Rumor: Rumors & Proposals Thread | Shopping List For Forwards

[Oilers]

I like Maroon, but not sure if he has a spot in the lineup, maybe if we didn’t sign Perry

 

[Hemsky4pm2]

None of those players make that 1st going out worth it.

Part of value for the first is the retention by the Caps. They also take back Janmark, a player they probably have no interest in, to make it work for the Oilers financially. Dowd is signed for another season. I'm not saying it's great value, but it's what we should expect. The Oilers 1st will probably be around 20th (or 32nd...we hope) this season.

 

[McTonyBrar]

That’s actually not too much…

 

[Jimmi McJenkins]

Part of value for the first is the retention by the Caps. They also take back Janmark, a player they probably have no interest in, to make it work for the Oilers financially. Dowd is signed for another season. I'm not saying it's great value, but it's what we should expect. The Oilers 1st will probably be around 20th (or 32nd...we hope) this season.

If the Caps think they're trading Mantha or Edmondson (who just sucks) without retaining, then they can get f***ed, honestly.

 

[frag2]

That’s actually not too much…

For a rental though?

 

[CupofOil]

That’s actually not too much…

That's the equivalent of 1st+Holloway+3rd as a low end as I'd rate Tippett higher than Holloway. I'm not giving that much for a pure rental, no way no how. I know some will disagree though

 

[oXo Cube]

I'm not making a case for any specific player with this post, but I don't really get the apprehension to trading our 1st for a rental. What are we going to need that pick for? Someone to play 12 minutes a game 4 years from now?

There are times to be hoarding picks and times to be trading them. We're in the latter of these two times.

 

[frag2]

I'm not making a case for any specific player with this post, but I don't really get the apprehension to trading our 1st for a rental. What are we going to need that pick for? Someone to play 12 minutes a game 4 years from now?

There are times to be hoarding picks and times to be trading them. We're in the latter of these two times.

It’s not really against the 1st
I think it’s the fact it’s 1st++ is what makes people apprehensive

 

[mkatcherin00]

That's the equivalent of 1st+Holloway+3rd as a low end as I'd rate Tippett higher than Holloway. I'm not giving that much for a pure rental, no way no how. I know some will disagree though

I used to say screw it get a guy, but this team still has not shown me it can go win by overpaying like this. Screw that for a rental

 

[Canovin]

I want the Giroux deal just so the prospect going back becomes better than the NHL player the following season

 

[oXo Cube]

It’s not really against the 1st
I think it’s the fact it’s 1st++ is what makes people apprehensive

Sure but what is the ++ really? Personally I value a 3rd round pick in our current situation at next best to nothing. I guess the best prospect comparable we have would be Broberg? Opinions on how good he is and what we should do with him vary wildly.

Just to reiterate I wasn't making an argument we should pay the price for Guentzel, but if(big if) management has decided he's their guy then IMO they should just do what they have to do.

 

[CupofOil]

I'm not making a case for any specific player with this post, but I don't really get the apprehension to trading our 1st for a rental. What are we going to need that pick for? Someone to play 12 minutes a game 4 years from now?

There are times to be hoarding picks and times to be trading them. We're in the latter of these two times.

We've had this conversation. Look at the history of teams that have traded 1st for rentals, it rarely works out for the buyer. Hell, the Giroux example in that tweet I quoted is one example. The Leafs have done this multiple times recently with Foligno and O'Rielly and were left with nothing but two lost 1st round picks and no players.

Just because you don't trade a 1st+ for a rental that doesn't mean you're hoarding picks. Holland traded a 1st++ for Ekholm last year. There are other ways to use 1sts to improve your team outside of burning them for rentals. If you traded for a rental who could potentially re-sign then I could see some merit to it but for a pure rental like Guentzel? I think it could be a big mistake. It wouldn't be just a 1st, it would be a 1st++.

 

[barry halls]

I'm not making a case for any specific player with this post, but I don't really get the apprehension to trading our 1st for a rental. What are we going to need that pick for? Someone to play 12 minutes a game 4 years from now?

There are times to be hoarding picks and times to be trading them. We're in the latter of these two times.

I’ve been apprehensive about it because of the possibility of Drai walking as a UFA and not having any quality prospects to plug into the lineup or use as trade chips to fill that hole. But on the other hand maybe getting Drai a quality rental winger could lead to a deep run and help persuade him to stay.

 

[McDoused]

I want the Giroux deal just so the prospect going back becomes better than the NHL player the following season

To be fair Giroux put up 23 points in 18 games for Florida in the regular season and then 8 points in 10 playoff games.

Giroux then followed it up with a 79 point season for Ottawa the season after the trade. Giroux is clearly the better player right now.

Tippett is a hell of a player and at 24 years old will be the better player shortly and for a long time.

 

[GhostfaceWu]

To be fair Giroux put up 23 points in 18 games for Florida in the regular season and then 8 points in 10 playoff games.

Giroux then followed it up with a 79 point season for Ottawa the season after the trade. Giroux is clearly the better player right now.

Tippett is a hell of a player and at 24 years old will be the better player shortly and for a long time.

That's what we paid for a top four d with term last tdl this has blow up in your face written all over it.

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

To be fair Giroux put up 23 points in 18 games for Florida in the regular season and then 8 points in 10 playoff games.

Giroux then followed it up with a 79 point season for Ottawa the season after the trade. Giroux is clearly the better player right now.

Tippett is a hell of a player and at 24 years old will be the better player shortly and for a long time.

That bundle for 8 points in the playoffs. A serious reminder how much trading the farm for a rental can backfire.

 

[McDoused]

That bundle for 8 points in the playoffs. A serious reminder how much trading the farm for a rental can backfire.

True but that's basically and extra goal a game that you are adding to the lineup. So if the goal is to win the stanley cup, it could be the difference that puts you over the top.

 

[oXo Cube]

We've had this conversation. Look at the history of teams that have traded 1st for rentals, it rarely works out for the buyer. Hell, the Giroux example in that tweet I quoted is one example. The Leafs have done this multiple times recently with Foligno and O'Rielly and were left with nothing but two lost 1st round picks and no players.

Just because you don't trade a 1st+ for a rental that doesn't mean you're hoarding picks. Holland traded a 1st++ for Ekholm last year. There are other ways to use 1sts to improve your team outside of burning them for rentals. If you traded for a rental who could potentially re-sign then I could see some merit to it but for a pure rental like Guentzel? I think it could be a big mistake. It wouldn't be just a 1st, it would be a 1st++.

Sure rental deals never look great in hindsight if the standard is 'you must win the cup or it wasn't worth it.'

Giroux was good for Florida. O'Reilly was good for Toronto. Adding those players improved those teams chances to win. To add that, they gave up picks that turned into players who won't play for them for years if ever. They did it because they understand windows to win are finite and don't come around all that often.

I think we should do the same.

 

[oXo Cube]

I’ve been apprehensive about it because of the possibility of Drai walking as a UFA and not having any quality prospects to plug into the lineup or use as trade chips to fill that hole. But on the other hand maybe getting Drai a quality rental winger could lead to a deep run and help persuade him to stay.

This doesn't factor in all that much to me.

Whether Drai stays or goes a player drafted 20+ this summer is a lot less likely to help us win a championship than any hypothetical impact player we could add 3 weeks from now for this specific run.

 

[Spawn]

I'm not making a case for any specific player with this post, but I don't really get the apprehension to trading our 1st for a rental. What are we going to need that pick for? Someone to play 12 minutes a game 4 years from now?

There are times to be hoarding picks and times to be trading them. We're in the latter of these two times.

I think there’s an argument to be made trading a 1st for a rental you know can be an impact player. Problem is some of these requests aren’t a 1st alone.

For example, Guenztel isn’t just a 1st, it’s a 1st and Holloway.

And then other players that reportedly are going to be around a 1st to trade for are guys like Dowd and Walker. These are not impact players.

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

True but that's basically and extra goal a game that you are adding to the lineup. So if the goal is to win the stanley cup, it could be the difference that puts you over the top.

That’s not really how it works though. His production probably slightly hurt another players production somewhere else.

 

[oXo Cube]

I think there’s an argument to be made trading a 1st for a rental you know can be an impact player. Problem is some of these requests aren’t a 1st alone.

For example, Guenztel isn’t just a 1st, it’s a 1st and Holloway.

And then other players that reportedly are going to be around a 1st to trade for are guys like Dowd and Walker. These are not impact players.

I get that I brought this on myself given the timing of my first post when I didn't really mean this particular player, but I agree that the reported ask for Guentzel would be prohibitively expensive. Being willing to move the 1st for a rental doesn't mean you just light your limited trade capital on fire at the earliest opportunity.

But we're also still 3 weeks out from the deadline. The prices will come down.

 

[CupofOil]

Sure rental deals never look great in hindsight if the standard is 'you must win the cup or it wasn't worth it.'

Giroux was good for Florida. O'Reilly was good for Toronto. Adding those players improved those teams chances to win. To add that, they gave up picks that turned into players who won't play for them for years if ever. They did it because they understand windows to win are finite and don't come around all that often.

I think we should do the same.

Cup or bust should absolutely be the standard if you're emptying the cupboard for a rental. If the Oilers blow their wad on Guentzel and didn't win the Cup, it's a poor trade. It's not even about the pick and players either per se, it would mean less prime assets to improve the team going forward.

If he had even one more year of term, like Konecny for example, then I could see the value in it to get 2 Cup runs out of it but a literal all or nothing move for one run? I'm not a fan of it. If it was just a 1st+minor stuff then maybe but this won't be minor. Think Lindholm return plus more.

 

[McDoused]

That’s not really how it works though. His production probably slightly hurt another players production somewhere else.

I mean it really depends on who the rental is replacing.

Right now acquiring Guentzel would push Perry back down into the bottom 6. Perry has 1 assist in 4 games. I don't think its unrealistic that Perry keeps up that pace in a bottom 6 role.

 

[LTIR]

Guentzel is not in the same tier as ROR or Giroux. Flip Guentzel to Crosby and sure!

Ideally Oilers should go after Giroux (OTT)or ROR (NSH) using these assets.