Question of the day…

By , June 6, 2011 1:10 pm

I didn't feel like coming up with a clever picture, sorry.

I didn't feel like coming up with a clever picture, sorry.


OK, not exactly something we haven’t brought up from time to time, but I can’t help but think about it more.

Would you trade the 1st overall and 19th overall pick to Colorado for 2nd and 11th overall?

I think I would. Last year, that gets you any one of these players:
Jack Campbell, Cam Fowler, Brandon Gormley, Jaden Schwartz, Derek Forbort, Vladimir Taresenko, etc…

As well, it also gets you one other player not named Taylor Hall.

Would you do it? I’m stealing a conversation between “spOILer” and “cabbiesmacker” on Lowetide. spOiler asked the question I phrased above, and cabbiesmacker replied with:

If it’s safe to assume that Taylor Hall and RNH are “franchise” players and using last years draft as an example : Are the Oilers stronger with Taylor Hall than they would have been with Skinner and Fowler?

Good questions, both of them.

Personally, I have to say that I think Taylor Hall is still the best player available in that draft. However, I have to say that I would take a defenceman of Cam Fowler’s ability and a forward of the Tyler Seguin variety over Taylor Hall and the picks 19th and beyond.

Now, I think this is a deeper draft that last year. However, I’d still say that I would give HEAVY consideration to swapping firsts with Colorado.. if they were interested.

Depending on who they picked, we could end up with a pretty excellent combination of players.

That said… would it be bad if we kept our 1 and 19 picks and went with a combination of say:

Ryan Nugent-Hopkins or Sean Couturier
AND
Jamie Oleksiak

Or perhaps:
Adam Larsson
AND
Mark McNeill

What do you think?


Should the Oilers trade #1/#19 picks to Colorado for #2/#11?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

8 Responses to “Question of the day…”

  1. Ca$h-Money! says:

    The real problem is uncertainty. If we can get McNeil or Oleksiak with 19 then we’re in good shape, but we can’t wait until draft time to determine if they will be available. It’s a tough call.

    On the flip side, why would Colorado want to draft #1?

    Colorado is deep enough up the middle that they don’t need a centre, but they could use one. They need defencemen, but they also just traded for 2006 #1 overall pick Erik Johnson to fill that hole. Colorado needs a forward, so they know they can get a good one with the #2 pick: more importantly they need a big strong winger like Landeskog, who is almost certain to be available since the wing is the only place that Edmonton is actually deep.

    In short: no way Colorado makes that trade. They will keep the 2nd pick and take Landeskog.

  2. Racki says:

    Hey C.M.,

    Yah I am skeptical myself that the Avalanche would make the trade. At the same time, I’m not even really sure WE would. The Oilers are obviously interested in moving that second pick up, so I would say moving to 2/11 instead of 1/19 isn’t too bad of an idea. However, it of course does take two to tango.

    As for why Colorado would do it, that might fit the bill of us adding more to the table. Or perhaps changing the trade to be a player + our 19th for the 2nd overall pick (or 11th, depending on who we offer), since as you say they might be less interested in a prospect as they would be in an NHL-ready player. That said though, that would mean trading within the division, which isn’t usually a good idea too.. so who knows if that would ever happen.

  3. zackman35 says:

    First of all I’m not sure Colorado would do it, I think one of the reasons that managers have such ambiguity when it comes to the draft is because of reasons like this. There’s no question, Larsson and RNH seem to be in a class of their own then after that closely followed by Landeskog and Huberdeau. Now we are not certain but I think a lot of people get the feel that the Oilerrs will be choosing RNH along with a lot of GM’s and if Colorado wants Larsson (Since they have an abundance of center-men) well he’ll likely fall to second. Now that’s just me thinking out loud but you never know I suppose. I think its just giving too much, giving up your 2nd and 11th for the 1st. If this was last year and Boston had that opportunity I think they would go for it, not that we’d give up our pick.

    I think the only reason Oilers should trade down is if they get the top two pick and a pick in the top eight, other than that no deal.

  4. Grass&sOIL says:

    I am gonna answer this one in a simple and predictable manner:

    In Stu we Trust :)

  5. oilinblood says:

    First. the RNH thing is done. reactions from scouts when the guy didnt know how to do a bench press was enough.

    Colorado will draft Larsson if they can.
    I would rather try to deal for the 2nd pick using 19 and a player Colorado wants. Whitney is even available if 11 is also on the table. Colorado is looking for high end D. I think they can be sold on Whitney since they have the forwards to achieve now. LArsson will be a work in progress, just like any Dman.

    If you are taking LArsson at 1 it changes the game for COlorado who really have alot of strength down the middle. LAndeskog would be my educated guess on where they go if Larsson goes at 1. Is Landeskog better than what the oilers would offer for pick 2?

    Eventually Tambi has to stop being a dramatic idiot and let the teams directly behind him like Colorado know they arent gettting Larsson…so do they want to make a trade?

    My prediction based on needs and reactions
    Larsson
    LAndeskog
    Huberdeau
    COuts
    Strome
    HAmilton
    Siemens
    Ryan Murphy
    RNH
    Zibanejad/Phillips
    NJ basically said they have no interest in RNH in a top 10 position so he definently isnt going at 4.

  6. oilinblood says:

    Racki: Hey C.M., Yah I am skeptical myself that the Avalanche would make the trade. At the same time, I’m not even really sure WE would. The Oilers are obviously interested in moving that second pick up, so I would say moving to 2/11 instead of 1/19 isn’t too bad of an idea. However, it of course does take two to tango. As for why Colorado would do it, that might fit the bill of us adding more to the table. Or perhaps changing the trade to be a player + our 19th for the 2nd overall pick (or 11th, depending on who we offer), since as you say they might be less interested in a prospect as they would be in an NHL-ready player. That said though, that would mean trading within the division, which isn’t usually a good idea too.. so who knows if that would ever happen.

    I dont see us giving up pick #1. I can see us aquiring pick 2, 3, or 6 thru trade without giving up pick 1 but likely involving pick 19. 6 is most likely and 2 and 3 are out unless Tambi abandons his rediculous closed mouth BS.

    If whitney is available or maybe Gilbert + Hartikainen. Or Gags… than i believe we will be in play for pick 2 or 3 and getting Hubert.
    I say trade what you need to because i want a player that i can call Hubert.

  7. Grass&sOIL says:

    Never heard anything about Whitney being on the block and if by some miracle he is then ST is nuts. We need to acquire some more quality defenders around here, not trade one of the few quality defenders we have away.

  8. Ca$h-Money! says:

    It seems everyone is counting on Colorado to take Larsson, but I maintain they will take Landeskog. Because of this they have no reason to want the 1st pick, since they know we don’t want a winger.

    They don’t need Larsson because they acquired Johnson.

    They need Landeskog to replace the winger (a power forward) they lost in acquiring Johnson (Chris Stewart, also a power forward).

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Panorama Theme by Themocracy

%d bloggers like this: