 |
 Adam
Messages: 6845
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
6 Cups
|
|
| bigEfromGP wrote on Wed, 20 February 2019 15:25 |
| Adam wrote on Wed, 20 February 2019 14:40 |
| bigEfromGP wrote on Wed, 20 February 2019 14:12 |
| Mullet wrote on Wed, 20 February 2019 13:22 |
I think that they should play stolarz so he doesn't become a UFA. If he doesn't get 10 more games he's out. Oilers need to give up on playoffs. Even yesterday they were talking about knowing in the next 3 games. So stuck on stupid.
|
Who cares if he becomes UFA?
|
Well, trading Talbot becomes pretty meaningless if he does...
Although if they didn't trade Talbot, they couldn't have unburied Spooner, so they wouldn't have been able to acquire Sam Gagner, so maybe people should say it was Talbot for Stolarz, Sekera and Gagner - and if so, then maybe it was all worth it!
I will say, if they were to go on a run and then Koskinen gets hurt or falls flat, then that Talbot trade will look really bad...especially if they really have no plans at all for Stolarz.
|
Talbot was gone at end of the season. Maybe one could argue that the Oilers should/could have gotten more for him (which I don't think is true, given his performance), but that's a different argument altogether.
So again, I ask who cares if Stolarz goes UFA? If he's the backup the Oilers want, he's still going to be less than $1.5 million (on the high end). Play him as many games as necessary to see how he performs as a backup this season but outside of that there is no reason to play him.
|
My perspective is that there were other ways of clearing cap space, so there was not NEED to trade Talbot.
Philly gave up a guy who was going to be UFA at the end of the year for them for sure - so virtually nothing - but they wanted him as a safety net for Hart, so I think it would have been reasonable to think you could have gotten a draft pick instead (or likely as well).
If Stolarz becomes a UFA, then it's another asset squandered for nothing, despite the fact that he was the better goalie the team had since Christmas and the organization has repeatedly said they still plan to make the playoffs this year. It signalled a white flag to deal him, especially in a situation where the team got virtually nothing for him.
I think the only benefit the team really gets from trading Talbot is that it saves Katz a few bucks, and I for one don't give a hoot about saving him money...
"Thinking that a bad team's best players are the reason the team is bad is the "Tambellini re-signing Lennart Petrell" of sports opinions." @Woodguy55
#FireLowe #FireBobbyNicks #FireKenHolland #FireKeithGretzky
|
|
|
|
Review:
Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: OilFans on Tue, 19 February 2019 21:30 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: g2k on Tue, 19 February 2019 21:48 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: NetBOG on Tue, 19 February 2019 22:00 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Kr55 on Tue, 19 February 2019 22:07 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: overdue on Tue, 19 February 2019 22:02 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: PlusOne on Wed, 20 February 2019 07:39 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: PlusOne on Wed, 20 February 2019 08:50 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Adam on Wed, 20 February 2019 09:18 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: K.McC#24 on Wed, 20 February 2019 14:54 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Adam on Wed, 20 February 2019 15:02 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: overdue on Wed, 20 February 2019 15:36 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: K.McC#24 on Wed, 20 February 2019 14:47 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Mullet on Wed, 20 February 2019 13:22 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Adam on Wed, 20 February 2019 14:40 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Adam on Wed, 20 February 2019 15:35 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Mullet on Wed, 20 February 2019 19:18 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Adam on Wed, 20 February 2019 22:28 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: overdue on Wed, 20 February 2019 15:40 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Adam on Wed, 20 February 2019 17:15 |
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
|
|
Re: Review: Arizona @ Edmonton (Game #59) |
By: Mullet on Wed, 20 February 2019 19:21 |
