Confirmed with Link: Petry signs a one-year contract.

[Wheathead]

Term is understandable. Cash is fair.

Oilers probably didn't want to buy Petry's UFA years at a considerable amount more.

This means we will not be dealing Petry during the summer. Bad form to sign a player to a deal and then immediately trade them unless it's a sign and trade.

 

[Beerfish]

Booya42;Quote:
Originally Posted by GMofOilers View Post
Im not a Petry fan but this deal tells me that the Oilers and me are on the same page.



You are not paying attention if you have never seen posts in which I give the Oilers credit for good moves. They just make a lot more bad moves over the years than good ones.

MacT should just be getting shredded in this thread since most of this board loves Petry.

 

[Raab]

Why would a team trade for a guy without the certainty of knowing how he fits into their pay structure?

We could have let a team talk to Petry and try to work out a deal if we were serious about trading him. MacT sure knows how to make valuable assets worthless with contracts. Did it with Gagner and now has done it with Petry.

 

[Asher]

I don't actually think Petry will play another game for the Oilers.

Establishing a low cap hit with no term may make it easier to move him to a team with cap concerns.

You would have to find a cap trouble team. Any other team would either stay away or only give you pennies on the dollar.

 

[McJadeddog]

well this is less than great, no other way to possibly spin it.... petry will be gone next year, and we lose a top-4 guy for basically nothing

i suppose if he plays lights out we could potentially get a late 1st rounder for him a the trade deadline ... still sucks to lose a top-4 guy though

 

[Wheathead]

Booya42;Quote:
Originally Posted by GMofOilers View Post
Im not a Petry fan but this deal tells me that the Oilers and me are on the same page.



You are not paying attention if you have never seen posts in which I give the Oilers credit for good moves. They just make a lot more bad moves over the years than good ones.

MacT should just be getting shredded in this thread since most of this board loves Petry.

Which I don't get. Petry is the best of a bad bunch. He'd be 4-6 d-man on a playoff team.

 

[T-Funk]

It just seems so counter-productive to give up on the 26 yr old D in favour of the 22 yr olds. And is Schultz really that good?

I'll have to wait and see how this plays out.

If nurse or klefbom are really ready by 2015-2016 then we cannot risk having Petry on a long term deal for 4.5-5 like some people were thinking. If he had that deal, playing like he's currently playing, we would never be able to trade him.

Anyways if he plays lights out, we have first dibs and usually the player's current team re-signs the guy. If he stinks or does not play better, you get an asset for someone not helping us win.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

well this is less than great, no other way to possibly spin it.... petry will be gone next year, and we lose a top-4 guy for basically nothing

i suppose if he plays lights out we could potentially get a late 1st rounder for him a the trade deadline ... still sucks to lose a top-4 guy though

The other possibility is that if Petry plays lights out then he becomes worth a stupid contract and the Oilers make the playoffs.

 

[Soundwave]

If nurse or klefbom are really ready by 2015-2016 then we cannot risk having Petry on a long term deal for 4.5-5 like some people were thinking. If he had that deal, playing like he's currently playing, we would never be able to trade him.

Anyways if he plays lights out, we have first dibs and usually the player's current team re-signs the guy. If he stinks or does not play better, you get an asset for someone not helping us win.

Pretty much this. Petry on a long term deal for 4+ is a big risk.

 

[Moose Coleman]

We could have let a team talk to Petry and try to work out a deal if we were serious about trading him.

Pretty sure you can't do that.

MacT sure knows how to make valuable assets worthless with contracts. Did it with Gagner and now has done it with Petry.

Oh brother. How do you know this was on MacT? Maybe Petry wanted a short term deal so he could test the waters as a UFA?

 

[Raab]

Pretty sure you can't do that.



Oh brother. How do you know this was on MacT? Maybe Petry wanted a short term deal so he could test the waters as a UFA?

We did it with Pronger and Nikitin... And he should have traded him if he wants to test UFA. We can't afford to let players walk for picks right now.

 

[Klimando Kostani]

We could have let a team talk to Petry and try to work out a deal if we were serious about trading him. MacT sure knows how to make valuable assets worthless with contracts. Did it with Gagner and now has done it with Petry.

I don't know if I agree, he probably wants at least 4 mill for anything over 1 year and if we did that and if the idea is to trade him then that hurts his value because now that cap strapped team that we're hopefully dealing with needs to inconvenience themselves to consider the trade.

 

[McBooya42]

Booya42;Quote:
Originally Posted by GMofOilers View Post
Im not a Petry fan but this deal tells me that the Oilers and me are on the same page.



You are not paying attention if you have never seen posts in which I give the Oilers credit for good moves. They just make a lot more bad moves over the years than good ones.

MacT should just be getting shredded in this thread since most of this board loves Petry.

No offense intended Beerfish, it just caught me off guard is all.
I for one don't love Petry, but I don't hate him either. He's a serviceable 2nd pairing guy thrown into a more important role and getting roasted for it (by fans AND opposing team's top lines).
I think however that the ball is now in his court, and this will hopefully give him motivation. It's shaping up to be an interesting season ahead.

 

[T-Funk]

Term is understandable. Cash is fair.

Oilers probably didn't want to buy Petry's UFA years at a considerable amount more.

This means we will not be dealing Petry during the summer. Bad form to sign a player to a deal and then immediately trade them unless it's a sign and trade.

Bad form to sign and trade a player unless you sign and trade them?

 

[40oz]

Which I don't get. Petry is the best of a bad bunch. He'd be 4-6 d-man on a playoff team.

Not many teams pay 4M+ for 4-6 defensemen though.

I think the fact that he's been signed means he'll start the year on the Oilers, then either an extension or deadline deal. No one likes going into the season with big question marks like that, but at least it doesn't handcuff the team.

 

[Moose Coleman]

We did it with Pronger and Nikitin...

Both UFAs. Petry is an RFA.

And he should have traded him if he wants to test UFA. We can't afford to let players walk for picks right now.

So trade him for picks now or later, what does it matter?

 

[s7ark]

I'm pretty sure he can, I remember looking at Columbus' D like last year or the year before and they had like 5 left handed D-Men, so someone must've been playing on the right side.

To be honest it's not really impossible for the Oilers to say re-up Petry at $4.5 mill next year long term if they want either. This just gives us flexibility in a lot of ways, I don't think Petry will get 5+ on the open market unless he has a really great year, but even in that case you still have the first shot at resigning him.

Well that's good to hear. I really hope we have a bit more depth for RD than I thought.

And yeah I suppose you are right. Here's hoping this all works out. We just aren't in a position to be losing top 4 D for little/no return.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

Both UFAs. Petry is an RFA.



So trade him for picks now or later, what does it matter?

This.

Who is in here thinking Petry's RFA rights are worth anything more than a 4th round pick?

This doesn't mean they don't get Berglund/whoever....

 

[Wheathead]

Bad form to sign and trade a player unless you sign and trade them?

I should've worded it better. Bad form to sign and trade without warning. Better form to know that it is an agreed upon principle of the deal that the situation is a sign-and-trade with another club.

 

[SK13]

You would have to find a cap trouble team. Any other team would either stay away or only give you pennies on the dollar.

You weren't getting full value from an RFA on the cusp of unrestricted free agency anyway.

I suspect the equalizer will be a larger contract in return or a player who is also approaching unrestricted free agency.

 

[Raab]

Both UFAs. Petry is an RFA.



So trade him for picks now or later, what does it matter?

It doesn't matter, they were both under contract. As long as a team gives you permission its fine.

 

[Quokka]

Petry as restricted "free agent" could definitely have spoken to other teams. How else would teams be able to offer sheet RFAs? It's only when RFAs have fewer than the required number of professional years that they are unable to speak with other teams (I think Schultz may fit in this category as he has only 2 years pro experience).

 

[Raab]

Both UFAs. Petry is an RFA.



So trade him for picks now or later, what does it matter?

Or trade him for a player now and let another team sign him to a multi year deal. This one year deal was absolutely worst case scenario.

 

[Raab]

Petry as restricted "free agent" could definitely have spoken to other teams. How else would teams be able to offer sheet RFAs? It's only when RFAs have fewer than the required number of professional years that they are unable to speak with other teams (I think Schultz may fit in this category as he has only 2 years pro experience).

And this, not even thinking this morning. Petry could already work out deals with other teams no permission needed.

 

[Soundwave]

I honestly don't see a deal from St. Louis anyways. They already have six NHL d-man signed to $2+ million dollar contracts, they have no need for Petry. It would give them virtually no cap savings to boot.