The Unknown Poster Posted December 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 5 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said: I'm not sure it was one-sided. EDM won the next cup without him. Gretzky never won another. Analysis of the trade http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2011/2/18/2001011/who-won-the-gretzky-trade The trade certainly didn’t look very good that day. The Oilers were giving up three players in their prime who had already combined for over 750 goals, 2000 points and 9 Stanley Cup rings. Gretzky already had 1086 assists which, at the time, was already an NHL record, ahead of Gordie Howe’s 1049 and Marcel Dionne’s 1024. Arguably it was only an injury that broke Gretzky’s incredible streak of 8 consecutive Hart Trophies and 7 consecutive Art Ross trophies. And what were the Oilers getting? Fifteen million in cash, three first round draft choices, and a couple of kids. Even for the known commodity Slats insisted on Luc Robitaille, but was forced to settle for Jimmy Carson. Walking away with only one NHL player was as incredibly high-risk deal for the Oilers. The prospect and three picks could have resulted in absolutely nothing, an extension of their dynasty, or anything in between. We all know how things worked out for the Kings. Gretzky would win the Hart trophy his first season in Los Angeles, but never again, and add only three more Art Ross awards to his massive trophy case. Fortunately both the prospect and one of the picks worked out well for the Oilers, and together they contributed more than Gretzky from that point forward. Martin Gelinas and Martin Rucinsky would outscore Gretzky 550 to 311, and 1272 to 1188 in points, earning 22.2 more goals above replacement value than the Great One. The only known commodity the Oilers received was the young Jimmy Carson, and though the benefit of hindsight reveals that he was worth less than Marty McSorley at the time of the trade, the Oilers shrewdly and quickly leveraged his talent to get Petr Klima and Joe Murphy from the Detroit Red Wings, who helped bring one more Stanley Cup to Edmonton in 1990. Even to the dispassionate eye, the Los Angeles Kings still won the trade, but it was by fewer than 5 goals. This trade was hardly the disaster that people anticipated at the time, or that more emotional fans still believe today. In fact, it’s remarkable how such a crapshoot could have turned out so evenly for both teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrostyWinnipeg Posted December 30, 2015 Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 Worked out for both teams. Big loser was Canada as it was the beginning of the end for Canuck teams not being able to compete against what the USA was offering. From the Rangers and for the next 10+ years it was whomever had the most money won the cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted December 30, 2015 Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 3 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said: Fortunately both the prospect and one of the picks worked out well for the Oilers, and together they contributed more than Gretzky from that point forward. Martin Gelinas and Martin Rucinsky would outscore Gretzky 550 to 311, and 1272 to 1188 in points, earning 22.2 more goals above replacement value than the Great One. You can't compare the output of two players to one. They take two roster spots. Gretzky takes one. What about the "other" player the Kings got to ice because they had Gretzky? The Unknown Poster 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted December 30, 2015 Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 14 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said: Worked out for both teams. Big loser was Canada as it was the beginning of the end for Canuck teams not being able to compete against what the USA was offering. From the Rangers and for the next 10+ years it was whomever had the most money won the cup. Which is why the leafs won so many cups back then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted December 30, 2015 Report Share Posted December 30, 2015 TUP is 100% correct. They spoke with the GM (name escapes me) when Teemu retired and he clearly stated that they traded Selanne because they had only enough money for either Teemu or Tkatchuk. Goalie is making up stuff... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted December 31, 2015 Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 Zach Bogosian - The Sabres defenceman struggled against Washington, with poor possession stats (20 for, 36 against, 35.7 SAT%) and on the ice for four Capitals goals in a 5-2 loss. The Myers-Kane trade could go down as one of the biggest fleeces in NHL History - and we haven't even seen what Lemieux can do in the NHL yet. The Unknown Poster 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted December 31, 2015 Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 Except it wasn't kane for myers. It was basically bogo for myers and kane for stafford (ufa at the time) armia Lemieux and a 1st (Roslovic) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtlanticRiderFan Posted December 31, 2015 Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 Well, then. Better not visit Buffalo if your last name is Kane, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted December 31, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 You can't really separate the players in the trade like that. Kane and Myers were the two big pieces. Id like to know why the thought process was because it sure looks like Buffalo put a ton of stock in Kane. Myers was a featured guy whenever deadline possibilities were talked about Hard to say yet but it looked like we won the. It looks like we won now. And unless kane gets a lot better or lemiex and roslovic suck, it's always going to look like we won fortunately we found a team in Buffalo that wanted to get worse at the time to try and get the #1 draft pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now