The Sens aren't moving Zub unless its an overpayment
They are too weak on the Right Side to move him
and if we do I'd want atleast a 1st, 2nd and a prospect for him might be an overpayment but I see that as being what it would take.
Value of: 2nd Pairing RHD to Edmonton
- Thread starter Bryanbryoil
- Start date
They are too weak on the Right Side to move him
and if we do I'd want atleast a 1st, 2nd and a prospect for him might be an overpayment but I see that as being what it would take.
Kraken Jokes
Registered User
- May 28, 2010
- 3,991
- 1,512
Larsson is most likely a deadline move, but possible. Depends on the offer. Not sure how the Oilers fit him under the cap though.
Oilers will likely address this need at the deadline as well.
Oilers will likely address this need at the deadline as well.
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
Depending on how the Kraken do this year, I personally have him at the very top of the list. I'd imagine there's an open dialogue all season between Larsson and his buddies in Edmonton.
Easy swap would be Ceci's expiring deal and some futures heading Seattle's way.
He just sounds like the perfect fit both short and long term, assuming they'd like Broberg to play LD.
Last edited:
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
I agree about two things - Faulk is the right player for what's being requested. Hungry, capable vet with some miles left ... but also he wouldn't waive for Canada.
Last year his form was off but it felt much more like some type of lingering injury as opposed to a capability issue. so if he rebounds and looks like the last couple seasons AND if he can talk himself into getting a good chance at a Cup then maybe he waives for Canada.
Last year his form was off but it felt much more like some type of lingering injury as opposed to a capability issue. so if he rebounds and looks like the last couple seasons AND if he can talk himself into getting a good chance at a Cup then maybe he waives for Canada.
Bryanbryoil
Pray For Ukraine
- Sep 13, 2004
- 87,738
- 38,156
$5 Million was my top number. Every dollar below that helps.
Jeff Jackson has been winning trades, so he is the guy I would want to negotiate a deal with Ottawa in this case.
Artem Zub is paid $4.6 AAV for three more years. Let's chew that over Oiler fans.
Ekholm Bouchard
Broberg Zub
Nurse Ceci . Lets chew on a 9.25 million dollar D playing 3rd pairing
We our still being screwed by Chia
ChaoticOrange
Registered User
You mean Ken Holland.
Nobody made him give Nurse that contract. We'd have been better off if he walked, in all honesty. 2nd pairing LD are a dime a dozen.
- Sep 27, 2017
- 5,700
- 3,008
McHelpus
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2021
- 2,392
- 3,487
What would the cost of Larsson at 50% at the deadline? However, I do feel like he resigns with Seattle.
Chet Manley
Registered User
Now that's some hyperbole. You think a couple of decent moves for prospects means Jackson can convince Ottawa to give away Zub?
Seems like a situation that could work for both. If Larsson would agree to a sign and trade return to Edmonton I'd offer a package comparable to the Ekholm return no question.
As for the cap Ceci is an expiring contract and if in the deal as a cap dump like (Barrie was) in the Ekholm deal it's least workable I'd imagine.
Ekholm had 2.5 years when he was traded. Larsson for one playoffs run isn't worth 1st, Ceci and prospect
Idk how you roll the lines for icetime but wasn't the point to get a new rhd was to get one that played well with nurse?
If we kept ceci which I don't mind put with bro and put zub with nurse
Dime a dozen? Then why have the Edmonton Oilers always been bad at acquiring them through any means?
The Oilers would have had to give that cap to a UFA, which more often than not results in a poor investment.
When we traded for Ekholm, it wasn't a deal being made out of desperation, because we still had Darnell playing respectable top four minutes. If the Oilers went into a season with Kulak as a potential top pairing guy, that team would've been a punching bag on the trade markets.
ChaoticOrange
Registered User
Ekholm is a top pairing defenceman, don’t get it twisted.
Someone competent should have been able to find a 2nd pairing LD with ease. Hell even Chiarelli managed that much.
No, I don't. I didn't say that. I said I'd prefer Jeff Jackson handle a trade like this because he has made good deals for Edmonton lately.
Why are you trying to make is sound like something different?
The Devilish Buffoon
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2018
- 12,708
- 11,497
Sens wouldnt even do that lol. Trading 11th + two 2nds for Chychrun, Chychrun for Jensen + 3rd, and then Zub for ~22nd, 55th, and a prospect would be one of the worst exercises in team building ever know
We would probably take Ceci for JBD or Hamo+mid pick, assuming Edmonton gets an RD elsewhere.
Theres no deal to be made to get Zub to Edmonton, though.
Not getting anything twisted. But we were a team in a playoff position with an already acting top pair defenseman in Nurse. We weren't a team bent over a barrel, desperately needing Ekholm. We were the team willing to get them out of that investment to an older player, which is why we were able to get him for the favorable price. If he wasn't available, there were other directions we could've gone.
Look at the options available the summer of Nurse's extension. Then take into account that we're the Edmonton Oilers and not the Vegas Golden Knights or the Florida Panthers. It didn't look good when WE treat our core players like disposable assets.
Even the Sekera signing had a downside that crippled this team for several seasons because he was an already aging veteran player who was signed several years ahead of the team's competitive window.
Darnell Nurse's extension was a 'necessary evil'. He was a player that fit the team's age group. He filled an immediate positional need. And he logged some important minutes in years where the team progressed.
BudBundy
Registered User
- May 16, 2005
- 5,994
- 8,129
The crime was Chiarelli tying up so much cap space in the likes of Lucic that Nurse got bridged twice to the brink of UFA. At the time Nurse was a poor man’s 1st pairing and McDavids Bestie. Plus losing him for nothing to free agency would’ve been terrible asset management.
In my premise of the trade it's based around Larsson extending also. I wouldn't do a 1st + prospect on level with the Ekholm package for purely a rental.
russ99
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2011
- 3,928
- 2,939
Everyone is forgetting that Larsson didn't want to come back to Edmonton because of what happened to his dad.
