

Avatar
#138 cccsberg
February 06 2014, 03:33PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers
Zarny wrote:

Hanzal has never topped 36 pts so yes.

Bozak has hit 40 pts once and trailed Gagner by 10 pts last year so yes once again.

Monahan is a rookie who is on pace for 35 pts. In his rookie year Gagner had 49 pts.

Legwand is 33, past his prime, and has only ever topped 50 pts twice. Most years he's in the 30's or 40's. Legwand's career pt/gm is less than Gagner's too and his career FO% is only 0.46 compared to Gagner's 0.448. By the time he's 33 Gagner will have been a much better NHLer.

Handzus will be 37 this year and has only topped 50 pts twice. The last was in 2003-04...a decade ago. Since then he's averaged between 20-42 pts and has a career pt/gm well below Gagner.

For a bunch of whiners complaining Gagner doesn't produce enough you sure come up with a pile of sh*tducks who you think are better.

pts, pts, points... all about points.

That's what's got the Oilers in this mess in the first place, rather than building a well-rounded team.

Hey, if that's what you want, fine. Keep him! Finishing 29th-30th for a few more years looks good on ya...

Avatar
#139 Dan
February 06 2014, 03:49PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
Zarny wrote:

John Tavares is a career -43. Hopefully he never wears an Oilers jersey either I guess.

Ovechkin is currently -19 for the season. I suppose you'd be disappointed if the Oilers acquired him too?

Let's see. Ovechkin Olympic team. Tavares Olympic team. I don't think if every player on team Canada was injured as well as everyone on the reserved list was injured would Yzerman even be thinking about Gagner. So lets stay focused.

Avatar
#140 Serious Gord
February 06 2014, 03:50PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
Zarny wrote:

Hanzal has never topped 36 pts so yes.

Bozak has hit 40 pts once and trailed Gagner by 10 pts last year so yes once again.

Monahan is a rookie who is on pace for 35 pts. In his rookie year Gagner had 49 pts.

Legwand is 33, past his prime, and has only ever topped 50 pts twice. Most years he's in the 30's or 40's. Legwand's career pt/gm is less than Gagner's too and his career FO% is only 0.46 compared to Gagner's 0.448. By the time he's 33 Gagner will have been a much better NHLer.

Handzus will be 37 this year and has only topped 50 pts twice. The last was in 2003-04...a decade ago. Since then he's averaged between 20-42 pts and has a career pt/gm well below Gagner.

For a bunch of whiners complaining Gagner doesn't produce enough you sure come up with a pile of sh*tducks who you think are better.

Nothing you say takes into account contract and other tangible and intangible aspects of their games. And those things HAVE to be accounted for.

Avatar
#141 David S
February 06 2014, 08:27PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
camdog wrote:

The problems on this team are higher than Sam Gagner. When he had big, defensively reliable Penner on his wing he played a good game.

Problem is he doesn't work with small, defensively unreliable wingers. It's been 8 years of the same team make up. Doesn't seem to matter who the GM is, they still try the same things. That tells me the problem is higher than the GM, who would have thunk it?

^ THIS - and why he's gonna rip it up in LA.

Avatar
#142 horndog77
February 05 2014, 10:20PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

Perhaps Edmonton wants to clear cap space. There is a lot of players to sign or resign next year. Just looked at this years free agents ....yikes! Any trade for Gagner should involve a decent defenseman because there isn't much too Like in free agency

Avatar
#143 The Soup Fascist
February 05 2014, 10:50PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Cheers
7
cheers
Mr common sense wrote:

Irrelevant to my 2 points. Read them again.

IF it's true that a Stanley Cup team who understands grit, defence and muscle wins championships is all of a sudden confused that a frail overhyped mediocre player will help them, ACT NOW!!

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.

Avatar
#144 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
#145 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
#146 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
#147 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
#148 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
#149 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
#150 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.

Comments are closed for this article.