Proposal: Oilers 1st to Las Vegas for an exposed D of Edmonton choice

[fuswald]

Why would Vegas trade their first draft pick for a 27 year old winger like Eberle?

So they can compete right away. My guess is their pick will not be at the bottom. Maybe 5 - 10th.

They will need top line wingers with experience. Money won't be an issue for Vegas either.

 

[Soundgarden]

So they can compete right away. My guess is their pick will not be at the bottom. Maybe 5 - 10th.

They will need top line wingers with experience. Money won't be an issue for Vegas either.

They're guaranteed a top 6 pick. It'd be incredibly short sighted to trade away their first draft pick for a winger. It's important to create a winning team, but they need to draft and develop otherwise they become a 00's Toronto or an Edmonton pre-McDavid.

Eberle isn't the difference between lottery team and playoff team most likely.

 

[Golden Gophers 4649]

Not sure if this is legal or not so if it isn't maybe a mod can delete it :

It would have to be ok with the NHL for the Oilers to approach Las Vegas and make an offer base on D that are available ahead of time

To Las Vegas Edmonton 1st 2017

To Edmonton a D of their choice that has been exposed

Edmonton needs a puck moving RHD that can QB the power play .

This becomes more of a prediction as to want D becomes available . I see 2 of the Wild Becoming available , NYI 1 but for the most part I am unsure .

So let me get this straight; Oiler fans have been against dealing anything of value to the Wild for any of their defensemen but you'll deal a #1 to LV for one of the Wilds defensemen? Joke might be on you; I expect the Knights to take Zucker from the Wild. The Wild will then deal from their depth on D for a forward to replace Zucker.

 

[McSuper]

Nobody going to expose any RHD that can QB the power play. The best D that might be exposed are going to be washout guys who get a extra year just to serve as expansion bait.

The Wild would like to say hi . One of their D will be exposed and that could be Dumba or Brodin . ! fits our need the other not so much

 

[McSuper]

So let me get this straight;

Oiler fans have been against dealing anything of value to the Wild for any of their defensemen but you'll deal a #1 to LV for one

of the Wilds defensemen? Joke might be on you; I expect the Knights to take Zucker from the Wild. The Wild will then deal from their depth on D for a forward to replace Zucker.

This is a statement that doesn't speak for all Oilers fans . Go back and look at my History . I wanted Hall trade for a D 2 years ago . But there no way we give you RNH for Dumba . Fair value I will pay . Brodin is not a need so I would not pay for him either

 

[McSuper]

So they can compete right away. My guess is their pick will not be at the bottom. Maybe 5 - 10th.

They will need top line wingers with experience. Money won't be an issue for Vegas either.

We are not getting a top 5 pick for Eberle even if we retained 50% . He just doesn't bring enough to the table . Sure he can score but he gives more then he gets Most of the team is + in the +/- stats this year . Eberle not so much . In years pass most fans let it slide as our d was really week and everyone was a - . Eberle is now showing everything that has plagued the Oilers for years . He is the last piece that needs to go to completely change the teams culture .

Players available for trade

Eberle
Fayne
Pouliot

plus picks in the next 2 drafted . Of course other players could be available if we are upgrading

 

[McSuper]

Vegas holds all the cards. They aren't making any deals until they first see who is available to them. At that point in time, any deals will be made based on shopping players around the league. No way they agree to something like the OP suggests.

It speculation . There no way a team agrees to trading a 1st until they know where they are drafting and what players are available for that pick .

Can I ask why you read HF ? Because 99.9% of the deals posted don't happen .

 

[McSuper]

If you're offering your 1st for an exposed defenseman, then Detroit will happily just give you Green instead. He's been Detroit's best D and I doubt a defenseman better than him will be exposed. Green ($1-1.5M retained) for Edmonton's first at the draft.

They way Edmonton is playing I would do this at the trade deadline . Not sure on Green contract . I would not do it unless he has that extra year . So this year and next

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

It speculation . There no way a team agrees to trading a 1st until they know where they are drafting and what players are available for that pick .

Can I ask why you read HF ? Because 99.9% of the deals posted don't happen .

That works both ways.

I'll repeat. Vegas holds all the cards. They will have their pick of all the unprotected players and can choose to trade any of them to any of the other 30 teams after the draft. They don't have to agree to any deal before they draft. They will have a pretty good idea which players are the most marketable as well as which they may want to just plain keep.

I read HF for the levity provided by some fans.

 

[rynryn]

It's easy to overestimate the value of "a 1st" if you've been picking in the range where they're actually worth a good roster player. No chance LV would deal either Brodin or Dumba for anything other than a top 5 pick, and maybe not then. They'll have to try to be a little competitive to start with for one, and the youth of the players above is such that they should still be a cornerstone on the D by the time LV should be expected to hit bubble team status.

People are underestimating the Stevens effect. Brodin has been far more active offensively this year. He's got a weirdly accurate shot from far out.

 

[Barness01]

or we just do a little pre-scouting, see a potential D man that would get exposed, contact that teams GM, and offer that same 1st (or even lesser) for said Dman so the GM doesn't lose him for nothing.

Oilers can't acquire another D until after expansion because that would leave either klefbom or Larsson exposed, unless Sekera will waive his no trade clause.