How'd Boston do with the Seguin trade? How'd Columbus make out after trading Rick Nash? ****, how did we do after trading Pronger?
You're comprehension of what I said has you on the far end of the spectrum regarding trades that don't carry fair value. I'm not looking to send the core off without getting impact players back. Ryder + Halak + 2nd aint gonna cut it.
I find your examples interesting though.
The Seguin and Pronger trades hurt their teams dearly because they had to be moved due to personal reasons, greatly reducing their value. That's not the case here. Value my be reduced due to suckage, but not nearly as bad.
Kinda funny you bring up the Nash trade. The Jackets had ONE season out of NINE where they had more wins than losses with Nash as their centre piece. After trading Nash, they have been a much better group overall. They went on to have 3 consecutive seasons of having more wins than losses up until this year where many had them contending for the playoffs if not more prior to the season. Jackets won that trade.
You can add players that bring that stuff easily without trading away skill. That's what contending teams do.
News flash, we're not a contending team. Not even close.
Most teams are defined by their top 6, a stud defensemen or two, and a decent goalie. As long as the Oilers top 6 is occupied by the guys this thread is referring to, then the dynamics of the team don't really change at all. Did Patrick Maroon and Zach Kassian add an element we've been sorely lacking? Sure. But has the core continued to be disastrous with those new elements added? Absolutely.
The nucleus of teams are what brings them to the playoffs every year, not the players you suggest are so easily added.
In other words you want the Oilers of the late 90s/early 2000s. A scrappy 8th place team in a good year.
Classic internet discussion. You read the words I wrote, your brain cramps up, you come up with a different interpretation, then regurgitate that interpretation to tell me what I'm actually saying.
You're assuming you know what I want as a team but have no clue. I'm talking about trading 2-4 of Yak, Nuge, Ebs, and Hall with useful pieces coming back. I'm not looking to blow up the entire team, I'm looking to blow up the old core, create a new one, and win some ****ing games.
But since you brought up the gritty hard-working teams of the 90s + early 2000s, did those teams not bring you more enjoyment compared to the last decade of the laughable rosters the Oilers have iced? That's assuming you're old enough to appreciated those teams. There used to be a term often used called "the Oilers brand of hockey" which was hard-nosed and in your face. Now that brand has evaporated over time and is now known as the biggest joke the NHL has ever seen. Ever. Let that sink in.
If you asked me to choose between a perpetual bubble team and a perpetual bottom feeder, I'd be in awe if you didn't know my answer to that question.
Depends on the fantasy return on the trades.
And who's fantasy returns would that be?
But no one is saying stand pat.
If you've been paying attention to the thread, the discussion is for management to nuke the core vs subtle changes. The change I refer to is nuking the core