I think the rationale would go that they're trading two good prospects, a 2nd and a top 10 pick for two rentals who have gone on the record stating their intention to test FA.
- Morris

MacDonald has not stated he wants to test free agency, the Isles just did not want to meet his demands. For a team like Anaheim, I am sure MacDonald would listen if they offer him the proper contract that he is seeking.

You'd be willing to give up MacDonald?
- ehabs9

I'd be willing to drive him to the airport.

Amac for a pack of gum...

Not everything works out the way you want it. Playing for the Ducks is not such a bad thing. Great weather and very good team.
- ses111

Once you go Cali you never go back

Eklund: LA-EDM deal gets closer....Anaheim looking at making splash. Vanek?
- Eklund

Bigger player involved between the kings and Oils,geez sounds like the return of Gretzky to Edm.

No its still bad. Both are intent on testing the UFA market and both turned down contracts from the Isles that were more than either is worth. Anaheim would be giving up everything for 2 guys that are 80% likely to not be there beyond this season.
- Iggysbff

Not in the case of Amac. MacDonald has stated he 'wants to remain with the Isles' however he wants $5 million per season. For those of us who watch Amac on a regular basis, the guy is barely worth $3 million. Offering him 4 years @ $16mil is insanity...demanding $5 mil is laughable.

MacDonald has not stated he wants to test free agency, the Isles just did not want to meet his demands. For a team like Anaheim, I am sure MacDonald would listen if they offer him the proper contract that he is seeking.
- [email protected]

Nvm I misread an article.

Still, trading that much for two pending UFAs is a gamble

Vanek to the Devils maybe, to get them over the hump?
- mattsox

Devils aren't cup contenders so why would they waste assets, that they really need, for a rental who will NOT stay there after this season?

I would hate to see ANA get him though because that is a great team now and can afford to get Vanek as just a rental with a chance to try and convince him to stay (even though he will end up in Min).

I then see Min dumping Heatley to make room for Vanek and then Heatley going to ANA and turning his career around.

We need another underachieving center like Justin Bieber needs to wax his genitals!!

but this is a Lombardi maneuver all the way, my guess is it will be Clifford and Vey going or Clifford and Muffin. and we will get Gags... uhg this is a horrible deal, absolutely fills zero of our needs so that is why I am guessing it will be the actual deal that happens.

So tired of trading with Edmonton. we always get the $hit end of the stick. BTW Clifford will most likely pull a Sydor and become an all star once he is traded.

Is there any other team in the league willing to trade with us?
- MikeOxbyg

Moulson?

Wasn't it your current GM though that let him walk for nothing? If that's correct, he'll have to swallow some pride for giving him away and then paying through a decent trade to get him back!

Please explain why this is a terrible deal for Anaheim? The goal is to win the Stanley Cup, is it not? This deal immediately adds a top-line winger to their already great offensive team, and you add the leading shotblocker in the league to their second-pairing.

You have to give up some to get, and I think that both teams get what they need out of this kind of deal. With Andersen, Fasth, and Hiller, why wouldn't they be willing to give up Gibson?
- [email protected]

Exactly my thought. Some guys in here speak before they actually think... and some actually speak from their anus...

Gagner can score, he's just struggling after coming back from that broken jaw. On a good team like LA he could be pretty good, and LA can't score goals for the life of them.

But I stil get the feeling all Eklund is doing here is taking tweets from other people, writing a quick paragraph blog and keeping it so vague that it sounds like it's coming from him. I could have written this same blog with my "sources", and by sources I mean twitter.
- OilersFan1985

more to come...

Moulson?

Wasn't it your current GM though that let him walk for nothing? If that's correct, he'll have to swallow some pride for giving him away and then paying through a decent trade to get him back!
- nikel

And there's the rub. Lombardi seems as stubborn as any, which is why Cammy probably won't be happening either.

We need another underachieving center like Justin Bieber needs to wax his genitals!!

but this is a Lombardi maneuver all the way, my guess is it will be Clifford and Vey going or Clifford and Muffin. and we will get Gags... uhg this is a horrible deal, absolutely fills zero of our needs so that is why I am guessing it will be the actual deal that happens.

So tired of trading with Edmonton. we always get the $hit end of the stick. BTW Clifford will most likely pull a Sydor and become an all star once he is traded.

Is there any other team in the league willing to trade with us?
- MikeOxbyg

wtf??


u got penner who played fantastic in your run to the CUP.
we got a lifelong ahl'er at best in teubert. and a pick that turned into a good prospect in klefbom. but he's never played an nhl game yet.

u got stoll and greene who were both very solid depth pieces and vital to any teams success. and that includes your CUP run.
we got the best player in the deal in visnovsky, but he was expendable for u guys anyway. and he wanted out after a couple years anyway

smyths wheels had fallen off. fraser wasn't a terrible 4th liner for u

Nvm I misread an article.

Still, trading that much for two pending UFAs is a gamble
- Morris

Trading for rentals is always a gamble. Still a chance they can sign one or both and when you're trading picks away for a chance to set a player like Vanek on a line with Getzlaf and Perry?! I think you gamble as much as you can, especially if you already have a shot at the cup without him.

Mark Spector ‏@SportsnetSpec 6m

Warning you, Oil fans: When dealing small C who does't win draws, is below avg. def'ly, with $4.8 AAV, you're not going to like the return
- Symba007

did you honestly just quote Spector?

Exactly my thought. Some guys in here speak before they actually think... and some actually speak from their anus...
- MnGump

It actually depends on the team. For example the Kings. The goal is to win the cup but why waste a #1 + a top prospect (at least) for someone who will only be around for a few more months and then the Kings are in a worse spot then when they started but now without their top prospect and #1 pick. The Kings need long term improvements not rentals. The goal is to win the Cup but at the same time always have the chance to contend for it.

ANA though it does make sense because they have a good team now and a team that could afford to go all in this year as long term right now they seem to be fine.

Completely different situations. So yeah, why go all in to win a cup if it only hurts your team worse after especially if you don't end up winning the cup?

Exactly my thought. Some guys in here speak before they actually think... and some actually speak from their anus...
- MnGump

I think its more about not trading your future away for the present. But at the same time would you rather win the cup this year and have potentially a few mediocre years or be a perennial playoff team that never gets past the Western Conf Championship?

With that trade the cup might not happen and the mediocre years might not either.

Trading for rentals is always a gamble. Still a chance they can sign one or both and when you're trading picks away for a chance to set a player like Vanek on a line with Getzlaf and Perry?! I think you gamble as much as you can, especially if you already have a shot at the cup without him.
- MnGump

I think getting a 5th-10th overall pick from Ottawa is an absolute godsend, and I wouldn't trade that for four months of Vanek, especially since the team as you say could win the cup without him.

of course I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I do see adding a rental defensemen as being a good move.

wtf??


u got penner who played fantastic in your run to the CUP.
we got a lifelong ahl'er at best in teubert. and a pick that turned into a good prospect in klefbom. but he's never played an nhl game yet.

u got stoll and greene who were both very solid depth pieces and vital to any teams success. and that includes your CUP run.
we got the best player in the deal in visnovsky, but he was expendable for u guys anyway. and he wanted out after a couple years anyway

smyths wheels had fallen off. fraser wasn't a terrible 4th liner for u
- hugefemale dog77

For LA fans though, you can't deny that it was the Smyth deal that somewhat poisoned the well. Not the results, just how the whole thing went down.

Oh please tell me this Gagner deal ends as hilarious as it sounds.

I mean I never thought he had huge trade value but still.

I think getting a 5th-10th overall pick from Ottawa is an absolute godsend, and I wouldn't trade that for four months of Vanek, especially since the team as you say could win the cup without him.

of course I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I do see adding a rental defensemen as being a good move.
- Morris

Amac for 'Godsend"

For LA fans though, you can't deny that it was the Smyth deal that somewhat poisoned the well. Not the results, just how the whole thing went down.
- cryptical77

Well, the jokes on Smyth for demanding a trade to Edmonton the year before LA won the Cup.

Oh please tell me this Gagner deal ends as hilarious as it sounds.

I mean I never thought he had huge trade value but still.
- S Kaspar Rollins

I'm thinking he's worth a lot because he's a decent second line center that can produce.and his cap hit isn't incredibly high.

Oh please tell me this Gagner deal ends as hilarious as it sounds.

I mean I never thought he had huge trade value but still.
- S Kaspar Rollins

I just don't get the trade, if it happens, on why the Kings are even going for him when he is a C (I think plays RW also?) and need a goal scorer.

I think getting a 5th-10th overall pick from Ottawa is an absolute godsend, and I wouldn't trade that for four months of Vanek, especially since the team as you say could win the cup without him.

of course I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I do see adding a rental defensemen as being a good move.
- Morris

Point is, it's not a "terrible" deal. It could back fire yes, but it's certainly worth pondering if you're Murray.

I think any GM if posed the question of; "Would you give up a top 10 pick for a Cup this year" the answer would unequivocally be yes.

wtf??


u got penner who played fantastic in your run to the CUP.
we got a lifelong ahl'er at best in teubert. and a pick that turned into a good prospect in klefbom. but he's never played an nhl game yet.

u got stoll and greene who were both very solid depth pieces and vital to any teams success. and that includes your CUP run.
we got the best player in the deal in visnovsky, but he was expendable for u guys anyway. and he wanted out after a couple years anyway

smyths wheels had fallen off. fraser wasn't a terrible 4th liner for u
- hugefemale dog77

Penner was OK... just OK, but now he is killing in in Duckville.

Stoll is OK, just OK, but more solid than Penner.

Greene is pretty good in his respective play style.

Smyth wanted to leave and forced the trade...

OH LET'S NOT LEAVE THAT TURD SANDWICH COLIN FRASER OUT OF THE CONVERSATION... WE ARE SADDLED WITH HIS USELESS A$$

PRETTY SURE YOU ARE HAPPY WITH SCRIVENS TOO !!!




I see your point though, and I know we have traded with other teams, it just seems like we always deal with the Oilers. and there are guys out there we need and Lombardi's answer is to go after Gagner! its disgustingly stupid

especially when we have 2 Gigantic wastes of ice time in Richards and Fraser