It doesn't have to be "giving up". They could trade a young forward for a young d-man. Take something you may have too many of anyways and trade it for something that you definitely don't have enough of. Find a better fit, not just get rid of the asset at all costs.

Just sayin...

Cogliano 1 year @ 1.95

Hasn't missed a game in 3 years.

Career -10 on a brutal team.

Remained professional after being traded..(twice?)

He's done more for the Oilers than Brule and should be paid accordingly.

To be fair, I thought Sam played himself off that fourth line. He gained big in my eyes for that.

Hey Willis,

What do we get if his agent DOES get him a great deal somewhere else? How does the compensation work for the oilers?

I like Cogs, but not sure his hands will ever catch up to his feet! Should I be cheering for his agent? Sounds like Ottawa kind of liked him last summer...

Fist!

How about giving Cogs an honest chance to have a good season? Sidney Crosby couldn't succeed with the linemates Cogliano's had the last 2 seasons.

At this time in oilers history Im not ready to give up on any of the young players not for any reason, A chance to play with this much young talent is an opportunity esp, with andrews speed that the oilers can not pass up

The only reason we should trade Cogs is if Souray goes with him.

Don't young D-men take a waaaaay longer time to develop than forwards? If that's the case, we'd be trading a guy possibly on the cusp of being useful (if he isn't already in the right situation) for yet another "maybe some day" guy.

On the other hand, if said young D was showing any real talent, would any competent manager deal him for a guy who may or may not pan out? I'd have to think a really promising D would be worth alot these days.

Especially when you need one.. Like the oilers do

For once I almost agree with you here. I definitely think he deserves a second chance with players that can keep up with him, not only speed wise, but in hockey sense too. Playing on the third line with grinders was just ludicrous. Cogs is an offensive talent and should be used accordingly.

The original post sums up my feelings on Cogs. Good stuff JW.

I think if Cogliano is going to be successful here, I'd put a line back together of Penner Brule Cogliano. At the very least, give him Penner on his wing to help size wise. And give him another skill player. Putting him with plugs last year was a sad sight. I thought they did that with Gagner briefly and then let him off the hook easy. But Cogs seemed to get stuck there, despite trying to reinvent himself as a more grittier player.

At any rate, I think his success depends on being a top six winger. If we can't do that for him, send him packing and don't waste his nor our time.

Colgiano should play the game with a little more reckless abandon.....much like Hemsky is afforded the odd defensive mistake, Andrew should be a little more selfish and not play deathly affraid of his next mistake. He looks overcoached to me. He should take what he's learned defensively and be more selfish on the offensive end of things. One thing is for sure we must all agree that a kid with his gifts should have progressed beyond where he is today.

Screw the coaches this year Andrew...go out and let your legs/hands do the talking for you.

He doesnt really have a choice. Renney said he'd let his horses run, and who faster with as much to gain as Cogliano.

His rookie year, I (and many others) hoped he'd even become a Todd Marchant comparable. He hasn't developed that defensive game yet, so its score or become obsolete

Oh yah, I totally agree. But I thought Cogliano did the same as well, but seemed to get stuck on the line. He showed more strength going in the corners, and even fought Boyd (although I would say that wasn't one that went well). I think he did much of what golden boy Gagner did, but didn't gain any ground.

I mean, I like Gagner, and would give him a free pass too, I just think Cogliano deserved a break as well. He did pick up some new skills on that 3rd line too and carried the plugs he got stuck with.

I think Cogliano's biggest problem is he's older than the guys that he's competing against. The potential is there, but it's hard to think we should give a 23 year old player (that albeit has shown good promise) more opportunity and hold back some of the younger guys a bit (especially given their potential as well).

As per the article: has Cogliano produced sufficiently lately? No.

Have the coaches and management put him in a position to be successful? No as well.

Cogliano may not be a fit long-term on this team. The goal with him should be to augment his value as much as possible, as RACKI suggests, complimenting him with linemates that will help make him successful.

Then the Oilers will be in a better position to measure his value and seek a stronger return for him.

He's a good guy - I'm glad the post'ers haven't gone to town on him ... yet.

1 year - $1.7M

Cogs deserves a shot with the Oil. He has gotten terrible minutes and little time on the PP. The problem is, there is no room for Cogs on this team. He is a top 6 forward miscast into a 3rd line role. It would be better for Cogs (who I like) and the Oil (who I like)to part ways and give the guy a shot to work his way into a top 6 role.

The biggest puzzler for me is where to fit Cogs in. As an offensive weapon who do you shuffle out? Penner? Hemsky? Hall? Gagner? Horcoff? MPS? Eberle? Brule? Can you honestly make up a top 6 with him in it that you are happy with? Who do you leave out? So, if he isn't in the Top 6 then on the 3rd or 4th line what does he bring? Can he function as a center? His faceoff % suggests not, so then as a winger then, but then you are asking him to take on a more defensive role and as noted he is a career -10 player and not a noted checker.

I like Cogliano as a player and think he has been a professional under trying times but I struggle to figure out how to define his role here

One poor season by Cogliano doesn't justify pulling the pin on him just yet. Cogo performed best when teamed with Sam Spade Gagner. Quinn totally cut Cogs off at the knees in my opinion last season. The poor result was consistent with Quinn's approach to handling the whole team all last year. Let's see what current coaching does to do a better job of integrating Cogliano into the upcoming version of the Oilers. If he gets the linemates and playing time this year and still pooches the opportunity then it may be time to take a hard look at moving him on. I think the overall poor performance of the Oil can be laid to a large degree at Quinn's feet.

Jon makes a good point that whatever the Oil decide to do they have to polish up his league wide value and move him for value. I think lots of teams would take him but his last season is probably compromising his value with other GM's and the kind of offers they might have been willing to make.

id like to see what the possible line of Hall,Cogs, and Gagner at center on the 2nd line.

Also i'd sign Cogliano for this season, if he dosnt produce under 3 different styles of coaching THEN get rid of him, but lets see what hes got cant do any worse than last year

Since the lockout:

Cogliano's 20-22 year goal production pace is similiar to: Kessel, Getzlaf, Perry, J. Staal.

First two years 18 goals is top 45 for his position.

His 5 goals in 16 games under renney's line control is top 25 pace.

The first 60 games of coaching nightmare under Quinn is an aberation.

Keep trying to trade our goal scorers.

I might be the only one who thinks this, but would letting Ebbs and MPS play a full year in the A be such a bad thing? It would make room for Cogs to play in top six role and prove his worth (either way), plus it would mean that we would only have to qualify Hall in three years. Worst case is we end up with that Sean Cotourier kid, who I hear isn't so bad!

Good points made about playing Cogliano with some decent wingers, even if it is only to increase trade value but then you almost are conceding 3 balanced lines vs two scoring lines. Not saying this is bad - Chicago basically did this. But let's face it we were the worst team in the league. Not sure we suddenly have the depth to pull that off. Quinn tried to balance four lines and ...uh ...well let's not relive it. I am really concerned we are overvaluing what we are going to get out of the young "Trinity". Looking forward to see them but I honestly think people believe they are going to score 200 plus points between them. Just don't see it.

Anyway back to Cogliano, whoever suggested Brule and Penner as linemates might be on to something. I can't recall that trio playing together but last year but it is intriguing. You may be able to play Cogs at center with Brule and Penner taking more critical draws. Plus gets at least a little grit with Cogliano so isn't as scared to get drilled through the middle. We will see. Lots of options for lines but we are still missing a large skilled gritty center. But everyone else in the league would likely say that too.

You're definitely not the only one that thinks that. But Lowe was recently interviewed by Tencer, and he made it sound like the kids will be getting a big shot.

Trade him for experience to help with the rookies, it is going to be another bad year, might take sometime for them to gel.

MADJAM'S SIMPLE SOLUTION TO MANY PROBLEMS FACING THE TEAMS TODAY . INCREASE ROSTER SIZE BY 5 PLAYERS . Cogliano would be very valuable if roster size was increased by 5 .

Merits of increased roster size are many . Less wear and tear on athletes resulting in fewer long term injuries ? You wouldn't expect football players to play an 80 game schedule with their suits of armour , but you do with hockey players with much the same and less armour . The athletes are getting bigger and stronger . Time to increase roster size . Injury problems lessened for those like Oilers whom had so many deleted roster last season.

Roster size and cap should open more jobs , as well as bringing down overpaying of players . A bit of a win win situation all the way . Less likelyhood of rookies getting set down to minors ? Boon to young player development ?

How might dynamics of game itself develop with an increase in roster size ? The smaller players would probably be more suited for an increased roster size than present 4 line roster system . Would their value go up accordingly ? Would deterrents like a MacIntyre also go up accordingly ?

I'd like to see the league increase roster size by 5 and see the merits that it might bring to players and dynamics of the game . Anyone else see some of the values of just such an avenue to go ?

If solution introduced over three season stages this should have little effect on those clubs presently over budget and up against the cap wall . Example if adoted readily : introduce 2 players this season and increase cap by $2M , same for next season increase cap by $2M and 2 more additional players , and by third season increase by only $1M and 1 player .

This is a year where we should be more concerned about player development than the overall performance of the team. Of course, all of the talk has been around Taylor Hall and Eberle, but we also should be focused on Sam Gagner and Cogs to make sure that they get to the next level. Why trade away Cogs now? If we put him in the right situations and ask him to work on his faceoffs, there will be dividends. We can keep him or trade him. I disagree playing him at wing though. I have the same skating stride as Cogs. You need the ice available in the centre lane to wind up to build your speed. It's tougher to build elite speed quickly when skating in a straight line. Bure and Selanne were great at it. I don't think Cogs has those legs. He was much better when Pat Quinn moved him to centre.

@madjam

Intersting thought on the roster size. I have always thought it should be reduced to increase the value of skill players vs pluggers. But to increase the roster size and not the cap, could be a starting point to management learning not to give out fat contracts that make a checking center think he is Jumbo Joe.

In order to make it work though, I think that the league minimum salary needs to increase and a mimimum roster size needs to be set...otherwise we get to a point where those 5 extra spots (if used at all) are fringe level players at best with minimal cap hit and not a developmental boon but more of a goon squad, or teams just ignore it.

Perhaps as well we make sure that the extra 5 do play a minimum number of games each season and if a team fails to qualify the expanded roster players they are penalized the following year in a reduced cap.

Feel free to tweak the idea or not....but it is something to think about.

Sometimes it makes sense to move a player out even if his value is low and Cogliano may fit qualify.

It's already been touched on but we're three years into his career and the Oilers still don't know where he fits into the make up of the team. He appears destine dto be stuck behind Gagner for the same spot. He certainly isn't a 'core' player for them to build around.

So send him on his way so that he can get some real traction on his career as well as free up a roster spot so the Oilers can try and fill a specific need. You know like that 3rd line center that has been three years in the waiting.

It's one thing to build a roster by assembling talent and quite another to assemble a team.

Just what we need to see for our $150 ticket, 5 guys worse then 4th liners/3rd pairing dmen to play 2-3 minutes a night.

Welcome to the NHL Ryan Omarra, Liam Reddox, Giroux, Bell and Chorney. I'm sure you'll fair well getting stuck out on a defensive zone FO against Heatly/Thorton/Marleau.

Another face palm please.

This is not a bad idea in theory. As Team Hall suggests, there is still only 60 minutes to go around, so I would be hard pressed to imagine that they would see a lot of ice time. The minor leagues are a better avenue to enable players to hone their talents for the show.

You also have to consider the financial impact. The NHL is a business. Adding more players won't help contribute to top line revenue, but it will add cost.

For that reason alone the concept isn't feasible, but I applaud posts that offer new ideas.

Sometimes guys with amazing wheels make you think there's something more there than there really is. I remember being a little perturbed when the Oilers got rid of Dean McAmmond on the first go-round. I'm also old enough to remember when Paul Ranheim first zoomed around the league in Calgary.

But, in both cases, the feet were quicker than the hands.

If that's the case with Cogs, he should be prepared to turn himself into a Todd Marchant-type of player who can kill penalties and use his speed as a defensive asset.

The problem that I have with Cogs is that, when someone in the media mentioned the Marchant angle to him a year or so ago, he bristled at the very notion that he would have to reduce himself to that kind of player.

Not good.

But, for now, I'd be prepared to see how Cogs fits into this lineup as a winger. Who knows? Maybe he ends up working up some chemistry with one of the Big Three rookies and scores 20. Could happen.

But if it doesn't and Cogs doesn't look like he's willing to embrace a more two-way role ... well ...

Does Cogs need to be signed in order to play the star of this season? Or can he start unsigned and possibly play his way into a nice contract?

Players are often invited to camp without a contract, but Cogs would need a contract before playing a real game.

I disagree . My plan calls for a cap of slighly under $65 M by year three . It also changes hockey dynamics as most squads would be looking at top 9 (3 lines) of offence , one shutdown and extra line of developmental , defence and goon combo . Some like Oilers have enough to go 4 lines of offence with their talented youth movement .

Carrying five lines / squad will be beneficial and keep salaries down in the long run if cap is kept reasonably close to my projections . The cost benefit would actually be better for the clubs in the long run as far as i can see . Benefit to union is more players with jobs - 150 to be exact with 30 teams . Players careers extended and injury problems reduced is also of benefit to all . For those who love the fights in hockey , i'm sure that would increase as well . More specialized talent in the end picture , more offence i see of value to all . I see new dynamics that can only flourish in expanded and controlled raising of roster limits, and financial stability !

Can't blame someone for throwing out an idea to chew on. Good on ya, madjam.

But I'd be a little worried about what the hockey might look like if there's five more players on a roster.

Would scoring go up or down? Some might assume it'll go up because the scoring lines will be better rested.

But my suggestion is scoring go down because there will be less ice-time, at least in the early parts of the game, for everyone on the team because you're having to put five lines out there. Plus, more defencemen mean there are also fresher defenders out there.

We don't need scoring to go down in this league right now.

Plus, I realize there are a lot of minor-league guys who deserve an NHL roster spot, but I'm not sure if there's 150 of them.

Think about it: you'd basically be adding, like, four or five new expansion teams' worth of players to the NHL ecosystem.

Right now, we need fewer NHL teams (and players) in the league, not more.

Again, I can't fault someone for thinking outside the box, madjam. As far as I'm concerned, you get high marks for creativity.

But, respectfully, I don't know if it would work.

In my opinion it all boils down to this. There isn't room for Brule and Cogliano long term. Both are similar players with eack bringing slightly different strengths. They both appear to be Tweeners fitting somewhere between the 2nd and 3d line, both can play C or RW (yes I know Cogliano is lousy on the dot) and neither has yet given up on the dream of being offensive contributors. In a perfect world the Oilers would take a season to decide which one fits best long term and move the other one.

I like Cogs the guy is a hard worker and he has maintained to be a class act even now that the Oilers have tried to trade him twice. Unfortunatly though I don't see where he fits on the team anymore I would like to see him stay but think the best move would be to try to package him with Souray and let him have a fresh start else where.

Just because you carry 5 more players does not mean you have to play all five for starters . In fact very few might at first depending on opposition they face . What it does do is allow easy access to use ones in pressbox and additional players with more specialized talents offensively and/or defensively that they cannot use now because of roster size now . Rather than just sit in press box those players can now play more often than not, even if it be in a limited role ! That will benefit offence and defence as far as i see it .

Play him with Penner and Hemsky for a year and fans will be calling him an elite outscoring center.

Sad but true.

Or, or, or, orrrr...

Have the best athletes play on the existing roster size. If you're not good enough, you don't make the team. Period. Its what sport is all about.

Of course this idea goes out the window when you see guys like Chorney and JFJ taking up roster spots, but increasing the size of roster just waters down the product even more.

Its the NH freaking L for crying out loud. Not a charity organization to help out fringe players.

The Oilers are an anomaly, primarily because of past poor team management. Other than (maybe) Hall, the young guys we'll see tripping over themselves this year would be earning their chops in the AHL if this were Detroit. Proper teams season their youth until such a point is reached where they're almost guaranteed to succeed.

Unfortunately here in Edmonton it's "Over the boards boys, let's see what you've got". That my friends warrants a super facepalm.

Sorry, but your ideas get more and more asinine as the days go on.

First off, salaries are tied to revenue, not to number of players. Adding 5 more roster players does nothing for revenue, so now your asking owners to fork out more $. "Here owners, we want you to add 5 AHLers to the lineup and we'll give you an extra 5M to spend... but don't worry about your bottom line though... you'll make no extra money... so what if you lose 5M... it is afterall only 5M, right?"

Secondly, adding 5 more players... to the bench? The crowded bench? Nonsense... "hey, 5th line, your up"... LOLZ.

Thirdly, as has already been covered, ~it sure would be good for the quality of hockey~

Fourth... ah nevermind...

madjam... get off your rocker. They'll eliminate a roster spot before they ever add one.

It's like Travis says...

"That sh!t almost writes itself."

I dont think Sam's agent will have an issue answering the "what have you done for me lately?" question. The answer would be '14 points in last 18 games'

when is say Sam I mean Cogliano :)

Totally agree with everyone who realized that Cogliano was given the short end of the stick when it comes to linemates. The Gretz himself would have had trouble playing with those tools.

Saying that, since him Gags and Nilson had that terrific finish in their rookie year, Cogliano hasn't really done much. (stats declining a bit too early in his career.) But, seeing as his trade value is at an all-time low, I would see what he can do this year and go from there.

Oh, and adding people to the roster is rediculous. I saw someone post the JFJ and Chorney were already taking spots from legitimate NHLers. I agree, except it should have read Horcoff and Stortini.

One has to wonder now that Mitchell has been signed by the Kings if the Caps (who I guess were pursuing him) will want to give Souray another look?

Sorry guys, I posted that in the wrong area!