Toggle sidebar

Proposal: Klefbom at 50% for Pokka+Gustafsson+

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
I always forget how weird Klefbom's contract is.

Anyone retaining 2 million for 7 years is going to get fired. I don't care who they get back
 
If we're giving up Klefbom at a salary of 2 million per long term, Keith is coming back. That's literally the only piece that makes me consider it. He's a bargain as is at 4 per
 
The Nuge said:
If we're giving up Klefbom at a salary of 2 million per long term, Keith is coming back. That's literally the only piece that makes me consider it. He's a bargain as is at 4 per
Click to expand...

I definitely had the wrong idea about Klefbom's value. I saw him as a second pair on the Oilers, and see that he's not on Sweden's team.

I thought he was a garden variety #4. Taking out retention, what's his actual value?
 
RememberTheRoar said:
I definitely had the wrong idea about Klefbom's value. I saw him as a second pair on the Oilers, and see that he's not on Sweden's team.

I thought he was a garden variety #4. Taking out retention, what's his actual value?
Click to expand...

Not making proposals for players you know nothing about is probably a pretty good guideline. I just don't get the logic behind it. You want the player but don't know anything about him? Why not just make a proposal for someone you actually know to fit the mold you're looking for instead of making completely random and inaccurate assumptions?

Imagine I didn't know anything about Hjalmarsson and just looked at his stats and saw he doesn't produce much offense. I offer you Benoit Pouliot and Mark Fayne for Hjalmarsson. He looks like a garden variety bottom pairing defender to me. How stupid would I sound? Pretty stupid. Why would I go making that proposal, ignorant as I am of the player in question? I wouldn't.
 
This might be the worst trade proposal in HFB history.

Klefbom is retained too? The optics are just astoundingly awful.
 
Nothing As It Seems said:
Not making proposals for players you know nothing about is probably a pretty good guideline. I just don't get the logic behind it. You want the player but don't know anything about him? Why not just make a proposal for someone you actually know to fit the mold you're looking for instead of making completely random and inaccurate assumptions?

Imagine I didn't know anything about Hjalmarsson and just looked at his stats and saw he doesn't produce much offense. I offer you Benoit Pouliot and Mark Fayne for Hjalmarsson. He looks like a garden variety bottom pairing defender to me. How stupid would I sound? Pretty stupid. Why would I go making that proposal, ignorant as I am of the player in question? I wouldn't.
Click to expand...

I hear ya. I admittedly made the proposal for the contract, and had misconceptions of Klefbom. The idea of longterm cost control of a young player got me excited.

The beauty of making a mistake like this is; now knowing just a little bit more about the league.
 
RememberTheRoar said:
I definitely had the wrong idea about Klefbom's value. I saw him as a second pair on the Oilers, and see that he's not on Sweden's team.

I thought he was a garden variety #4. Taking out retention, what's his actual value?
Click to expand...

His actual value is much, much higher to Edmonton than to anyone else at this point, however, he is at least a #2/3 with the potential to be much more than that very soon.
 
RememberTheRoar said:
I hear ya. I admittedly made the proposal for the contract, and had misconceptions of Klefbom. The idea of longterm cost control of a young player got me excited.

The beauty of making a mistake like this is; now knowing just a little bit more about the league.
Click to expand...

Well, at least you didn't disappear after getting roasted for this proposal. It's pretty terrible, but who cares? You got a few people talking about hockey. That's what we're here for!

But yes, you definitely STB on this one.
 
Bad proposal, but klefbom is not a #2 defencemen. He played like 20 games last year.
 
Drew4u said:
Bad proposal, but klefbom is not a #2 defencemen. He played like 20 games last year.
Click to expand...

It's debatable whether he's a #2 or a #3, although he played at a very high level before his injury last year. I would consider him a low-end #2 right now, and re-evaluate that after I've seen some games this season
 
RememberTheRoar said:
I definitely had the wrong idea about Klefbom's value. I saw him as a second pair on the Oilers, and see that he's not on Sweden's team.

I thought he was a garden variety #4. Taking out retention, what's his actual value?
Click to expand...

He's realistically a #3 at this point, but one could debate him being better than that, and is viewed as a long term fixture on our top pairing (by fans and management). In terms of comparable value, I'd say ask yourself what you'd want for Hammer, and add a bit because of the state of our defense
 
RememberTheRoar said:
I hear ya. I admittedly made the proposal for the contract, and had misconceptions of Klefbom. The idea of longterm cost control of a young player got me excited.

The beauty of making a mistake like this is; now knowing just a little bit more about the league.
Click to expand...

You know what? I like you. Unlike a lot of guys you didn't dig in your heels on your misconceptions, you admitted you messed up and opened yourself up to both criticism and growth.

Klefbom is the real deal. He makes the occasional brain fart like all young defensemen but as a whole he'll be a top pairing defender very soon if he isn't already. You'd have to give up at the minimum an equally proven talented young player on a similar cost controlled contact in order to get him, which unfortunately is not something the Hawks have at this junction, nor does Edmonton need quantity of assets.

Otherwise it's overpayment, of the same level of a Hall for Larsson deal. Not sure you'd wanna pay, say, Artemi Panarin for Klefbom, and even that might not be enough.
 
RememberTheRoar said:
I definitely had the wrong idea about Klefbom's value. I saw him as a second pair on the Oilers, and see that he's not on Sweden's team.

I thought he was a garden variety #4. Taking out retention, what's his actual value?
Click to expand...

Give same package to Dallas for Klingberg, he didnt make the Swedish team. Lindholm only made after injuries. Go get them with tha package. Try Brodin and Larsson aswell when your at it...
 
RememberTheRoar said:
I definitely had the wrong idea about Klefbom's value. I saw him as a second pair on the Oilers, and see that he's not on Sweden's team.

I thought he was a garden variety #4. Taking out retention, what's his actual value?
Click to expand...

Imagine making this proposal for 1 of Trouba, Jones, Reilly, Lindholm etc. That's how oiler fans value him after the season he had.

We'd add to him to get a top 10 dman under 25, nothing else makes sense.
 
Finnish your Czech said:
This is one of the worst proposals I've seen lately. This is absolutely terrible in value for Edmonton.

Klefbom is a 23 year old top 4 defenceman. On a 7 year 2 million dollar contract makes him worth a lot more than a few not-elite prospects
Click to expand...

I agree. This is a very bad proposal.

The OP displayed zero ability to evaulate a player value or team needs.
 
To redefine this thread with one of the components discussed... assuming Pokka is once again assigned to Rockford (behind Kempny, Rozsival, and TVR), what does Chicago want for him?

The Oilers could be interested in a RHD that has acquitted himself well at both the IIHF Championships and World Cup. I imagine the value also depends on how patient Pokka and his agent are with him spending another year in the AHL.
 
RememberTheRoar said:
I hear ya. I admittedly made the proposal for the contract, and had misconceptions of Klefbom. The idea of longterm cost control of a young player got me excited.

The beauty of making a mistake like this is; now knowing just a little bit more about the league.
Click to expand...

Very reasonable response.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom