Proposal: ANA - EDM
- Thread starter saskduckfan
- Start date
MMC
Global Moderator
1st and Holloway is the starting point for Gibson alone, gotta be more than Skinner coming back if we're taking 2 cap dumps
Honestly for a goalie the only extra might be a 2nd round pick. And Gibson has not been helping his stock lately. Last 8 starts since the all-star game, 2-6 .808 SV% 6.31 GAA. If you can get Holloway and 1st, take it while you can get anything.
OG Eberle
Registered User
- Aug 25, 2011
- 1,571
- 1,980
Turris and Koskinen are both UFA at the end of this season. Hardly cap dumps as they're off the books in 2 months.
I think this is a pretty fair offer overall. Would offer another prospect or supplementary 2nd perhaps to get it done as well.
Akrapovince
Registered User
- May 19, 2017
- 3,859
- 4,350
Would be great if Ottawa was able to take on both those expiring contracts from Edmonton for a second round pick in next years draft.
Ottawa:
2023 2nd round EDM pick
Koskinen
Turris
Edmonton:
Gibson
Anaheim:
2022 1st round EDM pick
Holloway
Skinner
Pretty huge package coming from Edmonton though.
1st + 2nd + Holloway + Skinner for Gibson and getting rid of two expiring UFAs.
Ottawa:
2023 2nd round EDM pick
Koskinen
Turris
Edmonton:
Gibson
Anaheim:
2022 1st round EDM pick
Holloway
Skinner
Pretty huge package coming from Edmonton though.
1st + 2nd + Holloway + Skinner for Gibson and getting rid of two expiring UFAs.
ChaoticOrange
Registered User
yeah, no, Edmonton’s not going to give up a 2nd just to dump 20 games of Turris. Koskinen’s not a dump, he’s playing quite well. A damned sight better than Gibson is lately. I wouldn’t give up that much for him.
Akrapovince
Registered User
- May 19, 2017
- 3,859
- 4,350
Holloway would be an absolute non-starter for me if I’m Edmonton.
Maybe replace Turris with Kassian then? I’m sure Kassian is the type of player our management wouldn’t mind taking for an asset.
Gurglesons
Registered User
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,198
- 13,215
Yep, a 10 team NTC. I’m willing to bet Edmontons on that list.
There is a weird irrationality surrounding "cap dumps". If the Ducks considered a 1st, Holloway, and Skinner an attractive return for Gibson, then taking on the two expiring contracts in Koskinen and Turris is just the cost of doing business. It's what both teams need to do in order to get the assets they want.
No to Kassian. He still has 2 years on the co tract. Ducks only want salary cap dumps back who are UFA.
Akrapovince
Registered User
- May 19, 2017
- 3,859
- 4,350
Would be my Senators taking on the dump at the expense of Edmonton, in my particular proposal.
This is true . Holland would rather sign 40 year old Smith ,Turris and other AHLer then pay for something good . He is too worried about the prospect doing well for the other team .
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
It's much less of an issue if neither contract goes beyond this season.
Bouboumaster
Registered User
- Jul 4, 2014
- 10,765
- 9,236
Not a bad trade for both team I think
It helps Ducks quick rebuild and the Oilers finally solve their most pressing issue in the best way possible. Gibson is IMO a top 10 goalie in the league. They can now go on to get one or two good d-men
It helps Ducks quick rebuild and the Oilers finally solve their most pressing issue in the best way possible. Gibson is IMO a top 10 goalie in the league. They can now go on to get one or two good d-men
bucks_oil
Registered User
- Aug 25, 2005
- 8,738
- 5,132
100% agree on this. I wish more people would get it. There is no way to do any deal, especially a "futures" for "present" deal, without equalizing cap in the modern NHL.
Edmonton's offer includes only "no term" cap, which is the best kind. For Anaheim's part, they want prospects and picks, which carry no cap presently, so the only deals they can make will see them taking back ~equivalent cap to Gibson. Any other team making an offer for Gibson would have to include expiring cap, or they'd have to give MORE assets to offset the non-expiring cap.
Back to the OP. I consider Bourgault and Holloway as equal prospects, but Holloway is older and therefore closer to ready... we need that. You may end up with the better player in Bourgault anyway... so I would counter:
1st, Bourgault, Skinner, Koskinen and Turris.
That's a solid return. Essentially two recent firsts and a B+ prospect goalie. I don't see anyone beating it. Nobody needs a goalie as bad as we do and that's a pretty high premium given historical values.... I can't think of a goalie traded for more recently.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 42,546
- 39,384
I think that’s pretty fair from both perspectives, cap dumps are fine they are ufas…. We could always retain on them and potentially get later picks for them or something
I’d swap out bourgaults for Holloway if that made oiler more comfortable.
If Holloway stayed, I’d throw in sam steel or similar valued player
I’d swap out bourgaults for Holloway if that made oiler more comfortable.
If Holloway stayed, I’d throw in sam steel or similar valued player
Last edited:
no trade lists are just them saying i don't want to play in Canada
I agree since they are both expiring contracts, but when there is term that completely changes.
- Apr 20, 2016
- 5,957
- 6,980
Seems like a fair enough trade. I don't think it happens because they are both in the same division, and interdivision trades are so rare. Nobody wants the other side to have a player terrorize them for a decade.
Wow, you mean I put together a trade proposal that everyone deems fair to both sides.
The 2022 1st going back to the Ducks is an unprotected 1st as well, and a conditional pick can also be added depending on where that 1st ends up being. If Oilers go on to win a Cup with Gibson this year, the 32 overall pick is not that enticing.
The 2022 1st going back to the Ducks is an unprotected 1st as well, and a conditional pick can also be added depending on where that 1st ends up being. If Oilers go on to win a Cup with Gibson this year, the 32 overall pick is not that enticing.
Very rarely do 1sts go unprotected. If one gets dealt this trade deadline by anyone it'll have some protection attached. That is just the reality of the NHL.
I agree with that as well (which is why I qualified my post with "on expiring contracts). Even when there is some term, people tend to overblow the value of a real or perceived cap dump without applying any context.
