Rumor: Rumors & Proposals Thread: The "Well, we're waiting!!!" Edition with a sprinkle of "Don't believe his lies."

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/
Status
Not open for further replies.

Faelko

Registered User
Aug 11, 2002
11,997
5,265
If Vegas gets Kane it's quite smart. Have to hand it to them, they are always aggressive on the market. They've had more playoff success than anyone in the Pacific and are probably going to win the division (again), more division wins than any other Pacific team since joining the league.

Hard to argue with that track record.
is this total wins or division championship?
 

Soundwave

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
73,483
29,416
is this total wins or division championship?

It's probably both I would think. Who in the division has more wins than they do? They basically just walked into the division and outperformed everyone. Probably will win the division again too as it looks like the Oilers don't have any interest in actually taking it, just content to get "close enough" once in a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JarvisFunk

WaitingForUser

Registered User
Mar 19, 2010
5,388
5,874
Edmonton
And are these primarily the top teams in the league? If those are 12 different starters I don't see how it makes the assessment accurate.
Yes they are. With the only real exception being Sarros
12404209-D4FD-4807-82D9-936939134A73.jpeg
 

Faelko

Registered User
Aug 11, 2002
11,997
5,265
It's probably both I would think. Who in the division has more wins than they do? They basically just walked into the division and outperformed everyone.
I dunno, they’ve won 2 division titles and one was the shortened Covid year. The Pacific is such trash it’s hard to gauge how good they’ve been. Record would be even better without the injuries.
 

SupremeTeam16

5-14-6-1
May 31, 2013
8,818
8,721
Baker’s Bay
If Vegas gets Kane it's quite smart. Have to hand it to them, they are always aggressive on the market. They've had more playoff success than anyone in the Pacific and are probably going to win the division (again), more division wins than any other Pacific team since joining the league.

Hard to argue with that track record.
Well teams that are desirable markets can afford to be much more aggressive because they know they’ll always be able to attract UFA’s at fair market prices, they’re not being hampered by trade protections often times, they have great chances of landing any euro or college UFA’s they want to pursue. When you have those advantages it’s a lot easier to throw away draft picks and prospects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TB12

Yuke

Registered User
Jan 15, 2020
607
358
Lol unnecessary pissy post but ok let’s go. Depends on the player. A top pairing D? Oooh sky is the limit.

Yeah I’m sure more Yam, JPs, XBs and Holloways will keep McDrai here after we get spanked in the first round.

Hilarious.

We need to win or get real bleepin close in the next 2 years or they are gone and then we really aren’t winning.
Thats your answer. What a joke.
You cannot even have an answer. That's what I figured.
How would you fit in Karlsson or Chychrun or any other player. Just curious
 

FlameChampion

Registered User
Jul 13, 2011
14,472
16,929
Nurse-Ceci is A
Karlsson-Megna is B
Leddy-Parayko is C
Ghostbear-Chychrun is D
Garvikov-Peeke is E
Johnson-Murphy is F

1676926183897-png.653707


Imo it just reinforces that Chychrun or Karlsson would be great additions but Murphy, Garvikov and Parayko would not.

Yeah I think unless you’re getting someone like Karlsson, Chychrun, Ekholm etc, you’re just wasting assets on defense.

Might as well just bulk up the forwards if can’t get a guy above. Team doesn’t need more bottom pairing guys.
 

Jet Walters

Registered User
May 15, 2013
7,438
3,181
To Edmonton: Ekholm (6.25), Lafferty (1.2), and Kane double retained (2.65)

To Nashville: Barrie @ 2.25, Puljujarvi, Oilers 1st 2023, plus 25% retention on Kane

To Chicago: Oilers 1st 2024, Oilers 2nd 2023, Yamamoto, 50% retention on Barrie, 50% retention on Kane.

That would be a solid base for a trade, and the Oilers might have to cough up a couple decent prospects on top too.

RNH McDavid Hyman
Kane Drai Kane
Foegele McLeod Lafferty
Kostin Ryan Janmark

Nurse Ceci
Ekholm Bouchard
Kulak Broberg/Desharnais
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDoused

CycloneSweep

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
50,541
42,261
Thats your answer. What a joke.
You cannot even have an answer. That's what I figured.
How would you fit in Karlsson or Chychrun or any other player. Just curious
People here have literally posted dozens and dozens of trade proposals to make it possible. Karlsson would mean Barrie out, Chychrun means guys like Yamamoto and Pulju leave.

I'll answer, looks like you are afraid to.
We need to be challanging when the big boys have their contracts up fro renewal. Go all in now and have nothing in the tank when their contracts are up, what is the reason for them to stay? Future would then look grim.
Next year Broberg, Holloway, Skinner and I'll throw Kostin in here, are a year older, more experienced and those guys will not b expensive.
That is when.
Rangers stopped speaking about Kane when the Blackhawks wanted a 2023 1st. That is how good this draft is. Every 1st rounder is a NHL player in the future.
Your turn...
So we should only have a single year of challenging for the cup? You know the rangers moved a 1st for Tarasenko right?

There have been like 4 notable players drafted in the last 10 picks of the 1st in the past decade. You move that pick.
 

Yuke

Registered User
Jan 15, 2020
607
358
People here have literally posted dozens and dozens of trade proposals to make it possible. Karlsson would mean Barrie out, Chychrun means guys like Yamamoto and Pulju leave.


So we should only have a single year of challenging for the cup? You know the rangers moved a 1st for Tarasenko right?

There have been like 4 notable players drafted in the last 10 picks of the 1st in the past decade. You move that pick.
Never once said single year, said next year will be better at going for it and a reason why. I wanted to know when too much is too much. Some of these suggestions are a joke and you know it.
Move one of those 4 players for Who?Why give one of these 1st for a Chariot type player and have them do nothing and dump JP who can play 3/4 line this year. We will be no further ahead, just minus a 1st.
I made a mistake on the 1st with Tarasenko. Read the cost was to high for Kane, miss read the rest.
 

Trafalgar Sadge Law

Registered User
Nov 8, 2007
11,535
7,030
Nurse-Ceci is A
Karlsson-Megna is B
Leddy-Parayko is C
Ghostbear-Chychrun is D
Garvikov-Peeke is E
Johnson-Murphy is F

1676926183897-png.653707


Imo it just reinforces that Chychrun or Karlsson would be great additions but Murphy, Garvikov and Parayko would not.
To be fair I think pairings isn't the most fair way to evaluate player on ice results b/c their teammate could be dragging them down and could be affected by matchups. Nurse-Ceci for instance is actually Nurse's worst on ice results pairing likely due to that duo's absurd quality of competition and volume deployment into elites. On the flipside, Nurse-Bouchard currently has the best on ice results of any defensive pairing with over 100 minutes of deployment (Bouchard historically has struggled vs elites while paired with anyone else, especially Duncan Keith, but flourished with Darnell Nurse, just seems to lack consistency to sustain the results for long stretches).
1676953205090.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad