Don’t trade Hendricks or Gordon

  • tileguy

    JG wrote “He is also the vocal leader in the room. He has challenged the young players to take hold of the team and become a leader. He’s done it in a positive way, but the Oilers don’t have many vocal leaders and his value is more than just his solid play on the ice.”

    Nice if it’s true, but have you any real (anecdotal) evidence that backs that statement up. I would love to know why you think he is a leader in the dressing room.

    • Jason Gregor

      Every player is on record as stating he is the vocal leader. He also was on my show and he said, “It is time one of our young guys takes over the team. This has to become their team.”

      This is not new. Players said he added a lot of energy the minute he came in the room.

        • Jason Gregor

          Brett, or whatever name, I didn’t edit it. Editor did and I back him, since I didn’t see post. That poster makes snide remarks all the time, and writing “Try to keep up” was a simple little jab. If he can dish it out be able to handle it. That was far from anything personal or rude and the fact is Hendrick’s leadership has been discussed openly for months.

      • Burnward

        I’ve gathered that you are not a huge proponent of the analytical community Gregor, but I’m not sure predicting that a player’s ability will drop in their mid-thirties is using advanced stats so much as knowledge of how humans work…

        I agree that I would like to see Hendricks in oiler silks next year but it should be acknowledged that every year you hold on to a contract of a player in his thirties you are taking a big risk in seeing his ability-dollar ratio plummet. And no, it does not happen “magically”, but as a result if a natural aging process. A person slows down and their joints experience wear and tear regardless of how many nhl years they have.

        As much as myself and oiler fans love Hendricks, the guy is a beast, if the RIGHT offer comes along, you have to take it I’d say. MAYBE Hendricks is one of those guys who can play forever and still be effective, but those dudes are pretty rare. Odds are Hendricks won’t be a part of an oiler playoff push (because he’ll be 60, get it?! Hur Hur Hur), so it comes down to asset management. We can try and move whatever young prospect or pick we get in return for an established veteran in his late 20s later, but right now we have to ask the tough question, is two years of Matt Hendricks, admittedly admirable but likely to decline, fourth line work worth more than whatever assets we can get for him now? Depends on what the return is, if you ask me. Then again people rarely do, haha.

        • Jason Gregor

          So you want to trade Hendricks because he might decline and get a mid round pick in return that history shows has a very low % of actually playing in the NHL?

          How is that a smart decision? Hendricks might slow down, but I doubt his game drops off next year and in the final year of his deal the team can play him 10 minutes instead of 12 if need be.

          What is the right offer? I always hear this phrase and it means nothing. It is usually an offer that would never occur. Look at trade history and return on Hendricks is at best a 2nd round pick or a more likely a 3rd.

          Trading him for that makes the Oilers worse.

          • Burnward

            Hi Gregor, appreciate the response.

            I agree with your assessment that the oilers would be worse without Hendricks but my argument is that for the right deal (I’m not great at predicting trade returns but maybe a 2nd or 3rd and/or a young player in the AHL with a decent shot of making the show), yes, is still a smart move from an asset management perspective.

            Your point that there is a low percentage chance of picks or prospects panning out is fair. I just think you understate the risk of his ability plummeting. In the modern era, by the age of 34, 84% of nhl players have already retired. Even if you try and adjust for players who’s career flamed out early, screwing the results, (say before they hit free agency) you still get 76.8% of players being out of the game by the time they get to their mid 30s. That’s not even taking Hendricks’ coveted hard-hitting style into account.

            Either way you’re taking a risk, and I could probably be persuaded that draft picks or prospects are a bigger risk than 2 more years of Hendricks at 1.85 million. But a draft pick in 2015 and especially 2016 will probably retain value longer (because it will be an unknown value for at least a while) and can be traded again as a package for established talent or maybe even used to draft a legitimate player (you know what they say about blind squirrels).

            I guess what it comes down to is while I value Hendricks leadership skills and passion, I don’t know if two more years of it, at 1.85 million, with significant risk of decline in his actual abilities, on a team that will not be making deep playoff runs during that time, is worth more than a 2nd round pick, or maybe a late round and a prospect. Of course I don’t see them getting that kind of offer for Hendricks so the question is probably moot.

          • Jason Gregor

            Couldn’t agree more.

            They also better be trading that Pitts first round pick for NHL players. I’d trade the oilers 1st to if it isn’t one of the first 2

            Stop being a terrible team and get NHL players

  • tileguy

    I don’t put Gordon and Hendricks in the same category.

    Gordon is a better player, plays a more important role, is younger, and tougher to replace.

    Keep Gordon, move Hendricks, IMO, although you can make an argument for moving Gordon as well if the right opportunity arises, IMO.

    • bazmagoo

      We lost McDavid the second Eakins was fired. Dallas was a moron, an inept coach who was all talk and no game. That was obvious to a lot of us 20 games into last season. Coaching is a major factor in the NHL.

      Completely agree with Gregor. Only in Edmonton would a 23 year old prospect who was rushed into the NHL due to managerial incompetence be considered a potential bust. Anton possesses high end leadership skills and a solid defensive acumen, he could be a legitimate 3rd line center in a year or two.

      Trading Gordon or Hendricks would be pure lunacy. If MacT does he should be fired immediately.

  • Matt the Economist

    Trade Hendricks and Gordon!! Not sure what his name is, but there’s gonna be a really good prospect at the top of the draft that we can tank for next year!!!

  • bradleypi

    The reason you trade them is asset management. I would only trade one of them ans not both. I can’t see them staying at this level for their next contracts and they will have real value possibly now. Their contracts are on the high side for what they do.
    That is only contigent on getting something of value back for these players. Not just draft picks but prospects or a roster player too.

  • Jason Gregor

    You clearly edited your own comment. No ownership on your words there. Pretty cowardly.
    If you’re offering hugs, I’m open to that. We could do it on the air. We will call the segment “hugs at pubs”. See you at the druid.

    • Jason Gregor

      Gregor, I have no idea how you deal with buffoons like this guy. Easily one of the biggest whiners I’ve read on here in awhile.

      I wish the Nation would vote for which posters we could block for a month. Could this be one of the polls.

      The constant whiners or less than intelligent ones could be banned for a month. It would make the site even better.

      Please anyone at the Nation let me know if this is possible.

    • Jason Gregor

      Keep it up Brett. I’m on air. I don’t edit site and host a live radio show. Seems like you need a hug. I addressed your complaint. You don’t like it. Oh well. Move on.

      • Jordan88

        Hey Gregor,

        I like the idea of keeping Gordon on our 4th line.

        The man is a work horse and no one ever talks about him because. He just does exactly what is expected of him kudos to him.

        Hendricks, This guy is nothing but gold, he is vocal regardless of what anyone else can say you can see it on the benches at games.

        I say they remain Oilers until such time as Yakimov, Khaira, or Moroz can challenge for those spots. Then and only then should they be moved.

        • Jason Gregor

          Right now he is their 3rd line C, which makes him even more valuable.

          Of those three prospects, if one of them become a regular NHLer that will be great for the Oilers. Moroz and Khaira have a few more years at least of development based on how they’ve played this year.

          Yakimov is a bit ahead, and might get a few games next year. I’m with you in thinking no reason to rush out veterans until they have young players who are, “over ripe,” to quote Ken Holland.

  • Randaman

    With Gordon and Hendricks we are a 29th place team in a 30 team league. That plan is not working!

    Gordon is a UFA in 2017.

    If we trade him this year he is work a first round pick….

    If we trade him next year (because is not re-signing here) he worth a third round pick …

  • tileguy

    Just because a guy doesn’t have many NHL miles on him doesn’t mean he doesn’t suffer from similar wear and tear.

    He’s got almost 700 pro games under his belt and this really is the age guys start to decline.

    Eric Belanger had a great year before coming to Edmonton and his game completely fell apart.

    This is not to say it’s going to happen to Hendricks, but history suggests there’s a good chance.