SWEET HOME CHICAGO

The Chicago Blackhawks won it all for the third time in six seasons. As a hockey fan, I’ve enjoyed two similar runs: The Orr Bruins of my youth won two Stanley’s in three years and the Glory Oilers won five in seven when I was a young man. I remember both runs well, these many years later. I’m in my 50’s now, don’t expect another run like that—although you won’t hear me bitching if it happens!

The Chicago Blackhawks’ management group wakes up today with one giant piece of silver and two big problems in the millions. Jonathan Toews and Patrick Kane have matching $10.5M albatross deals beginning this fall and it’s going to be extremely difficult for Chicago to overcome the massive piece of the cap pie those two contracts gobble up.

‘HAWKS SIGNED PLAYERS FOR 2015-16

  • Goal: Corey Crawford ($6M); Scott Darling ($.588M)
  • Defense: Brent Seabrook ($5.8M); Duncan Keith ($5.551M); Niklas Hjalmarsson ($4.1M); Trevor VanRiemsdyk ($.925M)
  • Center: Jonathan Toews ($10.5M); Teuvo Teravainen ($1.344M); Andrew Shaw ($2M)
  • Left Wing: Patrick Sharp ($5.9M); Bryan Bickell ($4M)
  • Right Wing: Patrick Kane ($10.5); Marian Hossa ($5.233M); Kris Versteeg ($2.2M)
  • 14 players (nine to be added, including three D, 1C, 3L, 2R)
  • $64,641,000 for those 14 players
  • $6,359,000 available for final nine players

Add to that the RFA’s (Brandon Saad, Marcus Kruger, Joakim Nordstrom, David Rundblad) plus UFA’s (Brad Richards, Antoine Vermette, Daniel Carcillo, Andrew Desjardins, Johnny Oduya, Michael Rozsival, Kimmo Timonen) and this is your basic nightmare. Let’s say the ‘Hawks trade awat Patrick Sharp ($5.9M) and Bryan Bickell ($4M), effectively offloading $10 million. That would give Chicago 11 holes to fill but they would have $16M to do it. Getting Saad signed is job one after dealing off Sharp and Bickell but there’s plenty of work to be done.

A few observations about a very smart hockey team:

  • Chicago has already added a few potential pieces to next year’s puzzle. They signed the best free agent out of the KHL (Artemi Panarin, $925,000) and former Oilers draft pick Erik Gustafsson ($667,500). College man Kyle Baun could help out down the line.
  • The minor league Rockford IceHogs have prospects knocking on the door like C Mark McNeill, C Phillip Danault, R Ryan Hartman, D Ville Pokka and G Antti Raanta.

If the Oilers are going to call about about Patrick Sharp or Bryan Bickell, the Blackhawks will be asking about men like Martin Marincin, Bogdan Yakimov, possibly the newly signed Anton Slepyhev, that kind of player.

I don’t see a way for Chicago to sign Seabrook to the deal it will require ($7M?) in order to get a new deal by next summer. I also don’t see any possible way for the ‘Hawks to let him go. Seriously. How can Chicago part with Toews, Kane, Keith, Seabrook? I don’t think they can.

slepyshev tweetThe Oilers are miles behind Chicago but small victories are big steps. Edmonton’s hockey team has been making news great and small since the end of the season and the cumulative effect is that they’re going in a very good direction. Not every bet works but they should be defensible—something you couldn’t say about any GM since Sather. Peter Chiarelli is bona fide qualified and this should be a very strong summer. Here’s a quick review of what has happened so far:

  • April 2: Anton Lander signs a two-year deal at a good number ($987,500) for Edmonton. It’s all about getting useful regulars for low dollars and Lander should be a value deal over the next two winters.
  • April 13: Nail Yakupov signs a two-year deal that pays $2.5M a season. It’s a nice number that could turn into a fine value deal if the young Russian can score 20 or more goals.
  • April 18: Oilers win lottery. Bettman’s expression is awesome. There’s no single thing this century—not even the Pronger deal—that will have more impact on the Edmonton Oilers than winning the lottery. It’s Everest.
  • April 24: Named Peter Chiarelli GM. I was not enthused about the Nicholson forensics but whatever process allowed him to find Chiarelli is fine by me. The Oilers’ new GM has a solid track record (with some notable errors) and should be a major upgrade on everything since 2006 spring.
  • May 12: Eetu Laurikainen signs a contract. A .933SP in the SM-Liiga is worth talking about and the 22-year old signed a $640,000 times two year deal with Edmonton. It’s a good bet—no assets out, low money, solid resume—need more like it.
  • May 19: Todd McLellan announced as coach. This is a big damn day for the organization, the first established coach since Tom Renney and a man highly regarded league-wide for his work in San Jose. Cream of the crop, No. 1 free agent. Fantastic.
  • May 27: Anton Slepyshev gets a three-year, $575,000/yr contract to come over to NA and play. The young Russian says he’s willing to earn it by way of Bakersfield and there’s a job (Matt Fraser’s) available this fall, although one would think Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl end up with the rookie slots.
  • June 8: Andrew Miller and Brad Hunt (both $575,000) sign one-year deals with the Oilers. It’s easy to disregard these signings but with a new coach coming in and a clean slate, both men could end up higher on the new depth chart. It’s certainly possible Todd McLellan finds Hunt’s offensive ability useful on his (likely) high octane power play.

The Oilers have miles to go in terms of becoming a contender but the addition of Chiarelli, McLellan and the Godsend lottery win should mean this team is in the game from day one. As we’ve been saying forever, there IS talent here, that talent has to be ground into a useful unit—and that means more attention to the defensive side for every player. It’s going to be a painful process and some of our favorites are going to be in other NHL cities, but the wins should come more often and there’s genuine hope for reasonable bets over curious decisions.

OILERS PLAYERS SIGNED FOR 2015-16 (AND MCDAVID)

oilers current roster

 

  • 20 players (three to be added, including No. 1 G, 1D, 1F)
  • $57,532,000 for those 20 players
  • $13,468,000 available for final three players

CHIARELLI’S LIST

  1. Draft McDavid (and sign him)
  2. Find a quality goalie option
  3. Acquire a legit top pairing blue
  4. Sign a more offensive two-way F
  5. Procure a veteran Pisani
  6. Ignore MacT re: Marincin
  7. Offload Gordon (unless McLellan decides to use a shut down, severe ZS line)

This gets us here:

  • Hall—McDavidJustin Williams
  • Pouliot—Nuge—Eberle
  • Pakarinen—Soderberg—Purcell
  • Hendricks—Lander—Klinkhammer
  • Klefbom—Seabrook
  • Marincin—Fayne
  • Ference—Nikitin
  • Talbot—Scrivens

ABOUT DELLOW

DELLOW

Based on what we’re hearing Tyler Dellow will remain with the Oilers organization but has been reassigned to the hockey ops side. That probably means delivering information on potential free agents and trade acquisitions—something Dellow would be extremely valuable doing (you may recall the Nikitin story on Sportsnet). I’m very happy for Tyler because this is his dream and he’s pursuing it, and I’m delighted he’ll be trying to help the Oilers this summer. The only real issue then, is will the hockey men listen to the man of math? We’ll know soon enough.

 

written by

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

194 Responses to "SWEET HOME CHICAGO"

  1. leadfarmer says:

    Happy Day of Affliction LT. Today we get to find out what ligaments were hanging on by a thread and who has been playing with malaria the last 8 weeks. Although Tampa tried to ruin the day of Affliction by announcing injuries yesterday.

  2. Ca$h-McMoney! says:

    A few notes:

    1. Brad Hunt. It seems like every time I watched him play last year he was paired with Schultz. I didn’t understand it then, I don’t understand it now. A Brandon Davidson type seems like the better choice.

    2. I keep coming back to it, but paying Soderberg $4million for the next 4 years isn’t an option. That’s a spot that has to be used by a cheap veteran (Roy) or a ELC (Draisaitl) or Lander, with a cheaper 4C option behind him. We need to use cap space more efficiently than that.

    3. If we sign Talbot, do we lock him up long term before we see what he can do behind our porous D? Because if we don’t, and he goes UFA, that will be frustrating. At the same time, if we do lock him up, and he goes full Scrivens, that will also be frustrating.

  3. Woodguy says:

    Interesting US TV numbers for the game last night linky: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/game-6-delivers-chicago-s-biggest-nhl-ratings-ever-140636369.html

    Top 10 US markets for last nights game:

    Chicago 41.0
    Tampa 15.2
    Buffalo 10.5
    Milwaukee 7.9
    Denver 7.6
    Minneapolis/St. Paul 7.5
    Boston 6.7
    Providence 5.8
    St. Louis 5.8
    Las Vegas 5.1

    Vegas?????

    Maybe a team will work there.

    Milwaukee is a Hawks town, the other are good hockey markets.

    Nice to see.

  4. leadfarmer says:

    Sad thing is you can add Seabrook to the D-corpse and it still looks like crap.

    You really need something like
    Seabrook Sekera
    Klefbom Michalek
    Marincin Fayne
    Whomever you are stuck with cause you can’t get rid of their contract as #7

    Now the D-corpse looks like a D corps

  5. MenovOil says:

    I think the Hawks will contend as long as Keith can maintain that level of play. Similar to the Wings with Lidstrom. Sharp is gone, of that there is no doubt. The bad contract that they need to lose is Crawford. It’s a lot of money for a decent goalie but the man is not irreplaceable, far from it, and that ‘two times SC winner’ tag might be enough to tempt some team into getting him (Let’s hope that will not be us).

    What the finals proved though, beyond all doubt, is that we will need legit #1D to make it the promise land. Can Nurse or Klefbom be that guy? We wait.

  6. Yak2 says:

    So, are you trading Yak for Seabrook?

  7. Klima's_Bucket says:

    If Seabrook ends up moving on from Chicago I expect Calgary will be at the top of his list.
    His wife is from there. She’s spent the past month in Calgary waiting for their second child to arrive.
    Seabrook spends his off seasons in Calgary. Calgary would pay for his services.

  8. Lowetide says:

    Ca$h-McMoney!:
    A few notes:

    I keep coming back to it, but paying Soderberg $4million for the next 4 years isn’t an option.That’s a spot that has to be used by a cheap veteran (Roy) or a ELC (Draisaitl) or Lander, with a cheaper 4C option behind him.We need to use cap space more efficiently than that.

    Carl Soderberg is 29, scored 44 points last season and can play center or wing. His 31 assists are a strong total and had a possession number above 50%.

    He is also a free agent. I would argue he is a VERY efficient use of cap space, in that you acquire a useful player for money, trade Boyd Gordon (plus something) for a quality defender who is not available via free agency, and improve your team.

    There seems to be a thought that the Oilers forward group is fine, leave it alone. I respectfully disagree, and Soderberg would also serve as a reasonable veteran replacement for Purcell when his contract expires.

    Take what the market is giving you but make sure it’s quality. Carl Soderberg is quality.

  9. Ducey says:

    Hossa is 36 and has a $5.25 M cap hit until 20-21, when he will be 41/42 yrs old.

    I am not sure how CHI got around the penalty imposed on NJ, but Hossa makes $1 million a year the last 4 years.

    Do they still get nailed with the cap hit if he retires?

  10. Lowetide says:

    Yak2:
    So, are you trading Yak for Seabrook?

    I don’t think Seabrook is going anywhere, put him on the list to represent real improvement. It would take a lot to get Seabrook and one of the items is probably an NHL-ready defender probably someone with experience already.

    Yakupov could play the Pakarinen role if he stays, I remain uncertain that he will.

  11. Lowetide says:

    Ducey:
    Hossa is 36 and has a $5.25 M cap hit until 20-21, when he will be 41/42 yrs old.

    I am not sure how CHI got around the penalty imposed on NJ, but Hossa makes $1 million a year the last 4 years.

    Do they still get nailed with the cap hit if he retires?

    I believe they do, yes. That contract was signed before the rule change iirc.

  12. BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1) says:

    Woodguy: Vegas?????
    Maybe a team will work there.

    That is puzzling – maybe it’s because of all the hockey ‘buzz’ around the city lately, with the ticket drive and hopes of getting a team?

  13. linkfromhyrule says:

    Ca$h-McMoney!: 1. Brad Hunt. It seems like every time I watched him play last year he was paired with Schultz. I didn’t understand it then, I don’t understand it now. A Brandon Davidson type seems like the better choice.

    I always found it strange how they would bring up a young, inexperienced (if any experience at all) player, and pair him with Schultz. Hunt, Oesterle, Nurse, and Davidson all spent 8-12 minutes per game with Schultz while they were with the Oil.

    I don’t think “veteran presence” means what they thought it meant.

  14. Bar_Qu says:

    BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1): That is puzzling – maybe it’s because of all the hockey ‘buzz’ around the city lately, with the ticket drive and hopes of getting a team?

    There is some buzz that there will be an announcement soon – Mirtle retweeted one of their tweets about being sad SC was done, but excited because of the announcement. I will try to find that, but I think we hear about LV being in the NHL before the draft, probably for 16-17.

  15. Bar_Qu says:

    Here is the tweet.

    We are loving the #StanleyCupFinals! Don't want it to end…except then we'll be that much closer to the BIG announcement!— Vegas Wants Hockey (@LVWantsHockey) June 16, 2015

  16. Jaxon says:

    I think you missed one of Chicago’s best prospects who will almost certainly be up with the big club next year. Michael Paliotta is 22 yrs old, RD, 6’4″, 205 lbs and his NCAA NLE from this season translates to 30 pts. He has one year left on his ELC at $925,000. In his draft year he was thought of as a physical shutdown type, but now has brought a huge offensive side to his game and was captain of Vermont last season. A big young physical defenseman leader with 30 pts NHLE is close to a sure thing I would think. He may need a bit of AHL seasoning (he played 1 NHL game last year, 0 AHL so far), but it shouldn’t take long to make the jump for that kind of player.

  17. Ducey says:

    linkfromhyrule: I always found it strange how they would bring up a young, inexperienced (if any experience at all) player, and pair him with Schultz. Hunt, Oesterle, Nurse, and Davidson all spent 8-12 minutes per game with Schultz while they were with the Oil.

    I don’t think “veteran presence” means what they thought it meant.

    Schultz was getting the soft minutes and so were the call ups.

  18. jm363561 says:

    Lowetide: I don’t think Seabrook is going anywhere, put him on the list to represent real improvement. It would take a lot to get Seabrook and one of the items is probably an NHL-ready defender probably someone with experience already.

    Yakupov could play the Pakarinen role if he stays, I remain uncertain that he will.

    <there's a Pakarinen role?

  19. misfit says:

    I must’ve missed it. What was the Sportsnet story re: Nikitin?

  20. BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1) says:

    Bar_Qu: LV being in the NHL before the draft, probably for 16-17.

    Great. Expansion draft. Yippee!

    The first expansion draft of the salary cap era. They’re going to have to approach this draft differently, because all the big spenders around the league will want to dump bad contracts off on Vegas.

    Well, good for the city of Lost Wages. It’s been 20 years or more since Gretzky and the Thunder rolled though that town. Brent, that is.

  21. LMHF#1 says:

    Congrats to the Hawks. Glad a city with respect for their team won it.

    Now on to the McDavid Era!

  22. Johnny Larue says:

    Enough of Justin Williams we don’t need to waste cap space on an aging veteren who is probably not as good as Purcell. Lets concentrate on finding a goalie and defense and let us see how our existing fowards do under a bonifide coach.

  23. linkfromhyrule says:

    Ducey,

    Fair enough, and I guess a big part of it is not having any functional veterans to pair them with. The numbers do not reflect well on Schultz in a mentorship role for the most part. Not really his fault either.

    Man this team was depressing last season

  24. LMHF#1 says:

    Really not interested in a full freight vet.

    Make a couple bets on guys who are in a slump and could rebound. If you do your homework and keep the money low, these should pay off.

  25. BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1) says:

    misfit:
    I must’ve missed it.What was the Sportsnet story re: Nikitin?

    Me too.

    Edit: Must be this:

    http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nikita-nikitin-a-poor-signing-by-oilers/

  26. Lowetide says:

    misfit:
    I must’ve missed it.What was the Sportsnet story re: Nikitin?

    Dellow, before Edmonton hired him, dressed down the Nikitin acquisition and signing with extreme prejudice. It was thoughtful, balanced, reached a reasonable conclusion and exposed the risk on that transaction. All well and good until the damn team hires you!

  27. leadfarmer says:

    Am I the only one that thinks Klinhammer’s position is very vulnerable and not someone you pencil into the lineup. He is like the Belanger triangle on offense

  28. Lowetide says:

    leadfarmer:
    Am I the only one that thinks Klinhammer’s position is very vulnerable and not someone you pencil into the lineup.He is like the Belanger triangle on offense

    Many things change when a new coach comes in. Klinkhammer got a contract from the last GM and doesn’t bring a lot of offense. Still, he’s signed and 4R was his role. Could be Pakarinen’s role or Pitlick’s opening night.

  29. Showerhead says:

    Admitting that it’s been a year (has it been a whole year?) since we’ve seen any of his work, I really like the Dellow reassignment. As insightful as some of his coaching-specific posts had been, I think the biggest impact can come from objective player analysis.

    Congratulations to Chicago too, of course. Their cap era mini-dynasty has been most impressive and even though they will be good for a while yet, this was their last chance to win it all while Toews and Kane were on value contracts. They built their team the right way and they play the game the right way so it’s great to see it all get vindicated.

  30. Bag of Pucks says:

    BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1): That is puzzling – maybe it’s because of all the hockey ‘buzz’ around the city lately, with the ticket drive and hopes of getting a team?

    I would think Vegas would have a respectable ratings share for any major sports final. Massive casino resorts most with huge sportsbooks containing huge banks of tvs. Bettors like betting & watching games with the potential to decide a championship.

    Will be amazed if the NHL becomes the first major sport to place a franchise in Vegas. Pro hockey players residing in that market will be exposed to betting influences (and thus the risk of fixing games increases exponentially). It’s unavoidable.

    Modano and Jagr both lost substantial fortunes to gambling so there is risk with these athletes.

    True gambling addicts like Art Schlicter comprise less than 1% of the population, but all it takes is one Pete Rose to compromise the integrity of a league.

    I’m likely the most liberal advocate of legalized sports betting you’ll find and I still think the NHL has to say no to Vegas.

  31. Ca$h-McMoney! says:

    leadfarmer:
    Am I the only one that thinks Klinhammer’s position is very vulnerable and not someone you pencil into the lineup.He is like the Belanger triangle on offense

    Entirely possible he’s in the pressbox if someone surprises. Which is fine because he’s cheap.

  32. Ca$h-McMoney! says:

    Lowetide: Carl Soderberg is 29, scored 44 points last season and can play center or wing. His 31 assists are a strong total and had a possession number above 50%.

    He is also a free agent. I would argue he is a VERY efficient use of cap space, in that you acquire a useful player for money, trade Boyd Gordon (plus something) for a quality defender who is not available via free agency, and improve your team.

    There seems to be a thought that the Oilers forward group is fine, leave it alone. I respectfully disagree, and Soderberg would also serve as a reasonable veteran replacement for Purcell when his contract expires.

    Take what the market is giving you but make sure it’s quality. Carl Soderberg is quality.

    Fair enough. If he can be a Pouliot then maybe he’s worth it. The problem becomes having Pouliot at 4, Hall/RNH/Ebs at 6, then having to pay Yak/Drai/McDavid… I’d just love to find someone to play forward for cheap because at a certain point we’ve got to spend cap dollars elsewhere.

    That said there are certainly worse options than Soderberg.

  33. Lowetide says:

    Ca$h-McMoney!: Fair enough.If he can be a Pouliot then maybe he’s worth it.The problem becomes having Pouliot at 4, Hall/RNH/Ebs at 6, then having to pay Yak/Drai/McDavid…I’d just love to find someone to play forward for cheap because at a certain point we’ve got to spend cap dollars elsewhere.

    That said there are certainly worse options than Soderberg.

    Yes. And we know that at some point the Oilers will have to move a winger (assuming CMB, Nuge, Leon at C) in order to keep up the middle strong. the best solution of course is that PC can sign both Sekera and Franson while flushing Nikitin and Ference. I don’t think he can do all of it in one summer.

  34. Showerhead says:

    Lowetide: Yes. And we know that at some point the Oilers will have to move a winger (assuming CMB, Nuge, Leon at C) in order to keep up the middle strong.

    If I can tangent:

    This is also why I think Edmonton has to make as many of its top 90 picks as possible this year. The 16, 33, 57, etc represent tremendous value – Especially as potential value contracts on cheap ELCs after MvDavid gets paid.

    Edmonton’s stars will get paid and they will deserve to get paid. Value contracts elsewhere in the order will be the difference between a consistent shot at Stanley and a waste of the prodigal kid.

  35. RexLibris says:

    Showerhead: If I can tangent:

    You called?

    Seriously though, absolutely agree.

    They have competing needs right now: the urgency of the McDavid ELC and the need to bring in affordable support players in two or three years’ time.

    Chicago became the dynasty they are today because they were able to retool internally after the Byfuglien/Ladd selloff. You can only manage that if you draft and develop well. That means making high-percentage picks when they are available and the Oilers have three after the 1st overall this year.

    Think what having two good ELCs at the wing could mean for a team with the top-six contracts this roster is likely to have in the future.

  36. kinger_OIL says:

    Poll: – Its 2025, The Oil have won 2 cups, lost another in final, and been to conference final : CMD is 29, and signs monster contract @ $20mm/yr, $200MM somewhere else, the first “baseball contract: would we take that in next 10 years?

  37. Lowetide says:

    kinger_OIL:
    Poll: – Its 2025, The Oil have won 2 cups, lost another in final, and been to conference final : CMD is 29, and signs monster contract@ $20mm/yr, $200MM somewhere else, the first “baseball contract: would we take that in next 10 years?

    Am I rich? Ha. Of course I would.

  38. Pajamah says:

    Showerhead: If I can tangent:

    This is also why I think Edmonton has to make as many of its top 90 picks as possible this year. The 16, 33, 57, etc represent tremendous value – Especially as potential value contracts on cheap ELCs after MvDavid gets paid.

    Edmonton’s stars will get paid and they will deserve to get paid. Value contracts elsewhere in the order will be the difference between a consistent shot at Stanley and a waste of the prodigal kid.

    Take your picks, develop them well, and trade from an over-abundance.

    Get your starting goalie, and a 1D this offseason, because frankly, this team is already sunk without those 2 critical pieces. Buyout 1 of Ference or Nikitin, and get Schultz on a 1x 3.6. Show some progression.

    If the team is close this year, make a few next year moves at the deadline and offseason next year. Assuming of course that next year sees a few better UFA options.

    If not, wait until the offseason, and go for broke. Trade one of Drai, Ebs, or Yak for a piece or two. If Chia takes best available at 16 this season, he may already have their replacement in the organization.

  39. BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1) says:

    kinger_OIL: would we take that in next 10 years?

    We’ve taken the last 10 years in stride (okay, stumbling gait), so what’s wrong with that?

    In the next 10 years, McDavid will have had knee, shoulder and hip surgery, a few concussions, and he’s already lost a step.

    Let some other GM overpay him – we just drafted Mike Comrie’s kid to replace him!

  40. slopitch says:

    Showerhead: If I can tangent:

    This is also why I think Edmonton has to make as many of its top 90 picks as possible this year. The 16, 33, 57, etc represent tremendous value – Especially as potential value contracts on cheap ELCs after MvDavid gets paid.

    Edmonton’s stars will get paid and they will deserve to get paid. Value contracts elsewhere in the order will be the difference between a consistent shot at Stanley and a waste of the prodigal kid.

    I agree with this. I think too many teams (ie Chicago/Colorado) are gonna be bidding on Seabrook and the price will be too high. I think the play is to make 4 smart bets. 2 of them are “easy”:
    – buyout NN and upgrade
    – signing a goalie as another or trade for Talbot/Lack

    Wait for later in the summer where teams are less desperate. Stock the warchest with elite prospects. There is nothing more valuable then a player 20-26 whose rights you own. Id put Yak and Drai both “on the block” for a Dougie Hamilton type but that’s it (Toronto and Edmonton are gonna have lengthy conversations at the draft). Otherwise carry one and let McLennen do his best Joel Quenville. The Hawks were an absolute mess till he got there. Sure they had Seabrook and Keith but Im excited to see what a world class coach will be able to do with the talent the Oilers have.

  41. Pajamah says:

    kinger_OIL:
    Poll: – Its 2025, The Oil have won 2 cups, lost another in final, and been to conference final : CMD is 29, and signs monster contract@ $20mm/yr, $200MM somewhere else, the first “baseball contract: would we take that in next 10 years?

    Every gord damn day of the week. I’m of the generation where I remember 90 fondly, but was of the age where I cried in 91, because I thought the Oilers were supposed to win the cup every season. I was spoiled.

    2006 was painful, yet fantastic, and will really be my most bitter sweet memory of this team for the next 25 years…

    ….unless of course, they do something better. 1 cup, 1 playoff upset over a cup favorite, a Todd Marchant goal etc.

    I’d like to say CMD and the lottery is already a moment burned in, but as big as the CFP playoffs were, I faintly remember the announcement of the day he was traded for.

    A cup win, regardless of cap hell, trading big pieces to achieve balance, and all the pain that comes before it, has to be worth it.

  42. RexLibris says:

    BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1):

    Let some other GM overpay him – we just drafted Ryan Smyth’s kid to replace him!

    Fixed that for you.

  43. Pajamah says:

    BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1),

    Firefiyter Matthew Duff-Comrie.

    And yes, I know theyre divorced, but they’re both famous, so I assume their son is named Firefiyter.

  44. BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1) says:

    RexLibris: Fixed that for you.

    Smyth – not nearly controversial or divisive enough, what with Sean MacTavish as GM…

  45. Ducey says:

    I was looking at Ehrhoff as a possible cheap UFA Dman for the Oilers.

    I knew he had a concussion this last year and figured he might sign a bonus laden deal with a relatively cheap base salary.

    However, it appears he had multiple concussions last year, at least one in April 2014 and some going all the way back to 2010.

    Hopefully he will just retire before his brain turns to mush.

    He has a huge buyout thanks to Pegula and the Sabres, so he doesn’t need the money.

  46. jbfuzz says:

    If a base package around Yakupov gets you a package around Cam Fowler, does that make sense for both teams? I think that’s a deal that makes some sense from both sides.

    As an aside, I’d be looking into James Wiesnewski regardless if I was Chiarelli. There is a player there and I believe ANA has some big RFAs approaching and might want to get out from under the second remaining year of Wiesnewski’s contract.

  47. Dominoiler says:

    Nice Win and season for Chicago.. It would have been that much more exciting if Tyler Johnson hadnt been injured, but them are the breaks.. As someone stated above, this Finals underlined the importance of having 1-2 big minute Dmen that impact that game at both ends of the ice.. What a goal by Keith, Huge..

    I have such a hard time figuring out what the oilers could do to improve, balancing forwards and D.. If Nail can survive the summer then he needs to own that 2nd line spot, but so many hockey people have commented on the balance of a forward line and the oilers not having enough variation (too many med sized, offence only types – with nuge n poo the exceptions) in their pieces.. On the one hand, soderburg seems like a strong addition of 2-way play from a bigger body but on the other hand we have become so attached to our drafted kids that there is too little cap space to play with.. Chicago won with a blend of tremendous vets and a solid supporting cast. With Chicago as a baseline, the Oilers are far away from seriously competing (never mind their current D depth and goaltending)..

    No easy solutions, but I dont think Soderburg can be had if a Franson type (big pay cheque, middling skill level) is going to eat up significant cap space.. Maybe if Gordon out, then Soderburg in? (Big Gordon Fan, btw) Seems more palatable, but what about Lander?.. Sending him back to toil with the 4th line dregs seems a shame and a mis-cast assignment.. Could both Soderburg and Lander shuffle around as 2nd / 3rd liners, at least the oil would have some defensive awareness on those lines?!..

    Anyways, so many questions while we wait for the answers.. Im all-in for Sekera or whomever this UFA-seasons Stralman is going to be, plus one more vet top 4-D.. Hoping MM survives and thrives, cus this team isnt going to win much until many of these young D percolate..

    And thanks, LT, for sharing your passion for the game while providing such a consistent haven for hockey talk..

  48. commonfan14 says:

    kinger_OIL: would we take that in next 10 years?

    And on another topic related to the idea some have of trading the #1 pick for a big package, would we trade the ’90 Cup in exchange for Gretzky staying and playing his whole career here (while somehow never winning another Cup)?

  49. TheOtherJohn says:

    Bowman signed Kane and Toews when everyone expected the cap to go up and up. That bet is looking questionable today.

    Do not expect to see Seabrook leave. Expect to see Seabrook sign a Keith type of contract. I.e. a $5.5 cap hit 6-7 year deal. And they run with Keith, Seabrook, Hjalmarsson and 4 cheap NHL D. They will move out Sharp, Bickell and possibly Crawford.

    Someone should offer sheet Saad. Fantastic young player. A poor mans Taylor Hall. That offer sheet could screw up the Hawks for the foreseeable future.

    Oilers could do it but I am not sure you want to offer sheet for another winger.

  50. John Chambers says:

    Showerhead: If I can tangent:

    This is also why I think Edmonton has to make as many of its top 90 picks as possible this year. The 16, 33, 57, etc represent tremendous value – Especially as potential value contracts on cheap ELCs after MvDavid gets paid.

    Edmonton’s stars will get paid and they will deserve to get paid. Value contracts elsewhere in the order will be the difference between a consistent shot at Stanley and a waste of the prodigal kid.

    Although we all want to be a playoff team in ’15-’16 I think your words of caution are sensible for the following reasons:
    – this is a deep draft year. We’ll get an impact player at 16 OV who will contribute on an ELC until 2019-2020
    – the free agency crop is crap. I would overpay Sekara to a limit of $5.5M but that’s about it. Franson could be okay and could be a time bomb that kills us in 3-4 years when we should be where Chicago was in 2010
    – Unfortunately we can’t objectively tell whether what we have is any good or not. Is Scrivens capable of being an NHL back-up? Is Lander a true 3C? How ready for the NHL are Draisaitl and Nurse? We’ll know well by this time next year, at which point Purcell and Nikitin’s contracts will have expired (I am anti-buyout), and we can dust Ference.

    The Oilers should still be proactive about getting a goalie. I for one am willing to pay the price for Crawford.

    The Oilers should still entertain trades of the #16 OV and #33 OV for an NHL defenseman, but the player should still be in their 20’s,

    The Oilers should still entertain bringing in quality UFA’s like Soderberg or Sekara, but avoid risky signings which may cause problems when our compete window opens.

    Looking forward to draft day to see how it all begins to unfold.

  51. rickithebear says:

    Purcell for Wisniewski
    13-14 Nikitin – Wisniewski 1st comp 1.63 EVGA/60

    Nikitin last 5 years facing 2nd Comp.
    -.09 CA/60 -.4 CF/60 +.5 CD/60

    Wisniewski last 3 years
    14-15 +3.7 CA/60 +5.8 CF/60 +2.1 CD/60
    13-14 -5.9 CA/60 +6.8 CF/60 +12.1 CD/60
    12-13 +1.4 CA/60 +6.8 CF/60 +5.4 CD/60
    3yr -.3 CA/60 +6.5 CF/60 +6.8 CD/60

    CD/60
    Marincin (+5.7) – Fayne (+4.1)
    Nikitin(+.5) – Wisniewski (+6.8)
    Klefbom(+5.0)- XXX Klef is a + 4.1 defensively and had a +2.4 CF rate under nelson.

    Ference (-9.3) 2nd/3rd comp
    Schultz (-4.9) 3rd comp

    UFA:
    Franson +7.0 2nd/3rd
    Sekara +3.4 1st/2nd
    Pardy +1.7 3rd comp
    Green +0.6 3rd comp +8.1 for 6 years and +0.6 for 2 years
    Martin +0.4 1st comp +6.6 for 5 years and a drop to +0.4 ???????
    Rozival -1.8
    Weaver -2.3
    Michalek -2.5
    Ehrhoff -2.8 +8.6 for 5 years then dropped to -2.8 this year ????????
    Beauchemin -3.4
    Prosser -3.5
    B. Jackman – 3.6
    M Irwin -5.2
    Oduya -5.3
    Hedja -5.7
    Gleason -10.0
    Hannan -10.6
    Brewer -11.6 -3.0 fro 5 years then a drop to -11.6

    Players discussed here in Trade Conversation.
    Goligoski +7.8
    Hamilton +6.3
    Klingberg +4.0
    OEL +3.8
    Chara +3.6
    Phanuef -7.8

    Calgary:
    Giordano
    without Brodie +1.2
    2 yr w/ +18.8

    Sekara (+3.4) – Fayne (+4.1)
    nikitin (+.5) – Wisniewski (+6.8)
    Marincin (+5.7)- Klefbom (+5.0)
    Nurse slots in to Nikitin at 1/2 season
    Depending on the Pairing reults!

    Oh and seabrook -.6 last 3 years and +3.2 before that playing 2nd/3rd comp
    No F……… Way!

  52. Melman says:

    BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1): That is puzzling – maybe it’s because of all the hockey ‘buzz’ around the city lately, with the ticket drive and hopes of getting a team?

    Maybe it’s all the TVs in the casinos and hotels…it wouldn’t be like Vegas to make things seem different than they really are,would it?

  53. Pouzar says:

    The Los Angeles Kings are reportedly close to re-signing Martin Jones.

    Jones had a 2.25 GAA and .906 save percentage in 15 games in 2014-15. He’s completed his entry-level contract, which came with a $526,666 annual cap hit.

    Source: Jon Rosen on Twitter

  54. Melman says:

    Bag of Pucks,

    Sorry, missed your post. Visiting teams would have to be very careful with their travel plans otherwise talk about your home ice advantage, if you could keep a lid on your home players.

  55. kinger_OIL says:

    commonfan14: And on another topic related to the idea some have of trading the #1 pick for a big package, would we trade the ’90 Cup in exchange for Gretzky staying and playing his whole career here (while somehow never winning another Cup)?

    I don’t allow myself to even think about how the OIL would have done with Gretz playing out his career. On the Boys on the Bus: they thought 10 cups if all together…

  56. OF17 says:

    LT, you talk about making improvements to the forwards while there’s a chance, but there’s at least as good of an opportunity to improve the defense this summer.

    Ehrhoff, Sekera, Green, Beauchemin, Martin, Michalek, Franson, Zidlicky, all guys who would be significant improvements in our top-4, all guys who would be available for only money.

    Wisniewski, Seabrook, Chara, Carle, Byfuglien, Staal, Klein, Braun, Spurgeon, Scandella, all guys potentially available by trade, all guys who would be significant upgrades to our defense.

    How can you look at that opportunity and say that upgrading 2RW and 4C are bigger needs than defense, that that’s the better use of cap space? That’s essentially what the Gordon-Soderberg and Yakupov-Williams swaps are, and in the case of the latter, I’m not even sure it’s an upgrade.

    Instead of dropping $8 million or more on Williams and Soderberg, why not drop that money on Letestu and Green, or Matthias and Ehrhoff?

    Looking for small, effective moves at forward (the ACTUAL Pisani move) and bigger improvements on defense would be way more positive for this hockey club than using all of your cap space upgrading 2RW and 4C.

  57. Lowetide says:

    OF17:
    LT, you talk about making improvements to the forwards while there’s a chance, but there’s at least as good of an opportunity to improve the defense this summer.

    Ehrhoff, Sekera, Green, Beauchemin, Martin, Michalek, Franson, Zidlicky, all guys who would be significant improvements in our top-4, all guys who would be available for only money.

    Wisniewski, Seabrook, Chara, Carle, Byfuglien, Staal, Klein, Braun, Spurgeon, Scandella, all guys potentially available by trade, all guys who would be significant upgrades to our defense.

    How can you look at that opportunity and say that upgrading 2RW and 4C are bigger needs than defense, that that’s the better use of cap space? That’s essentially what the Gordon-Soderberg and Yakupov-Williams swaps are, and in the case of the latter, I’m not even sure it’s an upgrade.

    Instead of dropping $8 million or more on Williams and Soderberg, why not drop that money on Letestu and Green, or Matthias and Ehrhoff?

    Looking for small, effective moves at forward (the ACTUAL Pisani move) and bigger improvements on defense would be way more positive for this hockey club than using all of your cap space upgrading 2RW and 4C.

    Since I’ve never said upgrading 2RW and 4C are bigger needs than defense, I can’t answer the question.

  58. OF17 says:

    Lowetide: Since I’ve never said upgrading 2RW and 4C are bigger needs than defense, I can’t answer the question.

    Is that not what you imply by prioritizing Williams and Soderberg as acquisitions?

  59. Ca$h-McMoney! says:

    OF17,

    Helping the team long term is less about signing the best player in free agency as it is about getting the best deal relative to the player.

    Lots of the Dmen you mentioned would be an upgrade to our blue line next year. With that said, lots of them will probably be offered contracts that analytics tell us are most likely to be in excess of their abilities (such as too many dollars as compensation for powerplay production) or too long a term for an older player (Martin getting a 5+ year deal).

    I’ve been vocal in my skepticism of the Soderberg acquisition, but I will admit there is certainly some appeal there, even assuming the 29 year old Soderberg gets the estimated $4 million x 4 year contract.

    In short, locking up Franson for a lot of money and term, while certainly improving our defense next season, is not better than locking up Soderberg for medium money and term, even though it fills a bigger hole. This is the trade off to be analyzed.

  60. Lowetide says:

    OF17: Is that not what you imply by prioritizing Williams and Soderberg as acquisitions?

    No. I’m suggesting hiring Soderberg so that Gordon can be used (with others) in a trade for a defensive upgrade. I’m suggesting the new GM and coach may not be happy with the undisciplined youth and that Nail Yakupov might also be sent away in favor of Justin Williams in an effort to help the defense.

    Again, you have to take what the market is giving you. Soderberg and Williams MAY cost more than Franson and Sekera but I don’t think they will. Either way, defense is the major need AFTER they get a goalie and I do think both Soderberg and Williams help defensively as I have stated in the past.

  61. OF17 says:

    Ca$h-McMoney!:
    OF17,

    Helping the team long term is less about signing the best player in free agency as it is about getting the best deal relative to the player.

    Lots of the Dmen you mentioned would be an upgrade to our blue line next year.With that said, lots of them will probably be offered contracts that analytics tell us are most likely to be in excess of their abilities (such as too many dollars as compensation for powerplay production) or too long a term for an older player (Martin getting a 5+ year deal).

    I’ve been vocal in my skepticism of the Soderberg acquisition, but I will admit there is certainly some appeal there, even assuming the 29 year old Soderberg gets the estimated $4 million x 4 year contract.

    In short, locking up Franson for a lot of money and term, while certainly improving our defense next season, is not better than locking up Soderberg for medium money and term, even though it fills a bigger hole.This is the trade off to be analyzed.

    All very reasonable points. The main thrust of throwing so many names out there though was that you have the flexibility to shop around. If Martin wants only 5+ years, go see what Beauchemin is up to, or Ehrhoff, or any of the others. You’re bound to find something that will work. If you’re looking for a Soderberg esque signing on defense, go after Michalek. There are lots of ways to make effective UFA signings on defense this year.

    It just seems really strange to me to have such a glaring need on defense, to have lots of guys available to fill that need, and to spend north of $4 million on a guy who does Lander’s job about as well as Lander did it last year. If you have to replace Purcell’s $4.5 million next year with a forward at about the same pay grade, I agree that Soderberg is a great option for it, I just question the wisdom of committing that space to him.

    Williams for me makes no sense though. If you’re worried about contracts to older players that are likely to be too long and too expensive when it comes to defense (i.e. Martin), I don’t see why those concerns would go away with a forward.

  62. grim.oil says:

    So yesterday some of you were saying #1 priority for the Oil is goaltending. I disagreed saying priority #1 was on D. Meanwhile Duncan Keith was putting in 30+ minutes, scoring a stanley cup game winner and winning the Conne Smythe Award. With a #1 workhorse defender and a #1 goalie (most here claim not good enough) the Hawks won Lord Stanley again. All that said it looks like the Hawks are on my side of the debate. What say you?

  63. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    So yesterday some of you were saying #1 priority for the Oil is goaltending. I disagreed saying priority #1 was on D. Meanwhile Duncan Keith was putting in 30+ minutes, scoring a stanley cup game winner and winning the Conne Smythe Award. With a #1 workhorse defender and a #1 goalie (most here claim not good enough) the Hawks won Lord Stanley again. All that said it looks like the Hawks are on my side of the debate. What say you?

    There are no Duncan Keith’s on the market. We can (and should) settle for a Brent Seabrook where available, if we can stomach the cost.

    If there are no Duncan Keith’s – Elite D men – I’d still rather add 2 or 3 good D men. No point waiting for Mr Elite to show up.

  64. RPG says:

    grim.oil,

    Honest question. Do you think Chicago win a Stanley Cup with Ben Scrivens in net? I’d answer no, therefore IMO goaltending > defense.

  65. OF17 says:

    Lowetide: No. I’m suggesting hiring Soderberg so that Gordon can be used (with others) in a trade for a defensive upgrade. I’m suggesting the new GM and coach may not be happy with the undisciplined youth and that Nail Yakupov might also be sent away in favor of Justin Williams in an effort to help the defense.

    Again, you have to take what the market is giving you. Soderberg and Williams MAY cost more than Franson and Sekera but I don’t think they will. Either way, defense is the major need AFTER they get a goalie and I do think both Soderberg and Williams help defensively as I have stated in the past.

    Soderberg and Williams are definitely nice players, I’ll give you that. I suppose the idea of having Klefbom-Marincin-Ference as our LD depth freaks me out much more than the idea of having a Lander-Letestu-Purcell 3rd line, or running Lander-Letestu as our 3C and 4C, or whatever it is. I don’t think spending the money on Soderberg makes sense if you don’t put him in a top-6 role, especially when you have a guy like Lander already at 3C. In the years before McDavid, Soderberg was my favorite UFA possibility for 2C BTW. I like the player.

    I also think trading Yak now, given his late-season success and the arrival of McLellan and McDavid, is trading the asset at its lowest point yet, and when it shows signs of rebounding. The other day someone mentioned that Chiarelli is acutely aware of his worst trade as GM, the “but,” to every good thing said about him. I’ll be very surprised if he trades Yakupov for anything short of a young building block on defense.

    So there are my thoughts. Once you get Talbot, most of your money needs to go to defense. Try not to do anything too stupid with the marquee UFAs. Once you’ve added two top-4 defensemen, go after guys like Soderberg, Letestu, Matthias, depending on how much room you have, but not before you fill the hole on defense.

  66. G Money says:

    grim.oil,

    Put Scrivens and his .890 sv% behind Keith & co., and the Hawks don’t make the playoffs.

    Put Carey Price behind the Oiler D and you’re looking at the playoffs.

    And no, Scrivens wouldn’t have been a whole bunch better behind that defense. For every goal that you can blame on the porous Oiler D, there were three that were entirely on Scrivens. That bumps up Scrivens’ sv% to a still godawful .900 and an early golf season for Chicago, despite Duncan Keith’s best efforts.

    G is the #1 priority. By far. It’s not even close. Don’t fix the goaltending and Chris Pronger in his prime can’t get this team in the playoffs.

    We get that stats scare you.

    You don’t need stats. Use your eyes.

    Hint: look up Pronger. And Markkanen. And Roloson.

  67. Lowetide says:

    dynasty-related:
    Secretly hoping that Provorov slides to #16. What are the odds?

    He’s more likely to go Top 5 than No. 16 overall imo.

  68. Lowetide says:

    grim.oil:
    So yesterday some of you were saying #1 priority for the Oil is goaltending. I disagreed saying priority #1 was on D. Meanwhile Duncan Keith was putting in 30+ minutes, scoring a stanley cup game winner and winning the Conne Smythe Award. With a #1 workhorse defender and a #1 goalie (most here claim not good enough) the Hawks won Lord Stanley again. All that said it looks like the Hawks are on my side of the debate. What say you?

    The Edmonton Oilers No. 1 need is goaltending. They also badly need defense. It’s like being stuck in a coal mine with no food or water. Your No. 1 need is water, but not having food will kill you too.

  69. LadiesloveSmid says:
  70. Lowetide says:

    OF17: Soderberg and Williams are definitely nice players, I’ll give you that. I suppose the idea of having Klefbom-Marincin-Ference as our LD depth freaks me out much more than the idea of having a Lander-Letestu-Purcell 3rd line, or running Lander-Letestu as our 3C and 4C, or whatever it is. I don’t think spending the money on Soderberg makes sense if you don’t put him in a top-6 role, especially when you have a guy like Lander already at 3C. In the years before McDavid, Soderberg was my favorite UFA possibility for 2C BTW. I like the player.

    I also think trading Yak now, given his late-season success and the arrival of McLellan and McDavid, is trading the asset at its lowest point yet, and when it shows signs of rebounding. The other day someone mentioned that Chiarelli is acutely aware of his worst trade as GM, the “but,” to every good thing said about him. I’ll be very surprised if he trades Yakupov for anything short of a young building block on defense.

    So there are my thoughts. Once you get Talbot, most of your money needs to go to defense. Try not to do anything too stupid with the marquee UFAs. Once you’ve added two top-4 defensemen, go after guys like Soderberg, Letestu, Matthias, depending on how much room you have, but not before you fill the hole on defense.

    I honestly don’t think you’re reading a word of what I’m writing, so will move on. Enjoy your day!

  71. Cahoon says:

    dynasty-related,

    I don’t know what the actual odds are, but I’d give 20 to 1 in a bet that he doesn’t. He won’t slide to 16. No way.

  72. rickithebear says:

    Eberle 1st comp
    +3.6 Eakins era
    +10.6 before eakins
    Hall 1st comp
    +1.5 Eakins era
    +13.8 Before Eakins
    RNH 1st comp
    +2.5 Eakins Era
    +10.0 Before Eakins
    Pouliot
    +4.3 eakins/Nelson
    +8.5 Before
    Gordon
    -2.8 Eakins
    +2.8 Before
    Hendricks
    -7.2 Eakins
    -3.4 Before
    Purcell
    +2.5 Eakins
    +5.5 Before
    Matt Fraser
    -9.7 Eakins
    +4.0 Before
    Klinkhammer
    -.5 last year
    +11.1 before

    Yakupov 3rd comp
    -5.7 Eakins Era
    -4.4 Before Eakins
    Gazdic
    -14.8 last 2 years
    They got to go!

    Roy
    -2.0 last 2 years
    +3.6 4 years befor
    Do not Resign

    Winnick +3.5
    Fehr +3.5
    Soderberg +.8

    Petry
    +3.3 eakins
    +2.0 w/0 smid 2nd/3rd comp
    +8.7 w/ Smid 1st comp

    Cannot sign Petry or franson as Klef bom is a offensively and defensively more productive 2nd comp Dman.
    +.5 Nikitin facing 1st /2nd has a more postive affect on players cause it is facing higher comp.
    Yak
    Gazdic
    Roy
    Schultz
    Got to go.

  73. Lowetide says:

    dynasty-related:
    Lowetide,

    What were the odds we won the McDavid sweepstakes?Let me dream until the 27th, then I’ll talk reality. :)

    Ha! Fair enough!

  74. Ca$h-McMoney! says:

    grim.oil:
    So yesterday some of you were saying #1 priority for the Oil is goaltending. I disagreed saying priority #1 was on D. Meanwhile Duncan Keith was putting in 30+ minutes, scoring a stanley cup game winner and winning the Conne Smythe Award. With a #1 workhorse defender and a #1 goalie (most here claim not good enough) the Hawks won Lord Stanley again. All that said it looks like the Hawks are on my side of the debate. What say you?

    We all agree a #1 Dman in needed, it’s more complicated than that.

    If the Hawks had, theoretically, obtained Keith and Hjalmerson by out bidding other teams on the UFA market and were paying Keith $9 million and Hjalmerson $7 million, then they wouldn’t have won the cup.

    When you have one of the best all around Dmen and one of the best shutdown Dmen locked up long term for a combined, what, $9 million, then you will win some cups.

    It’s all about effective contract management.

    Simply pointing out that D is important doesn’t really solve the problem. D and G are both very important, the problem with D is that it’s a lot harder to find an underpriced gem in the UFA market on D than it is for G. That’s why focusing on G in the UFA market is preferable, because there is a good shot that one of Talbot/Lack/Bernier/Gibson/Enroth/etc. outperforms their contract over the next 1 to 5 years.

  75. Really? says:

    It is interesting to note that just about everybody realizes it will be almost impossible for Chiarelli to check off all the boxes on his To Do List and yet the then proceed to outline numerous draft, UFA Signing and trade strategies that address every conceivable possible variation that might arise during the Oilers rebuild.

    Personally, I will be satisfied if he obtains a goaltender and improves the defense. This does not mean solving the D problems for the next decade. It means moving closer to an NHL level blue.

    Once again, patience.

  76. Bag of Pucks says:

    Lowetide: The Edmonton Oilers No. 1 need is goaltending. They also badly need defense. It’s like being stuck in a coal mine with no food or water. Your No. 1 need is water, but not having food will kill you too.

    I think the number one need is defence for 3 reasons

    1) We need more of them (at least 3 functional vet D) and it’s a sellers market for D whereas it’s a buyer’s market for G and we only need one. In other words, the difficulty of acquiring them (particularly the workhorse 1D) reinforces the importance and priority of the need.

    2) There’s more chance for G that the solution could be found internally. In other words, there’s better odds that Scrivens could regain some form vs Ference and Nikitin regaining their form and Jultz getting a clue.

    3) Over the course of a long season, I think a sold D corps with middling goaltending could outperform a middling D corps with a solid G. We’ve seen decent goaltenders break down here when exposed to the shooting gallery. Plus a more functional D helps on the O side as well with the first pass, breakouts and possession from the point.

    This imo is the most encouraging aspect of the Chiarelli hire. He identified and airlifted in a lot of solid dmen into Boston and he did it quickly and without selling the farm.

    I do anticipate him making an aggressive play for Talbot though as the player resembles what he went after with Rask (solid pedigree prospect on the verge of breaking out as a starter).

  77. LadiesloveSmid says:

    rickithebear:
    Eberle 1st comp
    +3.6 Eakins era
    +10.6 before eakins
    Hall 1st comp
    +1.5 Eakins era
    +13.8 Before Eakins
    RNH 1st comp
    +2.5 Eakins Era
    +10.0 Before Eakins
    Pouliot
    +4.3 eakins/Nelson
    +8.5 Before
    Gordon
    -2.8 Eakins
    +2.8 Before
    Hendricks
    -7.2 Eakins
    -3.4 Before
    Purcell
    +2.5 Eakins
    +5.5 Before
    Matt Fraser
    -9.7 Eakins
    +4.0 Before
    Klinkhammer
    -.5 last year
    +11.1 before

    Yakupov 3rd comp
    -5.7 Eakins Era
    -4.4 Before Eakins
    Gazdic
    -14.8 last 2 years
    Theygot to go!

    Roy
    -2.0 last 2 years
    +3.6 4 years befor
    Do not Resign

    Winnick +3.5
    Fehr +3.5
    Soderberg +.8

    Petry
    +3.3 eakins
    +2.0 w/0 smid 2nd/3rd comp
    +8.7 w/ Smid 1st comp

    Cannot sign Petry or franson as Klef bom is a offensively and defensively more productive 2nd comp Dman.
    +.5 Nikitin facing 1st /2nd has a more postive affect on players cause it is facing higher comp.
    Yak
    Gazdic
    Roy
    Schultz
    Got to go.

    so Ricki,

    say the lineup is as you said earlier on (defence)

    Hall-McDavid-J Ward
    Pouliot-RNH-Eberle
    Pakarinen-Lander-Beagle/Fehr
    Hendricks-Gordon-Klinkhammer

    Sekera-Fayne
    Nikitin-Wisniewski
    Klefbom-Marincin
    Nurse/Ference

    Talbot
    Scrivens

    Where do you project this team finishes? How many points?

  78. Jordan says:

    Lowetide,

    Completely Off-Topic

    Will the interview you did on the Lowdown with Bowman be uploaded to soundcloud? Or is there another venue I might be able to listen to it on?

    I missed it, and really wanted to hear the discussion…

    Thanks!

  79. OF17 says:

    Lowetide: I honestly don’t think you’re reading a word of what I’m writing, so will move on. Enjoy your day!

    All I’ve done is disagree with you, argue my points, and try to dig into yours. I’m legitimately curious as to why you see that course as either more effective or more likely than others that have been presented, and as of yet, I don’t feel like I have a clear picture. Like anyone, you don’t have to engage in any debate you don’t want to.

  80. Lowetide says:

    Bag of Pucks: I think the number one need is defence for 3 reasons

    1) We need more of them (at least 3 functional vet D) and it’s a sellers market for D whereas it’s a buyer’s market for G and we only need one. In other words, the difficulty of acquiring them (particularly the workhorse 1D) reinforces the importance and priority of the need.

    2) There’s more chance for G that the solution could be found internally. In other words, there’s better odds that Scrivens could regain some form vs Ference and Nikitin regaining their form and Jultz getting a clue.

    3) Over the course of a long season, I think a sold D corps with middling goaltending could outperform a middling D corps with a solid G. We’ve seen decent goaltenders break down here when exposed to the shooting gallery. Plus a more functional D helps on the O side as well with the first pass, breakouts and possession from the point.

    This imo is the most encouraging aspect of the Chiarelli hire. He identified and airlifted in a lot of solid dmen into Boston and he did it quickly and without selling the farm.

    I do anticipate him making an aggressive play for Talbot though as the player resembles what he went after with Rask (solid pedigree prospect on the verge of breaking out as a starter).

    If the Oilers had average goaltending a year ago the GA totals would have been wildly better, some people may have kept their jobs. Defense was ghastly, goaltending was death. I don’t think we’ll agree on this, suspect it’s one of those things, but I certainly agree that the defense was flat out terrible and needs to be improved.

  81. Pouzar says:

    I don’t trust my eyes so nor should you BUT Scrivens was absolutely ghastly last year. His positioning was horrid, the high blocker side was a huge vortex of suck, every scramble turned into a goal and dat puck handling…..oh my.

  82. rickithebear says:

    own the puck tells us if a player has a +ve affect on his teamates.

    Seabrook 2nd/3rd comp
    +1.4 CD/60 last 4 years
    Playing with:
    1250-1500min Toews Hossa Kane Sharp
    over 1000min Bickell Shaw saad Krueger
    Over 500 min BollandStahlberg; versteeg Smith

    Nikitin 2nd comp
    +1.1 CD/60 last 4 years.
    Playing with
    Over 500min Umberger; Letestu; Johansen;
    Over 400min Prospal; Atkinson;
    over 300min Foligno; Anisimov; Mackenzie; Dorsett; Calvert; Dubinsky.
    Over 200min Jenner; Bol; Comeau

    Seriously Seabrook!

  83. Lowetide says:

    Jordan:
    Lowetide,

    Completely Off-Topic

    Will the interview you did on the Lowdown with Bowman be uploaded to soundcloud?Or is there another venue I might be able to listen to it on?

    I missed it, and really wanted to hear the discussion…

    Thanks!

    Bowman cancelled all of his interviews that day, sadly. Very disappointed but he did coach the Habs so is diabolical.

  84. slopitch says:

    OF17,

    I think he was saying that yes the salaries are a wash but it allows you to trade Yak and Gordon to address D. Basically implying the trade route was a better alternative then UFA.

    LT has never stated once that addressing the F is a bigger need then fixing the D.

  85. Jordan says:

    Lowetide,

    Awe shucks. Sorry LT. That sucks.

    ….So, is it too soon to make “Bowman’d” a meme for when other “high-profile” guests decide they don’t want to be a guest on your AM radio show…?

    =D

  86. rickithebear says:

    LadiesloveSmid: so Ricki,

    say the lineup is as you said earlier on (defence)

    Hall-McDavid-J Ward
    Pouliot-RNH-Eberle
    Pakarinen-Lander-Beagle/Fehr
    Hendricks-Gordon-Klinkhammer

    Sekera-Fayne
    Nikitin-Wisniewski
    Klefbom-Marincin
    Nurse/Ference

    Talbot
    Scrivens

    Where do you project this team finishes? How many points?

    We were on a 84 point pace without hall and Not 7-9 ahlers on the team under nelson.

    We see the reduction in positive team affect under eakins.
    we saw 30g paces for RNH; Pouliot; Eberle; under Nelson.
    Winnick is a strong Set-up guy for the likes of Klink-Gordon-Hendricks.
    A 4 player rotation of HS for the Tough ZS players is neede to have them survive the season.

    Ward’s footspeedd is too Slow.
    We should expect the PvP roles to be shared By
    RNH; Lander.

    throwing out guesses is HFboeard!

    I think
    I believe
    I Guess.

    As stast hockeyanlysis shows us.
    what should be a good fit may not!

  87. slopitch says:

    Speaking of moving Gordon. I can see Tampa being interested after getting absolutely lit up on the dot against Chicago. Tough to say what Gordon is worth.

  88. Lowetide says:

    Jordan:
    Lowetide,

    Awe shucks.Sorry LT.That sucks.

    ….So, is it too soon to make “Bowman’d” a meme for when other “high-profile” guests decide they don’t want to be a guest on your AM radio show…?

    =D

    I was very disappointed, guy is a legend. I actually wrote 20 questions, FIVE about things that happened this century!

  89. ashley says:

    Welcome back Chicago model. Skill and speed win the day. Leave the coke machines for LA and Boston.

    Maybe this is dated though. Does Chia believe in models like Lowe and MacT did (fashionably, whoever wins the Stanley Cup), or is he carving his own path to anticipated glory?

  90. grim.oil says:

    Raventalon, get there are no Duncan Kieths on the market, I do. Does that mean there is a Carey Price on the market? No it does not. Hamilton could be the next Keith, Talbot could be the next Price. Right now no one knows for sure.

    RPG, do you think the Hawks would win with Crawford still but Nikitin instead of Kieth? Your question is irrelevant.

    G Money, saying Scrivens wont win the cup if he were on the Hawks roster and saying the Oilers would be in the playoffs with Price is completly speculation. Fact that both goalies are worst on both perspective teams is only legit claim. Scrivens was excellent in L.A. and that does not meen he wins with the hawks but sucking on the Oil does not meen he loses with the hawks. Everything you state is speculation. P.S. im not scared of stats. They are a very useful tool. However they are hust that, a tool. You don’t build a shed with hust a tape measure. Tou need a hammer, wood, nails, etc. as well. So its not stats that scare me its the man who uses stats too much that scares me. Keep looking at your tape measure and your shed will never get built.

    Lowetide, whats to say the D is not the water? How come goalie is instantly the water for you? I get your analogy 100% but I disagree as to what is water and what is food.

    Cash, i get the worries about the cap. The cap however is not my issue. My issue is priority. D>G in my book. Hawks win with great D and OK goaltending (I personally think Crawford is great but others have said otherwise). Habs do not win with Price and good D. Do you want to win cups or just be a team in the playoffs? I never once said UFA is the only means of acquiring players. If you are a good GM you find a way, no excuses. There is trades, offer sheets and free agents to acquire players. A great GM wouldnt limit himself to one option.

    Listen guys, I get we need a Goalie. I would prefer to grab two myself. The fact is with guys like Nikitin and Ference on the roster goaltending is not going to be the answer (outside of acquiring the next coming of Hasek/Broduer). You guys continually say goalies are voodoo and then put them in a scenario to fail. Im simply talking priority. Yes goalies are cheaper to acquire, doesnt mean they should be priority.Talbot still will get lit up every night 40 shots. That takes a toll on you, ask Scrivens. Or ask Fasth what he thinks of the D core. If goalies are that much cheaper and easier to acquire than you can easily grab one. The time to win is now. Bring in one solid top 2 D man and it makes a world of difference for Scrivens or whoever is in the crease. Scrivens and Fasth were both good bets prior to this season. I seen people here saying that. They failed, so how is it Talbot or whoever is brought in gets the ‘this is a good move’. Its not a good bet to set up someone to fail. Getting D is harder to do (as you all agree) thus should be priority. A good D added to this new coaching may very well no wait it will elevate Scrivens. He has shown greatness before and soft goals happen. Quick has let in softies in the playoffs. Crawford let in a cpl at the start of the playoffs. Then came back in dominate form to win it all. We could get some capable D and Scrivens could back up Brossoit who becomes the next great goalie for all we know. Getting goalies is trading chairs. Getting D is upgrading. D is priority!

  91. RexLibris says:

    Lowetide: Bowman cancelled all of his interviews that day, sadly. Very disappointed but he did coach the Habs so is diabolical.

    You should’ve broken out the Ouija board and interviewed Sam Pollock.

  92. slopitch says:

    LadiesloveSmid,

    So what happens to Yak?

  93. John Chambers says:

    OF17,

    I guess the idea being that most are here for a discussion as opposed to a debate.

    Your points are sound. So are many with conflicting ideas. None of us are the actual General Manager so all is moot anyway.

    Namaste

  94. Jordan says:

    Lowetide: I was very disappointed, guy is a legend. I actually wrote 20 questions, FIVE about things that happened this century!

    Sounds like a great post – 20 questions I never got to ask Scotty Bowman

  95. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    Raventalon, get there are no Duncan Kieths on the market, I do. Does that mean there is a Carey Price on the market? No it does not. Hamilton could be the next Keith, Talbot could be the next Price. Right now no one knows for sure.

    RPG, do you think the Hawks would win with Crawford still but Nikitin instead of Kieth? Your question is irrelevant.

    G Money,saying Scrivens wont win the cup if he were on the Hawks roster and saying the Oilers would be in the playoffs with Price is completly speculation. Fact that both goalies are worst on both perspective teams is only legit claim. Scrivens was excellent in L.A. and that does not meen he wins with the hawks but sucking on the Oil does not meen he loses with the hawks. Everything you state is speculation. P.S. im not scared of stats. They are a very useful tool. However they are hust that, a tool. You don’t build a shed with hust a tape measure. Tou need a hammer, wood, nails, etc. as well. So its not stats that scare me its the man who uses stats too much that scares me. Keep looking at your tape measure and your shed will never get built.

    Lowetide, whats to say the D is not the water? How come goalie is instantly the water for you? I get your analogy 100% but I disagree as to what is water and what is food.

    Cash, i get the worries about the cap. The cap however is not my issue. My issue is priority. D>G in my book. Hawks win with great D and OK goaltending (I personally think Crawford is great but others have said otherwise). Habs do not win with Price and good D. Do you want to win cups or just be a team in the playoffs? I never once said UFA is the only means of acquiring players. If you are a good GM you find a way, no excuses. There is trades, offer sheets and free agents to acquire players. A great GM wouldnt limit himself to one option.

    Listen guys, I get we need a Goalie. I would prefer to grab two myself. The fact is with guys like Nikitin and Ference on the roster goaltending is not going to be the answer (outside of acquiring the next coming of Hasek/Broduer). You guys continually say goalies are voodoo and then put them in a scenario to fail. Im simply talking priority. Yes goalies are cheaper to acquire, doesnt mean they should be priority.Talbot still will get lit up every night 40 shots. That takes a toll on you, ask Scrivens. Or ask Fasth what he thinks of the D core. If goalies are that much cheaper and easier to acquire than you can easily grab one. The time to win is now. Bring in one solid top 2 D man and it makes a world of difference for Scrivens or whoever is in the crease. Scrivens and Fasth were both good bets prior to this season. I seen people here saying that. They failed, so how is it Talbot or whoever is brought in gets the ‘this is a good move’. Its not a good bet to set up someone to fail. Getting D is harder to do (as you all agree) thus should be priority. A good D added to this new coaching may very well no wait it will elevate Scrivens. He has shown greatness before and soft goals happen. Quick has let in softies in the playoffs. Crawford let in a cpl at the start of the playoffs. Then came back in dominate form to win it all. We could get some capable D and Scrivens could back up Brossoit who becomes the next great goalie for all we know. Getting goalies is trading chairs. Getting D is upgrading. D is priority!

    My point was actually that you can’t use Duncan Keith as the answer to the argument “Should goaltending or defense be #1?”

    I actually AGREE with you that defense is a bigger issue than goaltending (as a good goalie cannot play well without good defense!), but I disagree with your evidence (Duncan Keith).

    That’s where the draft comes in and is so important. Teams simply don’t let these types of players go unless they really can’t make the roster work (Pronger was one of those exceptions). They sign them long term and for dear amounts of money. This is why Chicago would rather fight the cap year-after-year than give up one of their core. This is why the Oilers need to be patient with Nurse and company so that they have the fair chance to develop as Keith and Subban and others like him did in the AHL. It also means don’t be surprised if we don’t compete for the cup in the next two years.

  96. OF17 says:

    slopitch:
    OF17,

    I think he was saying that yes the salaries are a wash but it allows you to trade Yak and Gordon to address D. Basically implying the trade route was a better alternative then UFA.

    LT has never stated once that addressing the F is a bigger need then fixing the D.

    First of all, thank you for trying to enlighten the points to me. So far, I’ve gotten everything you’ve written. My question after that, or rather my assertion, is that going for cheaper replacements rather than expensive ones in Soderberg and Williams gives you the cap room to add two defensemen rather than one, bumping Klefbom and Marincin to 2LD and 3LD. I see that as more beneficial than going for the Cadillac solutions up front, even though the Cadillacs do do a lot of things quite well. That’s what I’m talking about when I mention that plan treating forward as more of a priority than defense, the choice to go for Cadillacs rather than a second top-4 D.

    The secondary point is that I don’t see now as the time to trade Gordon or Yak. I’m betting that Yak has more value a year from now than he does today, and I’m betting Gordon has more value at the deadline than he does in the summer. I agree with the general principle of using them to fill other needs, I just don’t think now is the best time. In the meantime, they’re useful players. I don’t see trading Yak for Seabrook as the same thing as trading him for a young building block on defense (my condition for trading him this summer), which might be where some of the “are you even reading?” confusion came from. I don’t know.

    I don’t want to keep harping on this since it obviously hit some nerves, but those are my thoughts. Thank you again for attempting to bridge the gap, and I hope some of my fellow posters found at least the premise of the debate interesting, if not its specific form.

  97. OF17 says:

    John Chambers:
    OF17,

    I guess the idea being that most are here for a discussion as opposed to a debate.

    Your points are sound. So are many with conflicting ideas. None of us are the actual General Manager so all is moot anyway.

    Namaste

    I’m sorry if I came off as too harsh, to LT or to anyone else here. That’s never my intention. I just wrote it down as I go through it in my own mind, trying to find the best decision.

    If anyone is interested in trying to pin down whether the difference between having Soderberg and Williams instead of, say, Letestu and T. Kennedy is bigger than the difference between Klefbom-Marincin-Ference and Ehrhoff-Klefbom-Marincin as LD depth, I’m happy to. Those are ultimately the differences that we’re comparing. If no one’s interested, I meant and mean no harm, and we can leave that discussion where it is.

  98. LadiesloveSmid says:

    slopitch:
    LadiesloveSmid,

    So what happens to Yak?

    maybe he goes in a deal for a Dman. Ricki said he, Gazdic, Roy, and Schultz “had to go”. So I was operating under that instruction

  99. Dashingsilverfox says:

    ashley:
    Welcome back Chicago model.Skill and speed win the day.Leave the coke machines for LA and Boston.

    Maybe this is dated though.Does Chia believe in models like Lowe and MacT did (fashionably, whoever wins the Stanley Cup), or is he carving his own path to anticipated glory?

    Since Chiarelli built the Bruins, I would imagine he has them as a template although I would hope he is flexible enough to see that there are other ways to be successful.

  100. spoiler says:

    RexLibris: You should’ve broken out the Ouija board and interviewed Sam Pollock.

    I would watch that!

    Not sure it would make good radio though.

  101. grim.oil says:

    raventalon40,

    Actually using Kieth in my argument makes complete sense. When others are talking goalies, do they not use names like Price. It’s all fair game. And when your in a city that wants to build a dynasty and not just win the cup or make the playoffs than Kieth is a perfect example of what we want to get. I am by no means saying we could acquire Kieth. I simply use him as a reference as to what works and what we one day hope to have. Maybe Nurse becomes that guy, maybe Klefbom, maybe not. Rask is considered elite and yet the Bruins did not make the playoffs. Sure there were other factors. My point is that D is priority over G for the Oil right now. I am not saying G is not a priority just that G is not priority #1.

  102. Lowetide says:

    RexLibris: You should’ve broken out the Ouija board and interviewed Sam Pollock.

    Ha! Man, I might just do that for a blog post.

  103. Lowetide says:

    Jordan: Sounds like a great post – 20 questions I never got to ask Scotty Bowman

    I still have them. One of them was ‘did you have a favorite fourth for Robinson, Lapointe and Savard?

  104. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    raventalon40,

    Actually using Kieth in my argument makes complete sense. When others are talking goalies, do they not use names like Price. It’s all fair game. And when your in a city that wants to build a dynasty and not just win the cup or make the playoffs than Kieth is a perfect example of what we want to get. I am by no means saying we could acquire Kieth. I simply use him as a reference as to what works and what we one day hope to have. Maybe Nurse becomes that guy, maybe Klefbom, maybe not. Rask is considered elite and yet the Bruins did not make the playoffs. Sure there were other factors. My point is that D is priority over G for the Oil right now. I am not saying G is not a priority just that G is not priority #1.

    I don’t agree with using Price an example either. He too was drafted and retained.

  105. Bag of Pucks says:

    Lowetide: If the Oilers had average goaltending ayear ago the GA totals would have been wildly better, some people may have kept their jobs. Defense was ghastly, goaltending was death. I don’t think we’ll agree on this, suspect it’s one of those things, but I certainly agree that the defense was flat out terrible and needs to be improved.

    You’re right, the goaltending was horrific last season and a respectable G likely moves the needle in a substantial way. Given it is a buyer’s market. I’m sure Chia will find a reasonable fix.

    Unfortunately, both positions have massive needs.

    Dubnyk’s revival elsewhere is a tell for me that there’s more going on there than the men behind the masks themselves. This team gives up a ton of grade A chances against. I think that exhausts their tenders and lessens their confidence over time.

    I think Chia has to address both positions significantly this offseason. Otherwise, he’s just trotting out another potentially solid G in front of the firing line where he’ll eventually give up the ghost.

    I agree with you that they’ll fight like hell to rationalize sending Nurse down and he’ll stick with the big club regardless. They simply don’t have better talent to keep him off the roster. Nice to watch Hedman in this year’s playoffs and visualize a potential future for Darnell. Love those Larry Robinson style Dmen.

  106. Lowetide says:

    Bag of Pucks: You’re right, the goaltending was horrific last season and a respectable G likely moves the needle in a substantial way. Given it is a buyer’s market. I’m sure Chia will find a reasonable fix.

    Unfortunately, both positions have massive needs.

    Dubnyk’s revival elsewhere is a tell for me that there’s more going on there than the men behind the masks themselves. This team gives up a ton of grade A chances against. I think that exhausts their tenders and lessens their confidence over time.

    I think Chia has to address both positions significantly this offseason. Otherwise, he’s just trotting out another potentially solid G in front of the firing line where he’ll eventually give up the ghost.

    I agree with you that they’ll fight like hell to rationalize sending Nurse down and he’ll stick with the big club regardless. They simply don’t have better talent to keep him off the roster. Nice to watch Hedmanin this year’s playoffs and visualize a potential future for Darnell. Love those Larry Robinson style Dmen.

    I wish they’d kept Marincin up all year, it would have given him a little more experience. Whatever else we can say about Craig Ramsay, and I like him a lot, he wasn’t able to get Marincin out there enough. Who is at fault for that is anyone’s guess.

  107. grim.oil says:

    raventalon40,

    Your missing my point. I know these guys were drafted and retained. That only further helps my point. No one can acquire a Keith (there was suter but these trades for #1 are extremly rare). Goalies on the other hand get traded before greatness all the time. There for it would be much harder to grab a goalie and then get a D man rather than grabbing a d man and then acquiring a G. There are guys attainable that are real promising young D that can grow with the team. Prices vary and are much higher than acquiring a G for sure but acquiring and OEL/Jones/Larsson/Hamilton is possible. Question: Do the hawks need Crawford to win? Most will say No. Do the hawks need Keith to win? Most will say yes. So if the Hawks could switch out Crawford but not Kieth and still win than how is G more of a priority than D. You need a D to grow with the team. You don’t need a G to grow with the team. If the Hawks drafted Fleury as well. Who would be more expendable, Keith or Fleury??

  108. G Money says:

    grim.oil: That takes a toll on you, ask Scrivens. Or ask Fasth what he thinks of the D core

    The failure in your analysis is that Scrivens sucked from the first day of training camp, and sucked the very first night of the season in Calgary, where he let in 5 goals on 26 shots, on a night when the Oiler D pretty much shut the Flames offense down and gave them barely a sniff.

    Of the goals, 2 were his giveaways, 2 were soft, and only one was a legit goal that could be blamed on the defense, and that was late in the game on a PK.

    That’s been the story right from the start of the season, easy goals early and often.

    That’s a weird kind of shell shock.

    You don’t need stats to see it, you just have to watch the game.

    The stats are only being used to hammer home a supporting point, which is that Scrivens and Fasth DID NOT face the unholy barrage that you claim is responsible for their demise. The defense was terrible, yes – but even an average goalie facing the kind of shots the Oilers let through would have been WAAAAAY better than Scrivens or Fasth.

    And that’s the point about observing Michal Neuvirth – a guy who is an averageish NHL goalie, who let in WAAAAAAY fewer goals than Scrivens or Fasth did, despite facing WAAAAAY more shots and WAAAAY more nasty scoring chances.

    That’s the goalie. Not the defense. The goalie.

    Even Dubnyk in Arizona was fantastic in front of a defense that was nearly as bad as the Oilers, and his EV sv% WENT DOWN when he played behind the fantastic MIN defense.

    How does that jive with your ‘defense causes goaltending’ theory?

    You can keep sticking to the idea that because Scrivens, Fasth, and Dubnyk (all young goalies ripe for a bad year) had bad years, this is some sort of definitive proof that the Oiler defense was really the problem. The only way you can support that is by claiming that the Oiler defense was the worst in the league by a wide margin.

    It was not. And the simplest way to observe that was to count the number of games where the Oilers outplayed the other team, played better defense … and lost because of bad goaltending.

    Don’t fix the goaltending, and the Oilers will be fighting to stay out of last place next year, no matter who they sign on defense.

  109. G Money says:

    raventalon40: as a good goalie cannot play well without good defense!

    False.

    Proven over and over and over again.

    Goaltending is affected by defense, but mildly so.

    Good goalies are good goalies, and bad goalies are bad goalies, no matter who they play behind.

  110. monsterbater4 says:

    Ca$h-McMoney!: We all agree a #1 Dman in needed, it’s more complicated than that.

    If the Hawks had, theoretically, obtained Keith and Hjalmerson by out bidding other teams on the UFA market and were paying Keith $9 million and Hjalmerson $7 million, then they wouldn’t have won the cup.

    When you have one of the best all around Dmen and one of the best shutdown Dmen locked up long term for a combined, what, $9 million, then you will win some cups.

    It’s all about effective contract management.

    Simply pointing out that D is important doesn’t really solve the problem.D and G are both very important, the problem with D is that it’s a lot harder to find an underpriced gem in the UFA market on D than it is for G.That’s why focusing on G in the UFA market is preferable, because there is a good shot that one of Talbot/Lack/Bernier/Gibson/Enroth/etc. outperforms their contract over the next 1 to 5 years.

    This all effing day. i agree defense wins championships but having an average to above average goalie on a reasonable deal for several years is what helps you pay (UFAs and internal raises/contracts) moving forward. Sort out the Goalie situation first, then look at best ways to improve D LONG TERM over next 12-13 months.

  111. grim.oil says:

    G Money,

    My answer is coaching. Coaching is the the missing factor of goaltending you seek. There are 4 factors I can see. (1)The Goalie, (2)The D, (3)The forward 2-way game (4)The Coaching
    Go play in net with a rookie coach teaching the swarm. Actually forget the swarm and just play with a rookie coach. The systems make a HUGE difference, much like the D. You can apply that to Scrivens in L.A., Fasth in Anahiem and Dubnyk in wherever.
    Your stats have also completely mislead you if you think Arizona’s D is similar to the Oilers D. Even Buffalo’s D is much better. When looking at D what do you look at? Its obvious to me the top pairing represents more than bottom 2 pairings by a huge margin. OEL and Yandle to me is miles and miles ahead of Klefbom and Schultz. Is it not? Myers/Bogosian or Klefbom? Yeah sure Klefbom in the long run, maybe. Last year start to finish though…

  112. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    raventalon40,

    Your missing my point. I know these guys were drafted and retained. That only further helps my point. No one can acquire a Keith (there was suter but these trades for #1 are extremly rare). Goalies on the other hand get traded before greatness all the time. There for it would be much harder to grab a goalie and then get a D man rather than grabbing a d man and then acquiring a G. There are guys attainable that are real promising young D that can grow with the team. Prices vary and are much higher than acquiring a G for sure but acquiring and OEL/Jones/Larsson/Hamilton is possible. Question: Do the hawks need Crawford to win? Most will say No. Do the hawks need Keith to win? Most will say yes. So if the Hawks could switch out Crawford but not Kieth and still win than how is G more of a priority than D. You need a D to grow with the team. You don’t need a G to grow with the team. If the Hawks drafted Fleury as well. Who would be more expendable, Keith or Fleury??

    Sounds like pure conjecture to me. Betting on guys who might be the next something this or something that is exactly what the Oilers did with Scrivens and Schultz. This is hardly a new strategy. The only “sure” thing about acquiring more younger talent is that you end up building depth and potential. How this has anything to do with the goaltending vs defense priority debate, I don’t understand.

    If you think you can acquire OEL, you got another thing comin.

  113. raventalon40 says:

    G Money: False.

    Proven over and over and over again.

    Goaltending is affected by defense, but mildly so.

    Good goalies are good goalies, and bad goalies are bad goalies, no matter who they play behind.

    Of course good goalies are good goalies, and bad goalies are bad goalies… that is a self-explanatory statement. And good goalies are going to play better than bad goalies behind good defense or bad defense.

    Defense wins championships, though.

    Not just the D position. Team defense.

  114. grim.oil says:

    Also G Money, How do you explain Scrivens night against SanJose. Where the team in front of him was horrid and he stopped everything. All 60+ shots. You can’t just bring up a bad game without also thinking of a good game. Thats like being blind in one eye.

    Goalies play a mental game as much as they play a physical game. Playing on a L.A. team with great D, Coaching and 2-way forwards will do wonders for your mental. Whilst playing with Klefbom as your #1, Eakins as your coach and not much of a 2-way forward group will do much the opposite.

  115. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    Also G Money, How do you explain Scrivens night against SanJose. Where the team in front of him was horrid and he stopped everything. All 60+ shots. You can’t just bring up a bad game without also thinking of a good game. Thats like being blind in one eye.

    Goalies play a mental game as much as they play a physical game. Playing on a L.A. team with great D, Coaching and 2-way forwards will do wonders for your mental. Whilst playing with Klefbom as your #1, Eakins as your coach and not much of a 2-way forward group will do much the opposite.

    I’d agree that the mental game is huge. Having a good D is a huge mental boost. Having no confidence in yourself is a terrible mental letdown (Dubnyk).

    But the Scrivens shutout game was an anomaly event. Can’t use that and ignore the larger body of evidence and how that speaks about his play as a goalie on average.

    That’s like being blind in one eye.

  116. Lowetide says:

    grim.oil:
    Also G Money, How do you explain Scrivens night against SanJose. Where the team in front of him was horrid and he stopped everything. All 60+ shots. You can’t just bring up a bad game without also thinking of a good game. Thats like being blind in one eye.

    Goalies play a mental game as much as they play a physical game. Playing on a L.A. team with great D, Coaching and 2-way forwards will do wonders for your mental. Whilst playing with Klefbom as your #1, Eakins as your coach and not much of a 2-way forward group will do much the opposite.

    Small sample sizes will kill you when it comes to anything, including goalies. It’s the one major worry re: Talbot.

  117. Ducey says:

    grim.oil:
    Also G Money, How do you explain Scrivens night against SanJose. Where the team in front of him was horrid and he stopped everything. All 60+ shots. You can’t just bring up a bad game without also thinking of a good game. Thats like being blind in one eye.

    Goalies play a mental game as much as they play a physical game. Playing on a L.A. team with great D, Coaching and 2-way forwards will do wonders for your mental. Whilst playing with Klefbom as your #1, Eakins as your coach and not much of a 2-way forward group will do much the opposite.

    Why are we having this discussion?

    The Oilers need to upgrade BOTH D and G.

    The “priority” of one over the other has nothing to do with it. The players brought in will be determined by lots of other factors (assets demanded, salary, wanting to come here) besides some arbitrary “priority”

    You can make getting Duncan Keith a “priority”. It aint happening.

    You can make Talbot a priority. If Sather wants #16, then you go elsewhere (hopefully).

  118. monsterbater4 says:

    G Money: False.

    Proven over and over and over again.

    Goaltending is affected by defense, but mildly so.

    Good goalies are good goalies, and bad goalies are bad goalies, no matter who they play behind.

    Further to that good goalies playing for bad teams and having slightly skewed numbers are a good market inefficiency to exploit for cheap. Low risk, high reward potential.

    As far as defence goes, you have to use UFA to find guys like Stralman who are undervalued and pay them a salary that may appear as an overpay but should be a good bet to cover the spread (think stralman). This is also how trades should be handled as you aren’t going to fleece a team to get an elite defenceman (save for an outlier like pronger).

    You use the draft to find your elite D that you develop internally and expect it to take 4-5 years to start to reap rewards like hedman, keith etc.

    I am all for trading 33 at most for talbot, would prefer to use 57 and would be fine with Lack. Then look at what it will take to get larsson from NJ. He just started turning the corner so his value isn’t as high as when he was drafted. NJ also has several good young D so one may shake loose. Now what you have to pay i don’t know but i am sure they are looking for good young skill up front. I wouldn’t trade drai, but i would trade yak plus a pick (say 2nd in 2016).

    Sign a williams or whatever good veteran top 6 will take a 2 year deal, and use 16OV to draft your yak/williams replacement 2 years from now. use remaining 2nd rounder this year to take BPA while leaning to D if possible.

    If you have cap space leftover use it on a UFA D that is undervalued and will sign a 2-3 year deal

  119. Dashingsilverfox says:

    Worth noting that Garth Snow was able to acquire 2 goaltenders (Halak and Johnson), 2 defensemen (Boychuk and Leddy) and two forwards (Grabovski and Kulemin) in ONE offseason by preying on cap strapped or distressed teams.

    Those same opportunities are also available this offseason to astute GM’s who have the cap space and the fortitude to get the job done.

    It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

    Since there are a limited number of teams with cap space to be aggressive (Calgary, Anaheim, Buffalo, Nashville and Winnipeg) the Oilers should be able to take a big step forward IF they haven’t fallen in love with their current roster.

  120. raventalon40 says:

    Lowetide: Small sample sizes will kill you when it comes to anything, including goalies. It’s the one major worry re: Talbot.

    I was a critic of the Talbot idea previously, but not so much anymore.

    NYR as a team rely heavily on Lunqvist to keep them in the games. This was also the case with Talbot during the Lunqvist injury. He carried that team, albeit for a short time.

    Is he a true #1 goalie?

    That’s a risk someone will have to take. But if they succeed in their experiment, the rewards will far outweight the cost!

  121. Showerhead says:

    Dashingsilverfox:
    Worth noting that Garth Snow was able to acquire 2 goaltenders (Halak and Johnson), 2 defensemen (Boychuk and Leddy) and two forwards (Grabovski and Kulemin) in ONE offseason by preying on cap strapped or distressed teams.

    Those same opportunities are also available this offseason to astute GM’s who have the cap space and the fortitude to get the job done.

    It doesn’t have to be one or the other.

    Since there are a limited number of teams with cap space to be aggressive (Calgary, Anaheim, Buffalo, Nashville and Winnipeg) the Oilers should be able to take a big step forward IF they haven’t fallen in love with their current roster.

    Yeesh. Was that all last summer? That’s monstrous. I don’t think anyone should expect such an accomplishment but to see such a positive example keeps that optimism rolling high.

  122. grim.oil says:

    raventalon40,

    My point is grabbing a young D to grow with the team and worrying about goalie 2nd to that works. How does this not make sense? I can understand if you disagree. However the method is working for the most dominate NHL franchise right now. Everyone is talking about getting unknowns whether D or G. There will always be more unknowns of both. The D is harder to acquire than the G. There for D is of higher priority.

    Also if you feel OEL can not be acquired and do not try to even inquire as to get him than you fail. He is the only player(pretty much) on a team in need of years of rebuilding. Arizona is broke. Does OEL want to stay on a losing team? Would it be a good idea for Arizona would depend on the offer. If we offered the #1 Arizona would give us more than OEL(I am not saying we should do this). OEL is attainable, if you wont even try. You are fired. Draisaitl and the #16 has to be appealing to them. Does that get it done? Probaly not quite. But to say something ‘can’t…’ without even trying is an absolute fail.

  123. spoiler says:

    raventalon40: That’s a risk someone will have to take. But if they succeed in their experiment, the rewards will far outweight the cost!

    One of the downers to the Talbot strategy is that he can’t sign an extension till January. What does he get if he’s knocking it out of the park?

  124. spoiler says:

    Y’know people, there is ONE WAY and ONLY ONE WAY to skin a cat.*

    😉

    *verifying this thesis, or it’s antithesis, is not recommended.

  125. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    raventalon40,

    My point is grabbing a young D to grow with the team and worrying about goalie 2nd to that works. How does this not make sense? I can understand if you disagree. However the method is working for the most dominate NHL franchise right now. Everyone is talking about getting unknownswhether D or G. There will always be more unknowns of both. The D is harder to acquire than the G. There for D is of higher priority.

    Also if you feel OEL can not be acquired and do not try to even inquire as to get him than you fail. He is the only player(pretty much) on a team in need of years of rebuilding. Arizona is broke. Does OEL want to stay on a losing team? Would it be a good idea for Arizona would depend on the offer. If we offered the #1 Arizona would give us more than OEL(I am not saying we should do this). OEL is attainable, if you wont even try. You are fired. Draisaitl and the #16 has to be appealing to them. Does that get it done? Probaly not quite. But to say something ‘can’t…’ without even trying is an absolute fail.

    OEL is not an unknown. He’s no Keith, but his market value is close.

    Would you trade a sure thing for a question mark? Let me remind you that Draisaitl has achieved nothing in the NHL and the #16 has achieved less. Is he a very promising prospect? Yes. Is he a sure thing? Not really.

  126. raventalon40 says:

    spoiler:
    Y’know people, there is ONE WAY and ONLY ONE WAY to skin a cat.*

    *verifying this thesis or it’s antithesis is not recommended.

    Man… I laughed out loud at this and my boss looked over all like, “what are you laughing at, crazy?”

  127. raventalon40 says:

    spoiler: One of the downers to the Talbot strategy is that he can’t sign an extension till January. What does he get if he’s knocking it out of the park?

    I’d rather Option A he knock it out of the park and get paid what he deserves playing for the Oilers, than Option B or C. Those options being he is acquired and sucks, or that he is not acquired and plays well, respectively.

    Option D, he plays in NYR or somewhere else next year and sucks, is of no concern to me.

    EDIT: I just realized I never answered your question. I think to persuade him to avoid the open UFA market, you have to give him a 500,000 to 1,000,000 salary cushion over market value, and maybe perhaps even term.

    The question is, what is his market value, and how good does he have to be to be considered as “knocking it out of the park?”

    We have to define a line in the sand in terms of GAA and SV%. Wins may vary.

  128. thejonrmcleod says:

    Dashingsilverfox,

    Since one of the defensemen that Snow acquired (Boychuk) was acquired from Chiarelli’s Bruins, you’d have to think that Chiarelli is fully aware of the strategy to prey on cap-strapped teams.

  129. raventalon40 says:

    thejonrmcleod:
    Dashingsilverfox,

    Since one of the defensemen that Snow acquired (Boychuk) was acquired from Chiarelli’s Bruins, you’d have to think that Chiarelli is fully aware of the strategy to prey on cap-strapped teams.

    I’d even imagine he’s looking at the Bruins and thinking,

    “phew, better not f*** up the cap space like last time!” while wetting his lips at the prospect of preying on the roster mess he left Sweeney.

  130. John Chambers says:

    spoiler: One of the downers to the Talbot strategy is that he can’t sign an extension till January. What does he get if he’s knocking it out of the park?

    Why can’t he sign an extension until January? I thought that applied only if a player signed a 1-year contract after July 1st.

  131. geowal says:

    “Offload Gordon” seems a poor choice of words for a player who is not the problem on this team, who has only one year left. I don’t see us having cap issues this year, so don’t get the desire to ditch him. I don’t want to put all my eggs in the lander basket, lest we be left with “2 centres and mud” again

  132. spoiler says:

    raventalon40: I’d rather Option A he knock it out of the park and get paid what he deserves playing for the Oilers, than Option B or C. Those options being he is acquired and sucks, or that he is not acquired and plays well, respectively.

    Option D, he plays in NYR or somewhere else next year and sucks, is of no concern to me.

    There is Option E… he plays well and decides to test free agency.

    There is some leverage there on the Oil side though, in that there are few starting jobs. However, there’s always a couple.

  133. BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1) says:

    thejonrmcleod: Chiarelli is fully aware of the strategy to prey on cap-strapped teams.

    He also pried away Rask for a guy named Raycroft, so he also knows how to prey on dunce-capped teams.

  134. spoiler says:

    John Chambers: Why can’t he sign an extension until January? I thought that applied only if a player signed a 1-year contract after July 1st.

    I’m going off memory, but isn’t that exactly what he did last year? Thought Speeds had brought it up.

    If he didn’t, I will be glad.

    Edit: Actually he couldn’t have (since the year is already in place). Don’t know what I was thinking. Okay, one less thing to keep me up at night. Thank you, John.

  135. Магия 10 says:

    Lowetide: Ha! Man, I might just do that for a blog post.

    If you can get Lou Lamoriello on I believe his board reaches Sam.

  136. raventalon40 says:

    spoiler: There is Option E… he plays well and decides to test free agency.

    There is some leverage there on the Oil side though, in that there are few starting jobs.However, there’s always a couple.

    I feel like that’s an extension of A! 🙂

  137. grim.oil says:

    I brought up Scrivens small sample size because G Money did. He used it to argue his point. I used it to argue against his point. I agree you cant use small sample size but when you use ammo against me I will use that same ammo against you.

    Not once did I say ‘Keith is attainable’. This name was used as an example of D>G on a Chicago team. A team that looks quite similar to what the Oilers could look like hopefully sooner rather than later. Acquiring a ‘Keith Type’ is not acquiring Keith. Read and than read again before blowing things out of proportion.

  138. G Money says:

    grim.oil: Also G Money, How do you explain Scrivens night against SanJose. Where the team in front of him was horrid and he stopped everything. All 60+ shots.

    Exactly right.

    The defense was absolutely dominated. Completely and utterly.

    Yet Scrivens was brilliant.

    How does your ‘defense drives goaltending’ square with that?

  139. Lowetide says:

    geowal:
    “Offload Gordon” seems a poor choice of words for a player who is not the problem on this team, who has only one year left. I don’t see us having cap issues this year, so don’t get the desire to ditch him.I don’t want to put all my eggs in the lander basket, lest we be left with “2 centres and mud” again

    Gordon MAY not be used in the same role, as Todd McLellan didn’t have a tough ZS 4line in San Jose. Now, he may decide to run one but if he doesn’t, Gordon’s effectiveness is going to be reduced (Gordon’s offense isn’t stellar).

    In the case I have suggested, Edmonton signs Soderberg, trades Gordon (plus something) for a true defender and solves the issue that way.

  140. G Money says:

    grim.oil: I brought up Scrivens small sample size because G Money did. He used it to argue his point. I used it to argue against his point. I agree you cant use small sample size but when you use ammo against me I will use that same ammo against you.

    Your sample size – Scrivens, Fasth, Dubnyk – is miniscule.

    Mine is not – it is the entire league. Every goalie on every team, including the Oilers, adjusted for the badness of the defense.

    You know what the large sample set says?

    Simple: it’s the goalies.

    I bring up the small sample size of Scrivens only to point out that his sample doesn’t support your point either.

  141. Generational Poster says:

    The Oilers need both D and G…let’s call them 1A and 1B – fact is until both D and G are vastly improved any gains in the standings will be minimal.

    To me it’s more of a supply and demand question – don’t overspend on assets / $ / term for a goalie because you don’t really have to with a decent number of good calculated risk options out there. Keep the war chest full b/c you will probably have to overspend in some way to make big strides in improving the D. This doesn’t mean I would hesitate to trade a 2nd rounder for the goalie you want. It means don’t trade a first rounder or shell out huge in FA.

    I don’t think the F core can be ignored either…sure McDavid will help immensely, but this is a team that was 26th in GF last year. The additions of some D that can chip in more and make a breakout pass in stride instead of the ‘auto panic flip to the neutral zone’ breakout’ would undoubtedly help in this regard. But, also, some changes to the forward mix aren’t a bad thought either, especially if you can leverage F assets to acquire D in trade and find value in FA F more easily than FA D.

  142. spoiler says:

    grim.oil: I brought up Scrivens small sample size because G Money did. He used it to argue his point. I used it to argue against his point.

    You were actually making his point for him.

  143. G Money says:

    grim.oil: Even Buffalo’s D is much better.

    Oh boy.

    If you believe that, we have no common ground on which to converse.

    And by ‘common ground’, I mean ‘reality’.

    Yeesh.

  144. grim.oil says:

    raventalon40,

    Did not say OEL is unknown. Seperate paragraph. Again Read first, read 2nd, than reply.

  145. Jordan says:

    Question for the assembled masses (especially you smart people)

    If the Oilers manage to turn this thing around now that they have AHJ with the other #1s and the other great young players they have coming…and maybe even manage to win a couple of cups…

    Who goes into the HHOF in the builders category? The new group who wins with them, or Lowe and Co for losing so convincingly for so long to get them?

    I’m really torn.

  146. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    Acquiring a ‘Keith Type’ is not acquiring Keith.

    Why, would the price be different?

  147. spoiler says:

    Jordan,

    The two Bill’s: Scott and Daly.

  148. G Money says:

    grim.oil: My answer is coaching. Coaching is the the missing factor of goaltending you seek. There are 4 factors I can see.

    raventalon40: I’d agree that the mental game is huge. Having a good D is a huge mental boost. Having no confidence in yourself is a terrible mental letdown (Dubnyk).

    Actually, we might have some common ground.

    If your theory as to why the goalies sucked (and there is no question about this – the goalies sucked, horribly so, league worst at letting in the easy shots) is because the environment created by an ogre-like coach caused a loss of ambition and focus, which presumably would affect the goalies worse than others on the team … hey, I might agree with you.

    I floated this theory myself several months ago.

    If so, the change in coaching will allow Scrivens to rebound next year.

    And I’ve already gone on record saying I think he may very well do that.

    But this is an explanation of why the goalies sucked way worse than can be explained by the defense. It doesn’t deny that they sucked – which they did.

    Denying they sucked is denying reality, to the extent it makes you say ridiculous things like “the Buffalo D was way better”.

  149. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    raventalon40,

    Everyone is talking about getting unknownswhether D or G. There will always be more unknowns of both. The D is harder to acquire than the G. There for D is of higher priority. […] Also if you feel OEL can not be acquired and do not try to even inquire as to get him than you fail.

    grim.oil:
    raventalon40,

    Did not say OEL is unknown. Seperate paragraph. Again Read first, read 2nd, than reply.

    What conclusion are we supposed to draw from this, then?

  150. raventalon40 says:

    G Money:
    Actually, we might have some common ground.

    If your theory as to why the goalies sucked (and there is no question about this – the goalies sucked, horribly so, league worst at letting in the easy shots) is because the environment created by an ogre-like coach caused a loss of ambition and focus, which presumably would affect the goalies worse than others on the team … hey, I might agree with you.

    I floated this theory myself several months ago.

    If so, the change in coaching will allow Scrivens to rebound next year.

    And I’ve already gone on record saying I think he may very well do that.

    But this is an explanation of why the goalies sucked way worse than can be explained by the defense.It doesn’t deny that they sucked – which they did.

    Denying they sucked is denying reality, to the extent it makes you say ridiculous things like “the Buffalo D was way better”.

    Scrivens was horrendous! Which makes it hurt more, cause I was really, really cheering for him to succeed in his hometown.

  151. John Chambers says:

    spoiler: I’m going off memory, but isn’t that exactly what he did last year?Thought Speeds had brought it up.

    If he didn’t, I will be glad.

    Edit: Actually he couldn’t have (since the year is already in place). Don’t know what I was thinking.Okay, one less thing to keep me up at night. Thank you, John.

    Hey I’m not a CBA expert and if I ever think that I am I end up learning something that proves I know nothing.

  152. G Money says:

    Dashingsilverfox: Worth noting that Garth Snow was able to acquire 2 goaltenders

    I’ve published an analysis of goalies that concludes that my ideal solution to the Oiler goalie situation is to get BOTH Neuvirth and Talbot.

    Talbot because he has brilliance written all over him, but sample size warnings, plus early stage goalie volatility (i.e. having a bad year a la Scrivens and Dubnyk) is actually to be expected.

    Neuvirth because he’s UFA, should be reasonably cheap to acquire, and has achieved a degree of steadiness early in his career that is very very unusual – and done that behind a defense that is even more of a tire fire than the Oiler D, in every way.

    They bring opposing but complementary characteristics to the table.

    It’s a “non-correlated asset allocation” portfolio approach to goaltending.

    Contrasted with last year, when MacT bought two penny stocks for his portfolio, and went bankrupt when they both went in the toilet.

  153. raventalon40 says:

    John Chambers: I know nothing.

    You are henceforth to be known as John “Snow” Chambers.

  154. Ducey says:

    Jordan:
    Question for the assembled masses (especially you smart people)

    If the Oilers manage to turn this thing around now that they have AHJ with the other #1s and the other great young players they have coming…and maybe even manage to win a couple of cups…

    Who goes into the HHOF in the builders category?The new group who wins with them, or Lowe and Co for losing so convincingly for so long to get them?

    I’m really torn.

    I understand. I have the same problem deciding on place settings for my wedding reception for my upcoming marriage to Kate Upton.

  155. oilswell says:

    Listen guys, I get we need a Goalie. I would prefer to grab two myself. The fact is with guys like Nikitin and Ference on the roster goaltending is not going to be the answer (outside of acquiring the next coming of Hasek/Broduer).

    Using the Blackhawks as a justification for your seeming witch hunt on Nikitin and Ference is pretty weak: the Hawks barely used their depth D and Nikitin can surely be hidden there until his contract expires. I get that the Hawks might not have won the cup with Nikitin instead of Timonen, but (a) that is speculation and surely you wouldn’t want to make that argument, and (b) the challenge this off season surely can’t be building a cup winner in one season after finishing third last.

    Oilers goaltending was putrid and the goalie has the biggest impact on goal differential. It can’t not be the greater priority, no matter the relative ease of fixing problems.

  156. G Money says:

    raventalon40: Scrivens was horrendous! Which makes it hurt more, cause I was really, really cheering for him to succeed in his hometown.

    It has been said a number of times – by all accounts, the Perfesser is a dedicated athlete and a really decent human being. Like Yak, I’m pulling like crazy for him to rebound. Like Yak, I have my worries.

  157. grim.oil says:

    G Money,

    My sample size is not all that small. If Dubnyk, Scrivens and Fasth all let in soft goals in Edmonton. Then all of them failed. That is a 2 year size of goalie failure. In that same 2 year span the 3 said goalies also did great things on great teams. I am not trying to defend these 3 goalies. I am saying they were all set up for failure. Was Scrivens letting in bad goals in L.A., Fasth in Anahiem, Dubnyk in Minn/Ari? Is Talbot letting in soft goals in New York? No, no, no and no. Point is bringing in Talbot without fixing the D is setting up for failure. When you can acquire these unproven goalies much easier than a D, why would you keep bringing in guys to fail? Fix the D and analysing the G becomes much easier. D is priority. Top two D in Edmonton are not top two on any other team. Not one.

  158. raventalon40 says:

    Dashingsilverfox:
    Worth noting that Garth Snow was able to acquire 2 goaltenders (Halak and Johnson),

    Timing is important too (I assume you meant Neuvirth at the deadline and not Johnson), though I have to agree it was a beastly season for Snow.

  159. John Chambers says:

    Jordan,

    I actually credit Tambellini for leading the scorched earth plan. Now he executed it very poorly (didn’t get a quality asset for Hemsky, making poor 2nd round selections, eroded the defense into dust, etc) but changing the focus from big-game hunting to building via the draft will be what ultimately makes this team competitive.

  160. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    G Money,

    My sample size is not all that small. If Dubnyk, Scrivens and Fasth all let in soft goals in Edmonton. Then all of them failed. That is a 2 year size of goalie failure. In that same 2 year span the 3 said goalies also did great things on great teams. I am not trying to defend these 3 goalies. I am saying they were all set up for failure. Was Scrivens letting in bad goals in L.A., Fasth in Anahiem, Dubnyk in Minn/Ari? Is Talbot letting in soft goals in New York? No, no, no and no. Point is bringing in Talbot without fixing the D is setting up for failure. When you can acquire these unproven goalies much easier than a D, why would you keep bringing in guys to fail? Fix the D and analysing the G becomes much easier. D is priority. Top two D in Edmonton are not top two on any other team. Not one.

    I don’t think anyone here has seen enough regular season LA, Anaheim, Minnesota, or Arizona games to make that judgment. And it is exactly that – a judgment – as Oilers fans might feel more of these goals were “soft” than, say, an unbiased third party observing fan from another team’s fanbase. The same way we might see Dubnyk as the “one that got away” but maybe Arizona fans and management saw him bad, bad enough to deem him expendable? All hypotheticals mind you, but not exactly evidence in any sense of the word “evidence.”

  161. RexLibris says:

    Lowetide: Ha! Man, I might just do that for a blog post.

    How do you think I stomach writing about the Flames? Built myself a blog-generator. I plug in a few names, use some sliders to adjust the number of references to Corsi, Fenwick and the like, dial in roughly how many words and voila! New blog post.

  162. G Money says:

    grim.oil,

    Three goalies is a trivial sample size. Especially three early stage goalies, for whom variations in performance are to be expected.

    An argument based on such a trivial sample size has little credibility.

    And it has no credibility at all when the larger sample size of the entire league contradicts the argument.

  163. grim.oil says:

    raventalon40,

    Draw whatever conclusion you want. These were answers to your previous statements. I refuse to go in circles chasing my tail like a dog.

  164. speeds says:

    spoiler: I’m going off memory, but isn’t that exactly what he did last year?Thought Speeds had brought it up.

    If he didn’t, I will be glad.

    Edit: Actually he couldn’t have (since the year is already in place). Don’t know what I was thinking.Okay, one less thing to keep me up at night. Thank you, John.

    John Chambers: Why can’t he sign an extension until January? I thought that applied only if a player signed a 1-year contract after July 1st.

    AFAIK any player on a one year deal can’t sign an extension prior to Jan 1, I haven’t heard of any exceptions to that based on when the one year deal is signed, but can’t say for sure that isn’t the case. I haven’t read anything suggesting that but doesn’t mean it isn’t somewhere.

  165. RexLibris says:

    Dashingsilverfox: Since Chiarelli built the Bruins, I would imagine he has them as a template although I would hope he is flexible enough to see that there are other ways to be successful.

    Chiarelli was asked more or less that exact question to which he replied that he helped build the Senators and they were a smaller, skilled team and then he built the Bruins who were a large, skilled team. His point was that team building is more or less on a spectrum with skill being the one constant and that he isn’t devoted to any one particular formula.

  166. Dashingsilverfox says:

    raventalon40: Timing is important too (I assume you meant Neuvirth at the deadline and not Johnson), though I have to agree it was a beastly season for Snow.

    He plucked Johnson from the Bruins too although he didn’t perform all that well (.889) in 17 starts.

  167. wheatnoil says:

    grim.oil:
    G Money,

    My sample size is not all that small. If Dubnyk, Scrivens and Fasth all let in soft goals in Edmonton. Then all of them failed. That is a 2 year size of goalie failure. In that same 2 year span the 3 said goalies also did great things on great teams. I am not trying to defend these 3 goalies. I am saying they were all set up for failure. Was Scrivens letting in bad goals in L.A., Fasth in Anahiem, Dubnyk in Minn/Ari? Is Talbot letting in soft goals in New York? No, no, no and no. Point is bringing in Talbot without fixing the D is setting up for failure. When you can acquire these unproven goalies much easier than a D, why would you keep bringing in guys to fail? Fix the D and analysing the G becomes much easier. D is priority. Top two D in Edmonton are not top two on any other team. Not one.

    Scrivens and Fasth actually did well in Edmonton when they were first acquired in the 2013/14 season. Scrivens particularly did very well when he first arrived in Edmonton, hence warranting a contract extension. So the 2013/14 Scrivens was much better than the 2014/15 Scrivens despite playing behind a very similar team with the same coach.

    For that matter, even Dubnyk was rebounding in Edmonton before he was traded but by then the playoffs were out the picture.

    No one is saying the Oilers defense is adequate. It is not a playoff calibre NHL level defense. What many are suggesting is that you can analyze the goalie’s performance despite a poor defense.

  168. Dashingsilverfox says:

    G Money: I’ve published an analysis of goalies that concludes that my ideal solution to the Oiler goalie situation is to get BOTH Neuvirth and Talbot.

    Talbot because he has brilliance written all over him, but sample size warnings, plus early stage goalie volatility (i.e. having a bad year a la Scrivens and Dubnyk) is actually to be expected.

    Neuvirth because he’s UFA, should be reasonably cheap to acquire, and has achieved a degree of steadiness early in his career that is very very unusual – and done that behind a defense that is even more of a tire fire than the Oiler D, in every way.

    They bring opposing but complementary characteristics to the table.

    It’s a “non-correlated asset allocation” portfolio approach to goaltending.

    Contrasted with last year, when MacT bought two penny stocks for his portfolio, and went bankrupt when they both went in the toilet.

    Agree completely and, as I’ve said before, MacT went all in with a pair of 8’s before the flop and lost his stack.

    Your analogy works too.

  169. commonfan14 says:

    Well this would get awkward fast if they decided to trade him on the draft floor…

    Edmonton Oilers ‏@EdmontonOilers 56s57 seconds ago
    #Oilers 2014 first-rounder @Drat_29 will be there! Will you? @FordCanada Draft Party | READ > http://ow.ly/OpDGM

  170. oilswell says:

    OF17: First of all, thank you for trying to enlighten the points to me.

    I can offer my take on what I think LT was driving at, perhaps that may also help?

    1. Coach has F on roster he thinks are expendable and could help Fetch a D in an even trade.
    2. The ufa market gives you an F for 120 cents on the dollar (overpay) but D trades at 140 cents on the dollar.
    3. Don’t swim upstream: make the trades and buy the relative bargains as replacements for the trades.

  171. grim.oil says:

    raventalon40: I don’t think anyone here has seen enough regular season LA, Anaheim, Minnesota, or Arizona games to make that judgment. And it is exactly that – a judgment – as Oilers fans might feel more of these goals were “soft” than, say, an unbiased third party observing fan from another team’s fanbase. The same way we might see Dubnyk as the “one that got away” but maybe Arizona fans and management saw him bad, bad enough to deem him expendable? All hypotheticals mind you, but not exactly evidence in any sense of the word “evidence.”

    Guess i have to reply with the qoute for you.

    I agree its small sample sizes with these guys on said teams. Didn’t stop Dubnyk from getting a Vezina nod did it. For the record I think Dubnyk would never have worked out in Edmonton. I feel is strongly over rated in Wild country.

    G Money, again yes small sample size on other teams I get it. I’m more interested on the sample size of goalies while they are in Edmonton. Over the last two years good prospects have not looked good over long periods of time. Scrivens looked good when we acquired him. Fasth never got much rope if any at all. Dubnyk was a first round pick who seemed pretty damb good but over time failed. Over time goalies get worst in Edmonton. This is evident on all cases. Bringing in a legit coach I feel will do wonders. That is however only 1/4 factors of good goaltending IMO. Still need 2-way forwards (Soderberg I agree with and hopefully someone morphs into Hossa), D (which looks like a black hole and is why I even place D>G) and of course the G himself.

    P.S. why am I the one witch hunting Nikitin and Ference? I thought we were all on that boat. Klefbom, Marincin and Fayne are the only keepers IMO, obviously you can add Nurse as of now.

  172. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil:
    raventalon40,

    Draw whatever conclusion you want. These were answers to your previous statements. I refuse to go in circles chasing my tail like a dog.

    I had no trouble reading your evidence and multitudes of replies. But I simply just want to know what your conclusion is supposed to be. You must be trying to prove something, but what is it?

  173. raventalon40 says:

    wheatnoil: Scrivens and Fasth actually did well in Edmonton when they were first acquired in the 2013/14 season. Scrivens particularly did very well when he first arrived in Edmonton, hence warranting a contract extension. So the 2013/14 Scrivens was much better than the 2014/15 Scrivens despite playing behind a very similar team with the same coach.

    For that matter, even Dubnyk was rebounding in Edmonton before he was traded but by then the playoffs were out the picture.

    No one is saying the Oilers defense is adequate. It is not a playoff calibre NHL level defense. What many are suggesting is that you can analyze the goalie’s performance despite a poor defense.

    Well over the larger sample size it did show that Dubnyk was an average-to-good goalie on a bad team. Correct me if I’m wrong, while the Oilers were picking first overall each year Dubnyk still had pretty decent stats from 2010-13, and not just in isolation, but also compared to other goalies who played similar amounts of games in each of those seasons.

    http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=62478

  174. wheatnoil says:

    raventalon40,

    Agreed. I wasn’t trying to say anything different. I meant Dubnyk was starting to rebound from his terrible start to his year. His even-strength save percentages and his adjusted save percentages (from war-on-ice) were quite reasonable to good.

  175. raventalon40 says:

    wheatnoil:
    raventalon40,

    Agreed. I wasn’t trying to say anything different. I meant Dubnyk was starting to rebound from his terrible start to his year. His even-strength save percentages and his adjusted save percentages (from war-on-ice) were quite reasonable to good.

    Oh okay, gotcha now. Thanks for the clarification.

  176. raventalon40 says:

    grim.oil: Guess i have to reply with the qoute for you.

    I agree its small sample sizes with these guys on said teams. Didn’t stop Dubnyk from getting a Vezina nod did it. For the record I think Dubnyk would never have worked out in Edmonton. I feel is strongly over rated in Wild country.

    G Money, again yes small sample size on other teams I get it. I’m more interested on the sample size of goalies while they are in Edmonton. Over the last two years good prospects have not looked good over long periods of time. Scrivens looked good when we acquired him. Fasth never got much rope if any at all. Dubnyk was a first round pick who seemed pretty damb good but over time failed. Over time goalies get worst in Edmonton. This is evident on all cases. Bringing in a legit coach I feel will do wonders. That is however only 1/4 factors of good goaltending IMO. Still need 2-way forwards (Soderberg I agree with and hopefully someone morphs into Hossa), D (which looks like a black hole and is why I even place D>G) and of course the G himself.

    P.S. why am I the one witch hunting Nikitin and Ference? I thought we were all on that boat. Klefbom, Marincin and Fayne are the only keepers IMO, obviously you can add Nurse as of now.

    I’m sure Dubnyk will have the chance to have a great career as he has already had a pretty decent one so far, despite what some might think.

    But is it for sure? Who knows.

    Dubnyk got a Vezina nod in half a season (or less) with the Wild.

    Andrew Raycroft also once won the Calder trophy. A good reminder that past performance is a poor indicator of future success.

    Although I do feel (in my gut, admittedly) that Dubnyk will be successful.

  177. G Money says:

    If you take all the goalies in the league who played at least 25 games and rank them in order of most to fewest EV soft goals allowed per game (a la War On Ice), here are your worst three goalies:

    Ben.Scrivens EDM 57 88.98 89.93 0.65
    Viktor.Fasth EDM 26 88.84 89.81 0.62
    Jhonas.Enroth BUF/DAL 50 90.36 91.22 0.54

    The first number e.g. 57 is GP, the second is EV sv%, the third is adjusted sv% (i.e. what the goalie sv% would have been if they’d been playing behind an average defense, which as you can see in Scrivens/Fasths case is still horrendously bad), and the last number is number of soft goals allowed per game.

    Those are inexcusably bad numbers, and that last one should be a wow inducing stat.

    For contrast, speaking of Stanley Cup goaltending, the best in the league is Corey Crawford, at 0.25.

    If you think that’s because of the defense, you should know:

    – the fourth worst is Lundqvist at 0.52 – but he makes up for it with a solid 0.922 sv% overall

    – second best in the league is M-A-F, at 0.25 and a decent (this year) 0.920%

    – third best, behind an OK Phi defense is Emery at 0.29 but a putrid 0.895 sv%. Behind the same defense, Steve Mason is 0.35 soft goals per game, but a stellar .928 sv%.

    Note that I used those two as my sample tandem of choice when I deconstructed why using EVGA/60 (Rickistats) was a terrible way to assess defensemen.

    When you try and assess goalie performance, one of the first things that strikes you is that goalie performance is all over the map. The second thing that strikes you is that goalie performance is all over the map regardless of how good or how bad the defense is in front of that goalie.

    Any attempt to try and ‘explain’ why a goalie is hot or cold tends to run you down all kinds of blind alleys and contradictions.

    That’s why you get Dubnyk looking like a Vezina candidate in Arizona, while his compatriot, last years unquestioned #1 goalie Mike Smith with a long track record of decent performance and a pretty decent World Cup, was almost as bad as Scrivens and Fasth this season.

    It’s why we call them voodoo.

    Because they are.

  178. G Money says:

    raventalon40: Dubnyk got a Vezina nod in half a season (or less) with the Wild.

    Note that Dubnyk’s sv% in Arizona was better than his sv% in Minnesota this year.

  179. RexLibris says:

    Detroit rebuilding speculation per TSN:

    However, the more drastic move St. James proposes is a draft day move that would see the Wings target the Arizona Coyotes’ third-overall pick. With an eye towards selecting Boston College blueliner Noah Hanifin, the Free Press suggests Detroit’s 19th-overall pick as well as 2013 first-rounder Anthony Mantha as potential building blocks to sealing a deal.

    http://www.tsn.ca/how-easy-will-a-kessel-trade-be-for-leafs-1.309567

    That’d be interesting.

  180. BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1) says:

    raventalon40: Man… I laughed out loud at this and my boss looked over all like, “what are you laughing at, crazy?”

    “Uh… just those… projections, from marketing, boss.”

    “Oh yeah, those are pretty whacky, RT.” I’m not even on the marketing mailing list – how did he get on it? He’s gunning for my job, I can sense it. Guess I know who I’m firing this Friday… “Those guys should quit the marketing department, and go into Olympic snowboarding!”

    “Hahahahaaahahahahah – good one boss! Haahahahahhaah…”

  181. raventalon40 says:

    G Money: Note that Dubnyk’s sv% in Arizona was better than his sv% in Minnesota this year.

    It wasn’t though?

  182. raventalon40 says:

    BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1): “Uh… just those… projections, from marketing, boss.”

    “Oh yeah, those are pretty whacky, RT.” I’m not even on the marketing mailing list – how did he get on it? He’s gunning for my job, I can sense it. Guess I know who I’m firing this Friday… “Those guys should quit the marketing department, and go into Olympic snowboarding!”

    “Hahahahaaahahahahah – good one boss! Haahahahahhaah…”

    Just awkward, amirite?

  183. raventalon40 says:

    G Money:
    If you take all the goalies in the league who played at least 25 games and rank them in order of most to fewest EV soft goals allowed per game (a la War On Ice), here are your worst three goalies:

    Ben.ScrivensEDM5788.9889.930.65
    Viktor.FasthEDM2688.8489.810.62
    Jhonas.EnrothBUF/DAL5090.3691.220.54

    The first number e.g. 57 is GP, the second is EV sv%, the third is adjusted sv% (i.e. what the goalie sv% would have been if they’d been playing behind an average defense, which as you can see in Scrivens/Fasths case is still horrendously bad), and the last number is number of soft goals allowed per game.

    Those are inexcusably bad numbers, and that last one should be a wow inducing stat.

    For contrast, speaking of Stanley Cup goaltending, the best in the league is Corey Crawford, at 0.25.

    If you think that’s because of the defense, you should know:

    – the fourth worst is Lundqvist at 0.52 – but he makes up for it with a solid 0.922 sv% overall

    – second best in the league is M-A-F, at 0.25 and a decent (this year) 0.920%

    – third best, behind an OK Phi defense is Emery at 0.29 but a putrid 0.895 sv%.Behind the same defense, Steve Mason is 0.35 soft goals per game, but a stellar .928 sv%.

    Note that I used those two as my sample tandem of choice when I deconstructed why using EVGA/60 (Rickistats) was a terrible way to assess defensemen.

    When you try and assess goalie performance, one of the first things that strikes you is that goalie performance is all over the map.The second thing that strikes you is that goalie performance is all over the map regardless of how good or how bad the defense is in front of that goalie.

    Any attempt to try and ‘explain’ why a goalie is hot or cold tends to run you down all kinds of blind alleys and contradictions.

    That’s why you get Dubnyk looking like a Vezina candidate in Arizona, while his compatriot, last years unquestioned #1 goalie Mike Smith with a long track record of decent performance and a pretty decent World Cup, was almost as bad as Scrivens and Fasth this season.

    It’s why we call them voodoo.

    Because they are.

    This is cool stuff. How are they definiting “soft” and non “soft” goals?

  184. BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1) says:

    G Money: Note that Dubnyk’s sv% in Arizona was better than his sv% in Minnesota this year.

    Raw or adjusted sv%? Because http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=62478 lists his stats as:

    Arizona: .916
    Minny: .936
    Minny (playoffs): .908

    Also interesting with Doobie, is that his sv% in Nashville was .850! I thought they had a good defense to play behind?

    And his time in the AHL that season saw him post .893.

    When you’re down, you’re down!

  185. G Money says:

    raventalon40: It wasn’t though?

    Sorry, my bad, should have explained – I meant ‘average game sv%’, rather than ‘cumulative sv%’.

    I like to look at both, but prefer the average game because the latter one hides the times a goalie gets pulled, while the first one emphasizes it.

    Dubnyks average game was 93.1% in Arizona.

    His average game in Minnesota was 92.9%.

    I’d use it more consistently (and explain it when I do) except its a manual bloody calculation each time!

  186. raventalon40 says:

    G Money: Sorry, my bad, should have explained – I meant ‘average game sv%’, rather than ‘cumulative sv%’.

    I like to look at both, but prefer the average game because the latter one hides the times a goalie gets pulled, while the first one emphasizes it.

    Dubnyks average game was 93.1% in Arizona.

    His average game in Minnesota was 92.9%.

    I’d use it more consistently (and explain it when I do) except its a manual bloody calculation each time!

    Learn something new every day!

  187. G Money says:

    BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1): Arizona: .916
    Minny: .936
    Minny (playoffs): .908

    Urgh, also should clarify – non-adjusted EV sv% as my goto marker. While sv% in general is not particularly repeatable year to year, PK sv% has almost zero repeatability so it can make a goalie look artificially good or bad, but is pure noise IMO.

    BTW, the year that Dubnyk played for Ralphie boy, his EV sv% was just OK, but his PK sv% was best in the league. This is one of the reasons why I was not as enamoured with him as many, and thought Schneider (one of the best in the league by EV sv%) would have been an excellent choice. Sadly … still would …

  188. grim.oil says:

    raventalon40,

    Point was D is more of a priority than G. At least IMO. May have got a little off topic but hey that happens.

  189. BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1) says:

    G Money,

    So you take each game’s sv%, and then average that manually? Yikes.

    And you also use EV sv%, non-adjusted. Is that also averaged?

  190. G Money says:

    raventalon40: This is cool stuff. How are they definiting “soft” and non “soft” goals?

    Yeah it is. I’d have to find the w-o-i blog post where they explain in detail, but at a high level, they define h/m/l danger chance primarily by zone on the ice. They break the ice up into about a dozen areas based on league-wide sh% from those zones, and use that as the primary classifier.

    It’s not perfect, but it is pretty good.

    They also do a temporal adjustment that I really like – they automatically classify shots that occur within 4 seconds of a previous attempt as a high danger chance, assuming it is a rebound shot (a la Parkatti’s work). They also use a ‘zone change’ time, where they’re trying to identify shots that are breakaways and odd man breaks off turnovers. E.g. if a shot comes within 5 seconds of a faceoff in the other end of the ice, its probably a breakaway of some sort.

    It’s pretty slick.

    As an aside, I’m trying to improve on it with my own temporal spatial Corsi work in two ways:

    – I’m trying to also identify cycles – when a team has repeated shots within a certain number of seconds of each other, with no breaks in play in between. That’s the temporal part. My theory is that those shots will have a higher danger associated with them, even if they’re from safe areas of the ice. And we all know how bad the Oilers were at breaking cycles! If there’s anything that will indicate the influence of the Oiler defense on goaltending, I bet this will be it.

    – I’m also separating the danger zones on the ice by shot, not just location. A 20 ft slapshot is more dangerous than a 15 ft backhand. I’ve already tested that part of the theory and it is solid. The ‘shape’ of the danger zones is very different depending on shot!

    I hope to combine both of those two into the standard Corsi calculation, which I plan to call “Danger Adjusted Corsi”. Catchy, no!

  191. G Money says:

    BOLD OVER (5-14-6-1):
    G Money,

    So you take each game’s sv%, and then average that manually? Yikes.

    And you also use EV sv%, non-adjusted. Is that also averaged?

    Yeah, that’s why I don’t use it as often as I’d like! But easy to do for a single goalie at a time. Or even the married ones badumpbump.

    So – average non-adjusted EV sv%!

  192. G Money says:

    So many different ways of trying to assess goalies … and they’re still fucking voodoo!!!!!

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!
© Copyright - Lowetide.ca