PERRON FOR PAAJARVI

Robin Brownlee
July 10 2013 02:46PM

Whether you deem it the bold move GM Craig MacTavish talked about, the Edmonton Oilers today made their most substantial move of this off-season, acquiring left winger David Perron from the St. Louis Blues for Magnus Paajarvi and a draft pick.

The Oilers get Perron, 25, who has 198 points in 340 NHL games with the Blues, including 10-15-25 in 48 games this season. In exchange, St. Louis gets Paajarvi, who was selected 10th overall by the Oilers in 2009, and a second-round draft pick.

Perron, six feet and 200 pounds, has three years remaining on a contract that pays him $3.5 million next season and carries a cap hit of $3,812.500 for the balance of the term.

More to come.

FROM THE OILERS

News release: "General Manager Craig MacTavish announced today the Edmonton Oilers have acquired left wing David Perron from the St. Louis Blues in exchange for left wing Magnus Paajarvi and a 2nd round selection in the 2014 NHL Entry Draft.

"Perron, 25, has spent the past six seasons with the St. Louis Blues organization, registering 198 points (84G, 114A) and 232 penalty minutes in 340 games with the Blues.

"In 2012-13, the 6'0", 205-pound, forward recorded 25 points (10G, 15A) and 44 penalty minutes in 48 games with St. Louis. He added two assists in six playoff games.

"The native of Sherbrooke, Quebec played junior hockey in the QMJHL with the Lewiston MAINEiacs for one season, registering 83 points (39G, 44A) in 70 games leading all rookies in the league that season in goals.

"Perron was originally selected by St. Louis in the 1st round, 26th overall in the 2007 NHL Entry Draft."

Listen to Robin Brownlee Wednesdays and Thursdays from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. on the Jason Gregor Show on TEAM 1260.

Aceb4a1816f5fa09879a023b07d1a9b4
A sports writer since 1983, including stints at The Edmonton Journal and The Sun 1989-2007, I happily co-host the Jason Gregor Show on TSN 1260 twice a week and write when so inclined. Have the best damn lawn on the internet. Most important, I am Sam's dad. Follow me on Twitter at Robin_Brownlee. Or don't.
Avatar
#151 Oilers4ever
July 10 2013, 06:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
OilClog wrote:

It's a good move for the Oilers, Perron comes from a franchise that quickly turned a rebuild around.

He is another outside voice within the dressing room, that will hopefully be able to help instill a winning culture.

He's only 25 FFS!? Yes, MPS has great potential.. but Perron is currently the far superior player.. if MacT doesn't put the 2nd on the table.. another team walks in and does. We then lose out, and you all cry and whine DSF's styles.

Agreed. This team has sat on their proverbial arses too many years in a row with the ole use the draft mantra and such. Eventually you have to stop with that stuff, step outside the box, sacrifice a pick, and get someone who can help you NOW. Not 3 years down the road... NOW. I for one am sick of this team and their "have patience BS". We've had patience for 7 years. Fix the problem and get going. :)

Avatar
#152 Tim in Kelowna
July 10 2013, 06:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I like this deal. Having said that, trading one of Hall, Ebs, RNH or Yak the only way I can see this team seriously addressing it's big needs big needs. Perron is a great pick up, but the team clearly needs a top pairing dman and way more size up front. Adding size in any meaningful way means displacing a top 6 forward. We need someone to be able to dominate physically in front of the net and in the corners.

Avatar
#153 Rocket
July 10 2013, 06:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Walter Sobchak wrote:

This is wrong Rocket.

Perron SH % is 13.8 very respectable

Paajarvi is 7.8 % and got a bit of a boost last year, or it would be around 5.5 to 6.0, which is not at all good.

Interesting. You may be correct. I'm just going off the numbers I saw on behindthenet.ca

I'm not super awesome on advanced stats (although I'm learning & find them fascinating), so feel free to correct me if I mess the numbers up.

Avatar
#154 madjam
July 10 2013, 06:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Rocket wrote:

Paajarvi's sh% is better but Perron's corsi rel is better. Not a bad trade but giving up that 2nd round pick makes me a little nervous. Hopefully Perron's compete level is high & he develops chemistry with his new team mates.

If you seen the play/show he put on in Memorial cup a few seasons ago - his compete level was off the charts . He carried the team ,being as Cliché was injured first game . Intensity plus , you shouldn't need to fret about his compete level as it is very high . If Vegas and Sportsbook odds are a good judge ,then we are expected to finish between 11-18th position . If we finish there then 2nd rounder may not hurt us . There is still time in trades, etc. to obtain a second rounder back , that might even be better with any luck . Perron's stick handling ability and drive to the net is going to surprise a lot of Oiler fans . He's not a periphery player .

Avatar
#155 Walter Sobchak
July 10 2013, 06:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Rocket wrote:

Interesting. You may be correct. I'm just going off the numbers I saw on behindthenet.ca

I'm not super awesome on advanced stats (although I'm learning & find them fascinating), so feel free to correct me if I mess the numbers up.

Oh, no worries my good friend, I'm far from a stats guy!

Just learning myself, the only reason I know this is because DSF has pointed Paajarvi SH% so much I know it by heart...lol

Avatar
#156 Rocket
July 10 2013, 06:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@madjam

"He's not a periphery player". More players like this on The Oilers please.

Avatar
#157 DSF
July 10 2013, 07:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Time Travelling Sean wrote:

Scwartz had 13 points last year, Sobotka is a 3rd/4th liner, even if he puts up good points, which he doesn't, Porter couldn't even crack a PPG in college, and you have all 3 ahead of a player who, if you made a case, could be seen as better than all three.

Who doesn't score in the Q? Esp 20 year olds. He wouldn't end up in Sweden either, maybe the AHL, and why would the Blues give up Perron just to let Paajarvi go back to Sweden?

Good grief.

Because the Blues had Perron, Schwartz saw limited action as a 20 year old.

Sobotka is the definition of a GREAT 3rd line player. His Corsi ON was +8.71 last season. (Paajarvi's was -12.88. That's really bad) Paajarvi might some day grow up to be like Sobotka but he's nowhere close in ability right now.

Chris Porter is an AHL/NHL tweener just like Paajarvi but Dmirtri Jaskins is far better than both of them.

Remember Paajarvi is currently not signed and, when he looks at the Blues depth chart, he may flee back to Sweden.

He'll have a much tougher time getting ice time in STL.

Avatar
#158 Oiler Al
July 10 2013, 07:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Would Paajarvi and a 2nd. got you Bobby Ryan?

Just asking.

Avatar
#159 robinrussia
July 10 2013, 07:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Sign grabovski and trade gags for a d man. That's my plan.

If he goes to arbitration, we will lose him next year for next to nothing.

Avatar
#160 DSF
July 10 2013, 07:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Oiler Al wrote:

Would Paajarvi and a 2nd. got you Bobby Ryan?

Just asking.

No.

Jakub Silfverberg and Stefan Noesen are both highly regarded young players and Ottawa also threw in a FIRST round pick.

Avatar
#161 Harlie
July 10 2013, 07:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

I like it.

I remember when I searched the net high and low to find an Omark euro hockey card and was so happy to have it.

I didn't even bother searching for an MPS card. Bullet. Dodged.

Avatar
#162 Bucknuck
July 10 2013, 07:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Ryan wrote:

Why would Gagner sign now? If I were him, I would go to arbitration, take the one year deal, and become the youngest free agent in league history. He will still get his points as long as he plays with Yak, and since RNH will be out of the lineup for a while to start the season he should get time on the top line to pad his stats. I don't see the Oilers paying him Hall/Ebs money, but if he gets premium playing time and puts up 70+ points then some other team likely will due to his age. Unless the Oilers overpay him, there is no reason for him to sign now.

If he doesn't sign, and they go to arbitration, I would bet real money that he will be traded. I think MacT will pull the plug before the arbitration hearing.

Avatar
#163 Taylor Gang
July 10 2013, 07:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Who cares if we lose a second rounder, our core's average age is like 21

Avatar
#164 madjam
July 10 2013, 07:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
toprightcorner wrote:

You wanted to draft Perron instead of Gagner?? Your a complete idiot!

So you wanted to draft a guy 6th overall who didn't even get drafted the year before when he was draft eligible so was an over ager and scored 83 points in 70 games when Gagner scored 118 pts in 53 games and played at the World Juniors? But you probably think Gagner would have only scored 30 pts if he wasn't on Kane's line right??

Quit talking out of your butt all the time. your probably pissed that the Oilers passed on Datsyuk and Zetterberg in the first round in '98 and '99 when they actually went in the 6th and 7th round.

You just keep telling yourself that your smarter than everyone else until the men in white coats come give you meds for the night.

You could be whistling a different tune when you see them together . I had him rated right there with Gagner as well and was undetermined whom I would choose at 6th - either one was a good choice . To see Oilers not pick him up with our other two first round selections was disheartening . DSF has a good eye if not superior eye for talent , and certainly is no idiot - which happens to be a personal attack I believe in the manner you put it . You trying to be a cyber bully with that statement ?

Avatar
#165 Taylor Gang
July 10 2013, 07:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
DSF wrote:

No.

Jakub Silfverberg and Stefan Noesen are both highly regarded young players and Ottawa also threw in a FIRST round pick.

Lol no kidding. Paajarvi and a second? Not even close

Avatar
#166 YFC Prez
July 10 2013, 07:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
robinrussia wrote:

Sign grabovski and trade gags for a d man. That's my plan.

If he goes to arbitration, we will lose him next year for next to nothing.

Gagner will be signed before he ever hits arbitration. It's just a bargaining chip.

Taking Gagner off the second line and replacing him with Grabovski puts the team back a step.

All though none of Mac T's moves are high impact they all have slightly bettered the hockey team

I would like to see this trend continue

No to Grabovski as our #2 center

Avatar
#167 @Oilanderp
July 10 2013, 07:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Only the fullness of time will tell if this is a good trade or not. Today the Oilers are a better team.

Avatar
#168 Bucknuck
July 10 2013, 07:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props

Public service announcement: madjam and DSF are the same people... and even if they are not, you can pretend they are.

WHY on Earth would anyone argue that they should have taken Perron instead of Gagner, when they could have had Perron much later with the Plante pick or the Nash pick.

Indeed you could have had Gagner AND Perron (AND Subban if you were clarvoyant). Hindsight is twenty twenty.

2007 draft should have been:

1: Kane

2: Subban

3: Couture

4: Gagner

5: Perron

If the teams could go back in time and choose again, that is.

Avatar
#169 YFC Prez
July 10 2013, 07:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Taylor Gang wrote:

Lol no kidding. Paajarvi and a second? Not even close

I think a more realistic scenario would have been PRV or a second for Setoguchi.

I was sad to see him go to a team that wasn't the oilers, oh well

Avatar
#170 madjam
July 10 2013, 08:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Bucknuck wrote:

Public service announcement: madjam and DSF are the same people... and even if they are not, you can pretend they are.

WHY on Earth would anyone argue that they should have taken Perron instead of Gagner, when they could have had Perron much later with the Plante pick or the Nash pick.

Indeed you could have had Gagner AND Perron (AND Subban if you were clarvoyant). Hindsight is twenty twenty.

2007 draft should have been:

1: Kane

2: Subban

3: Couture

4: Gagner

5: Perron

If the teams could go back in time and choose again, that is.

Why are you seemingly so negative and offended about DSF or my prediction (which by the way I said I was undecided whom I would take ) ? Were we that far out or was all the scouting reports further out ? Even your own lists them 4 and 5 which seems to contradict your prior sentiments . Clairvoyance has nothing to do with it , but it was a funny comment . But lets wait to see how they compare to help us get better , then we should all be able to make that assessments for ourselves .

Avatar
#171 Turnover
July 10 2013, 08:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Good move. Some dogs just don't hunt. PRV skates like the wind, and hits like a fly. I don't know what Perron brings, but I hope he brings determination. Lots of room for that on the teams i've been cursing at the last few years.

I don't see anything bold about moving PRV out. But I don't care about bold moves. I just hope the moves they make turn out to be improvements to the group.

Avatar
#172 Ari Gold
July 10 2013, 08:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Great pickup. Perron puts up playoff points, is a great possession player and goes to the tough areas. MPS is not that type of player. He's a 3rd liner on a competitive team.

The team got better today. Solid trade. Props to MacT.

To all those pessimists out there, read a book, go back to school, smoke some rock, do something! If you don't like this trade, please watch a different sport. (though I respect your ignorant opinion, I merely mock it!)

Avatar
#173 Ari Gold
July 10 2013, 08:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I also love what a prick Perron can be.

Anyone know his facewash-CORSI??

Avatar
#174 toprightcorner
July 10 2013, 08:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
madjam wrote:

You could be whistling a different tune when you see them together . I had him rated right there with Gagner as well and was undetermined whom I would choose at 6th - either one was a good choice . To see Oilers not pick him up with our other two first round selections was disheartening . DSF has a good eye if not superior eye for talent , and certainly is no idiot - which happens to be a personal attack I believe in the manner you put it . You trying to be a cyber bully with that statement ?

Sorry DFS's mom, it was not a personal attack, I should have said idiotic thought. All I know is I find it very unlikely that one would even remember such a thing from a draft 6 years ago. Its not like Perron is that memorable that that would stick in your mind. Not like Parise and Pouliot.

I simply call B.S. as it is too easy to say you would have done it differently when you can look at history prior to making that statement. You both are famous for using historical data to say you would have done something different.

Maybe you should kick your boy DSF out of your basement now that he is in his late 30's to get a job and since your reputation precedes you say that DSF has a superior eye for talent then your son should be quite capable of becoming an amateur scout for an NHL club. I am sure there is a team out there that needs someone to tell them how he would have made a different pick 5 years ago after endless hours of researching historical stats.

It's getting late, you should probably give DSF his weekly bath!!

Avatar
#175 Quicksilver ballet
July 10 2013, 09:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
toprightcorner wrote:

You wanted to draft Perron instead of Gagner?? Your a complete idiot!

So you wanted to draft a guy 6th overall who didn't even get drafted the year before when he was draft eligible so was an over ager and scored 83 points in 70 games when Gagner scored 118 pts in 53 games and played at the World Juniors? But you probably think Gagner would have only scored 30 pts if he wasn't on Kane's line right??

Quit talking out of your butt all the time. your probably pissed that the Oilers passed on Datsyuk and Zetterberg in the first round in '98 and '99 when they actually went in the 6th and 7th round.

You just keep telling yourself that your smarter than everyone else until the men in white coats come give you meds for the night.

Wow, I haven't seen somebody get squished under their shoes like that since Sheldon Souray was an Oiler.

Maybe before you talk down to someone like that, you should learn the difference between your, yours and you're. If you're that dead set on coming down him with that kind of hate an all.

Apologies if this is at all inaccurate. It comes across like you're the complete idiot you made reference to.

Avatar
#176 Bonvie
July 10 2013, 09:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
toprightcorner wrote:

You wanted to draft Perron instead of Gagner?? Your a complete idiot!

So you wanted to draft a guy 6th overall who didn't even get drafted the year before when he was draft eligible so was an over ager and scored 83 points in 70 games when Gagner scored 118 pts in 53 games and played at the World Juniors? But you probably think Gagner would have only scored 30 pts if he wasn't on Kane's line right??

Quit talking out of your butt all the time. your probably pissed that the Oilers passed on Datsyuk and Zetterberg in the first round in '98 and '99 when they actually went in the 6th and 7th round.

You just keep telling yourself that your smarter than everyone else until the men in white coats come give you meds for the night.

Lol that was gold.

Avatar
#177 Mike Modano's Dog
July 10 2013, 10:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Oilers4ever

Fact: NHL.com website had Perron listed at 5'11" and 190-something after the deal was made.

Fact: Now he is listed an inch taller and at 5% heavier than earlier today on the NHL.com website.

Unless you're saying he was re-measured just today after a sudden growth spurt and had joined Penner at the buffet table beforehand, it is probably not a legitimate change.

You were mentioning something about the other person being a moron? He was right, so I'd be a little more hesitant to call someone else an idiot when you were the one who was actually wrong here. He was stating a fact, as several people who saw this, including myself, can attest to.

Now about drinking the kool-aid...he wasn't blindly making statements about his team that weren't true, that was you.

Avatar
#178 Pouzar99
July 10 2013, 10:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I am very happy with this deal. Yes, there is some concussion risk, but Perron is a terrific, competitive player, who should make us better next year. We still need one or two bottom six bangers with acceptable offence. Maybe we can get a third liner for Hemsky and a 4th liner through FA. We have the cap room.

Avatar
#179 TeddyTurnbuckle
July 10 2013, 10:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Good trade. Magnus doesn't body check and is the softest player on the team.

Avatar
#180 McRib
July 10 2013, 11:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Bucknuck wrote:

Public service announcement: madjam and DSF are the same people... and even if they are not, you can pretend they are.

WHY on Earth would anyone argue that they should have taken Perron instead of Gagner, when they could have had Perron much later with the Plante pick or the Nash pick.

Indeed you could have had Gagner AND Perron (AND Subban if you were clarvoyant). Hindsight is twenty twenty.

2007 draft should have been:

1: Kane

2: Subban

3: Couture

4: Gagner

5: Perron

If the teams could go back in time and choose again, that is.

Jamie Benn, Kevin Shattenkirk, Max Pacioretty.....

Avatar
#181 Bucknuck
July 10 2013, 11:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
madjam wrote:

Why are you seemingly so negative and offended about DSF or my prediction (which by the way I said I was undecided whom I would take ) ? Were we that far out or was all the scouting reports further out ? Even your own lists them 4 and 5 which seems to contradict your prior sentiments . Clairvoyance has nothing to do with it , but it was a funny comment . But lets wait to see how they compare to help us get better , then we should all be able to make that assessments for ourselves .

I wasn't offended at all, I just thought what you posted made no sense. If you were going to go back in time and choose again, then I would take Perron (YES - I like Perron) later because he was ranked lower. I wouldn't have taken him instead of Gagner, but as well as Gagner. And then I would have taken Subban... since I was going back in time and would know how it was all going to play out.

At the end of the day it might be interesting to consider these hypothetical fantasy worlds, but it is ultimately pointless. I am happy that today the Oilers traded a "might be" for a player who already "is". I don't know if it will make much of a difference, but I can appreciate what's going on and applaud.

Avatar
#182 Dave Luukkonen
July 11 2013, 12:47AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Tim in Kelowna wrote:

I like this deal. Having said that, trading one of Hall, Ebs, RNH or Yak the only way I can see this team seriously addressing it's big needs big needs. Perron is a great pick up, but the team clearly needs a top pairing dman and way more size up front. Adding size in any meaningful way means displacing a top 6 forward. We need someone to be able to dominate physically in front of the net and in the corners.

I don't agree; they may not have a top pairing dman (other than young Shultz) right now, but they've certainly got a lot of big, young dmen, from Marancin and Gernat to Nurse and Klefbom on the way. No need to trade a franchise level player; just be patient for one more year.

Avatar
#183 madjam
July 11 2013, 07:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
toprightcorner wrote:

Sorry DFS's mom, it was not a personal attack, I should have said idiotic thought. All I know is I find it very unlikely that one would even remember such a thing from a draft 6 years ago. Its not like Perron is that memorable that that would stick in your mind. Not like Parise and Pouliot.

I simply call B.S. as it is too easy to say you would have done it differently when you can look at history prior to making that statement. You both are famous for using historical data to say you would have done something different.

Maybe you should kick your boy DSF out of your basement now that he is in his late 30's to get a job and since your reputation precedes you say that DSF has a superior eye for talent then your son should be quite capable of becoming an amateur scout for an NHL club. I am sure there is a team out there that needs someone to tell them how he would have made a different pick 5 years ago after endless hours of researching historical stats.

It's getting late, you should probably give DSF his weekly bath!!

I have watched some incredible performances over the years and many still stick out . I started at age 4 in the old Edmmonton Gardens in the knothole section .I grew up in an era where sports paid little and was frowned upon as a profession -relative to the times . I'm not big/fond on stats , but ON is filled with fans that seem married to them , and frequently get their opinions from that . My opinions are basically based on seeing them , and I will use at times stats to back them up . When it comes to drafting you have to combine the two , but I still rely on my eye over the stats, etc.. Obviously that's not always possible considering them all , but frequently you catch them in tournaments with other top level candidates . Still rely more on the eye than the stats by the way .

I recall back on the Score blogs having a discussion with Willis and saying he basis to much of his opinion on stats and not enough on his own eye .

I still recall vividly and fondly many performances over the years as my passion for hockey has run close to 62 years . Dfs likes to use stats far more than I do .

Avatar
#184 Clyde Frog
July 11 2013, 07:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
madjam wrote:

I have watched some incredible performances over the years and many still stick out . I started at age 4 in the old Edmmonton Gardens in the knothole section .I grew up in an era where sports paid little and was frowned upon as a profession -relative to the times . I'm not big/fond on stats , but ON is filled with fans that seem married to them , and frequently get their opinions from that . My opinions are basically based on seeing them , and I will use at times stats to back them up . When it comes to drafting you have to combine the two , but I still rely on my eye over the stats, etc.. Obviously that's not always possible considering them all , but frequently you catch them in tournaments with other top level candidates . Still rely more on the eye than the stats by the way .

I recall back on the Score blogs having a discussion with Willis and saying he basis to much of his opinion on stats and not enough on his own eye .

I still recall vividly and fondly many performances over the years as my passion for hockey has run close to 62 years . Dfs likes to use stats far more than I do .

Madjam May 10 2011, 12:35PM +1 0 props

MacGregors take sounds like Horcoff type of assessment . Yet many don't consider Horcoff a first liner . Will Hopkins be another Horcoff ?

http://oilersnation.com/2011/5/9/fthm-vii-ryan-nugent-hopkins

I think we can safely categorize Madjam's past predictions and allow them to flavor our view of him today.

As an aside Perron played 1st/2nd line minutes in St.Louis A MUCH better team; we traded our 3rd liner and one small magic bean (off a much worse team)... How is it possible based on today (barring meteor strikes, car accidents and the power of lightning) that this is a bad thing?

Avatar
#185 EHH Team
July 11 2013, 07:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Dave Luukkonen wrote:

I don't agree; they may not have a top pairing dman (other than young Shultz) right now, but they've certainly got a lot of big, young dmen, from Marancin and Gernat to Nurse and Klefbom on the way. No need to trade a franchise level player; just be patient for one more year.

Definitly. I think even then that trading one of the top young forwards might not be the way to go.

Avatar
#186 madjam
July 11 2013, 09:04AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Clyde Frog wrote:

Madjam May 10 2011, 12:35PM +1 0 props

MacGregors take sounds like Horcoff type of assessment . Yet many don't consider Horcoff a first liner . Will Hopkins be another Horcoff ?

http://oilersnation.com/2011/5/9/fthm-vii-ryan-nugent-hopkins

I think we can safely categorize Madjam's past predictions and allow them to flavor our view of him today.

As an aside Perron played 1st/2nd line minutes in St.Louis A MUCH better team; we traded our 3rd liner and one small magic bean (off a much worse team)... How is it possible based on today (barring meteor strikes, car accidents and the power of lightning) that this is a bad thing?

You obviously missed the question mark . It was to open discussion on the subject of Hopkins . You over assumed it was written in stone that I necessarily felt it that way . Many of my blogs are written in question form ,as options for discussion seeking all views on the matters . DFS does that well with his slants on subjects - often opposing views that mainly have relevance whether you, I or anyone else agrees . Site wouldn't be much fun ,entertaining or as informative if we all shared the same opinion .

Avatar
#187 Ryan2
July 11 2013, 09:22AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Tyler wrote:

If any of you think this is a bad trade, you probably don't know much about hockey. Magnus was a non-factor on one of the worst teams in the NHL. He will have a long career as a 3rd liner because he can skate fast and kill penaltys. He will NEVER be a top6 guy. Look at his numbers outside the NHL. He has NEVER been a point guy. He doesn't have the hands or shot, it's that simple.

Perron has established himself. He could play top6 minutes on virtually any team in the league when he's healthy. Magnus had a hard time cracking the oilers line-up. Would Magnus even be in the NHL if he was part of Pittsburg or Chicagos organization?? Probably not and even if he was it would be 4th line. Perron on the other hand would probably be in there top6, 3rd line at the very least. If Perron stays healthy this is a great trade.

I understand a lot of you have a soft spot for Magnus because he was part of the initial rebuild but face the facts... He's a 3rd liner who kills penaltys on his best days...

The big IF in this scenario is Perron staying healthy. Righ now, Perron = Hemsky or RNH re: injury risk and we all know how that has worked out so far with the Oilers.

The problem with this trade is it wasted an asset + draft pick without addressing the team's real needs up front right now (centermen and true bottom 6 forwards). There were a number of teams supposedly interested in MPS - were there other options to address bigger needs? Did MacT even explore this? As it stands, the trade does very little to get them closer to the playoffs next season, or even the following one, as there are too many other holes on the team. By the time they are ready, Perron will likely be gone.

FWIW, MacT made a huge mistake coming in by not taking the new GM mulligan and saying the truth: the roster has a bunch of holes that will take 2 years to fix so fans need to be a bit more patient. As a fan I hope I am wrong and that the team lights it up this year, but as a realist I have my doubts this will be the case (especially in the new division). It will be interesting to see how the fan-base reacts if the Oilers struggle again but the players MacT trades do well........

Avatar
#188 Clyde Frog
July 11 2013, 09:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
madjam wrote:

You obviously missed the question mark . It was to open discussion on the subject of Hopkins . You over assumed it was written in stone that I necessarily felt it that way . Many of my blogs are written in question form ,as options for discussion seeking all views on the matters . DFS does that well with his slants on subjects - often opposing views that mainly have relevance whether you, I or anyone else agrees . Site wouldn't be much fun ,entertaining or as informative if we all shared the same opinion .

Do you want more of your 2011 predictive gold pulled up?

I believe you had Nuge ranked 4th in the draft AFTER Couturier as he was bigger and would be better able to produce in the NHL.

Not to mention your and rickithebear's amazing statistical leap of dividing Goals by assists and declaring the Nuge a bust...

I think this data is relevant as well you and DSF post as if you have a 100% track record, yet a quick look at any of the predictions you two have made tend to be terribly, terribly wrong...

As compared to the hindsight predictions, where you discuss what should have happened in the past. You guys are much more amazing at those...

Avatar
#189 madjam
July 11 2013, 12:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Clyde Frog wrote:

Do you want more of your 2011 predictive gold pulled up?

I believe you had Nuge ranked 4th in the draft AFTER Couturier as he was bigger and would be better able to produce in the NHL.

Not to mention your and rickithebear's amazing statistical leap of dividing Goals by assists and declaring the Nuge a bust...

I think this data is relevant as well you and DSF post as if you have a 100% track record, yet a quick look at any of the predictions you two have made tend to be terribly, terribly wrong...

As compared to the hindsight predictions, where you discuss what should have happened in the past. You guys are much more amazing at those...

I don't have a problem with the Nuge and Couturier analysis I made . Still up to Nuge to prove otherwise . Both had poor years and somewhat different circumstances . I don't recall calling him a bust , but I know I was not overly impressed by his junior career and not performing well in playoffs , etc. against major competition . He seemed to disappear . Couturier fell from initial NBR.1 spot that he was at most of the year . I still believe he might end up being the better of the two over time . Hopefully Nuge can prove me wrong . I don't expect to be 100% correct in my predictions but I back them until it is proven wrong beyond my (my own assessment ) reasonable doubt .

If it helps I made a bad call on S.Bisaillon . Some of the most talent I had seen in a while and seemed to only need to learn to play physical . He obviously did not , and last I seen him in an Oiler uniform 3 years later the kid appeared to lose everything he once had . I recall asking Bucky if that was Cogliano he was that fast and good , good shot and passer and stuck out like a sore thumb . I went to see Cogliano (blazing speed ) and Peckham (OHL tough guy) but came away watching the skills and speed of Bisaillon . Bisaillon was just another talent that fell by the wayside .

Avatar
#190 John
July 11 2013, 12:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
madjam wrote:

I have watched some incredible performances over the years and many still stick out . I started at age 4 in the old Edmmonton Gardens in the knothole section .I grew up in an era where sports paid little and was frowned upon as a profession -relative to the times . I'm not big/fond on stats , but ON is filled with fans that seem married to them , and frequently get their opinions from that . My opinions are basically based on seeing them , and I will use at times stats to back them up . When it comes to drafting you have to combine the two , but I still rely on my eye over the stats, etc.. Obviously that's not always possible considering them all , but frequently you catch them in tournaments with other top level candidates . Still rely more on the eye than the stats by the way .

I recall back on the Score blogs having a discussion with Willis and saying he basis to much of his opinion on stats and not enough on his own eye .

I still recall vividly and fondly many performances over the years as my passion for hockey has run close to 62 years . Dfs likes to use stats far more than I do .

People (as I do) compare you to DSF not because of how you argue but because for the most part the things you say are usually stupid (not meaning to offend, couldn't think of a better word).

You have not been that bad this article with you prediction of Perron but there are some comments of yours that have been posted that just didn't need to be.

DSF gets^#$@ on here too much. He at least sparks debates albeit with a certain biased. I cannot say the same thing about the majority of your comments.

I don't mean to insult, just explaining how others may perceive you.

Avatar
#191 Quicksilver ballet
July 11 2013, 12:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@John

Madjam's not unlike the other 99.9% of the people who post here. We all have opinions on how we'd like to see things go/been handled.

The other .1% have dealings/relationships with the team/players themselves, and are often worried about possible repercussions in any of their spoken/written conversations/articles. Nothing wrong with hearing someones opinion whose hands aren't handcuffed with the burden of expectation.

I find it rather humourous when the 99.9%/outsiders fight over what is stupid, and what isn't.

Avatar
#192 John
July 11 2013, 12:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Quicksilver ballet

That's where you and I differ. I put madjam and DSF in different categories then the other 99.9% your referring to. I was merely explaining why people are comparing madjam to DSF.

Apparently there actually is something wrong with hearing other people's opinion. That's why Gregor threatened to ban DSF which has resulted in him posting far less. I don't think this should have happened because it was the 99.9% of the people's fault they responded to DSF. If DSF can almost get banned I think that madjam should too. If Gregor hadn't had done this I would have no problem reading madjam's stupid comments.

Avatar
#193 madjam
July 11 2013, 01:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
John wrote:

That's where you and I differ. I put madjam and DSF in different categories then the other 99.9% your referring to. I was merely explaining why people are comparing madjam to DSF.

Apparently there actually is something wrong with hearing other people's opinion. That's why Gregor threatened to ban DSF which has resulted in him posting far less. I don't think this should have happened because it was the 99.9% of the people's fault they responded to DSF. If DSF can almost get banned I think that madjam should too. If Gregor hadn't had done this I would have no problem reading madjam's stupid comments.

Settle down John . I , like a lot of bloggers , occasional like to "yank the chain" to promote hockey talk at times . Not frequently , but occasionally . I was quite surprised Frog went that far back to support something he felt that strong about . I doubt there are too many out there that haven't tried to" yank the chains" on occasions .

Avatar
#194 John
July 11 2013, 01:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
madjam wrote:

Settle down John . I , like a lot of bloggers , occasional like to "yank the chain" to promote hockey talk at times . Not frequently , but occasionally . I was quite surprised Frog went that far back to support something he felt that strong about . I doubt there are too many out there that haven't tried to" yank the chains" on occasions .

Settle down? Maybe you can enlighten me as to what I'm apparently so riled up about. Should I settle down by not calmly explaining to you why people compare you to DSF? Should I settle down by not including in my comments that I don't mean any offense by what I am saying to you? I guess I should be more demeaning and derogatory when I post a comment next time since your automatically going to assume I'm so riled up.

Moving on to your other comments, I don't mind when people try to promote hockey talk. That is what I liked about DSF but other people couldn't handle his views and couldn't ignore him. I also don't care when people post unrealistic comments that are stupid. The problem that I believe the problem people have with you is that most of your comments don't promote hockey talk because they are stupid and you tend to post them frequently. There is nothing left to talk about other than how stupid or unrealistic your comment is. If your comments did support hockey talk that was realistic I don't think others would have a problem with you.

Now maybe I just haven't read all your comments and you might not be doing this all the time, but it seems to me like this is what you do. It is also what I was trying to explain to you in my first comment today.

I guess I have to also reiterate that I am not trying to attack you, nor am I upset or riled up about anything. It seemed that you did not realize why people compared you to DSF and I thought I would explain to you why that might be. Take this as a criticism, I don't care if you continue posting the same posts, I just thought you'd want an explanation. If you didn't, I apologize for overstepping.

Avatar
#195 Clyde Frog
July 12 2013, 08:06AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
madjam wrote:

Settle down John . I , like a lot of bloggers , occasional like to "yank the chain" to promote hockey talk at times . Not frequently , but occasionally . I was quite surprised Frog went that far back to support something he felt that strong about . I doubt there are too many out there that haven't tried to" yank the chains" on occasions .

I actually just googled Madjam 2011 and that was the first page of predictions that came up...

When people take such a hard line stance and declare things to the degree you do, it is good to peak back at predictions previously made.

Did all you work actually come close to the truth? No one kid led rookies in scoring by a huge margin and surprised everyone with his game away from the puck... and the other has yet to crack the top six....

To make a statement like "I like to yank the chain" means now and forever more everyone can ignore you as the troll you are.

Comments are closed for this article.