Value of: McDavid

[Soundgarden]

Whoever gets McDavid is going to have to finally teach him how to play a 200' game, unless they just want him to score a lot and fill the stadium without any real hopes of contending, i.e., pretty much the same as where he is now with the Oilers.

Every other team has other players to play well defensively.

 

[Tanknation]

Best player on your team

It was meant as a joke.

 

[AndreRoy]

Drai would have to go first and if that's the case, you blow it all up for high end futures and head straight into a rebuild. McDavid has a full NMC, so regardless of offer, he'll decide where he goes.

This discussion happens in the 2025 off season IMO. Drai would be gone and the Oilers can retain on a 1 year deal for McDavid which opens up the possibilities.

Return would have to be:
- One of the teams top 3 young players
- Multiple 1sts
- Top prospect

The multiple 1sts is realistic. The top prospect may be, assuming that prospect is not elite - in a cap world elite young players who can contribute at a high level on their ELCs are worth their weight in gold and don’t get traded for rentals. And for the same reason, and also because any team that trades for McDavid is trying to win now, you aren’t getting one of their top young players unless said player isn’t that good; more realistically the roster players involved will be veterans on larger contracts to help balance the cap hit.

So realistically you’re looking at the following:
- Multiple protected firsts and/or top non-elite prospects
- Roster players who are not part of the team’s core, included primarily for cap purposes (though a better quality complementary player could be included in lieu of some of the futures.)

 

[Mrfenn92]

It was meant as a joke.

Got ya

 

[Spargon]

He has a full NMC - if they ever were to trade him its because hes made it clear he wants to go.

He would pick 1-3 teams he'd likely be willing to go to.

The return would be enormous, both in futures and cap-related pieces.

Leafs offer (next offseason, no chance its in-season)

Knies
Cowan
Minten
Kampf (money)
3 firsts

for

Mcdavid 50% retained.

Edit: They can't trade Marner/Matthews/Tavares as they all have NMC. Willy is of no use to Edmonton if they're trading McDavid.

Mcdavid is great and all but this would be a catastrophic trade for the Leafs.

 

[patriotfan]

it's time to discuss this. ignore the oilers fans in denial and let's discuss where the best player in the league ends up after this season.

post your team's real cap compliant offers.

oilers won't trade him to the canucks so i'll spectate.

just wondering if the oilers would do a mathews and nylander for mcjesus pretty sure leafs would

just wondering if the oilers would do a mathews and nylander for mcjesus pretty sure leafs would

this would bring the ontario boy home common oilers do it i know leafs would and look at the cap space it could create going forward............

 

[ChaoticOrange]

He has a full NMC - if they ever were to trade him its because hes made it clear he wants to go.

He would pick 1-3 teams he'd likely be willing to go to.

The return would be enormous, both in futures and cap-related pieces.

Leafs offer (next offseason, no chance its in-season)

Knies
Cowan
Minten
Kampf (money)
3 firsts

for

Mcdavid 50% retained.

Edit: They can't trade Marner/Matthews/Tavares as they all have NMC. Willy is of no use to Edmonton if they're trading McDavid.

the pile of crap for McDavid was funny, but the pile of crap for McDavid with 50% retained was even funnier. Excellent joke, well played.

 

[Lunatik]

I think Buffalo is in a good position to make such a blockbuster move.

At the draft...

to Buffalo:
- Connor McDavid, $12,500,000
- Cody Ceci, $3,250,000
to Edmonton:
- Owen Power, $8,350,000
- Dylan Cozens, $7,100,000
- Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen, RFA
- 1st in 2024
- 2nd in 2025
- 1st in 2026

 

[KevinFinnerty]

Adam Fox + Vincent Trochek + 1st for Mcdavid

 

[conFABulator]

I can see why you find that proposal laughable. I made a few posts in the last "Trade McDavid" thread that highlighted some of the issues I think this poster was getting at:

- Edmonton will have to take money back in a trade.
- The acquiring team has to think they can win a cup over the next three years or they can resign McDavid
- The acquiring team has to feel they can win without giving up too many assets in the deal
- Anyone moved back to Edmonton has to not have a NTC or partial NTC

Show me a deal that works with all of the above. I am not saying this proposal was good, I am saying this is very tricky...even moreso as an in-season move.

the pile of crap for McDavid was funny, but the pile of crap for McDavid with 50% retained was even funnier. Excellent joke, well played

 

[conFABulator]

I think Buffalo is in a good position to make such a blockbuster move.

At the draft...

to Buffalo:
- Connor McDavid, $12,500,000
- Cody Ceci, $3,250,000
to Edmonton:
- Owen Power, $8,350,000
- Dylan Cozens, $7,100,000
- Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen, RFA
- 1st in 2024
- 2nd in 2025
- 1st in 2026

This is pretty good. Does Buffalo give up all those years and picks for two chances at a cup with McDavid?

 

[ChaoticOrange]

I can see why you find that proposal laughable. I made a few posts in the last "Trade McDavid" thread that highlighted some of the issues I think this poster was getting at:

- Edmonton will have to take money back in a trade.
- The acquiring team has to think they can win a cup over the next three years or they can resign McDavid
- The acquiring team has to feel they can win without giving up too many assets in the deal
- Anyone moved back to Edmonton has to not have a NTC or partial NTC

Show me a deal that works with all of the above. I am not saying this proposal was good, I am saying this is very tricky...even moreso as an in-season move.

1) It's McDavid. No, they wouldn't. And "Money" doesn't have to be worthless
2) Not Edmonton's problem
3) Not Edmonton's problem
4) NTC cities, if I remember right, are set at either the beginning of the contract or the beginning of the season. Not everyone that has trade protection will automatically have Edmonton on it.

If Toronto "doesn't want to give up too much" and "would have to send bad money back" and "please Oilers retain 50% for us" then I guess that takes Toronto out of the running. It's not Edmonton's job to facilitate a trade specifically for Toronto's benefit, particularly when the only things coming back are Knies, magic beans, and junk like Kampf.

 

[GCK]

They can’t afford to re-sign Draisaitl but they can afford $5m in dead cap for the foreseeable future?

Draisitl at 13M while keeping Campbell and Nuse is a big problem.

 

[conFABulator]

1) It's McDavid. No, they wouldn't. And "Money" doesn't have to be worthless
2) Not Edmonton's problem
3) Not Edmonton's problem
4) NTC cities, if I remember right, are set at either the beginning of the contract or the beginning of the season. Not everyone that has trade protection will automatically have Edmonton on it.

If Toronto "doesn't want to give up too much" and "would have to send bad money back" and "please Oilers retain 50% for us" then I guess that takes Toronto out of the running. It's not Edmonton's job to facilitate a trade specifically for Toronto's benefit, particularly when the only things coming back are Knies, magic beans, and junk like Kampf.

I do think Toronto is out of the running, I was never defending this proposal.

Can you explain how one, two and three are "not Edmonton's problem"? Do you understand how supply and demand works? Less teams being in the market to acquire an asset lowers the value of said asset. The fact that most teams either didn't have the room, the window, or the disposable assets is a big part of what makes getting full value back very, very tricky.

I would venture that guess that close to 100% of NTC clauses include Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg and Ottawa. We could never confirm that is true, but we have heard it enough times anecdotally.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

I do think Toronto is out of the running, I was never defending this proposal.

Can you explain how one, two and three are "not Edmonton's problem"? Do you understand how supply and demand works? Less teams being in the market to acquire an asset lowers the value of said asset. The fact that most teams either didn't have the room, the window, or the disposable assets is a big part of what makes getting full value back very, very tricky.

I would venture that guess that close to 100% of NTC clauses include Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg and Ottawa. We could never confirm that is true, but we have heard it enough times anecdotally.

I mean, it's just what I said. Edmonton can't control how other teams perceive themselves, and "too many assets" is entirely subjective. If Toronto won't do it unless they can make it happen for whatever is in Treliving's pocket at the time, then they can try their luck if he ever hits free agency. As you've seen, there are plenty of other teams that would give much better assets than Toronto would. Heck I think most Leafs fans wouldn't even blink if they had to start with Nylander or Marner and then dump +'s on top.

