Rumors IV: Oilers, Canadiens and Sharks
  • David Staples of the Edmonton Journal: On Renaud Lavoie’s tweet that the Oilers have been looking at the Maple Leafs goalies the past couple of weeks. Staples thoughts on Leafs players

    “The problem with players from the Leafs is they are on a terrible team in a weak conference. However well players do on that team — not very well — they’re very likely to do worse when they face the stiffer competition of the Western conference.”

    There is nothing to love or hate about Jonathan Bernier and James Reimer. Bernier has outperformed Reimer the past two season. Bernier is a pending RFA with a current cap hit of $3.4 million. Reimer has another year at $2.3 million.

    Reimer wouldn’t be the answer for the Oilers. The Leafs may prefer to keep Bernier, and the Oilers would likely not want to pay the price for him.

    One final issue: why would the Oilers want to upgrade their goalie position — or any position — right now, when the management (whatever they may claim) has got to be tanking for a high draft pick? When the Oilers move for better veteran players, that move should happen in the June and July.

  • The Fourth Period: Multiple sources saying the Canadiens would like to make an “impact trade” and have held some talks with Oilers about Jordan Eberle, the Maple Leafs about Joffrey Lupul and the Sharks about Patrick Marleau. Nothing is believed to be imminent. Some think the Canadiens could get in on Chris Stewart, joining teams like the Bruins and Ducks. GM Marc Bergevin is also looking at a blueline upgrade and have been watching Jeff Petry.
  • David Pollak: Sharks GM Doug Wilson said that there are players he’s eyeing for a future pick-up that are not available at the moment. They will likely have to wait until the offseason.
  • Kevin Kurz: Part of the reason the Sharks traded James Sheppard was to give Tomas Hertl some more time at center.
  • David Pagnotta: Have heard all day that teams have asked the Sharks about Patrick Marleau. Marleau has a no-trade clause. There is nothing imminent, but there is interest.