[Discussion] Arizona/OEL

[UKNuck96]

2 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

its a good use of the pick as well. I do think the fanbase is sleeping on Rathbone too. 

Yeah I hope we keep him, I do think he is the real deal. That said he might be good  enough but not quite the right fit for the team, at which point I think the trade value for him would be a lot higher than a prospect makeweight 

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

I guess I’d be asking for the same and if I was JB I’d be hanging up the phone. Not gonna happen. Thanks for the reply 

Podz is too high an ask. AZ wants too much, hard pass if this is the line. 

 

Jims on 650 right now and he's already mentioned free agency as a possible option, so thats good. 

[oldnews]

10 hours ago, RomanP said:

Like what? Him only having one season in NHL where he was a “+” player? He’s not worth $8.5 million for 7 more years. I can give you a list of many players his age with much better stats and much cheaper contracts.

are you going to give me a list of players with better +/-.   if so, I'll save you the time and suggest you don't bother.

there are lots of statistics posted in this thread - and discussion of them - not going to bother repeating myself.

but if you believe draft position from 2009 means a whiff - or +/-, then I suspect there's not much to discuss.

[Provost]

10 minutes ago, oldnews said:

The part about going to sign with Boston before his extension with Arizona might play in the Canuck's favour - ie are they supposed to want to give up assets for him now that he did not sign with them..?  In light of that, I wonder if both teams on that list might share the lowball conviction.   Regardless - stick to a lowball and if Boston outbids you, so be it.

I don't know if we are a higher priority than Boston or not... but I think it is almost certain that we have a direct backchannel to OEL through some of our Swedish connections.  JB will have at least had a chat with his team leaders about their thoughts on OEL and that would have likely been passed on.

It isn't tampering if you talk to your own players about your "vision" for the team and those players happen to chat with their friends.

I honestly don't think the price will end up being that high, and that it may have progressed far enough that Arizona needs to pull the trigger and can't reverse course at this point.  They asked him to waive, and he did.  He knows there were offers on the table from at least one of his preferred destinations.  If they don't trade him now, the likelihood they can do it a year from now once he has one less season of prime production seems even less.

For me there are a few lines we don't need to cross:
- No Podkolzin, Demko, or Hoglander unless we are getting one of their nice prospects back as part of a package.  Any of Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty, Gaudette, Virtanen etc should be on the table
- No 1st round pick.  Maybe at best a conditional 2nd where it turns into a 1st if we make the conference finals within the next two years (ensuring it is a really late 1st at best)
- The HAVE to take money back that includes cap liability in the 2021-22 season.  Sutter and Baertschi doesn't help us with the tightest cap crunch that season, they are expiring anyways.  To me that is either Eriksson or Roussel + Beagle.  Either of those options free up enough to make the math work.  Obviously Eriksson is the preferred option and should be the preferred on from their end as he is cheap in terms of real dollars.
- If Arizona really wants to increase their return, retaining cap on OEL would make some of the above "no go" options more palatable, but I don't see that working for them.  OEL at $6-6.5 million is worth a lot more than him at $8.25

Edited October 5, 2020 by Provost

[Odjick29willkillyou]

The common theme among those on TSN1040 seems to be we cannot afford to keep Tanny and trade for OEL. All of these scenarios where people are listing Tanny and Stech moving forward are not indicitive of GMJB's desire to re-vamp the D corps either. I would LOVE to at least keep Tanny to insulate Huggie, but there will be other teams offering him more term and money than we can. That said, OEL is a hell of a replacement for Eagle should he move on in two years. Imagine how effective Eagle would be playing 18-20 minutes per game on a 3rd line pairing rather than his current workload.   

[oldnews]

9 minutes ago, Provost said:

I don't know if we are a higher priority than Boston or not... but I think it is almost certain that we have a direct backchannel to OEL through some of our Swedish connections.

It isn't tampering if you talk to your own players about your "vision" for the team and those players happen to chat with their friends.

I honestly don't think the price will end up being that high, and that it may have progressed far enough that Arizona needs to pull the trigger and can't reverse course at this point.  They asked him to waive, and he did.  He knows there were offers on the table from at least one of his preferred destinations.  If they don't trade him now, the likelihood they can do it a year from now once he has one less season of prime production seems even less.

For me there are a few lines we don't need to cross:
- No Podkolzin, Demko, or Hoglander unless we are getting one of their nice prospects back as part of a package.  Any of Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty, Gaudette, Virtanen etc should be on the table
- No 1st round pick.  Maybe at best a conditional 2nd where it turns into a 1st if we make the conference finals within the next two years (ensuring it is a really late 1st at best)
- The HAVE to take money back that includes cap liability in the 2021-22 season.  Sutter and Baertschi doesn't help us with the tightest cap crunch that season, they are expiring anyways.  To me that is either Eriksson or Roussel + Beagle.  Either of those options free up enough to make the math work.  Obviously Eriksson is the preferred option and should be the preferred on from their end as he is cheap in terms of real dollars.
- If Arizona really wants to increase their return, retaining cap on OEL would make some of the above "no go" options more palatable, but I don't see that working for them.  OEL at $6-6.5 million is worth a lot more than him at $8.25

I agree - but for me, there are two things I would not compromise on:  1) LE must be part of the deal, and 2) Armstrong would need to get real if he's expecting an ROR return - imo he needs to accept 1), and he needs to tone back his expected return by at least one asset (relative to that ROR return) - the conditions are simply nowhere near comparable.

Hardball/lowball to the last moment - and then be prepared to walk.  With what Armstrong appears to be messaging / or at least how he is being 'represented' by Friedman, I will be almost relieved to hear a deal does not pan out, if he's not ready to compromise - otherwise he seems to be a bit obstinate in the face of his lack of leverage.  He may not like it, but who cares.

 

Edited October 5, 2020 by oldnews

[canuckster19]

29 minutes ago, IRR said:

Moj on 1040 just now saying a close source (prob OEL's agent) saying they are Frustrated with Arizona because they are putting more effort into trying to get them to expand their list vs trying to get a deal done with the Canucks or Bruins. And the Canucks have def put in a fair / good effort. 

Sounds like he's just parroting theories on HF.

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I agree - but for me, there are two things I would not compromise on:  1) LE must be part of the deal, and 2) Armstrong would need to get real if he's expecting an ROR return - imo he needs to accept 1), and he needs to tone back his expected return by at least one asset (relative to that ROR return) - the conditions are simply nowhere near comparable.

Hardball/lowball to the last moment - and then be prepared to walk.  With what Armstrong appears to be messaging / or at least how he is being 'represented' by Friedman, I will be almost relieved to hear a deal does not pan out, if he's not ready to compromise - otherwise he seems to be a bit obstinate in the face of his lack of leverage.  He may not like it, but who cares.

 

just listening to Benning on 650 - sounds like he's fine with leaning on some younger guys next year (OJ, Chatfield, maybe Hoglander) and also going to the free agent market if need be. I don't think it was BS positioning, sounded quite comfortable with that path.

 

So we'll see. I suspect Armstrong has unrealistic ideas and isn't going to make the deal with us. OEL has no pressure or reason to expand his list whatsoever so Armstrong is the one under more pressure than anyone here, but ROR value? zero chance of that. 

[D-Money]

12 minutes ago, Odjick29willkillyou said:

The common theme among those on TSN1040 seems to be we cannot afford to keep Tanny and trade for OEL. All of these scenarios where people are listing Tanny and Stech moving forward are not indicitive of GMJB's desire to re-vamp the D corps either. I would LOVE to at least keep Tanny to insulate Huggie, but there will be other teams offering him more term and money than we can. That said, OEL is a hell of a replacement for Eagle should he move on in two years. Imagine how effective Eagle would be playing 18-20 minutes per game on a 3rd line pairing rather than his current workload.   

I think it’s time to move on from Tanev. There will be a lot of bargains available in free agency, and we’re now a desired destination. Especially if we trade for OEL - a RD will be guaranteed to have a solid partner: OEL, Hughes, or Edler.

 

That’s how Tampa beefed up their RD. There got Shattenkirk and Bogosian for cheap, because they could not only give them a chance to win, but they’d get to play with either Hedman, McDonagh, or Sergachev almost every shift. A good D partner can help you look better for future contracts.

[Odjick29willkillyou]

4 minutes ago, D-Money said:

I think it’s time to move on from Tanev. There will be a lot of bargains available in free agency, and we’re now a desired destination. Especially if we trade for OEL - a RD will be guaranteed to have a solid partner: OEL, Hughes, or Edler.

 

That’s how Tampa beefed up their RD. There got Shattenkirk and Bogosian for cheap, because they could not only give them a chance to win, but they’d get to play with either Hedman, McDonagh, or Sergachev almost every shift. A good D partner can help you look better for future contracts.

Agree completely. We tend to become enamored by our players when truth is, we both might benefit from a change of scenery (cue Jake). If we can replace Tanny with a younger comparable in Demelo who comes a bit cheaper, why would we not jump on it? Plus, if we get OEL he will probably want to play alongside a more defensive-minded player much like Huggie and Tanny. 

[rekker]

9 minutes ago, D-Money said:

I think it’s time to move on from Tanev. There will be a lot of bargains available in free agency, and we’re now a desired destination. Especially if we trade for OEL - a RD will be guaranteed to have a solid partner: OEL, Hughes, or Edler.

 

That’s how Tampa beefed up their RD. There got Shattenkirk and Bogosian for cheap, because they could not only give them a chance to win, but they’d get to play with either Hedman, McDonagh, or Sergachev almost every shift. A good D partner can help you look better for future contracts.

Tough to say but I agree. The upgrade on Tanev is the tough part. Problem ultimately is if you commit to him for 4 more years or so as he's probably asking, how do you upgrade down the road if the opportunity comes up? 

[oldnews]

7 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

just listening to Benning on 650 - sounds like he's fine with leaning on some younger guys next year (OJ, Chatfield, maybe Hoglander) and also going to the free agent market if need be. I don't think it was BS positioning, sounded quite comfortable with that path.

 

So we'll see. I suspect Armstrong has unrealistic ideas and isn't going to make the deal with us. OEL has no pressure or reason to expand his list whatsoever so Armstrong is the one under more pressure than anyone here, but ROR value? zero chance of that. 

My preferences would be - if the team is spending any of it's valuable futures to target Foote, who Tampa will unlikely be able to protect in the e.d.

That would give us an all situations type RHD prospect succession possibility.  And I'd re-sign Tanev and Markstrom as well.  Toffloli might have to wait, depending...

I'd move as much LW veteran contracts as I can - and perhaps start with the lesser cost of dumping Baer's contract as opposed to LE - who I'd probably wait out and let it be known that he is destined for unconditional waivers - that it's termination or assignment, because I imagine his agent has realized by now that there are no deals to be made for LE, short of dumping him into a deal like this OEL one - that does not involve futures and/or retention to a degree that don't work for the team.  Aside from Baer - Roussel, Benn certainly on the trade block imo - and depending how difficult deals might be, I'd also entertain moving Pearson for futures to use to move the others.  I'd be more that comfortable heading into next season with one or two spots open to competition - ie Fantenburg and Juolevi for the 3LHD spot, and our forward prospects competing with perhaps a deflated UFA signing to fill a middle six winger position....If they cleared enough cap and had to move Pearson in the process, they may have enough room for an opportune forward acquisition (ie Dvorak with Gaudette as principal).

Take the necessity to cut this deal out of the equation and they have pretty decent options this offseason, imo.

[aGENT]

33 minutes ago, Odjick29willkillyou said:

The common theme among those on TSN1040 seems to be we cannot afford to keep Tanny and trade for OEL. 

As much as I'd love to have him back, I'd be more tempted to try to retain Stecher at this point if we do indeed add OEL.

 

OEL, Hughes

Edler, Stecher/Myers

Juolevi, Myers/Stecher

 

He's younger, cheaper, less injury prone and IMO proved his worth this playoff run despite his stature.

 

Of course, that also means he'd need to sign at a bit of a discount to stay here too. Say $2.5+/-.

Edited October 5, 2020 by aGENT

[Spoosh]

This deal needs to happen. 
 

I can usually keep a distance from rumours, but I’m all in on this Ekman-Larsson deal now. 
 

I’ll be very very sad if he goes to Boston of all teams after you guys - and twitter got me excited and all.

[oldnews]

10 minutes ago, aGENT said:

As much as I'd love to have him back, I'd be more tempted to try to retain Stecher at this point if we do indeed add OEL.

 

OEL, Hughes

Elder, Stecher/Myers

Juolevi, Myers/Stecher

 

He's younger, cheaper, less injury prone and IMO proved his worth this playoff run despite his stature.

 

Of course, that also means he'd need to sign at a bit of a discount to stay here too. Say $2.5+/-.

I'd rather see OEL moved to his off side (he's bigger/heavier, more experienced, and more able to handle the pounding he might take with his back to the play/and transition (talking down low in the dzone here, particularly his off corner ..I don't like the idea for Hughes, who is already targeted enough.

But I'd rather just see a proper RHD addition to play with Hughes - for me that 'should' be a priority over bending to an off track contingency like this - add a proper RHD partner and then have those OEL and Edler pairings to tilt the ice. If this deal costs too much to do so - walk away.

If they don't go 'all the way' here, I don't necessarily see the point - a succession plan for Edler is not really a priority at this stage.

It has to really make sense imo - and I'm not sure that group of pairings does (or that Juolevi would even remain here?)

Edited October 5, 2020 by oldnews

[CanuckFan1123]

1 minute ago, Spoosh said:

This deal needs to happen. 
 

I can usually keep a distance from rumours, but I’m all in on this Ekman-Larsson deal now. 
 

I’ll be very very sad if he goes to Boston of all teams after you guys - and twitter got me excited and all.

I won’t be upset if a trade doesn’t happen but it sounds like we have so much leverage that OEL won’t cost a fortune so if you can buy low on a dman like that then I say go for it. He has a two team trade list, issues with his coach, and an organization that frankly seems to want to move him. At this point I’d be shocked if it doesn’t happen. Just praying JB can do it without moving our top assets and maybe even get them to retain some cap. 

[Junkyard Dog]

3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

As much as I'd love to have him back, I'd be more tempted to try to retain Stecher at this point if we do indeed add OEL.

 

OEL, Hughes

Edler, Stecher/Myers

Juolevi, Myers/Stecher

 

He's younger, cheaper, less injury prone and IMO proved his worth this playoff run despite his stature.

 

Of course, that also means he'd need to sign at a bit of a discount to stay here too. Say $2.5+/-.

If we did manage to keep Tanev we'd have a killer top 4.

 

Edler-Hughes

OEL-Tanev

OJ-Myers

 

Would require a ship out of Eriksson, Sutter, Virtanen, Stecher and one of Benn/Baertschi. Could be done if that happens and if Tanev takes a discount. Otherwise sign Stecher or try to find a top 6 upgrade.

[aGENT]

Just now, oldnews said:

I'd rather see OEL moved to his off side (he's bigger/heavier, more experienced, and more able to handle the pounding he might take with his back to the play/and transition...I don't like the idea for Hughes, who is already targeted enough.

Certainly a possibility as well...I think he's played there with Edler internationally.

 

I just think given the style Hughes plays, he'd easily be able to adapt to his 'off' side (and was quoted as producing more offense there). 'Rover' by definition isn't really side dependant 

 

Besides, if OEL is more the defensive 'safety'/ 2 way guy on that pair, it probably matters more to have him on the better defensively side of the ice.

 

Either way, it would be a nice 'problem' for the coaches to sort out.

[Barry_Wilkins]

Bill Armstrong is like that faithful employee who everyone notices, but his career path up that particular company's ladder is blocked by all the established personnel in place. So he gets a higher position with a, er .... "challenging" upstart company, and as soon as he enters his spacious new office with all his assistants hovering nearby, various multi-layer poo-storms explode all around him.

 

He's probably overwhelmed with how to work this all out. It's his first gig as head honcho. Imagine the knock to his pride to have to start out with a stinker of a trade.

 

My guess? He'll wait to the last minute, hold his nose, and take the best offer from whatever's been on the table for a while.

 

Oh, and don't fall for any marketing -type lies, JB. Here's Armstrong's high-powered BS from his job acceptance release:

 

"We have great ownership that is committed to winning, a very good core group of young, talented players, and a passionate fan base. I'm excited about our future and the opportunity to build this team into a perennial playoff contender."

 

[Nucker 67]

Sounds like Benning is also trying to acquire picks.

 

If he can:

- trade Eriksson

- acquire OEL and draft picks

 

the answer is Yes, he is a great GM