RE 15-16 BOB GREEN: (DON’T BOTHER WITH THE) LOCAL GIRLS

Bob Green was hired just about a half a mile down the road and did good work in the procurement department outside the draft in year one plus. I’m prepared to credit him with several astute adds, including Jordan Oesterle (a legit NHL prospect) and Josh Winquist (also legit, but not on the Oilers 50-man list this year). It would also be folly to suggest Green had no involvement in the acquisitions of Laurent Brossoit and Griffin Reinhart via trade (both occurring after Green arrived on the scene with the Oilers).

  1. So that’s it for Stu? Yes. He’s gone.
  2. Seems harsh. Suspect he’ll be gainfully employed sooner than later. That’s the business.
  3. What got him fired? Bob Nicholson’s forensic audit probably. Once Bob Nicholson had his talking points (the item about having only one second-round pick or lower on the NHL team) and expressed them publicly, something was going to give.
  4. You defended him to the end. Idiot! MacGregor’s story has so much track left to go, we’ll see at the end of this decade. Right now, 2008-2014 looks strong on the first-round picks and less so later. We’ll see how things roll. If you’re going to make a change in terms of scouting director, it’s important to make sure you’re not making the same mistakes as the last guy. We’ll see if that happens, Green has an outstanding reputation and did fabulous work with the Oil Kings.
  5. I was somewhat perplexed by Green’s first draft. Why?
  6. There was a lot of quality available at No. 16 and No. 33. Sure, but the scouting staff’s job is to have a good name ready when for the next turn at the talent pool. They don’t control what the GM decides to do in terms of dealing selections.
  7. You said Green would have some involvement in the Brossoit and Reinhart deals. Yes, makes sense he would but the final decision belongs to Chiarelli. I’m certain Green would have given a glowing report but that’s a Chiarelli transaction.
  8. Green had to be happy getting Reinhart. You bet, Reinhart was a big part of the OK run of championships and he does have all kinds of ability. I understand the thinking behind it too, they get a player who should be able to help during the McDavid entry-level deal.
  9. So part of the responsibility belongs to Green if Reinhart fails. It’s a bet, just like any other trade or selection. The Oilers added a close to NHL-ready Griffin Reinhart for two impressive prospects. They get a head start (three years) and more certainty in terms of quality. The reaction was wide ranging, but from cheers to snickers the one thing all have in common is we simply don’t know. I think it’s a very good bet.
  10. Why? The Oilers added a player who can grow with the team and be a part of the McDavid cluster (possibly) from day one. The team has three defenders who should be locks for 200 NHL games during McDavid’s entry-level deal (Reinhart, Klefbom, Nurse). That’s a nice addition and cuts off loads of development time.
  11. You yourself said acquiring Reinhart for No. 16 and No. 33 was an overpay. I still think that’s the case. If the Oilers had taken Evgeni Svechnikov or Joel Eriksson-Ek with the No. 16 selection and Jansen Harkins at No. 33, I believe the club would have maxed on the value. However, those players are years away, perhaps they don’t play a game in the NHL until McDavid’s second contract. Reinhart addresses need and helps now (or soon). I get why the trade was made, even agree with it, but remain convinced it was an overpay in terms of assets.
  12. God you’re stubborn. Yes, that’s true. Still, I’m right in this case, pretty convinced of it. That said, there is some evidence the Oilers did very well by that trade.
  13. What did you think of Green’s first draft? Pleased with it. McDavid was a no brainer and that selection allowed the team to make several moves (three in all) to shore up the current roster (Talbot, Reinhart, Gryba). I credit the scouting staff with getting nice value in Caleb Jones, Ethan Bear and John Marino. I don’t know much about the Europeans but the club got a lot of decent value later on. I like the fact that four of the six players drafted were known, and attended the combine.
  14. Why did they draft so many defenseman? The Oilers drafted for need. They don’t need any centers, suspect they didn’t like many goalies in the range their picks fell in and they have a decent number of wingers. One wonders if they pondered Svechnikov as an option at No. 16, but Reinhart was on their list and came available.
  15. What position will they chase next draft? Wingers and goalies, unless there’s a franchise defenseman or winger around their draft position.
  16. You always say drafting for need is a mistake. Yes. It is. However, the Oilers do it so beyond pointing out the fact that it’s a mistake there’s not a lot left to say about it.
  17. With Green at the helm, maybe they’ll change their template. Green was in charge this year and they drafted 67% defensemen. The Oilers have now drafted 16 defensemen in the six drafts since Stu MacGregor and the scouting staff argued over taking Tyler Pitlick at No. 31 in 2010. That’s 34%. The Oilers have a great big sign that screams DEFENSE but this summer added young players from 18 through 21 and are now brimming with prospects throughout the system. There’s no room at the Inn now, beyond Loik Leveille (possibly).
  18. Loik Leveille? Yes. The Oilers invited Leveille to Orientation camp and if they bring him to the fall camp can sign him. It’s the same bit of magic they tried with Vladimir Tkachev a year ago and Detroit successfully managed with substantial prospect Joe Hicketts. I really like the idea, hope it happens. Tyler Soy is also a consideration, but the Oilers appear to be avoiding forwards with foot speed issues this summer.
  19. Will the Oilers continue to shop the WHL? Yes, the CHL should continue to play a feature role and the WHL has given Edmonton some outstanding talent (most recently Nuge, Eberle, Leon, with trunks of memories still to come).
  20. Is that a good idea? Well, Green will know these people inside and out, so from that point of view it’s good because if the Oilers do take a dub kid there’s every chance we have inside information/key insight. Put it this way: It would be absolutely idiotic to AVOID a WHL player (or Oil King) BECAUSE they play in the league or a specific team. Trust your scouts, trust your board and have the courage of your convictions.
  21. Is this about Reinhart again? I think the Oilers scouting staff probably fractured on that 2012 first-round pick and it festered for three long years. Finally got it back when Reinhart got back, maybe they can grab Murray down the line and complete the set.
  22. Any sign of analytics in this draft? I think Ethan Bear would have shown up on the radar and of course Connor McDavid is the ultimate Everest for scouts and math. Edmonton’s high water mark in regard to draft analytics remains 2013. That draft produced Greg Chase from the bowels and Kyle Platzer from the depths, but Marco Roy—an analytics find—was not signed. I wonder if this means math is dead at the draft table. It would be a crying shame if that was the case.
  23. Why this song? The Oilers take a lot of crap in regard to going local (Oil Kings) either by trade or draft. I think that’s ridiculous, especially in regard to players who are high end and developed in your own back yard. Why would you hire Bob Green and the scouting staff and then not pay attention to them? Don’t draft the local guys is exactly as smart as saying don’t bother with the local girls. If these kids are quality, and Reinhart is, then have the courage of your convictions. Trust your scouts and have good scouts in every lake there are fish. Every one.
  24. If you could ask Bob Green one thing, what would it be? I’d ask him why no team drafted Nathan Noel. I think someone should have and that we’ll be talking about him next June. Math can tell you things, I’d say. I would ask why they could identify Greg Chase in 2013, but not do it with Vladimir Tkachev in 2014 and Nathan Noel in 2015? By then, I imagine security would have arrived and shown me the door.

written by

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

45 Responses to "RE 15-16 BOB GREEN: (DON’T BOTHER WITH THE) LOCAL GIRLS"

  1. Ca$h-McMoney! says:

    The more I think about it, the happier I am with this draft. I really like the last two picks, not do much because I know anything about them (I don’t) but because I like the philosophy. Both represent picks with risk, but big upside. The goalie posted several seasons of solid numbers in a tough league, the Russian has pro tools but is a project. If either guy develops, they will bring something scarce and valuable to the table.

    Picks in the 200s are the ultimate lottery tickets, so boom/bust is the way to go.

  2. Woodguy says:

    Why did they draft so many defenseman? The Oilers drafted for need. They don’t need any centers, suspect they didn’t like many goalies in the range their picks fell in and they have a decent number of wingers. One wonders if they pondered Svechnikov as an option at No. 16, but Reinhart was on their list and came available.

    I find it interesting that Bear and Marino are both RH.

    Its like their template was “TAKE BEST DMAN AVAILABLE”

    Then when they took Jones, they added an extra filter: “TAKE BEST RH DMAN AVAILABLE”

    I like all three of those picks btw, taken far lower than they were projected, all very solid picks.

  3. Lowetide says:

    Woodguy:
    Why did they draft so many defenseman? The Oilers drafted for need. They don’t need any centers, suspect they didn’t like many goalies in the range their picks fell in and they have a decent number of wingers. One wonders if they pondered Svechnikov as an option at No. 16, but Reinhart was on their list and came available.

    I find it interesting that Bear and Marino are both RH.

    Its like their template was “TAKE BEST DMAN AVAILABLE”

    Then when they took Jones, they added an extra filter: “TAKE BEST RH DMAN AVAILABLE”

    I like all three of those picks btw, taken far lower than they were projected, all very solid picks.

    Yes, agreed. Solid picks. I had Bear No. 38 and Marino No. 112 and knew he was rising because of my Luedeke conversations. Jones didn’t make my list but the math didn’t see him good. We’ll get a much better read in the coming year, he certainly looked mobile at the orientation camp. Those USHL numbers tend to be a bit wonky for blue.

    http://lowetide.ca/2015/06/26/here-comes-the-sun-2/

  4. frjohnk says:

    How the heck did Loik Levielle not get drafted?
    61 points in 75 games as a D man in his draft year ( reg season and playoffs)
    6 feet 223 pounds and plays physical.

    Even with skating or defensive issues ( I don’t know if this is the case, just saying), he should have went in the draft at some point.

    Glad the oilers are looking at him.

  5. Hammers says:

    The one thing that always bothered me is a Green or McGregor may say pick X but the GM goes another way . We never do know for sure , do we . ?

  6. Lowetide says:

    frjohnk:
    How the heck did Loik Levielle not get drafted?
    61 points in 75 games as a D man in his draft year ( reg season and playoffs)
    6 feet 223 pounds and plays physical.

    Even with skating or defensive issues ( I don’t know if this is the case, just saying), he should have went in the draft at some point.

    Glad the oilers are looking at him.

    Red Line had him No. 77. Liked him, but said this about his skating:

    Sloppy footwork; gets caught flat-foorted by speedy forwards. Needs
    to improve his quickness and lateral agility and is definitely playing a
    bit on the heavy side – shedding some bulk may help his overall game.

  7. Hammers says:

    Romulus Apotheosis:
    Oilers and Free Agent Value Contracts

    https://romtable.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/free-agent-value-contracts/

    Very interesting info in this article .

  8. RexLibris says:

    Why this song?

    Uh, because of the video!

    Sheesh.

    LT, thought I’d heard you say that you were taking Mrs. LT to the game last night.

    If so, I hope you didn’t have to spend the night on the couch.

    Fantastic win, great defense/offense balance and man alive that team is rolling. With BC next this could really fun.

    I’m actually anxious for this group to meet the Stampeders now.

  9. RexLibris says:

    Lowetide: Red Line had him No. 77. Liked him, but said this about his skating:

    Sloppy footwork; gets caught flat-foorted by speedy forwards. Needs
    to improve his quickness and lateral agility and is definitely playing a
    bit on the heavy side – shedding some bulk may help his overall game.

    All of that says “take a flyer in the 6th or 7th round”. Skating can improve, weight can be managed with diet and appropriate training.

    Not complaining we got him for free, but still, surprised.

  10. Lowetide says:

    RexLibris: All of that says “take a flyer in the 6th or 7th round”. Skating can improve, weight can be managed with diet and appropriate training.

    Not complaining we got him for free, but still, surprised.

    Well he was ranked in Red Line’s second round, there’s a lot to like about the player

    an underrated power play quarterback who shoots missiles from
    the point. Likes to handle the puck and moves up into the rush often.
    Makes crisp, pro-style outlet passes. Good puck movement on the PP
    and tees it up perfectly in the wheelhouse for forwards on 1-timers.

  11. sliderule says:

    I think when deciding whether it’s BPA or need it depends on the draft.

    In some drafts it pretty obvious up to the middle of first round who the BPA is.The later picks usually have a range of ten players were you can get a D or C who end up with pretty similar careers.That is the point were the team has to decide how big a difference there is between their need prospect and what might end up being the BPA .

  12. RexLibris says:

    Lowetide: Well he was ranked in Red Line’s second round, there’s a lot to like about the player

    an underrated power play quarterback who shoots missiles from
    the point. Likes to handle the puck and moves up into the rush often.
    Makes crisp, pro-style outlet passes. Good puck movement on the PP
    and tees it up perfectly in the wheelhouse for forwards on 1-timers.

    I agree.

    I guess what I’m saying is that if all the verbal says 2nd round but your scouts aren’t sold on his skating, then when he’s still there in rounds 6 and 7 why the heck not take him?

    Surely the idea of investing a little time with a skating coach outweighs the talent difference between someone listed as a 2nd round talent vs a 6th or 7th rounder? Especially when the 2nd round talent is someone playing in North America and over whom the club could probably assert more influence by way of coaching and nutrition than someone overseas where there may be more communication issues through distance, culture and language.

  13. Lowetide says:

    RexLibris: I agree.

    I guess what I’m saying is that if all the verbal says 2nd round but your scouts aren’t sold on his skating, then when he’s still there in rounds 6 and 7 why the heck not take him?

    Surely the idea of investing a little time with a skating coach outweighs the talent difference between someone listed as a 2nd round talent vs a 6th or 7th rounder? Especially when the 2nd round talent is someone playing in North America and over whom the club could probably assert more influence by way of coaching and nutrition than someone overseas where there may be more communication issues through distance, culture and language.

    Ah, gotcha. Yes agreed. I thought he fit right in at orientation camp and there was a lot (A LOT) of defensive talent there.

  14. RexLibris says:

    sliderule:
    I think when deciding whether it’s BPA or need it depends on the draft.

    In some drafts it pretty obvious up to the middle of first round who the BPA is.The later picks usually have a range of ten players were you can get a D or C who end up with pretty similar careers.That is the point were the team has to decide how big a difference there is between their need prospect and what might end up being the BPA .

    I think BPA becomes a far more nuanced thing the further one goes into the draft.

    The term “best” is entirely subjective to begin with, but the measures used to determine “best” are going to vary the further down you go.

    The “best” prospect at #184 may look to you like a big right-handed defenseman who shuts down 70% of the opposition sorties every night but needs to work on skating.

    Or maybe the “best” prospect at #184 looks to your neighbour like the 5’4″ 140lb winger who scored 60% of his points on the man advantage but is on the ice for 75% of his team’s EV point production.

    BPA works for a time, but even in the top ten it can have some subjectivity. Sometimes it is clear (Kylington where the Flames got him seems a good example to me) sometimes it isn’t (when the Ducks took Lindholm at #5 I recall a few people wondering why they passed on Monahan, Ristolainen or Nichushkin).

    I’ve never liked how some fans, not you in this case so don’t take this personally, cry out “BPA!” on draft discussion threads but don’t have anything to back it up aside from “GM needs to find a way to trade up and nab generations-prospect-X! Make it happen, Burkie”.

    I guess we really have no further to look than Vancouver’s 2010 draft list to see that “Best Player Available” is often widely interpreted.

  15. Lowetide says:

    I think you could make a strong case for the following players to have been BPA at 208 or 209

    No. 48— C Nathan Noel, Saint John Sea Dogs (QMJHL) Wide range of skills, undersized.
    No. 67— L Vladimir Tkachev, Quebec Remparts (QMJHL) Small W, extremely skilled.
    No. 74— G Michael McNiven, Owen Sound Attack (OHL) 23GP, 2.78 .914
    No. 75— C Tyler Soy, Victoria Royals (WHL) Lightning quick forward.
    No. 84— C Dante Salituro, Ottawa 67’s (OHL). Small forward, terrific skill.
    No. 86— D Sebastian Aho, Skelleftea (SHL). Undersized, puck mover.
    No. 92— C Sebastian Ohlsson, Skelleftea (SHL). Small skill center showed well at U18’s.
    No. 103— C Brett McKenzie, North Bay Battalion (OHL). Two-way C with skill.
    No. 116— R Kay Schweri, Sherbrooke Phoenix (QMJHL). Fantastic playmaker.
    No. 117— D Loik Leveille, Cape Breton (QMHL). I can’t keep him off the list. Ultimate boom/boom.
    No. 118— C Brayden Burke, Lethbridge Hurricanes (WHL). Was very good in half a season.
    No. 120— L Pius Suter, Guelph Storm (OHL). A small, older, highly skilled C, scored 72 points.

  16. RexLibris says:

    Lowetide: Ah, gotcha. Yes agreed. I thought he fit right in at orientation camp and there was a lot (A LOT) of defensive talent there.

    The only caveat I’ll add is that I believe in Bob Green’s case he’s using an approach that MacGregor used in the Gernat pick where they have him ranked at X but know he’ll drop or and when he makes it past a certain draft number they decide either to call him or figure he’ll pass through entirely and so move on to the next item on the list and make a note to contact his agent eight seconds after the draft to invite him to camp.

    That is maximizing value and using all available avenues to procure assets for your club.

    Come to think of it, I wonder if some tax lawyers to the wealthy would make good scouting directors?

  17. spoiler says:

    Lowetide: I think you could make a strong case for the following players to have been BPA at 208 or 209

    Or it might not be any of those guys.

  18. spoiler says:

    RexLibris: I guess what I’m saying is that if all the verbal says 2nd round but your scouts aren’t sold on his skating, then when he’s still there in rounds 6 and 7 why the heck not take him?

    Because getting him for free is so much better?

    It’s like the Oilers got an extra draft pick.

  19. RexLibris says:

    Lowetide:
    I think you could make a strong case for the following players to have been BPA at 208 or 209

    No. 48— C Nathan Noel, Saint John Sea Dogs (QMJHL) Wide range of skills, undersized. No. 67— L Vladimir Tkachev, Quebec Remparts (QMJHL) Small W, extremely skilled. No. 74— G Michael McNiven, Owen Sound Attack (OHL) 23GP, 2.78 .914 No. 75— C Tyler Soy, Victoria Royals (WHL) Lightning quick forward. No. 84— C Dante Salituro, Ottawa 67’s (OHL). Small forward, terrific skill. No. 86— D Sebastian Aho, Skelleftea (SHL). Undersized, puck mover. No. 92— C Sebastian Ohlsson, Skelleftea (SHL). Small skill center showed well at U18’s. No. 103— C Brett McKenzie, North Bay Battalion (OHL). Two-way C with skill. No. 116— R Kay Schweri, Sherbrooke Phoenix (QMJHL). Fantastic playmaker. No. 117— D Loik Leveille, Cape Breton (QMHL). I can’t keep him off the list. Ultimate boom/boom. No. 118— C Brayden Burke, Lethbridge Hurricanes (WHL). Was very good in half a season. No. 120— L Pius Suter, Guelph Storm (OHL). A small, older, highly skilled C, scored 72 points.

    Has anyone cross-referenced this to see how many have had camp invites?

    If it is close to 100% of eligible prospects than I’d say that more than one team is doing what we’ve described above, that is, betting that the players pass through, move on to some longshots that they don’t have to sign for four years (to get the drop on the next Fabian Brunnstrom/Danny Dekeyser) and then extending invites to the CHL kids who passed through.

  20. Lowetide says:

    spoiler: Or it might not be any of those guys.

    Well it wasn’t Troy Hesketh or Cam Abney in 2009, so there’s progress.

  21. spoiler says:

    LT said…

    That draft produced Greg Chase from the bowels and Kyle Platzer from the depths, but Marco Roy—an analytics find—was not signed. I wonder if this means math is dead at the draft table.

    That’s a helluva big assumption.

  22. Lowetide says:

    RexLibris: Has anyone cross-referenced this to see how many have had camp invites?

    If it is close to 100% of eligible prospects than I’d say that more than one team is doing what we’ve described above, that is, betting that the players pass through, move on to some longshots that they don’t have to sign for four years (to get the drop on the next Fabian Brunnstrom/Danny Dekeyser) and then extending invites to the CHL kids who passed through.

    Interesting. Certainly the final two selections are outliers by any definition. I always talk about draft and follow, maybe it’s draft and incubate far from our town?

  23. Lowetide says:

    spoiler:
    LT said…

    That draft produced Greg Chase from the bowels and Kyle Platzer from the depths, but Marco Roy—an analytics find—was not signed. I wonder if this means math is dead at the draft table.

    That’s a helluva big assumption.

    I did say “I wonder” to the word assumption is not correctly applied in this case.

  24. RexLibris says:

    spoiler: Because getting him for free is so much better?

    It’s like the Oilers got an extra draft pick.

    Yes, but he could have accepted invitations to any number of other teams and the 29 other teams at the draft at that point have no more guarantee that he will accept there invites than the Oilers.

    I go back to the Kings taking Nick Ebert at the very end of the 2011 draft. Former top-ten prospect going dead last in the draft due to some rumours of attitude problems is a good example of taking a shot with a depth pick.

    It is certainly worth the risk, I suppose, as the chances of finding the next Robitaille are pretty small but I’d be curious to know how many teams are actively pursuing this strategy and how many are just eschewing these kids out of stubbornness.

  25. striatic says:

    Should the conventional wisdom that drafting for need is a mistake be reevaluated?

    Trading for defense is really difficult. Almost impossible unless you’re Calgary and exploit an extremely rare new GM based idiotic mistake. Centres similarly so.

    The Big Idea underlying BPA drafting is that players are commodities that can be exchanged pretty much interchangeably regardless of position, so you want the highest absolute value at the draft and sort out positional balance later.

    But is that big idea actually true among today’s GMs in today’s NHL? If it isn’t, then is the BPA approach really optimal when you can potentially get stuck with a decent enough winger who still can’t return a quality defenseman in trade when that is the organizational need?

  26. RexLibris says:

    Lowetide: Interesting. Certainly the final two selections are outliers by any definition. I always talk about draft and follow, maybe it’s draft and incubate far from our town?

    Draft and incubate is exactly what I argued for in the moments following the Jankowski pick/hyperbole.

    Said the the best thing for the young man would be to send him away for four years and let everyone get on with their lives. Poor kid damned near had his life ruined because Feaster had to do a simonizing job on his ego on national television.

    Yes, draft and incubate the 7th rounders, take a gamble that the CHL fallers squeak through and then send out a Facebook Event invite to any and all.

    Also, one the topic of Green and the draft: his OK teams were build through the draft with balance in mind. He isn’t afraid to draft for need or take falling talent (Samuelsson) if he is confident it is a best fit for the team.

    I had argued for something similar when I suggested the Oilers take Galchenyuk over Yakupov. I felt Galchenyuk at the time offered as much skill as Yakupov and that his skill set better complemented what the forward corps would need than Yakupov.

    I was supportive of the pick and am a strong supporter of Yakupov today. I’m open to being proven wrong, but there are times to consider taking a lesser talent in one area if it means bolstering strengths all around.

  27. blainer says:

    I know we really like posting our opinions here and that’s what this blog is all about so I will add one more opinion. It is far too early to form an opinion on the Reinhart trade either way.. We need to start evaluating that trade in maybe six months but won’t really know how it will turn out for possibly three years or more. .. I do like the trade though.. JMHO..

  28. supernova says:

    You yourself said acquiring Reinhart for No. 16 and No. 33 was an overpay. I still think that’s the case. If the Oilers had taken Evgeni Svechnikov or Joel Eriksson-Ek with the No. 16 selection and Jansen Harkins at No. 33, I believe the club would have maxed on the value. However, those players are years away, perhaps they don’t play a game in the NHL until McDavid’s second contract. Reinhart addresses need and helps now (or soon). I get why the trade was made, even agree with it, but remain convinced it was an overpay in terms of assets.

    ———-

    I think this is well articulated.

    I am fan of Reinhart and am happy he is in our organization. I am also a fan of the draft.
    I wouldn’t have paid the price we did but now that we have I am solidly in Reinharts corner.

    Svechnikov and Harkins in those picks is a dream scenario prior to the draft and it could have happened. The forward system would be awesome for the oilers.

  29. supernova says:

    RexLibris: Draft and incubate is exactly what I argued for in the moments following the Jankowski pick/hyperbole.

    Said the the best thing for the young man would be to send him away for four years and let everyone get on with their lives. Poor kid damned near had his life ruined because Feaster had to do a simonizing job on his ego on national television.

    Yes, draft and incubate the 7th rounders, take a gamble that the CHL fallers squeak through and then send out a Facebook Event invite to any and all.

    Also, one the topic of Green and the draft: his OK teams were build through the draft with balance in mind. He isn’t afraid to draft for need or take falling talent (Samuelsson) if he is confident it is a best fit for the team.

    I had argued for something similar when I suggested the Oilers take Galchenyuk over Yakupov. I felt Galchenyuk at the time offered as much skill as Yakupov and that his skill set better complemented what the forward corps would need than Yakupov.

    I was supportive of the pick and am a strong supporter of Yakupov today. I’m open to being proven wrong, but there are times to consider taking a lesser talent in one area if it means bolstering strengths all around.

    I too personally believe in the draft and incubate or draft & nurture theory.

    I am not sure the actual numbers but perhaps 1.5 % draft picks should even be in the conversation of playing in the NHL immediately following their draft.

    —-
    I am a big fan of Bob Green prior to him getting his current role, and I think he will do well in his role.

    I have followed his procurement philosophy in Medicine Hat & Oil Kings.
    I do believe given the appropriate level of authority he will make excellent choices for the Oilers.

  30. RexLibris says:

    supernova: I think this is well articulated.

    I am fan of Reinhart and am happy he is in our organization. I am also a fan of the draft.
    I wouldn’t have paid the price we did but now that we have I am solidly in Reinharts corner.

    Svechnikov and Harkins in those picks is a dream scenario prior to the draft and it could have happened. The forward system would be awesome for the oilers.

    There’s something about this that reminds me of the Fox and the Crow.

    Can’t say why, but the longing for what could have been seems to resonate here. If the trade weren’t made then we could very likely feel the same way in two years’ time because we could have had Reinhart for a couple of picks.

    Oilers fans: never happy since 1991.

  31. supernova says:

    Lowetide:
    I think you could make a strong case for the following players to have been BPA at 208 or 209

    No. 48— C Nathan Noel, Saint John Sea Dogs (QMJHL) Wide range of skills, undersized. No. 67— L Vladimir Tkachev, Quebec Remparts (QMJHL) Small W, extremely skilled. No. 74— G Michael McNiven, Owen Sound Attack (OHL) 23GP, 2.78 .914 No. 75— C Tyler Soy, Victoria Royals (WHL) Lightning quick forward. No. 84— C Dante Salituro, Ottawa 67’s (OHL). Small forward, terrific skill. No. 86— D Sebastian Aho, Skelleftea (SHL). Undersized, puck mover. No. 92— C Sebastian Ohlsson, Skelleftea (SHL). Small skill center showed well at U18’s. No. 103— C Brett McKenzie, North Bay Battalion (OHL). Two-way C with skill. No. 116— R Kay Schweri, Sherbrooke Phoenix (QMJHL). Fantastic playmaker. No. 117— D Loik Leveille, Cape Breton (QMHL). I can’t keep him off the list. Ultimate boom/boom. No. 118— C Brayden Burke, Lethbridge Hurricanes (WHL). Was very good in half a season. No. 120— L Pius Suter, Guelph Storm (OHL). A small, older, highly skilled C, scored 72 points.

    Heck of a list.

    Was tweeting on draft day that we should be drafting Noel & Soy in the 7th round.

    I am a big proponent of trying to obtain a few 7th rounders each year, the cost to acquire 7th rounders is low and you can roll your dice in a big way in the 7th round if it doesn’t work out the cost wasn’t that high but if you hit on one you are stocking up your system.

  32. supernova says:

    RexLibris: There’s something about this that reminds me of the Fox and the Crow.

    Can’t say why, but the longing for what could have been seems to resonate here. If the trade weren’t made then we could very likely feel the same way in two years’ time because we could have had Reinhart for a couple of picks.

    Oilers fans: never happy since 1991.

    RexLibris,

    Maybe I didn’t state it clearly.

    I am very pleased to have GR, I am one of his biggest supporters on this blog and Twitter. (Behind Bruce McCurdy)

    What’s done is done.

    I can’t hide the fact that I also was a big Fan of Harkins, and of the draft. However he isn’t Oiler
    property. I have dealt with it and am fully in the GR fan department.

  33. RexLibris says:

    supernova: I too personally believe in the draft and incubate or draft & nurture theory.

    Oh yeah!

    Prove it!

    😉

    Great series so far, btw.

    Further to our discussion on the Flames, I dug up my old article on their rebuilding efforts prior to the 2013 sell-off: http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/9/18/on-rebuilding-part-ten-the-calgary-flames

    Here’s one small excerpt from that (very) long article: Button likely had Darryl Sutter making the calls on the first or second round picks during Sutter’s time as GM. This likely left Button with only the later rounds to work and thus put his and his staff’s stamp on the team. Button has found some decent players in those later rounds. Not necessarily any gems in the bunch, but some decent NHL players nonetheless (David Moss, Adam Pardy, T.J. Brodie as examples). What I cannot say, though, is that this amount of depth drafting success is any different, or even arguably better, than most other scouting departments.

    This was from Sept. 2012, so Brodie was just beginning to establish himself.

    Button has been their head scout since 1997 and in that time has struggled to bring talent to the organization.

    It isn’t until 2012 that things start to look like they’ve begun to turn around. One could suggest that Feaster and Weisbrod, for all their shortcomings at the NHL level, at least helped sort out the AHL system the same way Tambellini did for the Oilers.

  34. RexLibris says:

    supernova: RexLibris,

    Maybe I didn’t state it clearly.

    I am very pleased to have GR, I am one of his biggest supporters on this blog and Twitter. (Behind Bruce McCurdy)

    What’s done is done.

    I can’t hide the fact that I also was a big Fan of Harkins, and of the draft. However he isn’t Oiler
    property. I have dealt with it and am fully in the GR fan department.

    No, I wasn’t assuming you aren’t in the Reinhart corner. Just that we fans tend to always want the other half of what’s on offer.

    Think of the Perron/Paajarvi deal.

    We got a top six winger with a chip on his shoulder. But damn do we have to give up Magnus? Then it was about Barbashev falling to the Blues.

    We had an actual, real, breathing NHL player but we were sore over losing Paajarvi and giving up a prospect, neither of whom were playing in the NHL at the time.

    I mean, it’s kind of funny in a “what the hell is wrong with us” kind of way.

    I’m trying not to think about Harkins and Svechnikov because I was very high on both of them before the draft and could easily fall into dreaming about them as Oilers in four years’ time. Instead I think we need to start living in the moment rather than the future. It’s been ten long years of tomorrowland so it is a hard habit to break, but nonetheless, break it we must.

  35. Ryan says:

    Drafting the bpa is a widely-espoused doctrine at this blog, so I think it’s fair to ask….

    1. What is the bpa? If you’re comparing forward skaters, it seems fairly intuitive… Go for offense, but if you’re comparing a winger to a defenseman, what is the basis for comparison?

    2. If the bpa is a winger, do you keep drafting wingers? This is problematic for several reasons…

    First, we know even scoring wingers are not great trading currency.

    Second, top-pairing defensemen rarely become available in trade–Hamilton and McDonagh aside…

    Some GMs do crazy things like trade Seguin or Hamilton, but generally speaking top pairing dmen and number one centers need to be drafted by their teams.

    Third, if the bpa winger falters, you have an illiquid asset. See Yakupov vs Reinhart.

  36. frjohnk says:

    I am not a huge fan of the best player available argument.
    I think the “BPA” term has some holes in it.

    Lets say there is a ranking of draft eligible prospects
    Connor McDavid is a 100.
    A 7th rounder is a 50.

    Lets say the two candidates to be picked are a winger and a Dman.

    Winger ranked as a 90. Which would be a 2nd line winger, possibly a first liner and a D man who is ranked as a 84, which would be a number 3/4 Dman, possibly a number 2 D man.

    But lets say you are loaded on the wings in the NHL and AHL, but have huge holes on the D in the NHL and as prospects.

    Do you draft “best needed player available” or do you take “best player available”?
    In this case, the winger is the better player but I would argue that if the team would pick “best player available that will help the team the most” they would pick the Dman as the gap in the need is greater than the gap in the best.

    Another issue I have with taking “BPA” is that picking “BPA” at 18 years old does not necessarily mean that player will be the best player in 5 years. “BPA” rankings at 18 years old is widely different than best player rankings 5 years down the road at 23 years old. Some players just don’t seem to get much better than what they do as a 18 year old. Other players keep developing until 23-25 years old.

    Maybe a better idea would be to pick “highest projectable talent available that will fit team the best” Pick the player that will succeed the best with that teams development, playing style, depth, need and that players attitude to becoming the best they can become within a time period of 5 years.

  37. Bootstrap Effexor says:

    Even supposing there was a reliable, absolute rating scale the magnitude of difference between BPA and NIL BPA (next-in-line best player available) is almost certainly smaller than the negative bump of having BPA asked to play 40 games on his off-wing in his first AHL campaign because of a positional logjam when NIL BPA could have been developed entirely on his natural path. There no chance whatsoever that BPA is the optimal heuristic against a fully developed game-theoretic model that encompasses the development pipeline, the 50-man list, CBA culs-de-sac, and such like.

    A human brain that could usefully process such a complex model would be several percent nano-crystals by volume—after cremation, you’d still have to inter a thimble-sized glass stalactite hanging from the deposition plate of the electrostatic separator (once cooled it would chip off with a small hammer blow, looking something like the Franklin Mint’s limited-edition kiln-fired commemorative conifer of Shrek’s ogre ear extract)—so this isn’t going to happen any time soon.

    What we left with, then, is BPA in the red track pants vs a bunch of highly opinionated, road-weary anecdote-swappers in the blue Extendos—with not necessarily every hairy leg in its assigned leg hole; these are men who don’t always get their shirts buttoned with longitudinal rigour right after waking in a dreary motel at 0430 for a long day on the road (it’s all sorted out after three black coffees and the first trip to the men’s room).

    Thus the BPA track pants and T-shirt as mandatory group apparel.

  38. RexLibris says:

    RIP Rowdy Roddy Piper.

    I hope they have plenty of bubblegum wherever you are now, and Frogtown will never be the same.

    http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0684929/?ref_=tt_cl_t3

  39. Woodguy says:

    Edmonton moving all the way up to being an above-average team is mostly surprising
    because neither coaching nor Connor McDavid are part of the calculation. Improved
    goaltending and the arrival of Andrej Sekera could dramatically reduce the number of
    goals allowed.

    The above excerpt if from Rob Vollamn’s Hockey Abstract 2015.

    You can buy it here: http://www.hockeyabstract.com/hockey-abstract-2015-update

    Rob’s abstracts are always worth buying. Great stuff.

    You don’t need to be a fancy stats person either, its all explained very clearly.

    He has EDM ast 93 points and fighting for a playoff spot BEFORE adding in McLellen and McDavid’s impact.

    Woot!

    I say again Woot!

  40. supernova says:

    RexLibris: No, I wasn’t assuming you aren’t in the Reinhart corner. Just that we fans tend to always want the other half of what’s on offer.

    Think of the Perron/Paajarvi deal.

    We got a top six winger with a chip on his shoulder. But damn do we have to give up Magnus? Then it was about Barbashev falling to the Blues.

    We had an actual, real, breathing NHL player but we were sore over losing Paajarvi and giving up a prospect, neither of whom were playing in the NHL at the time.

    I mean, it’s kind of funny in a “what the hell is wrong with us” kind of way.

    I’m trying not to think about Harkins and Svechnikov because I was very high on both of them before the draft and could easily fall into dreaming about them as Oilers in four years’ time. Instead I think we need to start living in the moment rather than the future. It’s been ten long years of tomorrowland so it is a hard habit to break, but nonetheless, break it we must.

    RexLibris,

    I agree as a fan base we tend to really love on the picks that we could have had or cry about deals executed.

    Likely a few wins will calm some of that down.

  41. jp says:

    Lowetide: Red Line had him No. 77. Liked him, but said this about his skating:

    Sloppy footwork; gets caught flat-foorted by speedy forwards. Needs
    to improve his quickness and lateral agility and is definitely playing a
    bit on the heavy side – shedding some bulk may help his overall game.

    I wonder if they sent him home after Dev camp and said come to training camp in real good shape and we’ve got a contract for you.

    Sounds like he could be a player.

  42. jp says:

    RexLibris:
    Has anyone cross-referenced this to see how many have had camp invites?

    If it is close to 100% of eligible prospects than I’d say that more than one team is doing what we’ve described above, that is, betting that the players pass through, move on to some longshots that they don’t have to sign for four years (to get the drop on the next Fabian Brunnstrom/Danny Dekeyser) and then extending invites to the CHL kids who passed through.

    It’s a bit of an odd way of doing things though. Presumably if you’re willing to risk another team taking a player then you’re not that into him. You can`t be worried about NOT getting the player if you`re risking someone else picking him (or the player attend camp with another team).

    The other thing is that to actually get a player like Leville or Tkachev you have to forgo the 2 year evaluation window the draft gives you and hand the player a guaranteed ELC 3 months after passing through the draft. Lots of 2nd and 3rd rounders don`t end up progressing as expected and never get contracts. Handing them out to players who`ve just passed though the draft strikes me as poor management of the 50-man list.

    Seems like a dangerous game to play, and maybe unlikely something NHL teams would be doing. Not sure if it would even be advantageous if used on a bit larger scale (giving out multiple ELCs to un-drafted 18 year-olds).

  43. barry.moore23 says:

    RexLibris,

    Rex, I always like that you have to say. I haven’t figured out – are you an Oilers fan, a Flames fan living in Edmonton, or neither ?? Do you write at Flames Nation ?? That’s all ;). Hope you don’t mind me asking. B.

  44. RexLibris says:

    barry.moore23:
    RexLibris,

    Rex, I always like that you have to say. I haven’t figured out – are you an Oilers fan, a Flames fan living in Edmonton, or neither ?? Do you write at Flames Nation ?? That’s all ;). Hope you don’t mind me asking. B.

    Oilers fan. Dyed in the wool Oilers fan.

    I began writing for Oilersnation a few years back and split time between them and then-nascent Flamesnation as well as kicking in a few bits here and there for the Jets, Leafs and NHLNumbers.

    I’ve kept up with Flamesnation because I’ve found that an outside voice can bring some real value and it allows me to keep some emotional distance when evaluating the relative health of the organization.

    One of these days I’ll get off my duff and start my own blog, but even then, I’m not sure what I would write about in regards to the Oilers that isn’t covered as well or better by the battalion of very talented people already devoting so much of their time to the subject already.

    Here’s a link to my FN stuff, if you’re interested. http://flamesnation.ca/authors/RexLibris

    There’s some older stuff I posted before coming on as a freelancer for the Nations that would show up under either Jonathan or Kent’s byline.

    I’m on twitter (occasionally) as well as CodexRexLibris, if you are interested. I’m not there that frequently though so don’t expect great insights into the universe. 😉

Leave a Reply

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