Rumor: Sam Gagner getting close to signing

David Bruce Banner

Acid Raven Bed Burn
Mar 25, 2008
8,173
3,551
Waaaaay over there
I think the Canucks would be a pretty solid fit for both parties. Canucks could really use his skill, versatility, RH shot. For Gagner, he'd probably be getting about as good an opportunity as he's gonna find to potentially play some actual minutes. He's always produced reasonably well when he's had a chance to play some Top-6 type minutes.

If we can get him for reasonable money and term, why not.

Personally I think it would be funny to see him playing for the Canucks vs. Kassian on the Oilers.
 

Skobel24

#Ignited
May 23, 2008
16,789
921
Winnipeg
I still think he could get back to the 40-50 point range with the right team. I wouldn't mind taking a chance on him. I think he'd fit the Flames well, and he's a right hand shot, something they really need.
 

drew5580

Registered User
Sponsor
Jan 6, 2007
684
51
if Buffalo doesn't sign Vesey and we can trade Kane, I wouldn't mind bringing him here as a wing. I was just reading how he's actually a decent possession player and we need help in the shootout.
 

rt

Clean Hits on Substack
I've never understood the hate. I liked him when he was a Coyote. Play him at RW and don't give him a big contract. At the right price, he's fine as a depth scoring winger. He's physically weak and isn't a specialty teams contributor, nor is he effective in his own zone. But he doesn't hurt his team or anything. He also seems like a nice enough guy and appears to be well-liked. He's probably not a good fit on a playoff team, but if you've got a spot to fill and need a little offensive pop without breaking the bank, you could do worse.
 

biturbo19

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
27,219
12,361
If we can get him for reasonable money and term, why not.

Personally I think it would be funny to see him playing for the Canucks vs. Kassian on the Oilers.

:laugh:

That still seems like it was only yesterday. And yet since then...these two have combined for...5, likely now 6 changes of team, whenever Gagner signs? :handclap:

I've never understood the hate. I liked him when he was a Coyote. Play him at RW and don't give him a big contract. At the right price, he's fine as a depth scoring winger. He's physically weak and isn't a specialty teams contributor, nor is he effective in his own zone. But he doesn't hurt his team or anything. He also seems like a nice enough guy and appears to be well-liked. He's probably not a good fit on a playoff team, but if you've got a spot to fill and need a little offensive pop without breaking the bank, you could do worse.

Exactly.
 

YP44

Registered User
Jan 30, 2012
27,347
7,676
Calgary, AB
Sam Gagner played 3rd line RW for most of the season with Philadelphia.

Gagner is better off playing RW, then he would be playing as a centre.

and LA has enough RW.

I like gagner and think any team that gets him will be thrilled, but LA does not make sense.
 

nucksauce

Registered User
Oct 30, 2013
851
219
If we (canucks) can get him on a decent contract for a couple years could turn out to be Kyle Wellwood 2.0
 

WTFMAN99

Registered User
Jun 17, 2009
34,084
12,196
I've never understood the hate. I liked him when he was a Coyote. Play him at RW and don't give him a big contract. At the right price, he's fine as a depth scoring winger. He's physically weak and isn't a specialty teams contributor, nor is he effective in his own zone. But he doesn't hurt his team or anything. He also seems like a nice enough guy and appears to be well-liked. He's probably not a good fit on a playoff team, but if you've got a spot to fill and need a little offensive pop without breaking the bank, you could do worse.

Probably the perfect description for him

at 1.5M range, he's a respectable enough 3rd line RW.
 

Kamiccolo

Truly wonderful, the mind of a child is.
Aug 30, 2011
26,828
16,947
Undisclosed research facility
I think the Canucks would be a pretty solid fit for both parties. Canucks could really use his skill, versatility, RH shot. For Gagner, he'd probably be getting about as good an opportunity as he's gonna find to potentially play some actual minutes. He's always produced reasonably well when he's had a chance to play some Top-6 type minutes.

The issue is teams want more than points in their lineups. Either defensive play, strength/size on the ice, leadership, something. Gagner is just kinda there and puts up points.
 

projexns

Matchups Matter
Mar 5, 2002
2,450
1
Forsling, OK
Visit site
I've never understood the hate. I liked him when he was a Coyote. Play him at RW and don't give him a big contract. At the right price, he's fine as a depth scoring winger. He's physically weak and isn't a specialty teams contributor, nor is he effective in his own zone. But he doesn't hurt his team or anything. He also seems like a nice enough guy and appears to be well-liked. He's probably not a good fit on a playoff team, but if you've got a spot to fill and need a little offensive pop without breaking the bank, you could do worse.

He can be an option on a PP-unit.

As your 12th or 13th forward signed in August on a cheap one-year contract, you could do a lot worse than Gagner.
 

CBJFan827

I hate you Brad Marchand
Jul 19, 2006
1,646
325

I find this hilarious after the rumors right around that draft year in Columbus that he wouldn't sign with us if selected--he really only wanted to play in Canada.

It worked out that he went to EDM and we got Voracek. :cry:

Beggers can't be choosers at this point. I'm surprised how his career's gone--he's only 27.
 

Paul4587

Registered User
Jan 26, 2006
31,196
13,207
Got a feeling Anaheim is interested. I hope not though.

Edit: I see Columbus got him. Good for them.
 

HockeyGuy1964

Registered User
Oct 7, 2013
4,286
5,129
I've never understood the hate. I liked him when he was a Coyote. Play him at RW and don't give him a big contract. At the right price, he's fine as a depth scoring winger. He's physically weak and isn't a specialty teams contributor, nor is he effective in his own zone. But he doesn't hurt his team or anything. He also seems like a nice enough guy and appears to be well-liked. He's probably not a good fit on a playoff team, but if you've got a spot to fill and need a little offensive pop without breaking the bank, you could do worse.

He's not effective in his own zone but he doesn't hurt your team? This makes no sense but do agree with the part about not being a fit on a playoff team for that very reason.


The issue is teams want more than points in their lineups. Either defensive play, strength/size on the ice, leadership, something. Gagner is just kinda there and puts up points.

Pretty much this except he really doesn't put up points. His points came in bunches & usually in blowouts where they had absolutely no impact.

I don't understand lots of posters talking about his shootout prowess. He started gangbusters in Etown but by the time he left he was just another guy & his percentage was terrible in them from my recollection.

All that being said, let's be honest, the Oilers ruined him by playing him in the NHL as an 18 year old. He put up a few points but he never learned how to play hockey to an NHL level which can be said about a lot of players in Edmonton the last 10 or so seasons.
 

Skobel24

#Ignited
May 23, 2008
16,789
921
Winnipeg
He's not effective in his own zone but he doesn't hurt your team? This makes no sense but do agree with the part about not being a fit on a playoff team for that very reason.




Pretty much this except he really doesn't put up points. His points came in bunches & usually in blowouts where they had absolutely no impact.

I don't understand lots of posters talking about his shootout prowess. He started gangbusters in Etown but by the time he left he was just another guy & his percentage was terrible in them from my recollection.

All that being said, let's be honest, the Oilers ruined him by playing him in the NHL as an 18 year old. He put up a few points but he never learned how to play hockey to an NHL level which can be said about a lot of players in Edmonton the last 10 or so seasons.

I disagree. He showed he could already compete at this level. He put up 49 points in his rookie year. I think the problem is that he never really took the next step, and I don't think giving him another year in junior would have changed that.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad