Your point is? The SH time is irrevelant to me since Plek and Moen are their PK specialist with White and Gionta playing little time. Anyway, Galchenyuk wasn't drafted to be a defensive minded forward. Who's better between him and Yakupov? Who cares seriously, one is a playmaking center the other is a sniper winger. The debate should be between Yakupov and Murray since the Oils biggest needs are a good two-way 2nd line center like Dubinsky and top 4 D. Hendricks improved your bottom 6 at least.
- Habsody

The point being, Yak is not a bust despite what all the window lickers in here are saying. He is still just a kid in his second season in the NHL.

The point being, Yak is not a bust despite what all the window lickers in here are saying. He is still just a kid in his second season in the NHL.
- Al Hacker

He isn't, you guys shouldn't pay too much attention to trolls
l
I still think the Oils should have gone with Murray...

Vanek for Hiller ?

Your point is? The SH time is irrevelant to me since Plek and Moen are their PK specialist with White and Gionta playing little time. Anyway, Galchenyuk wasn't drafted to be a defensive minded forward. Who's better between him and Yakupov? Who cares seriously, one is a playmaking center the other is a sniper winger. The debate should be between Yakupov and Murray since the Oils biggest needs are a good two-way 2nd line center like Dubinsky and top 4 D. Hendricks improved your bottom 6 at least.
- Habsody

Agreed, It's not important who's better as both play a different game.

It often seems with prospects drafted close to each other (each playing on Canadian teams) that people want to champion one over the other.

That's especially true when they're teammates. Trolls seemed determined to demonstrate that one of them is actually talented and the other just glommed onto their talent.

Vanek for Hiller ?
- Nolanders

I think you can get a pick out of it too.

Vanek for Hiller and Anaheims first.

I think it is a hell of a deal. Hiller is a very underrated goalie, IMO.

NYI get a start on what they need.

He isn't, you guys shouldn't pay too much attention to trolls
l
I still think the Oils should have gone with Murray...
- Habsody

I think it's tough to say at this point.

Our 'lack of need' for a player like Yakupov has been severely over-stated.

Murray would certainly be the best prospect in our D corps, but we've got four guys under 25 who each project to be top 4 defensemen. Time will tell if they all get there, but that's a pretty safe position to take a "risk" with a guy like Yakupov.

The point being, Yak is not a bust despite what all the window lickers in here are saying. He is still just a kid in his second season in the NHL.
- Al Hacker

I think Yak is not a bust at all. But I hope the Rangers don't go for him. He would cost too much and that would set us back in the short term. The oil would want one of our top 3 D plus. And Hank is in his prime now and by the time Yak develops into an elite talent he would be 33/34.

I think you can get a pick out of it too.

Vanek for Hiller and Anaheims first.

I think it is a hell of a deal. Hiller is a very underrated goalie, IMO.

NYI get a start on what they need.
- ImThatGuy

Anahiem will dangle their first for sure since they have another one (Ottawa's I think)

haha ur dum
- sanfordnson

I love how he starts out with "don't watch too many Oiler games" then proceeds to act like he actually knows wtf he's talking about.

I also love how everyone in here is understanding about defensemen having sophomore slumps, but a Russian forward doing the same is a bust.

I think Yak is not a bust at all. But I hope the Rangers don't go for him. He would cost too much and that would set us back in the short term. The oil would want one of our top 3 D plus. And Hank is in his prime now and by the time Yak develops into an elite talent he would be 33/34.
- GioRock

Ok, he'll take that long...?

If he can just learn not to be a liability defensively that would be good enough.
- sanfordnson

You could say that about almost all of the Oilers top 6 though, why does Yaks get singled out?

Ok, he'll take that long...?
- Captain_Quiffe

2 years? Yes, I would say it will take 2 years until he reaches pull potential

To be fair Yakupov has played 15 more games then Galchenyuk. He is also by far the most one dimensional of the three.
- GardinerExpress

Yakupov also spent almost half the year on the 3rd and 4th lines, can you say that about the other 2 mentioned? Don't think so.

was he -4 or -5 agains USA?
- GardinerExpress

3

I think it's tough to say at this point.

Our 'lack of need' for a player like Yakupov has been severely over-stated.

Murray would certainly be the best prospect in our D corps, but we've got four guys under 25 who each project to be top 4 defensemen. Time will tell if they all get there, but that's a pretty safe position to take a "risk" with a guy like Yakupov.
- Morris

Nurse should develop into a top 4D in the next 3 years. Physically he is already there. The management just need to get some quality vets to surround the kids. Guys like Callahan, Girardi and Bolland should be your targets this summer. Also, Gagner and Hemsky should be traded.

2 years? Yes, I would say it will take 2 years until he reaches pull potential
- GioRock

I read somewhere that it takes Forwards somewhere around 250-300 NHL games to fully develop Yakupov has played 103..

Yakupov also spent almost half the year on the 3rd and 4th lines, can you say that about the other 2 mentioned? Don't think so.
- SpoiledByOil

Huberdeau has been a top 6 since he joined the Panthers while Galchenyuk has always played on the 3rd line for the exception of a 5-6 games span where he played on the 2nd with Plekanec and Gionta early in the season.

Nurse should develop into a top 4D in the next 3 years. Physically he is already there. The management just need to get some quality vets to surround the kids. Guys like Callahan, Girardi and Bolland should be your targets this summer. Also, Gagner and Hemsky should be traded.
- Habsody

Agreed. I think the whole Murray-Yakupov debate belies the fact that we don't need more prospects, we need solid vets.

We'll have a bit of money to spend this offseason, and I hope we do. Pay the decent price for a guy like Bolland or Kulemin (if they reach FA). Girardi seems to be the prize of FA dmen this summer, and while I don't know how many years he can continue playing an extremely competent 27 minutes a night, I'd be willing to send some major bucks his way.

As for Hemmer, I think the idea will be to move him at the deadline. Gagner, I don't know. It's not that he necessarily fits with where we're going or doesn't fit, but I'm not ready to dump him for essentially nothing as has been speculated.

I will say, that when you've got a relatively small top 6, and you're trying to find the right complimentary pieces, it restricts the type of player you can pursue. If you move Gagner, you can bring in a guy that might not be huge but is feisty (like Bolland). If you keep Gagner, the complimentary guy you're looking at is probably closer to a true power forward, with the costs associated with thtat.

Agreed. I think the whole Murray-Yakupov debate belies the fact that we don't need more prospects, we need solid vets.

We'll have a bit of money to spend this offseason, and I hope we do. Pay the decent price for a guy like Bolland or Kulemin (if they reach FA). Girardi seems to be the prize of FA dmen this summer, and while I don't know how many years he can continue playing an extremely competent 27 minutes a night, I'd be willing to send some major bucks his way.
- Morris

As a habs fan i believe Girardi would be a fantastic Partner for Subban. And you're right Kulemin is a pretty decent depth guy, he has offensive upside while being pretty good defensively.

2 years? Yes, I would say it will take 2 years until he reaches pull potential
- GioRock

Oh you are referring to Hank. I thought you were saying Yaks would take until 34-35 to reach his prime.
My bad...

Agreed. I think the whole Murray-Yakupov debate belies the fact that we don't need more prospects, we need solid vets.

We'll have a bit of money to spend this offseason, and I hope we do. Pay the decent price for a guy like Bolland or Kulemin (if they reach FA). Girardi seems to be the prize of FA dmen this summer, and while I don't know how many years he can continue playing an extremely competent 27 minutes a night, I'd be willing to send some major bucks his way.

As for Hemmer, I think the idea will be to move him at the deadline. Gagner, I don't know. It's not that he necessarily fits with where we're going or doesn't fit, but I'm not ready to dump him for essentially nothing as has been speculated.

I will say, that when you've got a relatively small top 6, and you're trying to find the right complimentary pieces, it restricts the type of player you can pursue. If you move Gagner, you can bring in a guy that might not be huge but is feisty (like Bolland). If you keep Gagner, the complimentary guy you're looking at is probably closer to a true power forward, with the costs associated with thtat.
- Morris

My main idea behind trading Gagner was that he isn't a good fit for you on the 2nd line. He shouldn't be dumped since he is a pretty good player i just think you can get something decent. As for Hemsky, if you can get a first go for it!

Anahiem will dangle their first for sure since they have another one (Ottawa's I think)
- Captain_Quiffe

I thought I read(red) somewhere that they would be willing to deal both.

I want Buffalo to go after that Ottawa pick hard.

Vanek for Hiller ?
- Nolanders

If it were the off season maybe but I believe it would cost more from Anaheim. At the same time I don't see Anaheim rolling the dice on Andersen & Fasth to get them to the Stanley Cup.

I think Anaheim is best positioned to meet the NYI's asking price but I think if Anaheim decides to meet the asking price or something close to it they will move their 1st & a couple of forward prospects, most likely wingers as NYI has great young C's now Tavares, Strome, Nelson & Cziskas. With Nielsen also only 29 & the #2 C, Strome will have to play wing for a few seasons before he can make the top 3. Nelson has good #3 ability currently & Cizikas is a great checking C & only 22.

Some combination of Palmieri, Etem, Rackell, Silfverberg, Noesen, Karlsson, Kerdiles, Roy or Smith-Pelly & depending upon the quality of these wingers whether they get 1 or 2 of them. Perhaps NYI even takes a 2nd making it a 1st Anaheim's a 2nd & a lesser prospect. None of the 1st 5 listed.

I thought I read(red) somewhere that they would be willing to deal both.

I want Buffalo to go after that Ottawa pick hard.
- ImThatGuy

I wouldn't be surprised. I think the Ottawa pick is projected to be 12th based on the current standings. I don't think that will change much with the log jam fighting for wild cards.

My main idea behind trading Gagner was that he isn't a good fit for you on the 2nd line. He shouldn't be dumped since he is a pretty good player i just think you can get something decent. As for Hemsky, if you can get a first go for it!
- Habsody

I gotta feel like if you could get a first for hemmer he'd be gone.

I'd love to see him go to a contender but I feel like a bubble team would give up a bit more for him.

Even if we keep him and try to gain confidence through the last quarter of the season he's definitely gone in the offseason.