RE 16-17 PETER CHIARELLI: NORTHWEST PASSAGE

Peter Chiarelli must have known this job could be his Everest. Any man gifted with the power of reason and a reasonable calculator would know the dangers of racing the roaring Fraser to the sea. Just as those brave men who blazed a trail through the beautiful wilderness we call home, Chiarelli must have known there would be no middle ground, no turning back, no quarter given, no way out. Make it to the sea—riches untold await you. Fail—and no glory, not even a marker on the plains to mark the spot. Godspeed, Peter Chiarelli. Having fun yet? (Northwest Passage)

CHIARELLI TRADES

chiarellis trades

  1. Are you ready for this? Sure. You are in a better mood than in the spring (here).
  2. What was I mad about then? You didn’t like the Reinhart trade and wanted him to accomplish more in year one.
  3. I miss those days. Haha. Hey, there are positives.
  4. Seriously? Didn’t expect that from you. Hey, as I mentioned yesterday in the comments section, I didn’t like the Hall trade in terms of value, but it is a paradigm shift for an organization that couldn’t spell defense even with the fence already completed.
  5. I don’t read the comments section. Ironic.
  6. Did you think PC would trade Hall? I thought it was possible. In that item linked to above, I mentioned Chiarelli had no fear in the trade market and we could expect another major one.
  7. You hate the trade. Why? I think it was an overpay and the team dealt an impact offensive player—one of the best in the league who was attached to a value deal through the end of the decade.
  8. You would have been happier to stay the course? Great question. The problem is that we have no idea what else was out there. Plenty of rumors about the Habs and Subban, but that depended on Dubois being at No. 4—or that is from what I can gather.
  9. You would have been happier to stay the course? No, I think Chiarelli needed to drill into the needs and address some or all.
  10. Why did he trade Hall? I think he was willing to trade any of the Steve Austins, but Hall had the most value. Chiarelli probably had a list of defenders he would sacrifice Hall for, and Larsson was on that list.
  11. Was it a wise move in terms of positional depth? Once Milan Lucic was secured in the free agent window, I would say PC had cover at the position. Lucic, Benoit Pouliot, Patrick Maroon and Matt Hendricks (or other) is a pretty strong depth chart. I think you can make the playoffs if those LWs stay healthy and the rest of the roster can bring that kind of quality.
  12. Did Chiarelli protect the quality and depth of the roster? Once Jesse Puljujarvi fell to Edmonton, I think he could be somewhat comfortable he was close. JP is not a proven NHL player, but he is a terrific prospect. If he can play in the NHL and score well, then keeping the pick and trading Hall made sense. I am not saying it was a no-brainer, but I can see the logic.
  13. So, Lucic—Larsson—Puljujarvi is close enough to Hall—Subban—no pick? I think Subban would have required more than the pick, possibly Leon—but the Oilers would have kept Hall—and of course Subban is a very dynamic player. He would have been my target and may have been Chiarelli’s, but it sounds like (based on what I have read) Dubois was a key for Montreal. The other thing is cap, Subban costs a pretty penny and that would have been a concern. The Subban deal, rumored to be Leon, the pick and Klefbom, was no bargain.
  14. So, and with respect, what the hell is wrong with the Hall-Larsson deal? It is an overpay and that will have its own cost. Lucic is older and more likely to be a drag on the roster in terms of price v performance earlier than Subban would have been. That is a factor. This summer may have moved the window of opportunity from (say) seven to five years, or from five to three. It has real risks.
  15. What about Larsson? He is a good addition, I think he could play well with Oscar Klefbom or Andrej Sekera or Brandon Davidson. I am excited to see him as an Oiler and my only issue is asset cost.
  16. Would a second round pick have done it? Nah, I think PC is too smart to look for futures like that in a deal of this kind. Hall was no deadline dump, this is a player. Although NJ does have Boston’s second-round pick (thanks to Bruce McCurdy for the info), and Edmonton will be on the hunt for one (the Oilers pick belongs to Boston this coming season unless Edmonton goes offer sheet).
  17. What would have done it? What would what now?
  18. Listen, I am asking to name your price, bridge the damned gap! I think a player who could also help and on a value deal. Or a prospect who would not need to be protected in the expansion draft but is close enough to maybe help this year in a pinch.
  19. Do you have a name? New Jersey doesn’t have a guy, but someone like Nikolay Goldobin. A player who the Oilers could keep outside the expansion draft and be reasonably sure of him helping in 2016-17 and 2017-18.
  20. So, Adam Larsson and Nikolay Goldobin for Taylor Hall and you are happy? Happier, yes. It is still a trade I would have preferred he not make, but we talked about Milan Lucic coming here long before free agency—and the impact of that signing were predictable.
  21. That isn’t a giant gap (Goldobin) you know. The actual trade ($6M Hall through 2019-20 for Larsson $4.167M through 2020-21) gives extra value to Larsson’s contract. Both are damned good, Larsson’s is for longer and Edmonton was hungrier to deal.
  22. The key to a negotiation? Yes. Indifference about the outcome. Blasted New Jersey.
  23. Can you see why he made this deal? Yes.
  24. Can the Oilers make the playoffs? Yes.
  25. What is the worst thing about this deal? The price was too high.
  26. Will Oilers fans ever settle down about the Hall trade? No. We are still not over the Bill Guerin trade.
  27. What about PC in Free agency? Great. I liked Andrej Sekera and Mark Letestu a year ago.
  28. And this year? I am a fan of Lucic, so that was a deal that—although it was longer than I thought it would be—pleases me.
  29. You like the deal? Yes. Said so at the time.
  30. You like Lucic and Larsson? Yes.
  31. Good lord you are stubborn! You have interacted with the Dutch, yes?
  32. The rest of the signings? Completely flummoxed by the Gustavsson signing. Honestly.
  33. Maybe they like Brossoit? I suspect that is it.
  34. What else? I liked the Beck signing at the time, even more now that I have had time to review.
  35. What is Chiarelli good at? I like his free-agent signings and his smaller deals (Maroon, Kassian) are rock solid in my opinion (not all, but most). Among the bigger deals, Cam Talbot was a good one, you know my opinion about the Reinhart and Hall trades.
  36. Why this song? I am saving Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald for the gales November.
  37. People want Chiarelli fired you know. Tough job. High stress. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
  38. Do you think he likes the improvements? God I hope so. He made them.
  39. What is the best thing you can say about this roster? After 10 damned years they finally have some balance on defense—and experience. It isn’t perfect, but the Edmonton Oilers are going to be able to shutdown some sorties this fall and winter. It has been a long time.
  40. Ten years! One percent of my life!
  41. Is he done? No. The Oilers will tweak either before the season or early days.
  42. What position? Defense, forward, maybe goal if the backups fail.
  43. So, all the positions? I think Peter Chiarelli has to see progress with this team. If the goaltending falters in October—and it could—I expect him to step in and attempt a fix on the fly.
  44. Where do the Oilers finish? Without changes? Fifth in the division, 10th in the conference and 21st in the nhl.

written by

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

264 Responses to "RE 16-17 PETER CHIARELLI: NORTHWEST PASSAGE"

« Older Comments
  1. SwedishPoster says:

    Centre of attention: Really? Wow. Stralman is a pretty damn good d-man.

    Do you think Larsson can get up into the high 30’s point-wise like Stralman has? I think Larsson’s offense will develop later similar to Stralmans.

    I like Strålman but he doesn’t control the game like Larsson. Offensive numbers will depend on usage but yeah I think he already has more offense than what we’ve seen. Still Strålman is probably somewhat better offensively at this moment in time, mainly due to shot and creativity but Larsson is far better defensively and a better passer.

  2. Rebilled says:

    One thing is for sure.

    PC made a huge trade this summer. it was an indirect ‘2 for 1’ trade.

    Lucic and McDavid looks great to me. We added Larrson and JP. Made a decision about one of our former #1 picks. Former. The guy is gone.

    Excited for the season. Just get another Dman.

  3. G Money says:

    Speaking of defensemen, it continues to boggle my mind how little respect the high profile statsy types around the league give to Doughty and to Shea Weber.

  4. G Money says:

    SwedishPoster,

    Suggesting Larsson is better, let alone as good as, Stralman is amazingly high praise.

    I hope you’re right.

  5. G Money says:

    Why is no-one talking about the fact that Brock Lesnar laid a beating on Randy Orton at SummerSlam?

    C’MON PEOPLE.

  6. Centre of attention says:

    G Money,

    I was asking for help in the Hedman vs Larsson debate. You agree Larsson won’t reach Hedman levels, even considering the best case scenario?

    I still think Stralman is a better comparison, maybe less offense and better defense?

    G Money:
    Speaking of defensemen, it continues to boggle my mind how little respect the high profile statsy types around the league give to Doughty and to Shea Weber.

    Weber snipes 15-20 goals playing brutal competition and ridiculous amounts of minutes. He can play on my team any day. Montreal can kindly retain 50% of his salary, though. Haha.

    Doughty to me is the best defenseman in the western conference. Enough said.

  7. Barcs says:

    Rebilled:
    One thing is for sure.

    PC made a huge trade this summer. it was an indirect ‘2 for 1’ trade.

    Lucic and McDavid looks great to me. We added Larrson and JP. Made a decision about one of our former #1 picks. Former. The guy is gone.

    Excited for the season. Just get another Dman.

    Very good post.

    Get another Dman, indeed.

  8. Lowetide says:

    G Money:
    Why is no-one talking about the fact that Brock Lesnar laid a beating on Randy Orton at SummerSlam?

    C’MON PEOPLE.

    I was shocked.

  9. haters says:

    G Money: Sweet lil baby Nuge.

    This is the year he becomes Datsyuk 2.0.

    BOOK IT!

    Holy crap, THEE Gmoney replied to my comment. I’m so screenshotting this shit. My buddy’s around the water cooler are gonna freak tomorrow 🙂

  10. Centre of attention says:

    G Money:
    SwedishPoster,

    Suggesting Larsson is better, let alone as good as, Stralman is amazingly high praise.

    I hope you’re right.

    Its not uncommon for defensemen to develop their offensive game later in their career. Larsson already has the defensive side locked down, which is most of the battle with young D-men isn’t it?

    Now it’s just a matter of getting offense-oriented minutes, which is something he seriously lacked in NJ.

  11. Barcs says:

    Off topic, but can anyone tell me where we sit in regards to cap space?

    With all of this shifting bonus money, and young players playing partly in the AHL and partly in the NHL, I’m having a hard time figuring out just how much space we actually have.

    Enough for an offer sheet?

  12. stevezie says:

    I know they just settled it but I was getting coffee. Saying “Player A in the future will be comparable to player B in the present” is a comparison.

    If Hall got traded for Hjarmalsson Chia should be fired. If Hall got traded for Hedman I’m going to have some words to eat. If Hall got traded for Larsson last year then it was a bad trade, but the team is salvageable with some other really good moves but ho man, you really don’t want to sell Taylor Hall for less than market value

  13. stevezie says:

    Caramel Batman,

    Is this a famous thought experiment with a name? I only ask because it’s something I started asking people to do in my teens (the result of growing up with sweet but opinionated fundamentalists. If the answer is, “nothing”, re-examine the point of the discussion.) If I independently stumbled across a technique minted by Plato or the like, well, hey! Look at me!

    Anyway, If Larsson take a step forward and becomes a 25 minute, 40 point defenceman who continues to excel defensively I will still be suspicious of the trade because I don’t think there is any current evidence to suggest that jump is about to happen*. It is a bad bet to put your chips on someone doing something they’ve never done- Chia will have gotten lucky and I am stingy with how many points I’ll award for that. But I will admit the bad trade will have become a tie.

    If he becomes Hedman, luck or not that’s a good trade and maybe Chia is the world’s best scout and saw what few others could see.

    If he is a 25 minute, 30 point guy who excels defensively (rich man’s Sekera) then I could accept the trade for the roster need/contract reasons the apologists offer, if it had come with a sweetener like a first or a substantial prospect or a salary dumb going the other way. Obviously this didn’t happen so it will remain bad. I expect this is where I will be.

    If he is something worse Chia should be probably loose his job over it.

    *(I think G is with me here, WG, the Swede and a few others might be more bullish on what the current available evidence says about Larsson’s future and what it can be compared to.)
    **No one has mentioned how Hall’s next season will affect the trade. If his leg falls off I will remain down on the trade because-even if Chia knew his hip was getting lose-the available evidence is what sets Hall’s value, not the future.

    Waiting and seeing tells you some things, but not all of them are true and/or relevant.

  14. Centre of attention says:

    stevezie:
    I know they just settled it but I was getting coffee. Saying “Player A in the future will be comparable to player B in the present” is a comparison.

    THANK YOU!!! 🙂

  15. Centre of attention says:

    stevezie,

    So you’re willing to let Larsson’s play after the trade affect his value re: the trade,

    BUT you’re not willing to let Hall’s play after the trade affect his value re: the trade?

    Smells like slight double standards here. Perhaps I’m missing something.

  16. Pescador says:

    G Money:
    Why is no-one talking about the fact that Brock Lesnar laid a beating on Randy Orton at SummerSlam?

    C’MON PEOPLE.

    I’m not certain, but I think it was rigged.
    Zing

  17. godot10 says:

    “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

    Chiarelli tried doing the same thing over ONCE. He wasn’t going to do it TWICE.

    He decided the best option was to abort the stillborn Hall Rebuild, and do the McDavid rebuild right, not based on a winger, but on centres, defensemen, and a goaltender.

  18. stevezie says:

    Centre of attention: Doughty to me is the best defenseman in the western conference. Enough said.

    Doughty looks amazing if you look at his best games. He is unbelievable in the playoffs and olympics. If you want to use this to judge him, that’s fair.

    That said I don’t think he is one of the five best regular season D-man in the league, and considering his team’s proclivity for missing the playoffs I do think that’s a legitimate knock.

    Since you were probably about to ask, Karlson, Hedman, Keith, Letang, Giordano. Yes Ricky, I probably overrate scoring and yes, I’m probably keeping Subban and Doughty out of the top 5 just to feel special. Really after Karlsson it gets pretty close.

  19. commonfan14 says:

    Even if Larsson never becomes Hedman, let’s hope he at least becomes Larsson.

    I’ll always remember a line about the Weight trade I read in a copy of the Gateway: “Jochen Hecht is not Doug Weight, and Marty Reasoner isn’t even Marty Reasoner.”

  20. Pescador says:

    I think Peter Peter Pumkin Eater will have a lot more friends on the Interblogs if he pulls the trigger on one of those smaller type deals (Musil or Yak+pick) for an actual NHL Dman before the season starts.
    Good or bad.
    Righty 3C doesn’t seem like that tough of a player to find, yet hear we are.
    Would you offer Gryba a contract, or will a PTO suffice?

  21. Centre of attention says:

    stevezie: Doughty looks amazing if you look at his best games. He is unbelievable in the playoffs and olympics. If you want to use this to judge him, that’s fair.

    That said I don’t think he is one of the five best regular season D-man in the league, and considering his team’s proclivity for missing the playoffs I do think that’s a legitimate knock.

    Since you were probably about to ask, Karlson, Hedman, Keith, Letang, Giordano. Yes Ricky, I probably overrate scoring and yes, I’m probably keeping Subban and Doughty out of the top 5 just to feel special. Really after Karlsson it gets pretty close.

    I think Doughty does so much for the Kings they would be nowhere without him. Jonathan Quick is highly overrated, Doughty makes his job SO easy.

    Quick has had a few good playoff runs, fairly “meh” otherwise. He also leads the league in disallowed goals against, which definitely affects my opinion of him. (never forget)

    Doughty is excellent during the regular season, playing 28 solid minutes on average. He doesn’t put up ridiculous points but he’s no slouch when it comes to scoring. He is also one of the best shut down defenders in the league, while still putting up ~40 points.

    I think Doughty is better than Keith, and Keith better than Giordano. Other than that I agree with your list.

  22. stevezie says:

    godot10: “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

    This is untrue and even if it was it still doesn’t apply here. “Hall for Larsson” or “do nothing” were no the only options, and even if they were I think a healthy McDavid and Klefbom could get the team pretty close to the current version.

    Probably the current version is still better because we did NEED a rhD, but they could have traded for Subban, they could have signed any one of the available ones, they could have traded for a third, unknown player…

    Hard to judge the trade against an imagined alternative I know, but it shows that fake Einstein quote doesn’t apply here.

  23. stevezie says:

    Centre of attention,

    Sorry, I’m trying to say that Larsson’s play after the trade will not affect my view of it unless he does something so miraculous (good or bad) that it overcomes my ability to be rational. A Hedman or Hjarlmason like performance would do this.

    Still on the fake Einstein quote (not trying to pick on Godot, who probably doesn’t care anyway), forget an understanding of how clinical science works- was no one paying attention to Jurassic Park? Doing things the same way twice results in different results ALL THE TIME!

    “Ah ha, Ah ha- Chaos!”

  24. jonrmcleod says:

    Caramel Batman: Put it this way. If Lucic didn’t have a NMC, would you be able to trade him for a seventh round pick tomorrow? The answer to that is an emphatic no.

    No offence, but this is insane.

  25. G Money says:

    Centre of attention,

    Stralman’s defense (as measured by DFA/60 at least) is superb – way better than what I expected when I first looked.

    His results against all levels of comp are excellent, both on an absolute basis and on a rel basis.

    Better than Larsson’s results, which is why if Swedish’s eye says they are comparable or Larsson is better, that is a hell of a booster pack.

    Hedman on the other hand is so good it’s sick, and the SOB is only 25.

    So it’s hard to imagine that Larsson will be as good as Hedman, that would be an astounding gap to cover in two years.

    I think one of the things that helps to assess whether I’m looking at things objectively is to give a justified probabilistic view to things rather than speak in certainties (which are exceedingly rare).

    For example, if I’m predicting Larsson, my wild ass guess as to how he turns out might look something like this:

    Top pairing – 40% – I give it close to 50-50 because he’s already playing top pairing and he’s only 23. But he’s getting shelled pretty good at it (one of my beliefs about top pairing defensemen is that they drag their teammates to respectability … and Larsson despite his stellar shutdown skills hasn’t been able to do that), so I’m going to drop it to 40%.

    While further development would be reasonable to expect, and hopefully an offensive ‘pop’ comes in the Oilers system, it’s not reasonable to treat that as a certainty.

    Second pairing – 55% – I give it better than 50/50 because he already has a track record of playing very effectively at this level. The only thing that gives me any pause is that NJ system that suppresses everything. Makes it really hard to tell.

    To put it another way, I believe chances are 95% that Larsson shows as a Top 4 D in Edmonton. Someone will give me shit for the 5%, but this is high praise.

    Third pairing – 5% – It’s small but it’s non-zero. That NJ system makes everything difficult to parse. We’re all expecting Larsson to preserve his defensive ability and spring his offense in Edmonton. What if it turns out his offensive ability is real, and his defensive ability is system? If you haven’t thought about that as at least one possible outcome, you’re ignoring downside risk.

    This kind of process I believe forces you to think a little more objectively on the upside and the downside, rather than say pulling comparisons (“Datysuk 2.0!”) for fun.

  26. stevezie says:

    Barcs: I think this is a point that isn’t brought up enough.

    Chia chose to keep the younger (and admittedly cheaper) Draisaitl and Nurse over Hall. Also, it seems as though he is intent on keeping Nurse rather than dealing him for a RHD.

    I understand his reasoning, wanting to keep the big C and the nasty Dman. Big, mean teams are his MO.

    Personally though, I would rather have kept the known elite Hall and dangled the still unknown Draisaitl for a Dman.

    Then you could have run something similar to Crosby-Malkin-Kessel in Pittsburgh with McDavid-Nuge-Hall, using a lesser C with the play driving winger.

    I understand his reasoning and think he is wrong. Hall is for sure Hall, and that’s awesome. Will Drai and Nurse be awesome someday? Hands and birds and bushes.

    (Which I know you agree with. I’m trying to avoid work today.)

    —-

    Off-topic article on Doughty:
    https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/drew-doughty-has-never-been-nhl-s-best-defenseman–trending-topics-212421594.html

    Like all sentient beings I have mixed feelings about Lambert but he makes a good caes heer. not that Doughty sucks- he’s obviously awesome. He just wasn’t “overdue” for a regular season award.

    He makes the Kings go but he has excellent defenceman to play with and excellent forwards to pass to and an excellent coach devising a system and a pretty good (if overrated) goalie to play in front of…

    I’d love to see him with a different coach, actually. I think Sutter reins him in. The results are there, but as a hockey fan I want to see him (and really want to see Subban) in front of a coach who wants him to go.

  27. stevezie says:

    commonfan14,

    Great line

  28. Woodguy says:

    G Money: Yes.Based on current results, I would put him in the Demers and Sekera bucket.Demers and Sekera actually both have better measured results, but that’s when even an objective-hardass like me makes allowances for usage and zone starts.

    Demers is 28.Sekera is 30.

    Larsson is 23.

    We can legitimately have significant upside hope for Larsson on that basis, can we not?

    (It’s refreshing for me to argue the other side of the coin)

    He’s not in that bucket.

    He’s in the Vlasic, Hjarlmasson, Tanev bucket.

    I actually put him there quantitatively, not qualitatively, so I know I’m right.

    🙂

  29. G Money says:

    Pescador,

    I hope the Oilers scoop Pirri and Nakladal for cheap. Pirri because when I dug into him more deeply, I’m convinced he’s the reverse-Korpikoski – he won’t drive the line, but he won’t drag them down either, his results reflect his teammates.

    His numbers right now are poor because of e.g. Logan Shaw and Gudbrandson, but they’re really quite good on the rare occasions when he gets to play with better players. So this would be a buy low situation on a useful and still-young player.

    Everything I’ve looked at with Nakladal is positive from a numbers perspective. The tiny bits of video suggest he’s not at all bad. The fact that the smart Falmes bolgers (e.g. Kent Wilson) want the Flames to re-sign him, and our own Rex notes that he has a pretty big cannon for a point shot and there you have it. DO IT CHIA.

    stevezie: Anyway, If Larsson take a step forward and becomes a 25 minute, 40 point defenceman who continues to excel defensively

    If this happens, I will dance in the streets and plan the parade route!

    Seriously, I *hate* being the objective Debbie Downer all the time. I was born and raised in the ‘Chuk, and was a young man when the Oiler dynasty was in full effect.

    I desperately want these fuckers to win again. It’s why I waste so much goddamn effort analyzing them!

  30. G Money says:

    Woodguy,

    Except I haven’t yet explained to you why your numbers are wrong. But I will, trust me! 😀

  31. Centre of attention says:

    stevezie: I understand his reasoning and think he is wrong. Hall is for sure Hall, and that’s awesome. Will Drai and Nurse be awesome someday? Hands and birds and bushes.

    (Which I know you agree with. I’m trying to avoid work today.)

    —-

    Off-topic article on Doughty:
    https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/drew-doughty-has-never-been-nhl-s-best-defenseman–trending-topics-212421594.html

    Like all sentient beings I have mixed feelings about Lambert but he makes a good caes heer. not that Doughty sucks- he’s obviously awesome. He just wasn’t “overdue” for a regular season award.

    He makes the Kings go but he has excellent defenceman to play with and excellent forwards to pass to and an excellent coach devising a system and a pretty good (if overrated) goalie to play in front of…

    I’d love to see him with a different coach, actually. I think Sutter reins him in. The results are there, but as a hockey fan I want to see him (and really want to see Subban) in front of a coach who wants him to go.

    I said Doughty was best D in the west. Never said in the league. Definitely beats Giordano out for a spot in my top 5 league wide as well.

  32. G Money says:

    haters,

    Hey, I am a man of the people!!!

  33. stevezie says:

    Woodguy,

    Does Vlasic’s recent and dramatic surge in offence not qualify him for a different bucket?

    Maybe his 15-16 was “luck” but if we’re lining Demers, Sekera, Vlasic, Tanev, Hjarlmalsson, and Larsson up for bucket assignment there is one who’s scoring is clearly beyond the pail.

  34. Centre of attention says:

    G Money:
    Centre of attention,

    Stralman’s defense (as measured by DFA/60 at least) is superb – way better than what I expected when I first looked.

    His results against all levels of comp are excellent, both on an absolute basis and on a rel basis.

    Better than Larsson’s results, which is why if Swedish’s eye says they are comparable or Larsson is better, that is a hell of a booster pack.

    Hedman on the other hand is so good it’s sick, and the SOB is only 25.

    So it’s hard to imagine that Larsson will be as good as Hedman, that would be an astounding gap to cover in two years.

    I think one of the things that helps to assess whether I’m looking at things objectively is to give a justified probabilistic view to things rather than speak in certainties (which are exceedingly rare).

    For example, if I’m predicting Larsson, my wild ass guess as to how he turns out might look something like this:

    Top pairing – 40% – I give it close to 50-50 because he’s already playing top pairing and he’s only 23. But he’s getting shelled pretty good at it (one of my beliefs about top pairing defensemen is that they drag their teammates to respectability … and Larsson despite his stellar shutdown skills hasn’t been able to do that), so I’m going to drop it to 40%.

    While further development would be reasonable to expect, and hopefully an offensive ‘pop’ comes in the Oilers system, it’s not reasonable to treat that as a certainty.

    Second pairing – 55% – I give it better than 50/50 because he already has a track record of playing very effectively at this level. The only thing that gives me any pause is that NJ system that suppresses everything. Makes it really hard to tell.

    To put it another way, I believe chances are 95% that Larsson shows as a Top 4 D in Edmonton.Someone will give me shit for the 5%, but this is high praise.

    Third pairing – 5% – It’s small but it’s non-zero.That NJ system makes everything difficult to parse.We’re all expecting Larsson to preserve his defensive ability and spring his offense in Edmonton.What if it turns out his offensive ability is real, and his defensive ability is system?If you haven’t thought about that as at least one possible outcome, you’re ignoring downside risk.

    This kind of process I believe forces you to think a little more objectively on the upside and the downside, rather than say pulling comparisons (“Datysuk 2.0!”) for fun.

    Agree, even Stralman is a “best case scenario” thing

    Btw, what were Stralmans numbers like at 23? Definitely wasnt scoring much.

  35. Centre of attention says:

    Science Asshole Always Trying to Prove Shit,

    I laughed pretty hard out loud reading that and got some weird looks. Hope you’re happy with yourself

  36. Ducey says:

    Barcs:
    Off topic, but can anyone tell me where we sit in regards to cap space?

    With all of this shifting bonus money, and young players playing partly in the AHL and partly in the NHL, I’m having a hard time figuring out just how much space we actually have.

    Enough for an offer sheet?

    Its complicated!

    My guess.

    If they pay all their bonuses based on Nurse, Leon and Connor, and they don’t put Ference on LTIR, they are at just under $70 M.

    Realistically, they will put Ference on LTIR and Leon and Nurse will get a portion of their bonuses.

    So maybe $3M (current) + $1.5 M (bonuses not earned) plus Ference.

    Ference is complicated as we don’t know how long he will be gone for and the LTIR only comes off the amount of salary they pay in excess of the Cap. So right now they would get no LTIR relief from Ference. If they got up to $71 M without Ference, then they would get $1.25 M in relief.

    But then they might need to call up Reinhart for a chunk of time or JP may make the team. That’s $4.8 in possible bonuses.

    I would think you might allocate $2 M for additional bonuses (over Nurse, Connor, Leon) for JP and Griff. If they keep these guys off the roster enough to eliminate most of their bonuses, they might have $7.375M to spend.

    It all depends upon Ference’s health and bonus structure/ playing time.

    If JP plays all year, and Ference plays nothing, I think they might have something like $5.375 M ?

    NB: I have no idea if I am correct 🙂

  37. Ducey says:

    Science Asshole Always Trying to Prove Shit:
    I took LT’s silence as consent.

    Does this mean that your research will now be described as WoodShit?

  38. Connoreah says:

    G Money: G MONEY

    Thanks again for responding. A couple of clarifications, though:

    1. My question to you about player opinions was regarding Larsson, not Hall. I stated that I found Larsson’s teammates (and McDavid’s) very positive comments about Larsson to be reassuring, and asked if you put any value on them. Your response was “very little.”

    2. You say the intangibles show up in the analytics, somewhere. I don’t disagree with that; my point is that you can’t measure all the intangibles or isolate their impact (yet) on a player’s performance (or those of his teammates) so advanced stats only takes you so far. For example, what percentage of Schneider’s stellar performance last year was due to confidence he felt when Larsson was on the ice? Surely (as you say) that confidence shows up in Schneider’s stats somewhere, but you can’t measure how or to what degree that confidence impacted how well Schneider played knowing Larsson was on the ice. Simply saying “they all show up in the stats” doesn’t allow you to put value on the intangibles because you’re not measuring them, you’re acknowledging they exist.

    3. You put forward a very strong argument, in theory, to suggest that player opinions are not that important, because everything boils down to things that you can measure. So my question to you (and others who share your opinion) remains:

    —– If you are Chia and considering a trade to bring Player A on to the team, and you ask your analytics guy what he thinks and he says “Player A is garbage based on the analytics.” Then you bring in Connor McDavid, Klefbom, Lucic and Talbot and they all say “Player A is a beast and would be a great person to add to our team.” If you’re Chia, are you saying you’d dismiss your players’ opinions as insignificant and side with your analytics guy???

  39. Connoreah says:

    stevezie: Connoreah

    I would drill down a bit further than that and say that an objective assessment is stronger than a subjective opinion on the surface. However, if the objective assessment cannot account for significant variables or factors that impact the result, it is less strong. And a subjective opinion from someone who takes part in an activity, experiences it first hand and has done so for their entire lives can be quite strong. Case in point – McDavid’s opinion about the value of one of his teammates is stronger (IMO) than an objective assessment that cannot account for a wide range of intangibles that have real impacts on the game.

  40. Connoreah says:

    stevezie:
    Connoreah,

    Oh yeah, 100%. Some guys are fun to play with which fools you into thinking they’re productive, some guys are hard to play against which fools you into thinking they’re good… humans are incredibly gullible.

    Of course, numbers lie too. So I would want more than one “stat”. But I’ll trust a strong objective argument over a subjective one any day.

    Unless we’re dealing with subjective things, like love and faith and happiness and such… but we’re not. Wins and losses.

    So if there is no subjectivity in hockey, and it’s all about wins and losses, then what was Hall’s value to the Oilers over the past 5 years? I personally don’t blame Hall for our terrible decade, I just don’t understand how you can ignore the variables that contribute to the end result, simply because they don’t fit in a neat little stat (or more accurately, you’re not able to measure them yet).

  41. Woodguy says:

    G Money:
    Woodguy,

    Except I haven’t yet explained to you why your numbers are wrong.But I will, trust me!

    List of NHL DMen with a RelZS of -10 or worse who ALSO had a rel CA/60 in the negatives (less shots against than when off the ice)

    Larsson
    Niskanen
    Tanev
    Hjarlmasson

    That’s it.

    DZS of those 4:
    Larsson 44.4%
    Niskanen 34.8%
    Tanev 34.5%
    Hjarlmasson 34.4%

    RelZSR (zone start ratio = OZS/(OZS+DZS))

    Larsson -24.6
    Niskanen -13.1
    Tanev -12%
    Hjarlmasson -11.2

  42. classict says:

    stevezie:
    Woodguy,

    Does Vlasic’s recent and dramatic surge in offence not qualify him for a different bucket?

    Maybe his 15-16 was “luck” but if we’re lining Demers, Sekera, Vlasic, Tanev, Hjarlmalsson, and Larsson up for bucket assignment there is one who’s scoring is clearly beyond the pail.

    Agreed. Just looking at the 2015-2016 season I think Vlasic’s play was top 10 in the league. Though at 29 that might just be a blip.

  43. GMoney says:

    Connoreah,

    1. The results to me always speak louder than words (this is true in all walks of life, right?). So when I read someone saying good things my first reaction is “he’s well liked” and when I read bad things it is “he’s not well liked”. It’s interesting, but I put little weight on it either way.

    The exception I suppose is if the players are saying something specific – like “that guy doesn’t show up for big games”, or “that guy is so unpredictable, no-one can play well with him”. Those things are testable. If they test out and prove to be true, I’d be more inclined to take the rest of their (untestable) thoughts as having value.

    So when Schneider says he has a measure of comfort with Larsson on the ice, I do give some weight to that. Because we can test that, and we can see that bad things happen less often with Larsson on the ice, and so we know it to be true.

    On the other hand, if a guy like Belanger or Scrivens (or even Klefbom) talk smack and say something that is demonstrably false (“Hall doesn’t play well in the big games” or some such), I discount the rest of what they have to say too, and assume they just don’t like the guy.

    I’ve never been on a team, or a locker room, or whatever, where everyone liked each other. (Except me of course. Everyone likes me, and I like everyone.)

    2. I acknowledge intangibles exist (they are intangible because they are hard to consistently define, like “leadership” … but I know they matter).

    I acknowledge that some intangibles matter … and the reason they matter is because they affect the outcome.

    I acknowledge that testing the nature of the relationship can be very difficult (in large measure because its tough to measure what you can’t clearly define).

    Even so, we can generally test some things about these intangibles.

    For example, I think Andrew Ference is a terrific leader and a fitness fiend. (These characteristics are now being attributed to Lucic too, though I don’t really see on what basis). But Ference’s demonstrable results are awful.

    So … to what extent does leadership matter? Or an extreme dedication to fitness?

    Answer: I don’t know, but the evidence suggests clearly that it’s not enough to overcome a lack of talent. Conversely, guys with talent and accusations of lack of character like Spezza, Kessel, Seguin are on teams that seem to be doing just fine.

    To circle back – there are many arguing that Hall’s (lack of) character are the reason the Oilers have been bad, that a ‘culture change’ is needed.

    The clear demonstrable evidence says otherwise.

    The team hasn’t had enough talent, for years and years now.

    There is no need to dive into intangibles, let alone the murky waters of cobbling together snippets of player hearsay to slander Hall’s character.

    The evidence says the shittiness of the team can be attributed to a lack of good players, and that can be attributed directly to grossly incompetent management.

    That’s where my finger points, and will remain pointed.

    3. It’s not an either or in this case. In the ideal world, all the evidence a team is gathering (stats, in person scouting, video scouting, interviews) would all point in the same direction. Inevitably, sometimes you get contradictions.

    Contradictions are signs that you need to dig deeper. If all I had about a player were soundly negative stats and soundly positive opinions from players provided without concrete examples, acting on that basis alone would be negligent.

    But in any overall picture, I would weight the players opinions sans concrete examples lowest, if at all.

  44. G Money says:

    OK, I had my fun, I have a rep ya know!

  45. Lowetide says:

    G Money:
    OK, I had my fun, I have a rep ya know!

    Haha! Appreciate it, G.

  46. Caramel Batman says:

    Centre of attention:
    stevezie,

    So you’re willing to let Larsson’s play after the trade affect his value re: the trade,

    BUT you’re not willing to let Hall’s play after the trade affect his value re: the trade?

    Smells like slight double standards here. Perhaps I’m missing something.

    I’m with Stevie on this. With Hall, you know what he is. If he gets hit by a truck tomorrow that doesn’t change that he was traded for much less than full value.

    With Larsson, on the other hand, the justification is based on a whole bunch of supposeds. He is supposed to e a #1 D. He is supposed to add offense, etc. None of these things have happened yet so the only time they can happen is in the future.

    So when Steviezie and myself say that “if he turns into …” we are actually being magnanimous since the only time this trade can pay off is in the future.

  47. Caramel Batman says:

    If Larsson is as good as Stralman I’ll be ecstatic. That has to be the absolute outer marker for him

    Also, Stralman was signed for nothing but money. So you don’t need to trade Taylor Hall to get him.

    In the NHL it is simply not true that you have to give up talent to get talent.

  48. Caramel Batman says:

    stevezie,

    It’s not a famous thought experiment or anything like that. Just something we used to do in grad school when arguing about things like invasions of Iraq, etc. What would have to happen for you to admit you were wrong is a useful question to ask yourself, if nothing else.

    And yet while I’ll be happy if Larsson is as good as Stralman I would still think it is an entirely unnecessary trade. There are always better options out there.

    The Oilers need to win a playoff series this year, and they need to do it because of Lucic and Larsson, otherwise the trade is a bad deal. They’ve shot their load.

  49. Lowetide says:

    Caramel Batman:
    If Larsson is as good as Stralman I’ll be ecstatic.That has to be the absolute outer marker for him

    Also, Stralman was signed for nothing but money.So you don’t need to trade Taylor Hall to get him.

    In the NHL it is simply not true that you have to give up talent to get talent.

    The Oilers stated they were going to market, and there was no Stralman in free agency. I know everyone wants to frame their issues in a specific way, and I enjoyed most of today’s thread. But I think the market factors imposed on Edmonton (by Edmonton) have to be part of the conversation.

  50. Caramel Batman says:

    Lowetide,

    Lowetide,

    If there is no Stralman this year then you hold your water and wait for next year. Or you find the next Stralman. Basically, you do anything but what they did.

    Based on these moves it is this year or bust. You’ve said this yourself and you’ve never been more right.

  51. Lowetide says:

    Caramel Batman:
    Lowetide,

    Lowetide,

    If there is no Stralman this year then you hold your water and wait for next year.Or you find the next Stralman.Basically, you do anything but what they did.

    Based on these moves it is this year or bust.You’ve said this yourself and you’ve never been more right.

    Sure, but I think it is important to view the trade through what Chiarelli viewed as his reality. But I am parsing here, we agree overall—save for waiting a year. I do think he had to go.

  52. Caramel Batman says:

    The other thing I hate about this deal is that this is the death of Hall’s career. New Jersey is where Edmonton was in 2009. He was already the most underated star of his generation. What is going to happen when New Jersey misses the playoffs the next five year?

    If I was him I would have pulled a Jeff Carter and demanded a trade without reporting. I think he is in the worst situation of any player in the entire league.

  53. Caramel Batman says:

    The other thing to remember is that there were other options, one of which included P.K. fucking Subban.

    When on the one hand you have a future with McDavid, Hall, and Subban, and the other is McDavid, Lucic, and Larsson it makes you sick to your stomach.

    I would give anything to know what it would have actually taken to trade for Subban.

    If Subban and Hall were on this team it would be so much better than it is now. Is that even in dispute? And it would be so much fun to watch.

  54. G Money says:

    Caramel Batman:
    The other thing I hate about this deal is that this is the death of Hall’s career.New Jersey is where Edmonton was in 2009.He was already the most underated star of his generation.What is going to happen when New Jersey misses the playoffs the next five year?

    If I was him I would have pulled a Jeff Carter and demanded a trade without reporting.I think he is in the worst situation of any player in the entire league.

    1 – It’s tough to feel sorry for someone in their early-mid 20s getting paid USD $6M a year to play hockey.

    2 – NJD may suck now, but they have a GM who just snagged a franchise winger. Who knows where that franchise will be in four years when Hall’s contract runs out?

    3 – Hall’s contract runs out at the age of 28 – he might be nearing the end of his peak/plateau, but he’ll still be a top rank player in heavy demand. And wait til those Eastern bastards get a look at just how good he is.

    4 – If he hasn’t had any team success by then, he can look back with satisfaction at the $42M (less tax of course) he’ll have pocketed from the contract he signed with the Oilers, and go Full Hossa – sign shorter duration lower dollar contracts with top contenders to be able to chase the Cup.

    I’m sure it stung, but pretty much everyone at some point changes employers, and not always on good terms. I don’t feel all that sorry for Taylor Hall.

  55. theDjdj says:

    G Money:

    I have a fairly blunt way of assessing ‘intangibles’.

    If any specific ‘intangible’ (leadership, intimidation, whatever you want to put forth) matters, then by definition it must have an impact on the on-ice results, and therefore can be measured.

    If it has no measurable impact on the on-ice results, it doesn’t matter.It is the homeopathy of hockey.

    We can put forward every character assassinating rumour about Hall that we want – the simple fact is that the team is *measurably* *vastly* better with him on the ice than off the ice.

    I agree with the theme of your post, the bad locker room nonsense about Hall is mostly slander, but disagree with your methodology for measuring.

    If you’re attempting to measure a personality impact upon the whole team, looking at on ice performance won’t work. It has no control. Hall’s supposed effect would be too holistic.

    In order to accurately measure Hall’s impact (negative or otherwise) you would need to measure player performance with Hall completely removed from the team. Next season provides you the opportunity but you would have to sort through the noise of new players, new arena, less injuries etc. in order to accurately measure.

    Fruitless exercise. And maybe indicative of how silly it is to factor in the minuscule “locker room personality” as a major component of a blockbuster trade.

    Side note: very intrigued by the concept of using analytics/metrics to holistically measure employee performance. You still in the software game?

  56. Connoreah says:

    GMoney,

    Okay, thanks again for the response. You’re probably right. I’m just surprised – I thought players would probably be pretty good judges of the strengths/weaknesses of their mates and opponents, and assumed that was just a given to everyone else. To say that a player’s opinion on another player’s value, based on first hand experience but without concrete mathematical measurement demonstrating said value, would be of little value just sounds strange to me. I guess I’m just old school.

  57. Glass says:

    stevezie,

    You don’t think that if a better deal was available through the draft and right up until the week after Chiarelli wouldn’t of took it? Would you rather Hall for a top 4RHD pp specialist or Hall for a top 2 RHD that is very reliable defensively and plays big minutes?

    Here’s a hint: Top 2 RHD (who EAT minutes) are tougher to acquire than top 4 pp specialists. Just the truth. Top 2 RHD like I mentioned is a bigger need at the moment, as for PP specialist we have McDavid and Nuge, McLennan can improvise for the time being. And if you are thinking we can acquire a top 2 RHD who can eat minutes and run the PP for Hall, you’re dead wrong.

    We’ll have a fine shut-down pairing in Klef/Larsson, and with Lucic, McDavid, Nuge, and Puljujarvi we have a healthy set of forwards with two way acumen. That’s a mighty fine long-term picture to me.

    Hall may be gone, but I still suspect our goals/for and goals/against will improve drastically.

  58. G Money says:

    Connoreah,

    Ah! Hmmm! I’ve thrown a wall of text at you but I fear I still haven’t explained myself well. I thank you for your patience and good faith conversation, my good sir. Let me try once more, I think this should clarify what I mean.

    A very important point you’ve raised: it’s not that I don’t think players comments don’t have value. They may. The problem is that in an information gathering process, we don’t know which ones are valuable and which ones are trash!

    Someone will be a good and objective judge of value and their opinion will be highly worthwhile.

    But sure as a shooting in Texas, someone else is going to have comments in there that aren’t honest, but made with an axe to grind. In fact, the axe grinders are the most likely to speak up in this situation, wouldn’t you think?

    And someone else is going to have a knowledge-free opinion that is worthless, but they’re going to express it anyway.

    And we can’t tell which is which.

    In survey/statistics terms, this ‘survey’ of player comments suffers from response/selection bias (we’ve only heard from a self-selected group of people who for their own reasons spoke up), and coverage bias (we’ve only heard from a small and definitely non-random sample).

    In a survey like that, you can easily (and almost always do) get results that are vastly different from anything resembling the underlying truth.

    So you have to toss it, because it’s not worth the pixels it’s written on.

    To repeat: not that some of the players assessments don’t have value. But because some of the assessments definitely don’t have value, or have strongly negative biased value – and we can’t tell which is which, or how many of each there are.

    Does that clarify?

  59. pts2pndr says:

    GMoney:
    Connoreah,

    1. The results to me always speak louder than words (this is true in all walks of life, right?).So when I read someone saying good things my first reaction is “he’s well liked” and when I read bad things it is “he’s not well liked”.It’s interesting, but I put little weight on it either way.

    The exception I suppose is if the players are saying something specific – like “that guy doesn’t show up for big games”, or “that guy is so unpredictable, no-one can play well with him”.Those things are testable.If they test out and prove to be true, I’d be more inclined to take the rest of their (untestable) thoughts as having value.

    So when Schneider says he has a measure of comfort with Larsson on the ice, I do give some weight to that. Because we can test that, and we can see that bad things happen less often with Larsson on the ice, and so we know it to be true.

    On the other hand, if a guy like Belanger or Scrivens (or even Klefbom) talk smack and say something that is demonstrably false (“Hall doesn’t play well in the big games” or some such), I discount the rest of what they have to say too, and assume they just don’t like the guy.

    I’ve never been on a team, or a locker room, or whatever, where everyone liked each other.(Except me of course. Everyone likes me, and I like everyone.)

    2. I acknowledge intangibles exist (they are intangible because they are hard to consistently define, like “leadership” … but I know they matter).

    I acknowledge that some intangibles matter … and the reason they matter is because they affect the outcome.

    I acknowledge that testing the nature of the relationship can be very difficult (in large measure because its tough to measure what you can’t clearly define).

    Even so, we can generally test some things about these intangibles.

    For example, I think Andrew Ference is a terrific leader and a fitness fiend. (These characteristics are now being attributed to Lucic too, though I don’t really see on what basis).But Ference’s demonstrable results are awful.

    So … to what extent does leadership matter? Or an extreme dedication to fitness?

    Answer: I don’t know, but the evidence suggests clearly that it’s not enough to overcome a lack of talent.Conversely, guys with talent and accusations of lack of character like Spezza, Kessel, Seguin are on teams that seem to be doing just fine.

    To circle back – there are many arguing that Hall’s (lack of) character are the reason the Oilers have been bad, that a ‘culture change’ is needed.

    The clear demonstrable evidence says otherwise.

    The team hasn’t had enough talent, for years and years now.

    There is no need to dive into intangibles, let alone the murky waters of cobbling together snippets of player hearsay to slander Hall’s character.

    The evidence says the shittiness of the team can be attributed to a lack of good players, and that can be attributed directly to grossly incompetent management.

    That’s where my finger points, and will remain pointed.

    3. It’s not an either or in this case.In the ideal world, all the evidence a team is gathering (stats, in person scouting, video scouting, interviews) would all point in the same direction. Inevitably, sometimes you get contradictions.

    Contradictions are signs that you need to dig deeper.If all I had about a player were soundly negative stats and soundly positive opinions from players provided without concrete examples, acting on that basis alone would be negligent.

    But in any overall picture, I would weight the players opinions sans concrete examples lowest, if at all.

    Placing the blame on management is correct. The correct choice for captain was not Ference but Hendricks! Ference is a good man an excellent citizen but I would argue not agood leader. He was put in a position to fail by another good man who was not a leader or a good coach. The mistakes made by management were epic and well documented. You can not as a good captain throw your team mates under the bus in the media.. His coach did the same thing with his assistants when his swarm defense didn,t work and so on. It is incumbent on management to put their people in a position to succeed within their talent level. I will miss Taylor Hall as he was a very talented player and worked very hard aand with very little support much of his tenure!

« Older Comments

Leave a Reply

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