This day on October 24
Acquired: Michel Petit (1996)
Departed: Alex Henry (2002)

Happy Birthday To: hubofhockey, Oil Tycoon, Sappy, oilers8371

F.A.Q. Terms of Use F.A.Q. F.A.Q.
Members Members   Search Search     Register Register   Login Login   Home Home
 Oilers » Trading #1 picks
Switch to flat viewSwitch to tree viewCreate a new topicSubmit Reply
 Trading #1 picks [message #610935]
Mon, 21 October 2013 13:35 Go to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 10081
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

http://oilersnation.com/2013/10/21/history-of-trading-1-over all-picks

Here's a piece from Gregor, continuing a line of thought he's trumpeted a lot lately - that is, that the Oilers should trade Yakupov.

He's listed all the top picks in the last 30 years who've been traded, but reading that list, I see only one time when trading a forward that was a #1 where it was a clear win - the Lindros deal. And even that wouldn't have looked good if the prospect involved, one Peter Forsberg, hadn't turned out to be All-World.

There's a couple pushes - Turgeon/Lafontaine, Nolan/Ozolinsh aren't big wins for either side. Daigle for Falloon and Prospal isn't the big win that Gregor proclaims it to be, since Prospal only played 3.5 years for Ottawa with fairly pedestrian numbers before being traded for a conditional draft pick.

Pretty much all the rest are terrible. Murphy trumps Carson just by himself, never mind with Sharples, Klima and Graves thrown in. The Thornton deal was a very poor decision, as they got some role players that didn't stick around very long for a guy who's top ten in the league in points since that time. Sundin and change for Clark and change is brutal.

I discount the defence trades, because they aren't as comparable to our situation. Defencemen drafted #1 overall seem to rarely be high octane, offensive players, which changes the likelihood that you're going to look stupid later on. That said, even there, it's not always a great idea. Tampa made an idiotic move dealing Hamrlik to the Oilers for Marchment, Kelly and Bonsignore.

Looking at those trades, I think what they should illustrate isn't that there's a great opportunity for the Oilers in dealing Yakupov, the greater likelihood is that you're going to lose the deal. The Oilers don't want to trade for more future, which means that you're probably dealing quality for quantity like the Thornton deal. There's very rarely Turgeon/Lafontaine or Hawerchuk/Housley type deals made any more. While there's a list of defencemen that I'd be willing to trade Yakupov for, I doubt any of those teams make that move. As for forwards, who is a likely target that the Oilers could take a run at?

I worry that the player on the Oilers' minds is and has always been Lucic and that we'd surrender Yakupov straight up for him. Given the style of game he plays, I do not expect Milan Lucic to be the same player he is today after the age of 30, and over the course of his career, he's scored at a rate of just 0.59 points per game. I fear that we'd give Boston a player who'll lead them in scoring for a decade for a guy who'll start dealing with more and more injuries within two to three years and drop off the map after five.

If not Lucic, is there another forward in the league who's a legitimate straight-up option for the Oilers?



#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireEakins #FireActon #FireSmith #FireBuchberger #FireMoores #Burnitdown #KeepJoey

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610938 is a reply to message #610935 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 13:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
v4ance  is currently offline v4ance
Messages: 2582
Registered: July 2008
Location: Calgary

2 Cups

Yakupov for Seth Jones straight up?[ 50 vote(s) ]
1.Yes 36 / 72%
2.No 14 / 28%

Just curious...


Jordan Eberle on his goal scoring: "A lot of guys joke that I have a muffin. Well, it's an accurate muffin, and that's all that counts."

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610939 is a reply to message #610938 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 13:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NetBOG is currently online NetBOG
Messages: 1492
Registered: January 2006
Location: Parts Unknown

1 Cup

v4ance wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:48

Just curious...


Of course ...... who wouldn't?



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610940 is a reply to message #610938 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 13:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
nullterm is currently online nullterm
Messages: 7910
Registered: July 2007
Location: Port Moody, BC

6 Cups

v4ance wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 12:48

Just curious...


Yes, ignoring player-to-player comparisons, Seth Jones fills a void while Yakupov is in surplus.

Seth Jones - Darnell Nurse

Can you imagine that pairing in 3/4 years?



Illegitimi non carborundum.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610948 is a reply to message #610940 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 14:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 10081
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

nullterm wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:51

v4ance wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 12:48

Just curious...


Yes, ignoring player-to-player comparisons, Seth Jones fills a void while Yakupov is in surplus.

Seth Jones - Darnell Nurse

Can you imagine that pairing in 3/4 years?


Agreed. If you can turn a stud winger (which you have lots of) in to a stud defenceman (which you don't have much of), and both are in pretty similar spaces as far as salary cap goes, then yeah, I think you have to consider it.

But does anyone here see Nashville making that trade? Their team is and has been built around defence and goaltending and now they have another great one. You're more likely to have them offering up Roman Josi, and I wouldn't trade Yakupov for him.

[Updated on: Mon, 21 October 2013 14:38]


#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireEakins #FireActon #FireSmith #FireBuchberger #FireMoores #Burnitdown #KeepJoey

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610951 is a reply to message #610940 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 14:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
g2k is currently online g2k
Messages: 6239
Registered: January 2003
Location: tracking mice

6 Cups

nullterm wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:51

v4ance wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 12:48

Just curious...


Yes, ignoring player-to-player comparisons, Seth Jones fills a void while Yakupov is in surplus.

Seth Jones - Darnell Nurse

Can you imagine that pairing in 3/4 years?

Would you toss in Klefbom?



Limecat Logic

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610952 is a reply to message #610951 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 15:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
nullterm is currently online nullterm
Messages: 7910
Registered: July 2007
Location: Port Moody, BC

6 Cups

g2k wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:47

nullterm wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:51

v4ance wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 12:48

Just curious...


Yes, ignoring player-to-player comparisons, Seth Jones fills a void while Yakupov is in surplus.

Seth Jones - Darnell Nurse

Can you imagine that pairing in 3/4 years?

Would you toss in Klefbom?


Without hesitation.



Illegitimi non carborundum.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610941 is a reply to message #610938 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 13:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 4042
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

4 Cups

v4ance wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:48

Just curious...


I'd do that for sure...sorry Yak. I'd like for Jones to finish a year of training under Weber first though so he has some good habits to teach the rest of our dmen icon_wink If Yak starts scoring, he would be very attractive to the Preds filling a gap for them too...



..talk is cheap
..success is coming
..the game that we present and stage for the fans most nights is one of very, very high entertainment
..limitless potential
..good structural improvement

Eakins: I know EXACTLY what we need to do next year...

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610947 is a reply to message #610938 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 14:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rukm01  is currently offline rukm01
Messages: 2059
Registered: December 2004
Location: Edmonton

2 Cups

v4ance wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:48

Just curious...


Jones is already playing 24+ minutes a night in Nashville and looks like an absolute stud.

I like Yak a lot but I'd make that deal without hesitation.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610942 is a reply to message #610935 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 13:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
bigEfromGP  is currently offline bigEfromGP
Messages: 2290
Registered: July 2006
Location: GP, AB

2 Cups

Adam wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:35

http://oilersnation.com/2013/10/21/history-of-trading-1-over all-picks

Here's a piece from Gregor, continuing a line of thought he's trumpeted a lot lately - that is, that the Oilers should trade Yakupov.

He's listed all the top picks in the last 30 years who've been traded, but reading that list, I see only one time when trading a forward that was a #1 where it was a clear win - the Lindros deal. And even that wouldn't have looked good if the prospect involved, one Peter Forsberg, hadn't turned out to be All-World.

There's a couple pushes - Turgeon/Lafontaine, Nolan/Ozolinsh aren't big wins for either side. Daigle for Falloon and Prospal isn't the big win that Gregor proclaims it to be, since Prospal only played 3.5 years for Ottawa with fairly pedestrian numbers before being traded for a conditional draft pick.

Pretty much all the rest are terrible. Murphy trumps Carson just by himself, never mind with Sharples, Klima and Graves thrown in. The Thornton deal was a very poor decision, as they got some role players that didn't stick around very long for a guy who's top ten in the league in points since that time. Sundin and change for Clark and change is brutal.

I discount the defence trades, because they aren't as comparable to our situation. Defencemen drafted #1 overall seem to rarely be high octane, offensive players, which changes the likelihood that you're going to look stupid later on. That said, even there, it's not always a great idea. Tampa made an idiotic move dealing Hamrlik to the Oilers for Marchment, Kelly and Bonsignore.

Looking at those trades, I think what they should illustrate isn't that there's a great opportunity for the Oilers in dealing Yakupov, the greater likelihood is that you're going to lose the deal. The Oilers don't want to trade for more future, which means that you're probably dealing quality for quantity like the Thornton deal. There's very rarely Turgeon/Lafontaine or Hawerchuk/Housley type deals made any more. While there's a list of defencemen that I'd be willing to trade Yakupov for, I doubt any of those teams make that move. As for forwards, who is a likely target that the Oilers could take a run at?

I worry that the player on the Oilers' minds is and has always been Lucic and that we'd surrender Yakupov straight up for him. Given the style of game he plays, I do not expect Milan Lucic to be the same player he is today after the age of 30, and over the course of his career, he's scored at a rate of just 0.59 points per game. I fear that we'd give Boston a player who'll lead them in scoring for a decade for a guy who'll start dealing with more and more injuries within two to three years and drop off the map after five.

If not Lucic, is there another forward in the league who's a legitimate straight-up option for the Oilers?


Excellent points and exactly my thoughts but with the added bonus of real life examples. I do not understand the rush by some fans to trade away Yakupov.



oilerinvan should never leave Oilfans.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610944 is a reply to message #610942 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 14:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
goffer48  is currently offline goffer48
Messages: 970
Registered: March 2006
Location: Edmonton , Alberta

No Cups

bigEfromGP wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:55

Adam wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:35

http://oilersnation.com/2013/10/21/history-of-trading-1-over all-picks

Here's a piece from Gregor, continuing a line of thought he's trumpeted a lot lately - that is, that the Oilers should trade Yakupov.

He's listed all the top picks in the last 30 years who've been traded, but reading that list, I see only one time when trading a forward that was a #1 where it was a clear win - the Lindros deal. And even that wouldn't have looked good if the prospect involved, one Peter Forsberg, hadn't turned out to be All-World.

There's a couple pushes - Turgeon/Lafontaine, Nolan/Ozolinsh aren't big wins for either side. Daigle for Falloon and Prospal isn't the big win that Gregor proclaims it to be, since Prospal only played 3.5 years for Ottawa with fairly pedestrian numbers before being traded for a conditional draft pick.

Pretty much all the rest are terrible. Murphy trumps Carson just by himself, never mind with Sharples, Klima and Graves thrown in. The Thornton deal was a very poor decision, as they got some role players that didn't stick around very long for a guy who's top ten in the league in points since that time. Sundin and change for Clark and change is brutal.

I discount the defence trades, because they aren't as comparable to our situation. Defencemen drafted #1 overall seem to rarely be high octane, offensive players, which changes the likelihood that you're going to look stupid later on. That said, even there, it's not always a great idea. Tampa made an idiotic move dealing Hamrlik to the Oilers for Marchment, Kelly and Bonsignore.

Looking at those trades, I think what they should illustrate isn't that there's a great opportunity for the Oilers in dealing Yakupov, the greater likelihood is that you're going to lose the deal. The Oilers don't want to trade for more future, which means that you're probably dealing quality for quantity like the Thornton deal. There's very rarely Turgeon/Lafontaine or Hawerchuk/Housley type deals made any more. While there's a list of defencemen that I'd be willing to trade Yakupov for, I doubt any of those teams make that move. As for forwards, who is a likely target that the Oilers could take a run at?

I worry that the player on the Oilers' minds is and has always been Lucic and that we'd surrender Yakupov straight up for him. Given the style of game he plays, I do not expect Milan Lucic to be the same player he is today after the age of 30, and over the course of his career, he's scored at a rate of just 0.59 points per game. I fear that we'd give Boston a player who'll lead them in scoring for a decade for a guy who'll start dealing with more and more injuries within two to three years and drop off the map after five.

If not Lucic, is there another forward in the league who's a legitimate straight-up option for the Oilers?


Excellent points and exactly my thoughts but with the added bonus of real life examples. I do not understand the rush by some fans to trade away Yakupov.


I am in NO RUSH to trade him either,..... BUT, .... To finagle a deal that would address an immediate team need... ?? ... Wayne Simmonds from Philly ; or a Nathan Horton from Columbus wouldn't hurt my feelings a whole lot. I love the way they play the game.



-Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
-Don't mess with old folks, they didn't get old by being stupid.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610945 is a reply to message #610944 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 14:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
bigEfromGP  is currently offline bigEfromGP
Messages: 2290
Registered: July 2006
Location: GP, AB

2 Cups

goffer48 wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 14:14

bigEfromGP wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:55

Adam wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 13:35

http://oilersnation.com/2013/10/21/history-of-trading-1-over all-picks

Here's a piece from Gregor, continuing a line of thought he's trumpeted a lot lately - that is, that the Oilers should trade Yakupov.

He's listed all the top picks in the last 30 years who've been traded, but reading that list, I see only one time when trading a forward that was a #1 where it was a clear win - the Lindros deal. And even that wouldn't have looked good if the prospect involved, one Peter Forsberg, hadn't turned out to be All-World.

There's a couple pushes - Turgeon/Lafontaine, Nolan/Ozolinsh aren't big wins for either side. Daigle for Falloon and Prospal isn't the big win that Gregor proclaims it to be, since Prospal only played 3.5 years for Ottawa with fairly pedestrian numbers before being traded for a conditional draft pick.

Pretty much all the rest are terrible. Murphy trumps Carson just by himself, never mind with Sharples, Klima and Graves thrown in. The Thornton deal was a very poor decision, as they got some role players that didn't stick around very long for a guy who's top ten in the league in points since that time. Sundin and change for Clark and change is brutal.

I discount the defence trades, because they aren't as comparable to our situation. Defencemen drafted #1 overall seem to rarely be high octane, offensive players, which changes the likelihood that you're going to look stupid later on. That said, even there, it's not always a great idea. Tampa made an idiotic move dealing Hamrlik to the Oilers for Marchment, Kelly and Bonsignore.

Looking at those trades, I think what they should illustrate isn't that there's a great opportunity for the Oilers in dealing Yakupov, the greater likelihood is that you're going to lose the deal. The Oilers don't want to trade for more future, which means that you're probably dealing quality for quantity like the Thornton deal. There's very rarely Turgeon/Lafontaine or Hawerchuk/Housley type deals made any more. While there's a list of defencemen that I'd be willing to trade Yakupov for, I doubt any of those teams make that move. As for forwards, who is a likely target that the Oilers could take a run at?

I worry that the player on the Oilers' minds is and has always been Lucic and that we'd surrender Yakupov straight up for him. Given the style of game he plays, I do not expect Milan Lucic to be the same player he is today after the age of 30, and over the course of his career, he's scored at a rate of just 0.59 points per game. I fear that we'd give Boston a player who'll lead them in scoring for a decade for a guy who'll start dealing with more and more injuries within two to three years and drop off the map after five.

If not Lucic, is there another forward in the league who's a legitimate straight-up option for the Oilers?


Excellent points and exactly my thoughts but with the added bonus of real life examples. I do not understand the rush by some fans to trade away Yakupov.


I am in NO RUSH to trade him either,..... BUT, .... To finagle a deal that would address an immediate team need... ?? ... Wayne Simmonds from Philly ; or a Nathan Horton from Columbus wouldn't hurt my feelings a whole lot. I love the way they play the game.


Simmonds is $4.9, Horton $5.3, so you are going to have to make cuts somewhere to get either one of them in somewhere. Or you can keep a kid who just turned 20, scored 31 pts in his first games, and costs you less than a million for another season after this one and then will still only be RFA.



oilerinvan should never leave Oilfans.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610946 is a reply to message #610944 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 14:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 10081
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

goffer48 wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 14:14


I am in NO RUSH to trade him either,..... BUT, .... To finagle a deal that would address an immediate team need... ?? ... Wayne Simmonds from Philly ; or a Nathan Horton from Columbus wouldn't hurt my feelings a whole lot. I love the way they play the game.


Both those players are inferior to Yakupov. Both would look decent in Oil silks (although I question how much you want a guy like Horton who's always hurt and who specifically wanted a team with very little spotlight in the community) but you shouldn't give up a guy who's scoring at the same rate as Stamkos and Hall were at the same point in their careers, without getting the same first line push that those guys got.

One of the things Gregor has pointed to and that Willis mentioned recently as well is that as far as #1s go, Yakupov is in the bottom half of the list of recent forwards at 53 games, but he's had two things working against him.

1) He's the third in a row so he doesn't get the opportunities that most #1 picks get.

2) He's had two coaches in his first 50-odd games in the NHL. He was just starting to gain the confidence of the first at the end of last season...now he has to start all over again.



#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireEakins #FireActon #FireSmith #FireBuchberger #FireMoores #Burnitdown #KeepJoey

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610955 is a reply to message #610935 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 15:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
benv  is currently offline benv
Messages: 723
Registered: May 2006
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

I've lost a lot of respect for Gregor in the last few days between the piece Adam cites, his immature twitter spat with MC79 last Friday, and this piece of mind numbing sludge from this morning's Edmonton Journal.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sports/hockey/edmonton-oilers /Jason+Gregor+Edmonton+Oilers+Taylor+Hall/9059545/story.html

The latter might be one of the dumbest sports articles I've ever read.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610956 is a reply to message #610955 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 15:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JPro  is currently offline JPro
Messages: 573
Registered: January 2006
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

Is this not clearly satire, or are we upset that it's just not that funny?


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610958 is a reply to message #610956 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 15:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
benv  is currently offline benv
Messages: 723
Registered: May 2006
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

JPro wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 15:27

Is this not clearly satire, or are we upset that it's just not that funny?


If it's meant as satire, it eluded me. I got the impression that he's being genuine.

It's probably more of a personal thing for me--as a scientist I've always hated the promotion of any superstitious mumbo-jumbo explanations for anything. The scientific method is there for a reason.

Edit: listening to Gregor right now: not meant as satire. He's serious about this crap. My respect level continues to plummet.

[Updated on: Mon, 21 October 2013 16:15]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610964 is a reply to message #610958 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 15:55 Go to previous message
eedok  is currently offline eedok
Messages: 864
Registered: March 2010
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

benv wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 15:36

JPro wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 15:27

Is this not clearly satire, or are we upset that it's just not that funny?


If it's meant as satire, it eluded me. I got the impression that he's being genuine.

It's probably more of a personal thing for me--as a scientist I've always hated the promotion of any superstitious mumbo-jumbo explanations for anything. The scientific method is there for a reason.

Could bring in a placebo effect though



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Trading #1 picks [message #610959 is a reply to message #610956 ]
Mon, 21 October 2013 15:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 10081
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

JPro wrote on Mon, 21 October 2013 15:27

Is this not clearly satire, or are we upset that it's just not that funny?


We were discussing that at my hockey game last night. Apparently after posting the article, he was defending it on twitter, so maybe he's serious?

He certainly wouldn't be the only person in sports to be superstitious, although I don't think sacrificing chickens in the dressing room is likely to fix our mojo more than better systems play and/or better systems. The injuries, you just have to live with them and play through them. Certainly, if Ottawa can lose both top forward AND top d-man and still make the playoffs, we can't cry too much about losing a guy in a position where we have some depth.

Although if our only response to skill guys getting hurt is to bring up the role players from the farm, I doubt they're going to weather the storm well...



#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireEakins #FireActon #FireSmith #FireBuchberger #FireMoores #Burnitdown #KeepJoey

Send a private message to this user  

 
Previous Topic:2013/14 Oilers Injury Thread
Next Topic:GDT: Edmonton @ Ottawa (Game #9)
Oilers NHL Minors Speculation For Sale 


Copyright © OilFans.com 1996-2014.
All content is property of OilFans.com and cannot be used without expressed, written consent from this site.
Questions, comments and suggestions can be directed to oilfans@OilFans.com
Privacy Statement


Hosted by LogicalHosting.ca