Value of: Your Team's Best Offer For McDavid

[BlueSeal]

I'll pass on McD and inquire about Drai. I'd rather have him.

 

[SmoggyTwinkles]

Here's the biggest problem you're going to run into (aside from Oilers fans don't love threads about trading McDavid, lighthearted or otherwise)

Take an offer like Marner and Matthews. Is it a good offer? Sure. Is Edmonton better on the ice short term after it? Yeah, probably. Where's the cap space coming for 23 million dollars worth of Leafs? Why would Edmonton do this knowing Matthews is a UFA after next year and it's probably Toronto or somewhere in the States for him?

There are people out there that are obviously not adept in any way at budgeting.

I would be one of those people actually, and yet this is the first thought that crossed my mind here.

Does the OP think someone on either side is doing retention to make it work?

It's just a very poor thought process really, because clearly the necessary thought didn't even enter the mind before clicking the post button.

 

[SmoggyTwinkles]

Exactly. This is not a hockey trade.

It would be Gretzky crying about how gutted and torn he is type of trade.

Probably not happening in this day and age.

 

[NVious]

There are people out there that are obviously not adept in any way at budgeting.

I would be one of those people actually, and yet this is the first thought that crossed my mind here.

Does the OP think someone on either side is doing retention to make it work?

It's just a very poor thought process really, because clearly the necessary thought didn't even enter the mind before clicking the post button.

Add a 1st for a team to take on Jack Campbell and take back a smalll contract and it works. Maybe you're not adept at doing a bit of basic budgeting yourself? Why didn't you do it for me then lmao.

 

[MAB1]

Especially straight up for Matthews.

The Habs haven't had a player of Matthews talent since your great, great, great grand mother was alive.

 

[Machinehead]

I wouldn't do it because it was just absolutely cripple us and leave us with a sub-NHL defense corps, but if we're being honest, the Rangers offer has to include Adam Fox.

A lot of paltry offers in this thread.

 

[StewieP19]

To Colorado : Mcdavid
To Edmonton : 2023 and 2024 1st round pick and Mikko Rantanen

 

[roon]

The Kings offer Danault for Mcdavid +.

 

[jonlin]

From Dallas. This trade would be strictly for PR-reasons, merchandise-sells etc. I assume this would make Dallas worse and Oilers better. $$-wise it would probably benefit Dallas and get them A LOT of attention. Also considering cap.

Edmonton get:

Hintz 8.45M UFA 2031
Heiskanen 8.45M UFA 2029
1st 2024


Dallas get:

McDavid 12.5M UFA 2026
Ceci 3.25M UFA 2025

 

[bernmeister]

Obviously he's not getting traded, but just a lighthearted fun thread. If you are an Oilers fan tell us what you think is the best offer.

From the Leafs if they somehow manage to get eliminated again from the 1st round I'd straight up offer Marner and Matthews

1. concur he is not getting traded.
2. Howev, as courtesy to OP, discussion is ok.

But before anyone goes there, a HUGE ?:
Is McD going as is, no contract extension in place, and he is thus a rental where you takes yer chances?
Or do I have opportunity, free and clear, to talk first and see if he extends immediately after?

BIG BIG dif in value

 

[WaW]

Joe Veleno and a conditional 4th that becomes a 2025 3rd if Detroit makes the playoffs.

 

[AndreRoy]

The way Mackinnon (1.31) and Rantanen (1.23) have produced points in the playoffs will join that list in 2 more seasons as they need 24 and 33 games respectively. Mackinnon might get it if they Avs can find a way to the cup this season

If they can maintain that level of play, sure. That’s the hard part though. Plenty of players have had one fantastic playoff run, but consistently performing at an elite level over multiple postseasons is far more difficult as the wear and tear from all those additional games accumulates over time. Kuch and Point put up those numbers playing through some really nasty injuries too. McD/Drai and Mac/Rantanen certainly have the potential to join those lists someday, but to do so they’ll have to continue to execute at an elite level while either remaining reasonably healthy or gutting it out through whatever injuries they do suffer. As a Lightning fan I obviously hope they don’t do it as long as my team is in contention, but as a hockey fan in general it’ll be fun to see if they can.

 

[AndreRoy]

It's not a case of small sample size. It is a case of few games played…

That’s the very definition of a small sample size. The reason for the small sample size doesn’t enter into it.

There is really no evidence that supports the notion that their current pts/gm numbers are out of line with what one might expect if the Oilers go deeper.

That’s not how statistics works. Your sample size determines the statistical significance of your results and the level of confidence with which you are able to draw inferences from the sample data. You cannot extrapolate from an insufficient sample size and assume that the results will be maintained over a larger sample.

Getting away from the mathematics and thinking of it strictly from a hockey perspective, it’s one thing to put up elite numbers in a single playoff run (plus one series) and quite another to maintain those numbers over several postseasons. Not only do the players in question have to consistently perform at that same elite level, but they have to do so as injuries and even just the wear and tear from all those additional games accumulates on their bodies. That’s why you can’t compare performance over the short term with performance over a longer term. Many people were certain Tiger Woods would shatter all of Jack Nicklaus’s records too, but it didn’t happen.

Again, I’m not saying McD and Drai aren’t great players or that they won’t establish themselves in that elite group of all-time postseason legends - only that they haven’t done so yet and that you can’t assume that they will be able to maintain their recent level of play over the long term. Maybe they will, but it is far from guaranteed.

If your team was facing a game 7 tomorrow and you could have any two of the four players would you actually include point over either McDavid or Draisaitl?

Actually I would. If you had asked about a random regular season game then of course I’d go with McDavid, but Point is the very definition of clutch and just has a knack for coming through in the biggest moments. He’s not the insane physical talent that McDavid is or the offensive genius that Kucherov is, but if I had to pick one guy in the league to score the GWG in a game 7, it would be Point.

 

[Rebels57]

You can have the entire Flyers roster (but we'll still pay their salaries), our AHL affiliate the Phantoms, the Wells Fargo Center (i'm sure we can find somewhere else to play), and an unlimited supply of Cheesesteaks.

 

[LucaBrasil]

Mcdavid + what for Bedard?

Absolutely not funny.

 

[OmniSens]

Ottawa likely would have to give up Stutzle, one of Batherson or DeBrincat, Greig and one or two 1sts.

But, I wouldn't do this as a Sens fan.

 

[Guffman]

Jets offer Mark Schiefel (C), Kyle Connor (LW), the Jets first-round draft picks in 2023, 2025 and 2027, along with $15 million in cash.

Figure the Oilers would need to toss us a couple of players back.

 

[Hockeyholic]

One elite player isn't enough to win a championship for a team. See.....Edmonton Oilers.

So trading three good to great players for an elite player is not a good trade off.

Trades like this don't happen in the NHL. Gretzky wasn't traded. He was sold off because the owner needed cash. This owner doesn't need cash.

 

[Fourier]

That’s the very definition of a small sample size. The reason for the small sample size doesn’t enter into it.


That’s not how statistics works. Your sample size determines the statistical significance of your results and the level of confidence with which you are able to draw inferences from the sample data. You cannot extrapolate from an insufficient sample size and assume that the results will be maintained over a larger sample.

Getting away from the mathematics and thinking of it strictly from a hockey perspective, it’s one thing to put up elite numbers in a single playoff run (plus one series) and quite another to maintain those numbers over several postseasons. Not only do the players in question have to consistently perform at that same elite level, but they have to do so as injuries and even just the wear and tear from all those additional games accumulates on their bodies. That’s why you can’t compare performance over the short term with performance over a longer term. Many people were certain Tiger Woods would shatter all of Jack Nicklaus’s records too, but it didn’t happen.

Again, I’m not saying McD and Drai aren’t great players or that they won’t establish themselves in that elite group of all-time postseason legends - only that they haven’t done so yet and that you can’t assume that they will be able to maintain their recent level of play over the long term. Maybe they will, but it is far from guaranteed.



Actually I would. If you had asked about a random regular season game then of course I’d go with McDavid, but Point is the very definition of clutch and just has a knack for coming through in the biggest moments. He’s not the insane physical talent that McDavid is or the offensive genius that Kucherov is, but if I had to pick one guy in the league to score the GWG in a game 7, it would be Point.

No offense but my math background is sufficient to recognize that sample size is not a significant issue here.

Players production in the playoffs will typically correlate with what they do in the regular season over the course of a career. A player who puts up close to 1.9 points per game over the course of a full season and who over his whole career has put up 1.49 points per game over 569 regular season games putting up 1.50 games over 42 games is highly likely to put up more than 1.03 pts per game by the time he has played 80 games. To do so he would have to put up 19 points in the next 38. In Draisaitl's case, it may be that he does not maintain a 1.64 pace through 80 games but he needs all of 13 points in his next 38 games to reach the "all-time elite" record of Brayden Point. (And by the way he played pretty much the whole playoffs last year with an injury that could easily of had him on the shelf for months in the regulars season.) What these two have done in the playoffs recently in terms of production is quite consistent certainly elite if the definition of elite includes Brayden Points 82 points in 80 games.

 

[AndreRoy]

No offense but my math background is sufficient to recognize that sample size is not a significant issue here.

Players production in the playoffs will typically correlate with what they do in the regular season over the course of a career. A player who puts up close to 1.9 points per game over the course of a full season and who over his whole career has put up 1.49 points per game over 569 regular season games putting up 1.50 games over 42 games is highly likely to put up more than 1.03 pts per game by the time he has played 80 games. To do so he would have to put up 19 points in the next 38. In Draisaitl's case, it may be that he does not maintain a 1.64 pace through 80 games but he needs all of 13 points in his next 38 games to reach the "all-time elite" record of Brayden Point. (And by the way he played pretty much the whole playoffs last year with an injury that could easily of had him on the shelf for months in the regulars season.) What these two have done in the playoffs recently in terms of production is quite consistent certainly elite if the definition of elite includes Brayden Points 82 points in 80 games.

No offense but based on your previous post that does not appear to be the case.

And nice attempt at moving the goalposts, but Point’s elite status is based on his goals per postseason game, not points. When the only people ahead of him are Lemieux, Bossy, Richard, Neely, Gretzky, and Kurri, I’d certainly say that qualifies.

View attachment 697186

 

[Rich Nixon]

oh jesus. ok. hmm.

Konecny
Provorov
Hart
Gauthier
Foerster
Brink
Andrae
1st 2023
1st 2024
1st 2024 (FLA)

Flyers don't really have much juice to offer, but that's their best forward, best defenseman, young quasi-stud goalie, 4 best prospects and 3 first round picks.

 

[Primary Assist]

7 years, $105M summer of 2026

 

[GrumpyKoala]

No one untouchable
But McDavid is the best player in the world signed at very good value

Gotta come up with multiple pieces that are:
Impact players that are young signed long term and also at value contracts.

 

[StateOfHockey101]

Yurov
Olghren
Walstad
Boldy
Next 5 first round picks

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Mattias Norlinder + 2nd from Habs