THE COST OF CLIFFORD

I was a little surprised this morning when we started discussing value payments to Los Angeles for Kyle Clifford. The Kings are led by an exceptionally smart General Manager and are extremely unlikely to trade Clifford for something less than full value.

It started me thinking about value, and what GMs are going to be asking from the Oilers in future. Edmonton is in full ‘add’ mode now, there’s no turning back–that means the days of stockpiling prospects with no one going the other way are gone, gone gone.

ASSETS TRADED

This summer, Craig MacTavish traded the following prospects/picks:

  1. Magnus Paajarvi
  2. 2nd round pick (37th overall) in the 2013 Entry draft
  3. 2nd round pick in the 2014 Entry Draft
  4. Defenseman Kyle Bigos

That’s some pretty big value dealt away. Paajarvi could play another 15 years in the NHL as a quality 2-way player, the 37th pick was spent on Valentin Zykov and he could be a very productive player for a long time too. The 2014 pick has slightly less value but remains a big item and Bigos is a fringe prospect.

WHAT ISN’T AVAILABLE?

Let’s start with a list of ‘untouchable’ players, guys who are not going anywhere. This list would include Taylor Hall, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Jordan Eberle, Nail Yakupov and Sam Gagner among the forwards, and it’s probably reasonable to suggest David Perron, Boyd Gordon and Jesse Joensuu aren’t going anywhere this season. On defense, Jeff Petry, Justin Schultz, Ladislav Smid and Andrew Ference would probably be considered safe bets to stay. Beyond that, I think Devan Dubnyk and Ryan Smyth aren’t likely to be dealt for one reason or another.

The rest of the NHL depth chart–Ryan Jones, Anton Belov, Denis Grebeshkov, Corey Potter, Nick Schultz, etc, they’re probably available and some may be waiver available later this year. However, those players are unlikely to bring back value (Belov and Schultz possibly being exceptions) when the Oilers look to add NHL players to the roster. Veteran defensemen like Nick Schultz always have value at the deadline, but usually go for a 2nd or 3rd round choice.

THE COST OF CLIFFORD

If the Oilers are going to acquire a useful piece for their current team, and a piece who will be part of the club long term, some of those prospects are going to be going. And you know NHL teams want the ‘close to ready’ edition because there’s less guessing if they’ve been productive in the AHL. My summer top 30 (here) has only two untouchables from my point of view–Darnell Nurse and Oscar Klefbom. Beyond that, any and all of the top 30 is a trade asset in a possible Clifford deal. Here are my 5 most likely trade pieces to be sent away for Clifford or similar.

  1. D Martin Marincin: He’s young, big and mobile, plus he has an AHL season under his belt. In that year, he flourished early, struggled badly and then regained himself posting impressive numbers (69, 7-23-30 in OKC). Los Angeles needs another defensive prospect like a hold in the head, but the Carolina Hurricanes could use Marincin rfn, and the Oilers/Kings/Hurricanes were once involved in a deadline three-way–it could happen again.
  2. C Anton Lander: Lander is a young, fairly inexpensive center with some NHL experience and defensive acumen. I think a coach like Darryl Sutter might be able to find Lander to be a useful player and if he does work out that’s a player who can hang around for a decade.
  3. 2nd rd pick in 2015: Clifford’s worth a 2nd and maybe a little more, but I bet if the Oilers had a 2nd rd pick in 2014 that would be the price. The 2015 pick will be less attractive because the Oilers will be better.
  4. L Teemu Hartikainen and D Dillon Simpson: Hartikainen might be an ideal fit, the Kings get a useful asset they don’t have to find a roster spot for until next summer (one assumes Harski’s agent got him a window in that 2-year deal); Simpson might be a little strong as an addition, but he’s unsigned and there’s some risk there because of it.

Thoughts?

(photo by Rob Ferguson, all rights reserved).

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

74 Responses to "THE COST OF CLIFFORD"

  1. Bar_Qu says:

    How much do we actually know about Clifford? Is he a guy worth pursuing? Copper ‘n Blue called him Ben Eager on twitter today, but i haven’t seen any #s one way or the other.

  2. sliderule says:

    Clifford is one head shot from being Ben Eager.

    LT Why do you keep trying to trade Marimcin?

  3. SinceTheWHADays says:

    sliderule:
    Clifford is one head shot from being Ben Eager.

    LT Why do you keep trying to trade Marimcin?

    Ya!!! And why do you hate Belov?

  4. Young Oil says:

    Hartikainen for Clifford would actually make a lot of sense for both teams. Would probably have to throw in a mid round pick or lower tier prospect, but I would be incredibly happy if that deal was somewhat possible.

  5. bookje says:

    sliderule:

    LT Why do you keep trying to trade Marimcin?

    He used to be the same with Schmeed.

  6. Melman says:

    I agree the Oilers could use Clifford now, but we aren’t winning the cup this year and I’d venture it would be far easier to find a replacement player of his ability than a D prospect with Marincin’s skill set (and size). Given the choice I’d sit tight and see if we can come close to filling Clifford’s role from within. As you have pointed out often and correctly, injury, etc. can easily derail a D prospect. The odds are likely that one of Nurse, Klefbom and Marincin becomes a legit top 2-4 defenseman.

    I’d keep all 3 until things shake out a little further and we have more intel on them and Gernat and some of the of tier 2 D prospects.

  7. Lowetide says:

    Melman:
    I agree the Oilers could use Clifford now, but we aren’t winning the cup this year and I’d venture it would be far easier to find a replacement player of his ability than a D prospect with Marincin’s skill set (and size).Given the choice I’d sit tight and see if we can come close to filling Clifford’s role from within. As you have pointed out often and correctly, injury, etc. can easily derail a D prospect.The odds are likely that one of Nurse, Klefbom and Marincin becomes a legit top 2-4 defenseman.

    I’d keep all 3 until things shake out a little further and we have more intel on them and Gernat and some of the of tier 2 D prospects.

    Sure, but if we’re talking Clifford (or similar) the cost is going to be Marincin, or something of value. The Oilers have a lot of nice prospects–I really like a bunch of the kid forwards like Khaira and Roy and the defense group is outstanding–but they aren’t going to fetch a guy from the NHL rosters.

    I don’t think Gernat gets you one, just not established enough yet.

  8. Woodguy says:

    A 2nd or a prospect is too much to pay for Clifford.

    He may become more in the future, but right now he’s a 4th liner who doesn’t have a history of scoring at any level.

    He did get 1pt/gm in his draft year+1, which isn’t bad for this type of player, and his pts/gm this past year in the NHL was a career high as well.

    He may be trending up, and I like him more than Jones and Brown, but he’s not quite worth what you are proposing imo.

    LAK is one of the best possesion teams in the NHL, so most of them have good corsi.

    Its good to see that he RelCor is decent on a good team, and I think he’s fast enough to become something more than he his today.

    At the moment though, a 2nd or Marincin it too much to pay for what he brings.

    Lander/Harski/Simpson is about right, but with a lack of C’s on the team I’m hesitant to give up one for a winger.

    Lander’s 8pts in 8 playoff games this past year and his late season offensive surge makes me want to look at him for another year in the NHL as a 4C before deciding on him. Assuming he wins the job at camp.

  9. Lowetide says:

    Woodguy:
    A 2nd or a prospect is too much to pay for Clifford.

    I haven’t expressed myself well. The COST of Clifford is going to be Marincin, or a second. The VALUE of Clifford is another issue.

  10. Ducey says:

    I would be pretty upset if they trade Marincin for a big red dog (I can’t believe you missed a chance to add that as the intro picture, LT). Marincin could be a #2, #3 D man with skating, size, offense and developing defense. You don’t trade that to a team who is over a barrel and for a guy who is a 3rd/ 4th liner.

    Is the upgrade of Clifford over Jones worth Marincin? No.

    Musil, sure. Pitlick and a pick, sure. Simpson, ok. But not Marincin.

  11. Ducey says:

    LT, not sure you noticed, but the Canucks signed ex Oilers prospect Jeremie Blain

    http://capgeek.com/player/2550

  12. Captain Smarmy says:

    7 years of Marincin seems like better value to the Oilers when Schultz, Eberle, Hall, Yak, Nuge and Gagner are all getting paid..

    Need some value contracts on the blueline.

  13. Lowetide says:

    Ducey:
    LT, not sure you noticed, but the Canucks signed ex Oilers prospect Jeremie Blain

    http://capgeek.com/player/2550

    Yes, saw that. Hope he does well, his noxious verbal slip aside.

  14. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Lowetide: I haven’t expressed myself well. The COST of Clifford is going to be Marincin, or a second. The VALUE of Clifford is another issue.

    In this vein, I think I should express myself more clearly from this morning.

    I really don’t want to part with Marincin. And, the cupboards are full at D. The failure of the F prospects to become a Clifford is a crappy situation. But that is why you stock up, to insure against leaks.

    I would part with Marincin, but for me the return has to be better than Clifford for me to walk away happy.

    With the cupboards full at D, I think we should be more comfortable exploring whether Clifford’s COST can be met with one of the lesser lights (Musil, Simpson, etc) packaged with a pick.

    The new team philosophy (puck movement) means you need to prioritize the cluster of Nurse, Klefbom, Marincin and Gernat as near sacred totems of our future. These are the names that will be sending our forwards across the sea for years to come.

    I do, however, like the Harski idea. I think that has some promise.

  15. sliderule says:

    Lowetide,

    If Kings value Clifford that much let them find another sucker.

    Big guys who depend on fighting and intimidation who have concussion issues should have red flags painted all over them..

    The oilers of all teams should know this .

  16. Hall Awaits says:

    2016-17:
    Klefbom / Schultz
    Nurse / Petry
    Smid / Ferrence (give or take with these two)

    Marincin is expendable to me with this future look in mind. Gernat may not have the mean streak Marty does but his offence should match.

    In order to get something of value we have to concede a bit. Marincin is the pay and if i’m Mac-T, I’ve already made the call to Dean.

    Serious question: Does KFC actually have a history of concussions?

  17. Lowetide says:

    sliderule:
    Lowetide,

    If Kings value Clifford that much let them find another sucker.

    Big guys who depend on fighting and intimidation who have concussion issues should have redflags painted all over them..

    The oilers of all teams should know this .

    Given MacT’s chase for size this summer, Im not certain he feels the same way.

  18. godot10 says:

    It is nuts to trade a D prospect with #2-3 potential for a bottom six coke machine of not yet proven quality, IMHO

  19. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Hall Awaits:
    2016-17:
    Klefbom / Schultz
    Nurse / Petry
    Smid / Ferrence (give or take with these two)

    Marincin is expendable to me with this future look in mind. Gernat may not have the mean streak Marty does but his offence should match.

    In order to get something of value we have to concede a bit. Marincin is the pay and if i’m Mac-T, I’ve already made the call to Dean.

    Serious question: Does KFC actually have a history of concussions?

    Even if we can concede that the some of the big D prospects are expendable (ie., Marincin, Gernat; assuming Klef and Nurse are untouchable), why are we using them for such low-hanging fruit?

    I’m ready to let these two go, but I think the price should be a lot higher than is being suggested.

    A prospect like Marincin, who projects to have a good to great NHL career, who will be on a value contract and be protected by RFA status for a long time… you just don’t walk away from that.

  20. Woodguy says:

    Lowetide: I haven’t expressed myself well. The COST of Clifford is going to be Marincin, or a second. The VALUE of Clifford is another issue.

    Got it.

    I was disappointed that MacT signed Jones so fast.

    I thought he would chase a Clifford type first.

  21. Woodguy says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: Even if we can concede that the some of the big D prospects are expendable (ie., Marincin, Gernat; assuming Klef and Nurse are untouchable), why are we using them for such low-hanging fruit?

    I’m ready to let these two go, but I think the price should be a lot higher than is being suggested.

    A prospect like Marincin, who projects to have a good to great NHL career, who will be on a value contract and be protected by RFA status for a long time… you just don’t walk away from that.

    Yes, this is pretty much it.

    I hope MacT feels the same.

    You only have so many prospects like Marincin and Gernat. Good prospects with excellent arrows.

    I like the idea of a Lewis type. An established 3RW who has played toughish minutes successfully and is still an RFA.

    I could see using a prospect for a guy like that.

    Otherwise keep your powder dry and don’t blow your brains out chasing for the lower part of the roster.

  22. BlacqueJacque says:

    I seem to recall someone posting Clifford’s WOWYs and they were kinda meh. Not terrible, but bad enough to poke some holes in his nice Corsi.

  23. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    LA’s defence is actually one of the more interesting examples.

    What would their D depth look like if they walked away from Voynov, Muzzin and Martinez? All LAK draftees, all spent considerable time in the AHL, the last two on real cheap contracts.

  24. Woodguy says:

    BlacqueJacque:
    I seem to recall someone posting Clifford’s WOWYs and they were kinda meh.Not terrible, but bad enough to poke some holes in his nice Corsi.

    No, they’re ok.

    http://lowetide.ca/blog/2013/07/the-truth-is-out-there.html/comment-page-1#comment-242483

    Here’s the whole page from last year: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1360&withagainst=true&season=2012-13&sit=5v5

    LAK is a strong corsi team, but his RelCor rank of 6/12 is pretty good.

    http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?ds=30&s=29&f1=2012_s&f2=5v5&f4=C+LW+RW&f5=L.A&f7=20-&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67

  25. 99thoilerfan says:

    Woodguy:

    Lander’s 8pts in 8 playoff games this past year and his late season offensive surge makes me want to look at him for another year in the NHL asa 4C before deciding on him.Assuming he wins the job at camp.

    Maybe Mac”Money-puck”T talks to his “trending guys” who say for sure, Lander is the guy.

    ,,,Better then his ” horoscope ” guy….right?

  26. fifthcartel says:

    I say no to moving Marincin too quickly. A 6’5 defenseman that can score seems highly valuable, especially when he will be on a cheap contract. I would welcome Clifford, just not at that price. However, you’re right with he’s probably the best trade chip which is why I’m okay with MacT staying put for now.

  27. RexLibris says:

    I support the Hartikainen deal with a 4th round pick thrown in.

    A straight swap of Hartikainen for Clifford suits the roles either is expected to play, but we’d need to cover the risk for the Kings should Hartikainen fail to develop any further or go MIA overseas, thus the pick.

    I think Clifford is a 3rd line winger by himself or on an average NHL roster. If the Oilers can slot him in higher then it shouldn’t cost them more because of their particular circumstances.

    I might also debate Lombardi being one of the best GMs in the league. Granted, sometimes this group (NHL GMs) seems to go out of their way to diminish their own reputations, but Lombardi has made bad calls here and there, and his success recently has been the result of some high-risk bets paying off (the Richards trade, getting Stoll and having him recover from concussion, the emergence of Jonathan Quick, etc). No doubting he is a smart fellow, and the margin between genius and moron in this business is slim, but I’d argue that he is in a cluster of several GMs that are above-average right now rather than class of the league.

  28. Radman says:

    I’m with WG.

    I think Clifford might turn into a valuable piece for the Oil. He brings elements that are lacking and he can play a bit. Just not sure I would cough up a top flight prospect like Marincin to get a bottom six rugged winger. Harski or Lander OK. Not sure there is a love connection with these guys and this team, and they might do well with a fresh start.Lombardi is a shrewd GM. He likely is in no hurry to help a division rival get more competitive. MacT might have to overpay to get him, if he has his heart set on Clifford.

  29. Lowetide says:

    Rex: Is there a GM who doesn’t make a bad or poor bet? I think all of them try to make bets that fall within a range, but sometimes they (as I’m sure we can all recall) go out on a limb for high risk. When Lombardi had to replace R Smyth, he made a good bet and grabbed Simon Gagne. did it work? No. But a good bet.

    As you mentioned, some of the things that look good now were more risky. I don’t think many are smarter than Lombardi.

  30. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    fifthcartel:
    I say no to moving Marincin too quickly. A 6’5 defenseman that can score seems highly valuable, especially when he will be on a cheap contract. I would welcome Clifford, just not at that price. However, you’re right with he’s probably the best trade chip which is why I’m okay with MacT staying put for now.

    I think we should fight the fatalism here.

    Why is it suddenly Marincin for Clifford or nothing?

    Maybe it is, maybe when Lombardi looks at our assets (including future picks) that is all he sees that fits for a Clifford deal.

    But that seems to me a pretty narrow box to put a perspective deal into. I don’t know anything really about how to evaluate trades, or how these things actually take place. But it seems counterintuitive to suggest there is only one road to Damascus.

    So, maybe Musil isn’t an option. Ok. I can see that that doesn’t get it done. But what about Musil +? Or, what about Kharia, Rajala, Arco, etc. What about our entire future draft table? Must be something on there we can part with that Lombardi wants.

  31. Oilanderp says:

    I wonder what interest if any LA would have in Rajala?

  32. Ca$h-Money! says:

    As I was suggesting earlier today, I think the issue at hand isn’t simply the cost of Clifford but the value of the currency being used to acquire him. I believe selling Marincin right now is selling low:

    Marincin: I think we recognize that he has real NHL potential.. not bottom pairing pottential but upper pairing potential if the progress continues. No other NHL GM is going to see that: he was overshadowed by the Kids in the AHL and under scouted pre-draft. Trade him if you must, but you will get more from him in 2 years than you will now.

    Musil: Other GMs will have scouted him extensively in his draft year, they will like the fact that he’s played a key role in 2 deep WHL runs as a shutdown guy, and they will like the fact that his dad played NHL hockey. They won’t be as clear on his lack of speed as people that watch his progress super keenly. Big sell high potential here; if he doesn’t get Clifford, even packaged with a depth pick, I still try to move him for something, even a prospect forward with a few question marks who will need 1 or 2 years at the AHL level… a Pitlick with somewhat better offence. Not being an AHL guru I can’t tell you who that is.

    When I say “sell high” it doesn’t mean “sell for lots” rather it means “sell for more than their realistic true value”. For example, I would sell Hamilton for almost anyone. Point out his being the second best player on the WJC team behind Schenn… explain how his numbers are bad because he got burried behind Pajaarvi, Hartikainen, and Hall/Ebs… and that he need’s a change of scenery. I’m not saying this is true (it’s total BS, there likely is simply not a player there) but if I can get a struggling 20 year old prospect who looks to have some (re: any) upside for him then I pull the trigger.

  33. Big Dan says:

    I’d be ok with swapping out Lander and replacing him with Steckel. But I’d prefer he stay. He’s young, cheap, and agitating.

    I’d definitely be ok with Harski, Potter and a mid-range prospect like Dillon Simpson, Taylor Fedun, or David Musil or a pick if we had too (3rd?). Clifford is the exact profile we look for. He won’t score much but he can play with talented players and make room for them.

    If Martin Marincin is the asking price, I would pass. He has so much potential but I doubt he will have a career as an Oiler. He carries a lot of trade value. You should be able to fetch a helluva lot more than a grinder for him! … Just wait a year when he improves some more in the AHL.

    Besides, for all we know, Jesse Joensuu is the next Clifford? Or Ben Eager, who had a great attitude after being sent down, comes back healthy and motivated (except when it comes to fighting). Eager has never really been healthy as an Oiler – in year 1 or year 2 . And from what I’ve heard, he isn’t a sourpuss like Belanger was. He took the demotion like a man and mentored the kids in Oklahoma.

    I also foresee the Oilers running with 11 forwards and 7 defensemen most nights anyway. Do we need another forward?

    Also, how much money is Clifford asking? Trevor Lewis just got $1.3M so I’d imagine that is the ballpark. Is the RFA holdup because he is asking for too much? That’s a factor too as the Oilers don’t have a lot of cap room either, unless a team like Phoenix wises up and offers something fair for Hemsky.

    … On a side note, can someone remind me the inside joke between Grebs and tin foil? It’s been a few years – I forget the correlation.

  34. godot10 says:

    The LA defense makes Clifford, just like they make Fraser an adequate centre. Lander is a better player than Fraser, except the quality of the D distorts the picture. Ditto for Clifford,

  35. G Money says:

    Lowetide: I haven’t expressed myself well. The COST of Clifford is going to be Marincin, or a second. The VALUE of Clifford is another issue.

    If the COST of the deal is more than the VALUE, why make the deal?

    Ultimately, you make a trade because the cost on both sides is less than the value gained, AND the value on both sides is higher than the status quo.

    In this case, the equation of value on the LAK side is enhanced by the cap space they are buying – or to put it another way, the value of the status quo is damaged by cap restrictions. (It’s similar to when a player publicly demands a trade. There, the value of the status quo, keeping the asset, is destroyed on one side of the table, to the benefit of the other side who can get the asset cheaper).

    If Lombardi is insisting on making a trade where the cost and value are in line even before his cap space is factored into the equation, you don’t make the trade.

    A potentially elite D prospect for a good 4th line player is probably fair value under normal circumstances. It’s also not a trade that makes sense because the value of the status quo is higher than the trade value. So Clifford = Marincin does not make sense (probably for either side).

    In this case, Clifford = Musil + cap space might make sense, and so you do the deal.

  36. Dead Cat Bounce says:

    Oilanderp:
    I wonder what interest if any LA would have in Rajala?

    Zero. Zip, Nada. Bupkis.

    Tyler Toffoli, Tanner Pearson, Bud Holloway, Linden Vey, Jordan Weal, Andrey Andreaoff.

    The Kings need a small scoring winger like a fish needs a bicycle.

  37. Racki says:

    I think option 4 on the list makes the most sense for both teams.

    I’m not sure what the Kings’ needs are, but I’d dangle the likes of Hartikainen, Simpson, Lander, Pitlick, Hamilton, Abney, maybe Gernat (not all in the same proposal of course). Let Lombardi choose a couple of those names, or a pick and a name (or pick and two lesser names).

    Surely something can be done here to acquire Clifford.

  38. Oilanderp says:

    Dead Cat Bounce,

    Well apparently they don’t need defence either but here we are…

    Is it strange that I would prefer to give up Rajala before Marincin? Rajala appears to be the more talented of the two, no?

  39. jp says:

    Ca$h-Money!:

    Musil:Other GMs will have scouted him extensively in his draft year, they will like the fact that he’s played a key role in 2 deep WHL runs as a shutdown guy, and they will like the fact that his dad played NHL hockey.They won’t be as clear on his lack of speed as people that watch his progress super keenly.Big sell high potential here;if he doesn’t get Clifford, even packaged with a depth pick, I still try to move him for something, even a prospect forward with a few question marks who will need 1 or 2 years at the AHL level… a Pitlick with somewhat better offence.Not being an AHL guru I can’t tell you who that is.

    I agree with the sell high idea, but I’m not sure you can still find a GM who isn’t aware of Musil’s mobility issues. He essentially hasn’t progressed since his age 17 season (the year BEFORE his draft season). 71-7-25-32-33-67. 3 more seasons and those assists, Pts and +/- are still his WHL career highs. Sell high if you can, I’m just not sure it’s realistic.

    Also, he was traded to the Oil Kings this season. He only has 1 long playoff run on his resume (appears to made the conference finals with the Giants back in his “career” year though.

  40. Dead Cat Bounce says:

    Oilanderp:
    Dead Cat Bounce,

    Well apparently they don’t need defence either but here we are…

    Is it strange that I would prefer to give up Rajala before Marincin?Rajala appears to be the more talented of the two, no?

    The Kings don’t need anything the Oilers have to offer unless they’re willing to give up a high draft pick.

    Spending a high pick on Clifford doesn’t make a lot of sense.

  41. jp says:

    Oilanderp:
    Dead Cat Bounce,

    Is it strange that I would prefer to give up Rajala before Marincin?Rajala appears to be the more talented of the two, no?

    Not the least bit strange. 6’5″ 2nd round pick scoring Dman vs 163 lb 4th round scoring winger (who is also older to boot). I don’t think you’re alone in preferring Marincin.

  42. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Dead Cat Bounce: The Kings don’t need anything the Oilers have to offer unless they’re willing to give up a high draft pick.

    Spending a high pick on Clifford doesn’t make a lot of sense.

    So, basically the kings are standing pat for eternity. got it.

  43. Dead Cat Bounce says:

    Racki:
    I think option 4 on the list makes the most sense for both teams.

    I’m not sure what the Kings’ needs are, but I’d dangle the likes of Hartikainen, Simpson, Lander, Pitlick, Hamilton, Abney, maybe Gernat (not all in the same proposal of course). Let Lombardi choose a couple of those names, or a pick and a name (or pick and two lesser names).

    Surely something can be done here to acquire Clifford.

    You could package 4 of those players and they would be near the bottom of the LA prospect list.

    Lombardi doesn’t need the refuse of the Oilers draft record.

    His draft selections have been much, much better.

    For example, you state you would include Lander.

    Kopitar

    Carter

    Richards

    Stoll

    Toffoli

    Lewis

    Nolan

    Lander is #8 on that dance card.

    Jordan Weal is also a centre.

  44. dangilitis says:

    I would trade Lander or Teemu + Dillon for Clifford.

    2nd rd way too steep, as is Marincin – maybe Marincin for Clifford + LA Kings 2nd rd 2014?

    I know there will be competition for Clifford, but at the end of the day, you tell Lombardi to enjoy cap purgatory and hang up the phone if he goes walkabout…

  45. Dead Cat Bounce says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: So, basically the kings are standing pat for eternity. got it.

    No, I’m sure Lombardi won’t stand pat for eternity but any moves he makes will be to improve his team.

    Adding a bunch of dross from Lowe’s failed draft strategy doesn’t pass that smell test.

    If you want to get a player out of LA, you’re going to have to give up a player that will help the Kings win NOW.

    Other than the kids, the Oilers don’t have anyone even close to that standard.

  46. Dead Cat Bounce says:

    dangilitis:
    I would trade Lander or Teemu + Dillon for Clifford.

    2nd rd way too steep, as is Marincin – maybe Marincin for Clifford + LA Kings 2nd rd 2014?

    I know there will be competition for Clifford, but at the end of the day, you tell Lombardi to enjoy cap purgatory and hang up the phone if he goes walkabout…

    Lombardi can send Toffoli to the AHL for a weekend, put Mitchell on LTIR and he’s free and clear.

    I would think he wants to have some cap flexibility but he’s not going to step on his dink to do it.

    Lander and Hartikainen are AHL quality players.

    Lombardi has a score of those.

  47. Oilanderp says:

    Dead Cat Bounce,

    Agreed, Yakupov for Clifford it is then.

  48. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Dead Cat Bounce: If you want to get a player out of LA, you’re going to have to give up a player that will help the Kings win NOW.
    Other than the kids, the Oilers don’t have anyone even close to that standard.

    We’re talking about Clifford still, right?

    How much do we have to add to one of the kids to get him do you think?

    Hall and next year’s first?

    Probably a steal for MacT right friend?

  49. Captain Smarmy says:

    Damn Lombardi drops the guantlet in this here thread.

  50. Racki says:

    Dead Cat Bounce: You could package 4 of those players and they would be near the bottom of the LA prospect list.

    Lombardi doesn’t need the refuse of the Oilers draft record.

    His draft selections have been much, much better.

    For example, you state you would include Lander.

    Kopitar

    Carter

    Richards

    Stoll

    Toffoli

    Lewis

    Nolan

    Lander is #8 on that dance card.

    Jordan Weal is also a centre.

    The Kings probably won’t take the Oilers drivel, but I’d be willing to bet that they don’t get a “win now” player in any trade because, for one, they can’t afford to take 1/8th of the salary of a “win now” player. They’re fucked cap wise, and they really don’t have any players that make sense to shed away either (that a team would take / they would give up). So my personal belief is that whomever gets Clifford is going to be doing it for a pick of some sort (2nd?) and some players to help stock their cupboards even more.

    You Kings d-depth is pretty solid, but you vastly overrate the forward pool as far as the talent level there. Unfortunately for the Oilers, however, their forward talent isn’t all that hot sh– either.

    But as other’s already mentioned.. this IS Kyle Clifford we’re talking about here. He’s a good 3rd line player, but we’re not talking about elite talent… but your valuation of Clifford might explain your thoughts on the Kings prospect pool too.

  51. Dead Cat Bounce says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: We’re talking about Clifford still, right?

    How much do we have to add to one of the kids to get him do you think?

    Hall and next year’s first?

    Probably a steal for MacT right friend?

    Cant see anything the Oilers would be willing to give up that Kings would be willing to accept..

    They clearly don’t need a raft of failed draft picks since theirs are better than the Oilers.

    A 2nd round pick might get it done if no other team is willing to pay more.

    Apparently, Lombardi has been shopping Clifford for a while so he’s obviously not going to take a pig and a poke just to move him.

  52. Bar_Qu says:

    Dead Cat Bounce: Cant see anything the Oilers would be willing to give up that Kings would be willing to accept..

    They clearly don’t need a raft of failed draft picks since theirs are better than the Oilers.

    A 2nd round pick might get it done if no other team is willing to pay more.

    Apparently, Lombardi has been shopping Clifford for a while so he’s obviously not going to take a pig and a poke just to move him.

    Normally I just let mangled metaphors go, but it is pig in a poke (colloquialism for a sack). Don’t buy a pig unless you can see it, essentially.

    Which is something even Aristophanes knew (alluding to it lewdly in the Acharnians).

    Now, how can we sweeten the deal to get Nurse + to be appealing to the juggernaut of an LAK team which is not backed into a corner at all with this Clifford thing.

  53. Lowetide says:

    Dead Cat Bounce: Cant see anything the Oilers would be willing to give up that Kings would be willing to accept..

    They clearly don’t need a raft of failed draft picks since theirs are better than the Oilers.

    A 2nd round pick might get it done if no other team is willing to pay more.

    Apparently, Lombardi has been shopping Clifford for a while so he’s obviously not going to take a pig and a poke just to move him.

    The Oilers have things of value and the Kings would certainly be interested. The question is ‘where do they intersect in terms of mutual interest’ and for me that answer is the deep end of the pool from the LAK end.

    And I do think MacT is in a bit of a spot because of his unsuccessful shopping for this player type over the summer.

  54. Dead Cat Bounce says:

    Bar_Qu: Normally I just let mangled metaphors go, but it is pig in a poke (colloquialism for a sack). Don’t buy a pig unless you can see it, essentially.

    Which is something even Aristophanes knew (alluding to it lewdly in the Acharnians).

    Now, how can we sweeten the deal to get Nurse + to be appealing to the juggernaut of an LAK team which is not backed into a corner at all with this Clifford thing.

    Oh. good grief.

    With NINE NHL defensemen on their 24 man roster, the KIngs have $200K in cap space.

    I’m sure Lombardi can think of something if he can’t move Clifford in a deal that he likes.

    Suggesting the Oilers can swoop in and send him Colten Teubert to sweeten the pot is just goofy.

  55. Bank Shot says:

    Racki:
    But as other’s already mentioned.. this IS Kyle Clifford we’re talking about here. He’s a good 3rd line player, but we’re not talking about elite talent… but your valuation of Clifford might explain your thoughts on the Kings prospect pool too.

    Is Clifford a good third liner? He’s been running in place in terms of ES ice time since he broke into the league at just under 10 minutes a game. He’s been passed on the depth chart by King and Lewis.

    I’m not sure the juice is worth the squeeze when it comes to Clifford. I think you can get a much better player then him if you are offering a 2nd.

  56. Bar_Qu says:

    Colten Teubert… now why didn’t I think of that?

    Oh right, I didn’t.

    A pick or prospect will get it done. Whether the Oil will provide one dearer than another NHL team remains the question. But it does appear this is the way LA will solve its problem, and give some of its invincible prospect depth a chance to fight its way onto the roster.

    Much like a great GM would do (theoretically).

  57. Dead Cat Bounce says:

    Lowetide: The Oilers have things of value and the Kings would certainly be interested. The question is ‘where do they intersect in terms of mutual interest’ and for me that answer is the deep end of the pool from the LAK end.

    And I do think MacT is in a bit of a spot because of his unsuccessful shopping for this player type over the summer.

    What do you think the Oilers have “of value” to the Kings?

    They don’t need centres, wingers or goaltenders and they have 4 defensemen under 24 on their roster.

    I suppose they might look at a Marincin but they already have Derek Forbort and Colin Miller (55P in 54GP with the Greyhounds) in the pipeline.

  58. Racki says:

    Bank Shot: Is Clifford a good third liner? He’s been running in place in terms of ES ice time since he broke into the league at just under 10 minutes a game. He’s been passed on the depth chart by King and Lewis.

    I’m not sure the juice is worth the squeeze when it comes to Clifford. I think you can get a much better player then him if you are offering a 2nd.

    (Potential) Good third liner on the Oilers… 4th liner on the Kings. But I wouldn’t disagree with you, if the price is too high, he isn’t going to be worth it.

  59. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Dead Cat Bounce: a raft of failed draft picks

    The picks I’ve mentioned include: Musil, Simpson, Kharia and Rajala.

    Which of those picks qualify as “failed?”

  60. Lowetide says:

    Dead Cat Bounce: What do you think the Oilers have “of value” to the Kings?

    They don’t need centres, wingers or goaltenders and they have 4 defensemen under 24 on their roster.

    I suppose they might look at a Marincin but they already have Derek Forbort and Colin Miller (55P in 54GP with the Greyhounds) in the pipeline.

    I agree that the two teams don’t match up terribly well, but we’re discussing the cost of Clifford and the Oiler prospects are known to us. I’m certain Minnesota has a bunch of prospects they could make available, or Colorado or Tampa.

    But this is an Oiler blog, so we’re discussing the Oilers.

  61. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Pause:

    do we know why Clifford didn’t file for arbitration?

    and… is there a rule of thumb regarding why a player wouldn’t file?

    i.e., can we interpret that as saying something about a player’s willingness to move along or stay… or is it too context specific for such generalizations?

  62. VanOil says:

    The Colonel may be a good fit for the Oilers bottom 6 as 6 & 7s is what we need. We also may have to give up some assets to get them. We have a lot of promising defensive assets.

    All that being said, I would not trade Marincin for Clifford right now. If Clifford was a Center I would have a different view. I don’t see Clifford as the missing piece between a playoff berth or not. Nuges shoulder and Yakupovs progression hold that in balance. At the deadline should a playoff berth look likely I might have a different opinion. For now a pro try out offer to Malhotra seems like an inexpensive long shot that addresses a bigger need, even if he just works as a practice dummy for the other centers at camp.

  63. jp says:

    Dead Cat Bounce: What do you think the Oilers have “of value” to the Kings?

    They don’t need centres, wingers or goaltenders and they have 4 defensemen under 24 on their roster.

    I suppose they might look at a Marincin but they already have Derek Forbort and Colin Miller (55P in 54GP with the Greyhounds) in the pipeline.

    They seem to be at least exploring moving the player, yet they don’t need C, W, D or G, and they don’t have cap space to bring back an NHL player. What do you propose the team that has everything WOULD want for Clifford?

  64. speeds says:

    Romulus Apotheosis:
    Pause:

    do we know why Clifford didn’t file for arbitration?

    He’s not eligible for arbitration.

  65. spoiler says:

    jp: They seem to be at least exploring moving the player, yet they don’t need C, W, D or G, and they don’t have cap space to bring back an NHL player. What do you propose the team that has everything WOULD want for Clifford?

    FTMFW!

    Beautiful post, just beautiful.

  66. Deeg says:

    Do folks think Ben Eager has a hope in hell of coming back up this Fall or are his concussion issues going to keep him down in the AHL? I heard he had a decent time in OKC.

    Granted there are health concerns to overcome and an age difference – but if Eager is healthy in the Fall, what is the gap between him and Clifford? Can Clifford take/make a pass better?

  67. OilLeak says:

    I couldn’t justify giving anything of value for Clifford, seems like a decent 4th liner, but a poor option for 3rd line duty. At this point he can’t take on Tougher comp and he seems like a spare part for LA as he filled in on various lines, but primarily played on he 4th. His shot totals are up slighty year over year so there is some improvement, but with the caveat of playing with some better players this year too. He’s still young enough to improve, but could just as easily stall in his development and top out as a 4th line player. Taking a chance on Clifford is not a chance the Oilers can take(unless the cost is really low). The Oilers need quality NHL players today, not a few years from now, so I don’t see a fit on this team.

  68. OilLeak says:

    Deeg,

    He seems better than Eager at this point, but was sheltered on a deep LA team, Oilers don’t have that luxury.

    Really hard to evaluate this short season, he seemed to improve in the last 9 games or so in the reg season(increase in shot totals and slightly increased ice time), but didn’t carry that progress into the playoffs.

  69. Marc says:

    Dead Cat Bounce:
    Tyler Toffoli, Tanner Pearson, Bud Holloway, Linden Vey, Jordan Weal, Andrey Andreaoff.

    Who are people who have never been in my kitchen?

  70. nelson88 says:

    Ryan Martindale.

  71. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    speeds: He’s not eligible for arbitration.

    Cool. That would certainly explain it.

    Why? what are the eligibility requirements?

    ps. last night when I tried to look into it, this is what I found:

    “Lewis has an arbitration hearing scheduled for Aug. 2. Clifford did not file for arbitration and remains unsigned, while his name has recently started to surface in trade rumors. The problem Los Angeles might run into when it comes to keep all three of them is the fact that it’s currently right up against the NHL’s $64.3 million salary cap.”

    It is clearly under the impression that Clifford had the choice. It shocks me very little to discover a sports article with incorrect information.

    http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/blog/eye-on-hockey/22839231/jordan-nolan-resigns-with-kings-avoids-arbitration

  72. speeds says:

    They are all listed in the CBA, which can be found online here:

    http://www.nhlpa.com/inside-nhlpa/collective-bargaining-agreement

    Article 12, pg 57 of the document, pg 77 of the PDF

    A player in Clifford’s situation, a player his age who just finished his 3 yr ELC, has to have 4 yrs of pro experience to be arbitration eligible – he only has 3 years. Same reason Pietrangelo and Stepan, to list a couple, are also not eligible for arbitration.

  73. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    speeds:
    They are all listed in the CBA, which can be found online here:

    http://www.nhlpa.com/inside-nhlpa/collective-bargaining-agreement

    Article 12, pg 57 of the document, pg 77 of the PDF

    A player in Clifford’s situation, a player his age who just finished his 3 yr ELC, has to have 4 yrs of pro experience to be arbitration eligible – he only has 3 years.Same reason Pietrangelo and Stepan, to list a couple, are also not eligible for arbitration.

    That’s the kind of research I’m simply too lazy and incompetent to do.

    Thanks for the answer though. I really appreciate it.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca