If we factor moves connected to the original assets, as well as some other indirect ties, this is what I think the deal worked out to be.
To ANH: Pronger, (and a friggin cup win)
To EDM: Pitkanen, Penner, Smid, Riley Nash
What about all the draft picks? I counterbalance our 1st, 2nd and 3rd we give up in the Penner deal with the 1st and 2nd from ANH for this year (the 2nd now being NYI property), and the 3rd for next year from Philly in the Lupul deal.
If we factor moves connected to the original assets, as well as some other indirect ties, this is what I think the deal worked out to be.
To ANH: Pronger, (and a friggin cup win)
To EDM: Pitkanen, Penner, Smid, Riley Nash
What about all the draft picks? I counterbalance our 1st, 2nd and 3rd we give up in the Penner deal with the 1st and 2nd from ANH for this year (the 2nd now being NYI property), and the 3rd for next year from Philly in the Lupul deal.
If you include Pitaknen, then you've got to include a 3rd, Smith, and Sanderson as well.
Also, you can't include the draft picks or Penner because they're different picks than the ones we got for Pronger. In fact, none of the assets are in any way related to the Pronger deal. You might as well include Smyth, Nilsson, O'Marra, and Plante, because they're just as relevant as the Penner stuff.
Out of curiosity, is the cup win really a bad thing? Didnt that get us an extra draft pick? Would you rather no finals appearance and no extra pick?
Some ******* will win the cup every year. Might as well try to work it so we get an extra asset out of it. Thats why I always thought it was weird that people were so mad that Lowe handed Burke a cup. It was a calculated risk that gained an asset.
Out of curiosity, is the cup win really a bad thing? Didnt that get us an extra draft pick? Would you rather no finals appearance and no extra pick?
Some ******* will win the cup every year. Might as well try to work it so we get an extra asset out of it. Thats why I always thought it was weird that people were so mad that Lowe handed Burke a cup. It was a calculated risk that gained an asset.
Excellent point because, if your team is going to win the cup, it doesn't really matter who does unless than gains you an asset.
Pitkanen, Smid, Riley Nash, Geoff Sanderson, ANA 1st 08, ANA 2nd, Phi 3rd
If you want to include the connected assets and related trade/draft move. OTHERWISE you must remove Pitkanen. Note that I have already removed Penner because it is not 'really' connected to this deal.
Last edited by alphahelix: 05-06-2008 at 02:56 PM.
Then you can deal with what was done with those assets after.
Looks Pretty good fro Edm- no?
If you really want to trace it back, we got Brewer for Hamrlik, and Hamrlik for Bonsignore and Kelly (and Marchment), which are arguably the two worst draft picks in franchise history.
So looking at asset management, we were able to take our 2 worst draft picks and use them to obtain Hamrlik then Brewer then Pronger then Lupul and then Pitkanen.
Of course there were other players involved in those deals, but since people love to harp on the Oilers drafting record in the 90s, it should be pointed out that the bad draft picks were at least used to obtain a string of blue-chippers since then.
If I start banging my head against the wall--ignore me
to fully annylize the Pronger deal--start with the Brewer deal, with all players involved with that and the go onto the Lupul deal---so ingeneral--you anylize the trade--without actual using pronger
__________________
Joy of being an oiler fan--watching the team play worse then AHL teams. Guess the oiler brass is already on the golf course
If you really want to trace it back, we got Brewer for Hamrlik, and Hamrlik for Bonsignore and Kelly (and Marchment), which are arguably the two worst draft picks in franchise history.
So looking at asset management, we were able to take our 2 worst draft picks and use them to obtain Hamrlik then Brewer then Pronger then Lupul and then Pitkanen.
Of course there were other players involved in those deals, but since people love to harp on the Oilers drafting record in the 90s, it should be pointed out that the bad draft picks were at least used to obtain a string of blue-chippers since then.
It would have been even sweeter if you guys had been able to parlay Marchment into Lecavalier the way the Lightning did, instead of trading for Hamrlik. That way, you would have had that true franchise center you've missed since Messier left, or maybe Doug Weight.
If you include Pitaknen, then you've got to include a 3rd, Smith, and Sanderson as well.
Also, you can't include the draft picks or Penner because they're different picks than the ones we got for Pronger. In fact, none of the assets are in any way related to the Pronger deal. You might as well include Smyth, Nilsson, O'Marra, and Plante, because they're just as relevant as the Penner stuff.
First off, I wasn't done, I must apologize, I was doing this in the NAIT computer lab and a fire drill went down and they punted us out. So to continue....
My thoughts in the draft position of our original pick (12th) to theirs (22nd), is that, without Pronger last year our season really took a nose dive and we finished low enough to get Gagner. I know its an obtuse way of viewing the deal, but I feel their is some relevance - particularly due to Lowe selling the fans on winning the deal long term. Obviously we lose the deal in the first year or two. The reason I bring it up is because I think Lowe did a good job considering how his hands were tied, as I think our youth/prospect pool was only average considering what we were losing after the cup run.
To misfit: How are they not relevant? The Lupul/Pitkanen part of that deal was more or less straight up. Penner is relevant because the initial trade saw 2.5 mil in salary (Lupul, Smid) go for 6.25. No Pronger (and Bert, Schneider), and Penner is probably still a Duck.
It has always been a very simple equation for me. We traded away an elite asset around which to build a team around and in return received non-elite assets that reset our build point backwards. However, I do not believe any trade would have resulted in a different equation. You simply cannot lose a player of Pronger's skills and not lose the trade.
It has always been a very simple equation for me. We traded away an elite asset around which to build a team around and in return received non-elite assets that reset our build point backwards. However, I do not believe any trade would have resulted in a different equation. You simply cannot lose a player of Pronger's skills and not lose the trade.
agreed...I generally use the following as my criteria to gauge trades:
the team that ends up with the best player in the deal, won.
To misfit: How are they not relevant? The Lupul/Pitkanen part of that deal was more or less straight up. Penner is relevant because the initial trade saw 2.5 mil in salary (Lupul, Smid) go for 6.25. No Pronger (and Bert, Schneider), and Penner is probably still a Duck.
If Lowe could've done the deal as Pitkanen/Lupul, then he would've. In fact, I'd say it was closer to Smith and Lupul for Pitkanen and a 3rd. Sanderson was simply thrown in as a salary dump.
If Buffalo didn't match the Vanek OS, then Penner is still a Duck too. The picks we got from the Pronger deal were Anaheim's picks. The ones we sent to Anaheim for Penner were ours. That's why you can't compare the two, because they're completely different deals involving none of the same assets. You'd might as well throw Souray in there too if you're going to use that reasoning, because without Pronger, we needed another defenceman, and with Pronger's money off the books, we had the cap space to sign him.
It baffles me that some connect Penner to the Pronger trade. I guess the common thread is that both involve Anaheim. Then again, Lowe seemed to think as much too:
It's all about spin and what the fans are willing to accept as a decent trade. It is ridiculous to connect two trades that are separated by one year between two different teams.
A lot of factors had to fall in place in order to make the Penner and Pitkanen deals occur, including the departure of Peca, Spacek, Smyth, Pronger, Smith, Lupul and Samsonov to create salary space and a need for bodies.
The failure to capitalize the best assets for Pronger and Smyth, in conjunction with a slew of injuries, prompted Lowe to overreact last summer and make a trade for Pitkanen and sign Penner to an offer sheet. Pitkanen has yet to show that he is an elite defenceman and Penner cannot be classified as a top-line winger. This could all change next season and Penner could score 35 goals while Pitkanen racks up 45 points, then we could all forget about Pronger, Lupul and the subsequent deals since the cup run.
at this rate, the trade will never be fully analyzed...we'll just keep linking trade by trade and asset by asset until it reads what everyone wants it to.
This was the deal, there is no more discussion necessary:
ANA gets: Pronger
EDM gets: Lupul (Gone), Smid, ANA 1st Rounder 2007 (Riley Nash), ANA 1st and 2nd Rounders 2008 (?)
Joffrey Lupul didn't suddenly become Joni Pitkanen, he was the most NHL-ready player coming back who was supposed to be a top 6 forward...and we all know how that turned out. The jury's still out on Smid, the Nash selection looks good so far, and who knows what'll transpire with the picks in this year's draft. Lowe got some assets out of it, but the best player in the deal is no longer around due to not meeting expectations. Smid is on the fence as of now, so who knows what will happen with him.
What happens to the assets (prospects and draft picks) is a completely separate issue from this trade. That's all they are, assets. In fact, I'll say Smid is an asset just because he was and remains a prospect as of now. The assets could turn out to be draft selections or involved in another trade, or if the asset is a prospect they could pan out/bust. Regardless, it has nothing to do with the trade at hand.
Agreed pretty much. At the time Pronger was the best d-man on the planet and a bonafied top 5 player in the NHL.
The deal should've been
Getzlaf
Smid
Beaucheman
ANA 1st 2007
for
Pronger
Greene
Or something along those lines. The fact that we only got one player with any NHL experience for Pronger back, and that was Lupul is mind boggling.
It's also very clear to me that Burke was bluffing by telling Lowe he better make a decision quickly or they wouldn't be interested or have the cap room for Pronger.