Almost any asset is disposable if it lands you McDavid.

 

[krutovsdonut]

just wondering if the oilers would do a mathews and nylander for mcjesus pretty sure leafs would


this would bring the ontario boy home common oilers do it i know leafs would and look at the cap space it could create going forward............

quoting your own post within that post is a new epic 4d mastermind move.

 

[Lunatik]

This is pretty good. Does Buffalo give up all those years and picks for two chances at a cup with McDavid?

I think so. At worst they trade him in a year for a haul of their own if he's unwilling to sign an extension.

I think this deal would make the Sabres a cup contender, they'd still have over $17m (19m+ if they don't qualify Bryson) in cap space to get a good goaltender to play with Levi and add another defensemen or two.

 

[innitfam]

to

Jesper Bratt
Simon Nemec
Alexander Holtz
Erik Haula
1st 2024 or 1st 2025 (whichever doesn't go to SJ in the Meier deal)

to

Connor McDavid
Derek Ryan

Oilers can basically pick and choose assets - Hischier, Bratt or Meier, Nemec or Luke Hughes, Mercer or Holtz etc

I included Haula and Ryan to make the cap line up better.

I'm still not sure if the Devils do this trade as they give up a lot, but it does not cripple them IMO.

 

[Xelebes]

Maybe we can trade him for Justin Schultz?

 

[b in vancouver]

I guess it depends where the team is at. 3 lates first aren't very appealing if the team is currently at 10 to 15 overall maybe it is doable.

Lots of Oilers fans never agreed with me but I would have trade him and run Draisaitl and RNH as the 2 centres. Just have to build a line suited to RNH. A couple defensive minded rugged wingers.

Maybe on the next rebuild the Oilers will learn to build from the net out. Draft a highend goalie in the first round. Hire a proven goalie coach. Then draft D and draft more D. They would need to add a proven scouts and listen to him. Katz can not be wanting his way and overriding him like he did in the Yakupov draft.

How does this solve the Oilers' problem?

Then they'll just suck with Matthews instead of McDavid.

I've said it before --

IF McDavid is getting traded, he will be traded for a quality to quantity deal.

A team trading FOR McDavid would be a contender - meaning that if they acquire him, asking for their 1D and 1G just makes them the Oilers. So that won't happen. You can't make a "value" hockey trade for McDavid. Unless there's teams with 2 #1D and #1G. And they'd need the space to make it work.

What is needed is the Oilers to accept several players for depth in a trade to round out their roster who are young-ish with upside and also willing or contract restricted to to stay in EDM while having a team to provide those specific positions in lower tier players, and that team also needs to have players ready to step in ready to fill those roles again. If you get a player near caliber to McDavid (relatively speaking of course), that doesn't solve their actual problem of no D and G. If McDavid is trade for Matthews + 1st, or Petersson or Hughes or whoever, the + won't be big enough to solve their issues.

Edmonton needs a top 4 D and a #1G.

I think the Flyers here are still a good fit. They can give a lower tier C/W who is lacking opportunity with low cap hits and positional value (Frost/Laughton or even both), a #1G in Hart (with Ersson replacing), several wingers (Tippett/Farabee/Cates) who are top 6 caliber, and a top 4 RHD in Walker/Risto. It's not without risk, on both sides. Those are just example players - obviously from a value perspective, any singular piece can be asked for by EDM, but like I said, that won't solve their problem of depth and position - and the higher value piece asked for reduces the depth that can be asked. Unless you're getting Makar/Fox/Q Hughes (which the other team won't do because again - they are contenders and need those players), 1 for 1 replacements don't make sense either because EDM needs D AND G. In addition, the Flyers can also take on Campbell and cap, allowing the Oilers the freedom to trade their 1sts or whatever for additional assets with cap space. I do think these two teams are good trading partners if the Flyers 'abandon their rebuild' - which is entirely possible due to Torts, and they certainly will if a player of this caliber is feasible to acquire.

So EDM needs to accept a quality for quantity deal for players, maybe dumping salary in the process to acquire even more depth to actually become a team.

It's a hard pill to swallow, but you're going to lose whatever trade McDavid is in. You do it to acquire depth; not just a replacement. Just my thoughts.

So maybe something like Frost, Laughton, Tippet, Risto, Hart for McDavid + Campbell. Cates can be swapped in if C or defensive presence is more important. I used RIsto because Walker is UFA, and Risto is signed for 3 more years. Couple of young-ish players with upside, signed/RFA type, and 1 elite (Hart). Flyers cap is roughly $17M, as is McDavid + Campbell, so additional dump can be included because that's salary neutral for EDM to then leverage their picks/prospects for more depth.

This frees up cap from EDM, keeps their firsts, rounds out their forward core, adds a defenseman, and gets them a 1G. I think this makes them a better TEAM. EDM needs depth, Flyers need star power. If EDM can swallow the "best player team wins the trade" type of mentality (because the best player in the world being traded automatically means you lose that by said definition), something can be worked out IMO.

Was musing about this today. Will never happen. PlusCan't see The Bruins messing with their team in season even for McDavid but was wondering if The Oilers would be better served looking at multiple NHLers from a good team than more futures or a lesser star return.
Some combination of
Swayman/Ullmark
Carlo/Grz/Lorhei
DeBrusk/Zacha/Poitras/ Beecher/frederick
4 of the above. He's near impossible to put a proper value on.

Where The Oil bring in multiple players from a good culture.

Bruins definitely not alone in being able to offer this kinda deal (outside the level of goaltender) but using them as an example and wondering if The Oil wouldn't be better served going that route.

 

[VivaLasVegas]

McDavid will not waive his NMC for undesirable destinations.

 

[thedjpd]

Was musing about this today. Will never happen. PlusCan't see The Bruins messing with their team in season even for McDavid but was wondering if The Oilers would be better served looking at multiple NHLers from a good team than more futures or a lesser star return.
Some combination of
Swayman/Ullmark
Carlo/Grz/Lorhei
DeBrusk/Zacha/Poitras/ Beecher/frederick
4 of the above. He's near impossible to put a proper value on.

Where The Oil bring in multiple players from a good culture.

Bruins definitely not alone in being able to offer this kinda deal (outside the level of goaltender) but using them as an example and wondering if The Oil wouldn't be better served going that route.

It’s unknown. Flyers have a a glut of young-ish assets, but Hart would need to be included as the star asset no matter what. It’ll just be up to EDM to decide how they want to acquire these assets.

 

[POVERTY]

Slavin if Edmonton adds

 

[b in vancouver]

I can see why you find that proposal laughable. I made a few posts in the last "Trade McDavid" thread that highlighted some of the issues I think this poster was getting at:

- Edmonton will have to take money back in a trade.
- The acquiring team has to think they can win a cup over the next three years or they can resign McDavid
- The acquiring team has to feel they can win without giving up too many assets in the deal
- Anyone moved back to Edmonton has to not have a NTC or partial NTC

Show me a deal that works with all of the above. I am not saying this proposal was good, I am saying this is very tricky...even moreso as an in-season move.

Swayman, DeBrusk, Zacha, Lohrei (or switch Z and L with Carlo and Poitros)
Not saying it's a realistic deal but the money is around the same, none have NTCs and it doesn't gut Boston. (Carlo might)
Just an example.

 

[b in vancouver]

It’s unknown. Flyers have a a glut of young-ish assets, but Hart would need to be included as the star asset no matter what. It’ll just be up to EDM to decide how they want to acquire these assets.

I'm a Bruins fan so used them as an example of return but I've also seen my team trade stars for nothing... yet somehow remain good. It's a mixed blessing.
I hope if The Oil are forced to move him they don't go all futures or a not as good star plus b prospect,1st. Get NHLers. No matter what it's going to suck.
I'd be tempted to trade both between now and next August.