(Trade) Podkolzin to Edmonton

[Hogs and Podz]

4 minutes ago, The Lock said:

 

What's to lose? Well the answer is simple. We'd lose Podz on waivers for nothing. lol

and you have your 4th... like a participation ribbon.  congrats. 

[4petesake]

1 minute ago, Captain insano said:

Ah okay I missed that, but the Kane thing is still a major issue and matching the kids you can’t trade them for a whole year, so clearing out 5 million when you have an already bad back end bad goaltending, Kane has pretty much already said he won’t waive his Nmc which pretty well leaves you with RNH or Hyman out, then there is summer 2025 when draisaitls rough 14 million contract kicks in prob have to shed another big contract player for that well having 7.5 tied up in bubble nhlers 

 

100% agree with all of that. 

[The Lock]

7 minutes ago, Hogs and Podz said:

Hogs was waiver elegible last season.  Had to show or be traded.  That worked out for Hogs, now he's worth a lot more than a 4th if he was traded.  Podz should have been given some sort of opportunity this coming season like Hogs. 

 

The difference is Hogs had already shown a lot more than Podz at the NHL level. These 2 were drafted in the same draft, so ideally Podz should have also been able to show more last year. He didn't.

 

We also arguably had more roster space last year than this year and we have to consider that a factor. We're a good team now.

 

These decisions are obviously not easy ones, but you have to think about our team and remove any attachments you have. Attachments can only make a team worse in the long run. Perhaps, if anything, we could look at it as Hogs beat out Podz in terms of earning a roster spot.

 

Keep in mind too, I'm not saying suddenly a player at 23 who is waiver eligible should be traded. It should be a case-by-case basis.

Edited August 19 by The Lock

[PistolPete13]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

 

That's unlikely to happen until they actually see Podz not do well in Edmonton.

 

Or, who knows, maybe Podz does do well in Edmonton, but no matter what, he's a project for Edmonton that may or may not pan out.

 

1 hour ago, Pure961089 said:

You youngins might not know this but back in 1995 there was a Montreal Canadians player named John LeClair.  He put up modest numbers but was never able to find consistency in his game, he was young though and had a lot of talent with room to grow.  The Canadians didn't have the patients to develop him even though he scored 2 overtime game winning goals in the 1993 Stanley Cup playoffs and would be a big part of their Cup win. Despite that he was traded to the Flyers.

 

He would join a line with Eric Lindros and Renberg and together those 3 would form one of the most dominant lines in NHL history. the Legendary line was called  The Legion of Doom.

 

He would especially torment the Canadians for the rest of his career. Dominating the Canadians with 4 point games and hat-tricks.  He made the Canadians PAY. And there wasn't a day that past where the Canadians didn't dearly regret trading him.  Against the Canadians after they traded him he recorded 30 goals, 18 assists for 48 points in 33 games as a Flyer.

 

Is Podkolzin going to be our John LeClair?  Probably not, I really hope not. Saying that however the possibility is there.

Good posts. LeClair was a force in Philly.

 

Podz more likely trajectory is to end up in the KHL as part of a Legion of Doomski line.

 

Edited August 19 by PistolPete13

[rmok]

17 hours ago, Westcoasting said:

How did Jake Virtanen work out for them? Listen this happens every year in hockey, one team wants to find a cheap player that needs a change… once in a while it does work out

?? 

Again. There is nothing here of value for the Canucks, so why do it? It helps the oilers and not the Canucks. Its at best senseless for the Canucks and at worst might end up harmful if he turns it around with the oil. It's a dumb trade. Not sure why you feel the need to defend it. 

[Pure961089]

Just now, Hogs and Podz said:

and you have your 4th... like a participation ribbon.  congrats. 

I have more faith in 4th round picks panning out with our current management group than I ever did under the Benning regime.  The amateur scouting staff picked some nice prospects in the late rounds.  

[Hogs and Podz]

Just now, The Lock said:

 

The difference is Hogs had already shown a lot more than Podz at the NHL level. These 2 were drafted in the same draft, so ideally Podz should have also been able to show more last year. He didn't.

 

We also arguably had more roster space last year than this year and we have to consider that a factor. We're a good team now.

 

These decisions are obviously not easy ones, but you have to think about our team and remove any attachments you have. Attachments can only make a team worse in the long run. Perhaps, if anything, we could look at it as Hogs beat out Podz in terms of earning a roster spot.

I mentioned in a previous post that the team as a whole has progressed faster than Podz... I understand, just wanted them to see if he could show this one last time.  It wasn't going to harm this team if they'd allowed a short showing before trading or releasing him.  Anyway, what's done is done.  I'll get over it eventually. 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, rmok said:

?? 

Again. There is nothing here of value for the Canucks, so why do it? It helps the oilers and not the Canucks. Its at best senseless for the Canucks and at worst might end up harmful if he turns it around with the oil. It's a dumb trade. Not sure why you feel the need to defend it. 

How does this trade help the Coilers?

[Hogs and Podz]

1 minute ago, Pure961089 said:

I have more faith in 4th round picks panning out with our current management group than I ever did under the Benning regime.  The amateur scouting staff picked some nice prospects in the late rounds.  

I hope so... won't know for 3-4 years. 

[rmok]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

How does this trade help the Coilers?

? Is this a serious question. 

 

They just got a 23yr old 10th overall for a 4th round pick. 

 

Do you think the Oilers made the trade to not help themselves? Please do explain that logic. 

[tas]

28 minutes ago, HKSR said:

You jump to conclusions so quickly.  Like I said Hoglander looked mediocre as well for his first 3 years.  This is a case of giving up on a young player a bit early.  I mean could he turn into a bust?  Absolutely.  But can we absolutely 100% guarantee he won't turn into at minimum a big and strong bottom 6 forward?  Absolutely not.  He has 2 or 3 more years before that likelihood is out the window.

 

If your only argument is that he would guaranteed to be picked up off waivers in late September, I've given a very strong and legitimate counter argument to that.  Again, a 4th round pick from a division rival that is in the worst cap situation in the entire NHL was the value placed on him.  Waiving him along with 20 or 30 other players in the NHL could very well meant he could have cleared waivers.  The odds of him being picked up or clearing waivers is likely about the same.  

 

I would have gambled on it if it meant he could stew for some more time in the AHL.

so you'd choose to lose him for nothing. ok. 

 

I'm glad canucks management sees it differently. 

[NoCupSyndrome]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

How does this trade help the Coilers?

 

Gives them a Holloway replacement, I suppose. Podz might be better suited for a 3rd/4th line role and comes in at more than $1M less.

[tas]

28 minutes ago, Hogs and Podz said:

no I wouldn't... I'd rather give him one last shot... and let him show if he could earn a spot... if he failed... oh well, wavers then.  Imho, a 4th is worth less than giving him one last chance.

screenshotted for the next time the canucks lose someone on waivers. 

[PistolPete13]

1 hour ago, RomanPer said:

Finally. Wanted to see this putin lover gone for a while. Really don't care what the return was. And before you ask "why do you assume he's putin lover?" - I don't assume, I know. He openly supports the war in Ukraine (within the team locker room) and calls Ukrainians "khokhols" (which is a derogatory term for Ukrainians in russian language).

Glad that he’s gone then. 

[The Lock]

1 minute ago, Hogs and Podz said:

I mentioned in a previous post that the team as a whole has progressed faster than Podz... I understand, just wanted them to see if he could show this one last time.  It wasn't going to harm this team if they'd allowed a short showing before trading or releasing him.  Anyway, what's done is done.  I'll get over it eventually. 

 

If it's any consolidation, my first reaction of this was to be up in arms and question it. As soon as I found out about the waiver issue though, given the makeup of our team, it made a little more sense to me.

 

It sucks no matter what. I even said in a previous post, whoever was going to trade away a pick for him wins this trade. This is what happens with good teams though: we started to see players who would otherwise potentially make the team get traded. Just look at us back around 2010 and having to see Grabner go. Yet, Grabner wasn't making the team at the time. It happens.

[Alflives]

Just now, rmok said:

? Is this a serious question. 

 

They just got a 23yr old 10th overall for a 4th round pick. 

 

Do you think the Oilers made the trade to not help themselves? Please do explain that logic. 

We got Krapsoft for a seventh rounder. He was a higher pick. It’s far more likely guys at 23, who have not cracked the nhl, never will than they become a player. 

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, NoCupSyndrome said:

 

Gives them a Holloway replacement, I suppose. Podz might be better suited for a 3rd/4th line role and comes in at more than $1M less.

Holloway is a far better player than Podz. It’s more likely the Soilers will waive Podz than he helps them. 
We all loved Podzilla and hoped for him to do well. But he plays the game too slow to be effective in any role. 

[HKSR]

25 minutes ago, The Lock said:

 

But Hoglander didn't go that route... so no we wouldn't have lost Hoglander given he played the full season last year and is only a few months older than Podz. Not to mention Hogs has played almost double the number of NHL games Podz has.

After each of their 3rd seasons in the NHL:

 

Hoglander with 141 games played.

 

Podkolzin with 137 games played.

 

Hoglander had 54pts.

Podkolzin had 35pts.

 

So I give it that Hoglander had better production, but if Hoglander isn't producing he doesn't have the size and strength to play bottom 6 effectively.  Podkolzin can.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

Just now, The Lock said:

 look at us back around 2010 and having to see Grabner go. Yet, Grabner wasn't making the team at the time. It happens.

A rare hit from our Western Canadian scouts (Grabner played in the WHL).  As much grief I give to Delorme, this was a solid selection.  He (Grabner) just lack the maturity (I think Florida chose to fill its last roster to a past his due date enforcer (Hordichuk) instead of Grabner & just put him on waivers.  Now I realize both players serve different kinds of roles but at that point in Darcy's career, he wouldn't be able to handle that role well.

[Jaimito]

 

 

[HKSR]

8 minutes ago, tas said:

so you'd choose to lose him for nothing. ok. 

 

I'm glad canucks management sees it differently. 

No, I choose taking the gamble that he may or may not be taken on waivers.  You can't state with certainty or fact that he would get claimed when there would be 20 or 30 other players on waivers at the same time.  Especially when we see his value as low as it is on the market with this trade.  Your opinion isn't a fact.  There is just as good a chance that he'd clear waivers.

[Alflives]

Just now, HKSR said:

After each of their 3rd seasons in the NHL:

 

Hoglander with 141 games played.

 

Podkolzin with 137 games played.

 

Hoglander had 54pts.

Podkolzin had 35pts.

 

So I give it that Hoglander had better production, but if Hoglander isn't producing he doesn't have the size and strength to play bottom 6 effectively.  Podkolzin can.

If Podz could play bottom six effectively we wouldn’t have moved him. He just plays too slow. And it’s not his skating. So that’s an IQ issue. He processes too slow. The Empties predict he will be on waivers. 

[HKSR]

37 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Dont put him on waivers, get rid of pdg instead.  Continue his development with the big club.

Yeah that would have been an option too. 

[HKSR]

Just now, Alflives said:

If Podz could play bottom six effectively we wouldn’t have moved him. He just plays too slow. And it’s not his skating. So that’s an IQ issue. He processes too slow. The Empties predict he will be on waivers. 

He was 22yo just 2 months ago Alf.  Giving up on players that young, especially powerforward types is not a solid strategy IMO.

[tas]

Just now, HKSR said:

No, I choose taking the gamble that he may or may not be taken on waivers.  You can't state with certainty or fact that he would get claimed when there would be 20 or 30 other players on waivers at the same time.  Especially when we see his value as low as it is on the market with this trade.  Your opinion isn't a fact.  There is just as good a chance that he'd clear waivers.

if edmonton was willing to pay a 4th for him, you don't think they'd be willing to put in a waiver claim?

 

sure, maybe he'd slip through (remarkably unlikely), but if you go the gamble route. you're doing so on the assumption you've lost him for nothing on the small hope that you might not.