WAIVERS AND WAVERING

David Musil will be waiver eligible this fall and the Edmonton Oilers will have a choice to make: Risk losing him or keeping him on the roster as a 7D or 8D. This is exactly what happened last fall with Brandon Davidson, who is now (probably) one of the four most valuable defensemen in the organization. Will Musil see the same treatment this fall? My guess is no, but we will find out in due time.

Using the 23-man roster limit as our guide, there are pressure points emerging across the NHL in regard to waivers. Some teams will make trades before cutdown day, while others will risk losing players. Here is a quick guideline of the top players I see who could come available via waivers:

  1. R Ryan Sproul, Detroit Red Wings. The young man has been in the AHL for three years and is NHL-ready. I think he makes the big club based on numbers, but it is not a slam dunk and the Oilers should leap at the chance to add the puck mover.
  2. L Josh Leivo, Toronto Maple Leafs. I am probably wrong in my counting, but this is a fine prospect and there appears to be no room. If Toronto attempts to slide him through, Edmonton should grab him.
  3. L Teemu Pulkkinen, Detroit Red Wings. They will deal him long before he hits the waiver wire, but someone is heading out of Detroit based on their having 17 signed forwards at this time. A dandy young player.
  4. C Mark McNeill, Chicago Blackhawks. There are things about him (RH, two-way center, better speed than Lander) that would make him an attractive addition. I wonder if the Oilers end up trading for him if he doesn’t make the Hawks this fall.
  5. L Kenny Agostino, St. Louis Blues. The Oilers don’t specifically need a LW, but this guy is 24, scored 57 points in 65 AHL games and is 6.01, 200. I think Edmonton might look at him in an effort to shore up the depth forward spots.
  6. C Derek Grant, Buffalo Sabres. I didn’t understand why he hadn’t received a long NHL look—apparently Buffalo agreed. Grant went 27-18-45 in 36 AHL games last season, followed by 15 games where he averaged 11 minutes a night. I hope he hangs around for expansion. Make sure you are UFA next summer, young man.
  7. RD Connor Carrick, Toronto Maple Leafs. An interesting young player, I don’t think the Leafs have room for him. Has scored 45 points per 82 AHL games and may have enough to help an NHL team.
  8. RD Stefan Elliott, Nashville Predators. He is an RFA and is in the journeyman portion of his career, but Elliott posted 24 points in 84 games and is a righty—a player who could help the Oilers organization.
  9. RD Scott Mayfield, NY Islanders. Edmonton liked him in his draft year and Mayfield has shown some progress. He is a defensive defender with size, Edmonton has a bunch of those types—but Mayfield is a righty.

written by

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

207 Responses to "WAIVERS AND WAVERING"

« Older Comments
  1. GCW_69 says:

    spoiler: I would bet that his more frequent handling of the puck holds up over the rest of your sample, and that in itself is encouraging.

    I have a funny feeling that Chia made a phone call to SportLogiq for their passing stats before pulling the trigger that sent away his stud winger.

    If you watched Behind the B you would have much less faith Chiarelli made that phone call.

  2. GCW_69 says:

    Ca$h-McMoney!:
    GCW_69,

    Oh I agree, it’s not fixed (it’s better).I’m just saying clearly we aren’t blaming the coach anymore.

    Ah, on that we can agree.

  3. Gordies Elbow says:

    ~ Hall of Shame ~: Some forget that for Reinhart schedule B includes league paid bonus that don’t count against cap and 1.5M inbonuses that would count. (Not to be confused with the 850K in more achievable schedule A).

    So does anyone know the terms NYI gave GR for schedule B?. And the cap implications this year (even if he is unlikely to hit them even if he plays 82)

    I posted the following in the last thread, but it may have been missed.

    It has to be for the league-wide performance bonuses.

    From the CBA: “A Player and Club may also negotiate individual bonuses payable by the Club for the League-wide Awards/Trophy Bonuses and League Performance Bonuses set forth below, except where specifically stated otherwise, in amounts to be individually negotiated between a Club and a Player (the Club and Player could agree to pay more, or less, than the amounts payable by the League, set forth below). The maximum aggregate amount that a Club can pay a Player (in addition to any amounts paid by the League to such Player) on behalf of a Player’s Individual “B” Bonuses is $2 million per season. There is no limit on the quantity (as opposed to the dollar amount) of League-wide Awards/Trophies and League Performance Bonuses a Player may receive from the Club.”

    He could have an additional bonus of up to 2 million for winning the Norris, Hart, etc., making the official NHL All-Star Team, or for being “A defenseman who finishes among the top ten (10) defensemen in the League in goals, assists, points, points per Game (Minimum 42 Regular Season Games played by Player and comparison group) or ice time among defensemen (aggregate and/or per Game.)”

  4. GCW_69 says:

    The stuff out of Montreal on their analytics guy sure is interesting.

    For me, the mandate of a hockey analytics department should be three fold:
    1) Reality check on decisions. Do the numbers align with management’s intuition? If not, provide guidance to management on what they might should consider before making a decision, or suggesting further analysis management might do before proceeding (this is what Toronto’s scouting department uses analytics for)
    2) Bring new insights fit management’s consideration (hidden gems, market inefficiencies, etc.)
    3) Explain what has happened that goes beyond judgment. Providing linkages between drivers and outcomes.

    Montreal clearly had issues grasping this. Need in Behind the B, I am not convinced Chiarelli does either.

  5. rickithebear says:

    frjohnk: So the reason why Fayne went from allowing 6.5 high danger scoring chances per 60 in NJ in 13-14 while playing top competition to allowing 11.6 and 12.2 high danger scoring chances per 60 in the last two seasons with Edmonton was because he was not in shape?

    Phew! All along I thought New Jersey’s system made Fayne’s numbers look good.

    if that is what you gleaned from that?
    Ok then.

    1. Under Deboer Greene and Fayne had great numbers.

    2. Next 2 years under new coaches in NJ Larsson continued to maintian similar numbers.
    greenes numbers climbed.
    Larsson held!
    Greene was worse!

    3. we have the #5 HSCA save% goalie and NJ has the #3 HSCA save% goalie.

    4. SJS under Wilson and Tmac also had a history of younger Dmen developing into low SA and top end HSCA D.
    when you look at Braun and vlasics progression under TMAC they were
    strong SA d and top 30 HSCAD.

    5. 14-15 they all bailed on TMAC.

    6. Doboer a return to Elite standard HSCA and SA rates in SJS.
    Deboer and Tmac similar numbers from the players.

    7. fayne has Decent SA rates under Eakins/MacT / Nelson
    with Nelson rolling Klefbom and Fayne together they generate 2 elite HSCA games to 1 AVG/bad.
    resulting in similiar but slightly higher numbers in edm.

    8. Fayne being sent down and Fitness are declared an issue. 15-16 to 2016 offseason.
    I analyze the mechanics of play for each position player.
    Look at that players specific playing style.
    You need to look at video from NJ; 1st yr EDM and 2yr EDM!

    9.Sekera a 32.60 + SA/60 and bottom 20 HSCAD when facing first comp is paired with Fayne.
    Paired together facing 1st comp Fayne zooms up 3.7 SA and HSCA and Sekera zooms down in his career SA and HSCA.

    Who is the positive push?

    So concern over not having Schnieder?
    A drop from #3 to #5

    Concern over team system.
    SJS and NJD develop strong SA and HSCA D.
    we saw an improvement in HSCA performance from 2 young D KLefbom and Davidson under Tmac.
    We see similiar SA and HSCA results between same players under Tmac and Deboer in SJS.

    We saw Sekera’s SA and HSCA numbers improve against 1st comp with a less than fit Fayne.

    Larsson RD
    KLefbom LD
    Fayne RD
    Davidson LD

    hopefully provide enough depth that Sekera a top SA and HSCA d aginst 2nd comp never sees 1st comp.

  6. Woodguy says:

    Ca$h-McMoney!:
    GCW_69,

    The correct narative around TMac was as follows:

    1.He’s a good coach.
    2. Maybe not elite.
    3.He’s certainly not a bad coach.
    4.if/when the Oilers are bad in the future we won’t fire the coach.We will fix the god damn f*#king roster.

    Truth

  7. Ryan says:

    Woodguy:
    Ryan,


    Show me an example of players that’s above this level but are poor at moving the puck over the major portion of an NHL season.

    There’s only 24 of em who can.

    I know it was an arbitrary cut off, but its far too exclusive.

    I looked at cf60 as it was one of my original ideas. It seems to sway too much by team. It also isn’t useful to discern anything between two players on the same pairing who play significant minutes together. Also, Fayne was excellent by this measure in Jersey.

    That’s why you use RelCF/60 and pay close attention to good teams who can have good players with slightly negative Rel, they will tell you where to set your line in the sand.

    Also,

    Fayne played with Greene.

    None of these metrics will exclude the partner effect.

    I think there’s a miscommunication here.

    I am saying any defensemen who can post 1 p/60 over a course of a season is a good bet to be able to transition the puck.

    For those under the cut-off, follow the steps I gave examples of to predict if they can move the puck.

    If their most common d partner plays more minutes at evens than they do, that’s one red flag.

    If their d partner’s A2/A1 ratio is significantly higher than there’s, that could be a red flag.

« Older Comments

Leave a Reply

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