50-MAN ENTERING SUMMER

Since we have an evening to chat about challenges past the current season and playoffs, I thought it might be an idea to talk about the 50-man list as we enter the summer. Let’s start with the 50-man list as Chiarelli took over.

50-MAN MAY 2015

  • Looking over this list, it was obvious (as it had been for some time) Edmonton needed to build through the middle. Ben Scrivens didn’t work out, but even if he had, there was work to do.
  • The center position would get a giant lift from the anticipated McDavid selection at the 2015 entry draft, and the team had a strong future on either wing.
  • Defense, put simply, was a mess. Oscar Kelfbom, Darnell Nurse and Brandon Davidson were part of the future, and there was (among some) hope for Justin Schultz.
  • No one argued on Day One this team should stay together. Changes were going to be made, and of course we know what happened in the summers of 2015 and 2016.

CURRENT 50-MAN LIST

  • This is the current list, but doesn’t really represent the actual state of affairs. Andrew Ference is no longer part of the active roster, David Musil is in Tucson. On the other side of the coin, Ryan Mantha and Joe Gambardella have signed NHL entry-level deals and are headed to Bakersfield on ATO’s.
  • Plenty of work has been done and we see much improvement up the middle. Edmonton isn’t there yet, but the top 6D are probably going to be a big part of next season and the goaltending at The NHL level may be set for 2017-18.
  • Center looks better, and we may see PC grab another one this summer. If Leon is going to play RW, that’s suddenly an area of strength but center needs some help.
  • Let’s cull this group and then have a look at possible needs.

PROJECTED 50-MAN WITH CUTS AND CULLS

  • There are going to be CHL and college free agents signed in the coming weeks, and maybe the Oilers keep a player I’ve pruned from the list. Either way, this is most of the June 30 roster.
  • The goal of this exercise is to make a wish list. Do you remember those ‘Chiarelli’s Summer List’ posts you get sick of every spring? This is the beginning, so speak now or forever hold your piece.
  • Goaltending: Chiarelli has done fine work here, and I’d be fine if he just brought Anders Nilsson back. More likely he gives Brossoit the chance to win the backup job and we see a fringe NHL-veteran AHL goalie. That’s my guess.
  • Defense: I think the RH side needs a RHD who can play a rugged game and move the puck effectively. That’s the ideal. Josh Manson, that kind of guy. If they can’t get that done, perhaps Mark Pysyk could be acquired. Beyond that, I am fine with Cody Franson as an addition and I know you do not like that option. That’s fine, it’s good to have dialogue. I also believe Griffin Reinhart is close to a lock for 7D if he shows up in shape, so that’s one more thing you can be mad at me about in the comments section.
  • Center depends almost entirely on Leon Draisaitl. If he stays at RW (and I have listed him there), we can assume Peter Chiarelli is going to pursue a Martin Hanzal/Brian Boyle option. That may mean dealing Nuge for a less expensive Nuge, and we should be prepared for it, possibly as the showcase deal of summer. It might be a bigger deal with Carolina, Edmonton getting a RHD and a center in return. Something like that.
  • Right wing, if Leon stays there, is set. I do believe Jesse Puljujarvi will get a big push in the fall, unless Matt Duchene is coming here and he’s part of the price tag. Jordan Eberle could also go, but for me that’s less likely than a year ago. The Oilers will have some cap pressure this summer, but next summer is the real issue. If Leon moves back to C, that’s good news for Zack Kassian, who (imo) has shown he can help offensively with capable help. A wrinkle in the roster we should keep in mind, as a 1-2-3R of Eberle-Puljujarvi-Kassian allows Todd McLellan to run a C depth chart of McDavid-Draisaitl-Nuge.
  • Left wing will have Patrick Maroon and Milan Lucic as feature players, and I do think Drake Caggiula will be 3L opening night. Where does that leave Benoit Pouliot? I’m not sure. My preference would be to keep Pouliot, I think he’s a helluva player. The Oilers are going to make room for Puljujarvi in the fall, and imo they’ll do the same for Caggiula. Someone is going.

Thoughts?

written by

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

91 Responses to "50-MAN ENTERING SUMMER"

  1. EtownDre says:

    Pouliot is going to Vegas. It’s him or Testes

  2. tcho says:

    Question for the group – could anyone point my to a site where I could take a look at how players have done vs. the rest of the league over multiple seasons? Specifically, I was looking to calculate where Eb’s offence (points) ranks relative to all wingers since the start of his career.

  3. frjohnk says:

    tcho:
    Question for the group – could anyone point my to a site where I could take a look at how players have done vs. the rest of the league over multiple seasons? Specifically, I was looking to calculate where Eb’s offence (points) ranks relative to all wingers since the start of his career.

    hockey reference
    corsica

    you will have to do some stickhandling to get where you want though.

  4. Dennis King says:

    I think they would love to get rid of 67 but how do they manage it? They might not be done with 36 down the middle. I mean they probably should be but they may not be.

    The obvious need is a RHD to go along with 6-83 and maybe that’s Nuge or maybe it’s Eberle.

  5. TO10801 says:

    I think pouliot will be bought out after next year. I wouldn’t be surprised to see EDM dangle Eberle to Vegas to see what they can get. Say Vegas selects Letestu, would you be willing to trade Eberle to Vegas for Manson and Letestu. Vegas is going to be desperate for scoring and Eberle would fill that void and they wont have any salary concerns. We take Letestu back to keep our depth up the middle and add to our young D-core. Whether it is Nuge or Eberle, I think there will be a trade to be made with Vegas that a lot of other teams may not be able to match.

  6. DBO says:

    the playoffs will be a huge factor I believe in whether Nuge stays or goes. I wonder, with Leon probably getting between $5.5 and $6.0 if Nuge is the trade bait. He has more value then Eberle, and if we trade him for D help, I believe it is our best use of dollars.

    Nuge for Faulk. Pieces to round it out. Saves us $1.2 mill per season.

    Sign a 3C. I expect Desharnais if he plays well in playoffs. On a 1 year deal. no long term fix, but if Leon is at centre, then a vet 3C on a 1 or 2 year deal works well for depth. And he wouldn’t be expensive and thats a real issue going forward. Interchange any of the vets out there for a year or two. This is a team that will attract vets now.

    And that’s all folks.

  7. Scungilli says:

    I’m not a fan of listing players out of position,especially players with unproven NHL track records. Caggiula is a LW, Slep is a RW, Simpson is a LD.

    If they are not putting Neon at C they need one at a good day price. After that RD is still barebones.

    The biggest difference between the two year’s rosters is now there are few marginal guys in key roles. Putting Russel on third pair if he’s signed and passing on DD move furthur that way.

  8. Ducey says:

    EtownDre:
    Pouliot is going to Vegas. It’s him or Testes

    Isnt it likely to be Reinhart, Khaira or Pouliot?

    They will protect Sekera, Larsson, Klefbom on D and 7 forwards (Eberle, Nuge, Lucic, Leon, Kassian, Maroon, Letestu).

  9. npanciroli says:

    My thoughts are twofold.

    1. Crazy not to run McDavid Draisaitl RNH down the middle.
    2. Not a lot of holes anymore.

  10. geowal says:

    Lt: you have your contract status for right hand D named Mark F backwards…

  11. Richard S.S. says:

    Peter Chiarelli trades for one significant piece, signs one significant piece and fills the other needs as he can. That what he’s done so far. No one gets resigned before the Expansion Draft. Both Jordan Eberle and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins needs big Postseasons or they have poor to no trade value. I think Benoit Pouliot, Eberle and Nuge should be moved/upgraded before McDavid ELC expires. That’s too much money for where they play.

  12. Bank Shot says:

    geowal:
    Lt: you have your contract status forright hand D named Mark F backwards…

    He’s listed as a UFA which is unfortunately not the case. One more season of that boat anchor of a contract, and two more for Benoit.

    I guess maybe Chiarelli could retain salary on Fayne to get him moved?

    Pouliot is going to be a hard one to move out for sure. The Oilers are probably stuck with him. Sad.

    The Oilers are going to need to shore up 3C for sure. An upgrade on Russell would be nice, but I’m not sure how you can get that piece for cheap. Maybe swing something with Vegas after they pick up 6 ok defencemen.

  13. Primetime says:

    “Center depends almost entirely on Leon Draisaitl. If he stays at RW (and I have listed him there), we can assume Peter Chiarelli is going to pursue a Martin Hanzal/Brian Boyle option.”

    LT, are we sure this is what Chia really has in mind?

    Here is what we know:
    They forced Drake into the 3C role for most of the season…it only ended when you could no longer ignore the poor results. To fill the spot, Chia went out and got an even SMALLER center in Desharnais…and the team seems happy with the result.

    I agree that preferably we get a larger, right handed centre for the role but are we sure the plan isn’t for a smallish, offensive 3rd line center? Most likely Drake part 2 with a year of NHL experience under his belt?

  14. Professor Q says:

    Primetime,

    If we go out to try to get both types, and obviously​ emphasising the efficient cost of the player, which I believe lies in the college signings thus far and in the future, then wouldn’t there be more of a chance one works, and perhaps opens up the opportunity for another to succeed on the wings or on the 4th line?

    Maybe alternating between the two or however many they acquire (in-house acquisitions included)?

  15. PhrankLee says:

    I am freaking out about LW depth!

  16. Jaxon says:

    tcho:
    Question for the group – could anyone point my to a site where I could take a look at how players have done vs. the rest of the league over multiple seasons? Specifically, I was looking to calculate where Eb’s offence (points) ranks relative to all wingers since the start of his career.

    https://puckalytics.com/#/skaters?orderby=iprimarypoints60&sortorder=true&paginate=undefined&season=201016&situation=5v5&Pos=W&dgoals=false&dcorsi=false&dpcts=false&dtm=false&dopp=false&dreltm=false&drel=false&dind=true&dpctteam=false&dzs=false&GPMin=41&GPMax=999&TOIDecMin=550&TOIDecMax=99999&showFilters=true&Team=&Player_Name=

    This would be perfect except for some reason Eberle is listed as a F(C), so he gets filtered out. His 5-on-5 Primary Points per 60 is 1.74 over that span, which puts him 11th in the NHL over his first six seasons (not including this year). In other words, his production has been elite (he would be on the 6 best pairs of wingers in the NHL) on a very bad team.

  17. Centre of attention says:

    Jaxon,

    IMO if Eberle finds his way back onto the first PP unit I think he’s got a couple more 60 pt seasons in him. Todd needs to have more than one RH option on the same unit anyways.

    Why not Ebs down low on the left goal line and Letestu up in the circle? I guess that would mess with WoodCrofts 1-3-1 but c’est la vie. We must all adapt eventually.

  18. pts2pndr says:

    Ducey,

    Not to be rude but why would any sound thinking GM want a 34 year old 4th line center when building a new team? To protect Letestu who I do like , over a young player just approaching their prime would seem to be foolish! The oil have a number of good young players that should be protected over Letestu. Just my opinion.

  19. Side says:

    Professor Q: You’re a smart person. Figure out how it applies. I believe in you.

    Also, you’re ass backwards about your last point. It would actually open the game up more and become more exciting, as seen in International Hockey.

    Smaller Ice = More Trapping and Boring Hockey. As well as more injuries, particularly due to the increased trapping, cheap shots, and hacking. The officiating doesn’t help, either.

    There have been many calling for the increasing of the size. Less injury to players and more space. It’s too crowded as it is right now, with bigger, faster, and more skilled players.

    I too, struggle to see how more space would encourage boring trap hockey as well.

    More space benefits the skilled players. I could only imagine what Connor and Drai could do with more space and time.

  20. spoiler says:

    Ducey: They will protect Sekera, Larsson, Klefbom on D and 7 forwards (Eberle, Nuge, Lucic, Leon, Kassian, Maroon, Letestu).

    Letestu is by no means a lock.

  21. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Professor Q,

    You’re a smart person. Figure out how it applies. I believe in you.

    I asked an honest question and you were an asshole about it.

    Seriously dick answer and it leads me to believe you don’t have one.

    Also, you’re ass backwards about your last point. It would actually open the game up more and become more exciting, as seen in International Hockey.
    Smaller Ice = More Trapping and Boring Hockey.
    There have been many calling for the increasing of the size. Less injury to players and more space. It’s too crowded as it is right now.

    From everything I’ve read, you’re the one who’s ass backwards.

    Not a fan of Ken Campbell, but he quotes some people in this piece that should be listened to:

    http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/big-ice-a-big-failure-when-it-comes-to-creating-offense

    but, by far, the biggest culprit in dragging the tournament down was the international-sized ice surface. After watching Sochi 2014, it would be impossible for anyone to continue to perpetuate the myth that a larger ice surface would create more offense. The Canadian team, which allowed three goals in the tournament and outchanced its opponents badly, proved beyond any doubt that the extra 3,000 square feet afforded by the big ice is largely wasted space.

    “People make a big deal of the big ice,” said Canadian defenseman Jay Bouwmeester. “They think it’s going to be a more offensive game and it’s kind of the opposite because all the extra room is on the outside of the rink.”

    Duncan Keith remarked after Canada won the gold medal that much of the reason for its defensive success was that any time they were in trouble, they were able to put the puck into an area of the ice where it was a safe distance from the net. And only when Canada learned to adapt by basically playing within the faceoff dots did it really begin to excel in the tournament. In fact, at one point in the tournament, Corey Perry talked about “shrinking the ice…more like an NHL-size rink.”

    Also here’s a piece all the way back to 1998 that talks about the same thing:

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1998-02-10/sports/9802100072_1_neutral-zone-trap-corners-nhl-hockey

    The fact that you actually think big ice means more offense tells me that you haven’t read much about it because everyone who know anything about pro hockey comes to the opposite conclusion.

    I’m not one to appeal to authority, but they are pretty universal in this.

  22. Jaxon says:

    My guess at likely additions are Spencer Foo on RW (he is just too good a fit for Edmonton), Ziyat Paigin on LHD (just to get him out of a possibly bad situation and get him working on his North American game), and one of the following 3 players at around #23 in the draft:

    1. RHD Conor Timmins (they should add at least one more high-end RHD prospect and Timmins fits that bill perfectly.
    2. Right-handed Left Winger Nikita A. Popugayev (seems like the best forward fit for Oilers in that range)
    3. Left-handed Right Winger Kristian Vesalainen (you can find highlights from the 15-16 World Junior Under 18s with Vesalainen, Rasanen and Puljujarvi playing together and looking pretty good).

    If they can get Foo, then maybe Timmins makes the most sense. He’s already scoring at a great pace with an NHLE of 24 pts. 24 NHLE in his draft season puts him at the same production as Ceci, Ekblad, Pietrangelo, Hamilton, Doughty and Subban. He’s not big, but if he fills out a bit he won’t be small either (currently 6’1″, 182lbs).

    2 Draft Compiling Sites:
    My NHL Draft: 23. Vesalainen, 25. Timmins, Outside 1st Round. Popugayev
    Draftsite: 21. Vesalainen, 22. Popugayev, 25. Timmins

    Hopefully one of them is still left when Edmonton comes to the podium.

  23. DBO says:

    LW. Maroon, Lucic, Pouliot, Cagguila, Khaira.
    That’s good LW depth.
    RW. Draisatl, Eberle, Puljujarvi, Kassian, Slepeshev, Pitlick.
    That’s great RW depth.

    You can move Draisatl to centre and still have fantastic winger depth. No idea how they keep everyone with the cap, so I expect they move Draisatl to centre and Nuge is dealt. Two drivers in separate lines is needed.

  24. striatic says:

    Professor Q: Also, you’re ass backwards about your last point. It would actually open the game up more and become more exciting, as seen in International Hockey.
    Smaller Ice = More Trapping and Boring Hockey. As well as more injuries, particularly due to the increased trapping, cheap shots, and hacking. The officiating doesn’t help, either.

    From the Hockey News article Woodguy linked to:

    “But in Vancouver, there were 12 games involving those teams that produced 67 goals, or an average of 5.58 per game, meaning Vancouver produced more than 1 ½ goals per game among the hockey powers than Sochi did and roughly between a half and one goal per game more than any of the others.”

    Hockey is a game defined by the boards. Because the boards slow and stop the puck, they are where pucks are retrieved and plays begin. If plays begin feet further away from the net, it takes more time and effort to bring the puck into dangerous positions. This does not benefit offence, it benefits defence, and the numbers reflect this starkly.

    Sure, with a wider ice surface there is theoretically more space available to skate around a defender, or more space to pass through, but in order to use that space you need to be playing farther away from the net and your hockey becomes a game of low quality perimeter chances.

  25. treevojo says:

    Woodguy v2.0,

    striatic,

    I agree that Olympic size ice is not the answer.

    I think it has been proven to set up for a more defensive style game.

    I have my own theory that keeping NHL width and adding ten feet of length all in the neutral zone would create more offence.

    I have no way to prove it though.

    But imagine mcdavid with ten more feet of seperation causing dmen to shit their pants.

    Thoughts?

  26. Glass says:

    I’d like to see McDavid/Draisaitl together for another year, at least until next years deadline. It’s been great for both their development, and they will continue to push each other. The downside is that although the line is likely to be dynamite, Maroons next contract may force the GM’s hand to offload him or let ’em walk.

    Line 1: Maroon/McDavid/Draisaitl

    The second line this year has been hot and cold. Lucic is the only one that is a lock to be here for the long-haul, so we may as well build around him. If I had to choose between Eberle and Nuge, it would be Nuge. Soon to be 24, he still has room to grow, and may yet have a bounce back year. I probably trade Eberle for the RHD we are looking for. Eberle + Jones for Hamonic & Barzal? Barzal is a RHC who could develop into our 3C or 2RW in the longterm. Would start in the AHL next season.

    To temporarily fill 2RW (and not hand the job to Puljujarvi), FA targets are Vanek, Eaves, and Vermette. If we could get Vanek at 4-4.5 million for 2 years would that be so bad?

    Line 2: Lucic/Nuge/Vanek

    Given the fact that our 3rd line is going to function as an elevator to give our prospects a closer look, we need to find a veteran 3C for this role. For free agents, Boyle and Hanzal could be leaned on, although there is a chance one of Pouliot, Khaira, or Slepyshev is dealt with a middling draft pick for said 3C.

    I doubt Pouliot starts the year with the Oilers next season, given that he is paid too much for 3LW and his a history of inconsistency and being in the dog house with the coach constantly (prior to injury obviously). He will either be claimed by Vegas or dealt for an area of need, possibly with .500 retained.

    Line 3: Caggiula/Boyle/Puljujarvi

    On the final line, Gambardella will be shown favoritism, getting playing time where necessary. We’re going to see him everywhere at training camp. Like the college men before him, there will be an adjustment period, making it less likely for him to beat out Caggiula and friends. Letestu and Kassian have shown chemistry in the past, and I think Gambardella will fit in like family on that line. Demon on the forecheck and fearless in front of the net.

    Lines:
    1: Maroon/McDavid/Draisaitl
    2: Lucic/Nuge/Vanek
    3: Caggiula/Boyle/Puljujarvi
    4: Gambardella/Letestu/Kassian

    1st Pairing: Klefbomb/Larsson
    2A: Nurse/Hamonic
    2B: Sekera/Benning

  27. Professor Q says:

    This might perhaps better explain my thinking, as I was primarily talking about the changing of the game and it’s variables in the players playing it, although that also lies in the hands of poor officiating – but that gets into a chicken and egg scenario (and Burke isn’t the only one – while Edmonton poopooed him with Rogers Place and unsure about Vegas, Detroit gave him their ears).

    I may have been a bit off on the differences in “scoring”, which is in my response and apology on the previous thread. Although to me, personally, I find International Tournaments, College/University (some which have various hybrid ice sizes), and the like can be more of an exciting game than in the NHL.

    http://www.tsn.ca/burke-on-a-mission-to-increase-size-of-nhl-ice-surfaces-1.425938

    “”Ninety feet,” Burke said. “An extra five feet on the width, that’s it. I believe it would make a big difference in the quality of hockey.”

    Those dimensions currently exist in a number of college rinks in the United States, most notably at Boston University’s state-of-the-art Agganis Arena, where many NHL teams practise when in Boston.

    “If you really think about it, it’s crazy that we are still using the same size ice surface as we started with in hockey,” Burke added. “The players have gotten so much bigger and stronger. There’s not enough room out there. It’s too congested. An extra five feet would make a big difference.””

  28. Centre of attention says:

    Woodguy v2.0,

    Adam Oats was on 1260 with Gregor one time talking about exactly what you just mentioned around the time of the world cup.

    Smaller ice does equal more offense 5 on 5. But it also leads to more injuries etc etc.

    If you want to think about it in the most basic terms, most offense at 5 on 5 results from a skillfully executed lucky bounce. Seriously. Less space means more bounces have a chance of ending up in the net rather than random open ice / space.

    Also, its easier for your skilled guys to get their hands on the puck close to the net and get high quality scoring chances when the net is closer and thus easier to get too. Open space actually benefits the zero skill pluggers because they have more room to create a gap and stand your skill guys up further from the net.

    The best argument against this is it leads to more contact and more injuries. But if the refs actually called interference…

  29. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Georges: Some teams score more than others. When you sort on GF60, players from higher scoring teams will appear higher on your list, out of position with the actual line they play on.

    I’d sort on TOI first and then find the median GF60 in each group. There’s only so much TOI to go around and I think it would be a closer approximation to lines.

    Although the results may not be that different because you’re using median…

    I ran the all forwards with at least 360 5v5 minutes this year.

    Limiting it to 300+ minutes might be a mistake.

    One thing G and I learned doing Woodmoney is that A LOT of 4th line time is taken up by call ups etc and by excluding them, you miss a lot of what actually happens on 4th line time.

    You have to add up a lot of players to get your total TOI, but those players play those minutes and they need to be counted.

    Therefore I think this thing I just did skews the 3rd and 4th line GF/60 up a bit, or maybe first line (judging by results)

    Anyhow, here it is:

    I sorted them by TOI/gm then looked at GF/60

    Top 94
    1.74 – 3.59 – Median 2.63 (other way was 2.90)

    94-190
    1.67 – 3.56 – Median was 2.50 (other way was 2.47)

    191-284
    0.90 – 3.24 – Median was 2.14 (other way was 2.09)

    285-380
    0.42 – 3.48 (Buchnevich and Hartnell destroy the curve here) Median was 1.83 (other way 1.66)

    Not sure which way (if any) if better.

    I think I *might* like separating out by GF/60, because they you are separating by job (score, saw off, survive) and not TOI as different types of players get different TOI by different coaches for different reasons.

    Thoughts?

  30. Lloyd B. says:

    Professor Q: You’re a smart person. Figure out how it applies. I believe in you.
    Also, you’re ass backwards about your last point. It would actually open the game up more and become more exciting, as seen in International Hockey.
    Smaller Ice = More Trapping and Boring Hockey.
    There have been many calling for the increasing of the size. Less injury to players and more space. It’s too crowded as it is right now.

    LLOYD B. says:
    April 3, 2017 at 7:09 pm

    International hockey is not faster nor more exciting. Play in the extra width of the ice slows the game down. The game is still won from the middle of the ice.

    Lots of players that excel in the international arena can’t make the NHL due to the speed the smaller ice surface forces.
    I’m not saying the players that excel on the international surface aren’t great players. They are.

    Consider how many comments there are on this blog about bringing over the guys that play on the international ice surface to NA to get used to the pace of the game and size of the playing surface.

    Most include some sort of comment about needing to go to the AHL to acclimatize. Puljiarvi comes to mind.

    Not unlike the difference in the CFL and NFL field sizes. Both football but different games.

    Very few players that excel in one leaque go to the other and excel. Yes I’m aware of Warren Moon to name only one. But they are rare.

    One of the guys I hope for the most in the Oilers system is a case in point. Lander.

    He is an excellent player on the international surface but his lack of speed catches up to him in the NHL.

    ** Edit ** Of course WG finds any manner of quotes to support my comments while I was creating my diatribe on International vs NHL sized games/players. Well done as ever**
    (Quote) (Reply)

  31. Centre of attention says:

    The Panthers just got a short handed 3-on-1

    Habs not looking so good.

  32. Scungilli says:

    It’s much easier to reign in cheating, cheap shots and goalie equipment than change the ice, and would work as well if not better. More offense, less injuries.

    The size of players goes as obstruction is called. More interference, players get bigger and heavier, less interference players with more speed and skill succeed. Its probably helping Maroon a lot.

    Focusing on the easiest solution makes it far more likely to happen. The NHL isn’t exactly progressive. Enough fan noise about boredom and concussions, and profit will be on the line and Bettman’s attention will be acquired.

    Or maybe he’ll balls up the Olympics, LGK, Carolina and Arizona because of his obstinance towards the love of the game and the bully will run out of rope. He has no love for the game and the players are not going to be happy now.

  33. stush18 says:

    Woodguy v2.0,

    Thanks. Worked late so I couldn’t reply. Lemme say off the start good job of explaining everything. You usually do a good job of that. Also when I’m working I try to reply quickly, so my words might not be what you said. I knew you’d call me on me saying “getting killed” lol but I didn’t have time to review

    Now, I didn’t misunderstand the time against elites.

    What I meant was alzner plays close to half of his even strength time against elite forwards. The other half is against “whoever”. But he also has extra man time. His extra man time would be primarily PK time, with no power play time. So essentially he’s doing what larsson did last year, and is playing the best of the NHL for over half the game.

    I just can’t see washingtons results getting much better than they already are, and “your” results show that if he was replaced properly, they would do “that much” better.

    They are
    -2nd in GF
    -1st in GA
    -5th in shots against
    -7th in PK

    I suppose you could argue that you can always get better. That even though they’re 1st in GA they could be 1st by even more, and that maybe alzner affects that.

    But to me the stats we’re pulling aren’t painting the right picture, or I guess to cliche, don’t match the eye test. If he’s playing that much time against the elites, and washingtons stats are that elite, then I can’t see how he’s that much of a drag

  34. who says:

    Glass:
    I’d like to see McDavid/Draisaitl together for another year, at least until next years deadline. It’s been great for both their development, and they will continue to push each other. The downside is that although the line is likely to be dynamite, Maroons next contract may force the GM’s hand to offload him or let ’em walk.

    Line 1: Maroon/McDavid/Draisaitl

    The second line this year has been hot and cold. Lucic is the only one that is a lock to be here for the long-haul, so we may as well build around him. If I had to choose between Eberle and Nuge, it would be Nuge. Soon to be 24, he still has room to grow, and may yet have a bounce back year. I probably trade Eberle for the RHD we are looking for. Eberle + Jones for Hamonic & Barzal? Barzal is a RHC who could develop into our 3C or 2RW in the longterm. Would start in the AHL next season.

    To temporarily fill 2RW (and not hand the job to Puljujarvi), FA targets are Vanek, Eaves, and Vermette. If we could get Vanek at 4-4.5 million for 2 years would that be so bad?

    Line 2: Lucic/Nuge/Vanek

    Given the fact that our 3rd line is going to function as an elevator to give our prospects a closer look, we need to find a veteran 3C for this role. For free agents, Boyle and Hanzal could be leaned on, although there is a chance one of Pouliot, Khaira, or Slepyshev is dealt with a middling draft pick for said 3C.

    I doubt Pouliot starts the year with the Oilers next season, given that he is paid too much for 3LW and his a history of inconsistency and being in the dog house with the coach constantly (prior to injury obviously). He will either be claimed by Vegas or dealt for an area of need, possibly with .500 retained.

    Line 3: Caggiula/Boyle/Puljujarvi

    On the final line, Gambardella will be shown favoritism, getting playing time where necessary. We’re going to see him everywhere at training camp. Like the college men before him, there will be an adjustment period, making it less likely for him to beat out Caggiula and friends. Letestu and Kassian have shown chemistry in the past, and I think Gambardella will fit in like family on that line. Demon on the forecheck and fearless in front of the net.

    Lines:
    1: Maroon/McDavid/Draisaitl
    2: Lucic/Nuge/Vanek
    3: Caggiula/Boyle/Puljujarvi
    4: Gambardella/Letestu/Kassian

    1st Pairing: Klefbomb/Larsson
    2A: Nurse/Hamonic
    2B: Sekera/Benning

    Don’t see the Oilers signing Vanek AND Boyle. Maybe Boyle because they need another center.
    Also I think you are dreaming if you think they get Hamonic AND Barzal for Eberle and Jones. They might not even get Hamonic with that package.

  35. Lowetide says:

    Scungilli:
    I’m not a fan of listing players outof position,especially players with unproven NHL track records. Caggiula is a LW, Slep is a RW, Simpson is a LD.

    If they are not putting Neon at C they need one at a good day price. After that RD is still barebones.

    The biggest difference between the two year’s rosters is now there are few marginal guys in key roles. Putting Russel on third pair if he’s signed and passing on DD move furthur that way.

    Caggiula has played C for much of the year, Slepyshev has played L and R and Simpson has played a ton on RHD. All three men can be listed in multiple positions, especially since they are not established.

  36. Scungilli says:

    “Soon to be 24, he still has room to grow, and may yet have a bounce back year. I probably trade Eberle for the RHD we are looking for. Eberle + Jones for Hamonic & Barzal? Barzal is a RHC who could develop into our 3C or 2RW in the longterm.”

    Barzal might be a great player. The thing is what they need is players to support the great players and centres they already have. Barzal is another green player. Hamonic would be helpful.

  37. stush18 says:

    Someone made a good point here the other day, and I’d like to steal it and claim it as my own.

    I can’t see the oilers dealing nuge before ebs. Right now our right wing depth looks like
    Drai
    Ebs
    JP
    Kass
    Pitlick
    Slepy
    Pak

    While our centre depth is
    Mcdavid
    Nuge
    Desharnais
    Letestu
    JJ

    Desharnais likely isn’t going to be resigned unless it’s a late summer thing. Letestu might get taken in the upcoming expansion draft. And we have zero prospects close to NHL ready other than JJ.

    Even if drai is moved back to centre, which I like, our right wing depth is still better than centre. Not as skilled, but more NHL quality players still.

  38. Centre of attention says:

    Lowetide: Caggiula has played C for much of the year, Slepyshev has played L and R and Simpson has played a ton on RHD. All three men can be listed in multiple positions, especially since they are not established.

    To be fair, Slepyshev is a natural LW if you go off where he played in Russia.

    He was drafted as a LW too.

    Technically RW is playing out of position for young Slepy, though he has looked fine on either wing to me.

  39. Georges says:

    Woodguy v2.0,

    Tough exercise. I looked at sorting by TOI and EDM had CMD, Leon, Drai, Lucic, and Ebs in the top 40. Obviously coaches juggle lines throughout the season. Working from the aggregate numbers would hide that.

    Maybe go with game data and work your way up. Injuries and line juggling could still happen but it should give a clearer picture of what the lines were. And then total up individual game results for lines to get the GF60 in aggregate.

    If this is really important to you. As I said, it looks like a bunch of work. May require programming.

  40. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    The goal of this exercise is to make a wish list. Do you remember those ‘Chiarelli’s Summer List’ posts you get sick of every spring? This is the beginning, so speak now or forever hold your piece.

    Upgrade in the NHL:

    3C, 2RHD, 4C, 2G.

    With JP slated to get a spot next fall I think I’m ok with wings.

    Upgrade in the pipe:

    Forwards, Forwards, Forwards and keep the D and G coming too.

  41. Georges says:

    Lots anticipating trading Nuge and Ebs. Those two guys are signed to first line cap hits. Who are the trade partners?

    If someone trades for Ebs, they want him for 1 RW and PP1. Which team would that be?

    Off hockey reference, here’s a list of RW whose cap hit this season is as much or more than Ebs (sorted by cap hit) and how many cap dollars they’re being paid per point they’ve scored this season:

    $120,690, Kane
    $169,118, Perry
    $137,500, Voracek
    $205,263, Nash
    $107,143, Tarasenko
    $302,083, Ryan
    $101,493, Kessel
    $162,162, Backes
    $133,333, Okposo
    $133,333, Eberle

    EDIT: Let’s extend the list a bit (just for fun) to include players with a lower cap hit than Ebs.

    $183,594, Brown
    $110,577, Radulov
    $121,739, Pominville
    $80,000, Wheeler
    $119,886, Hossa
    $125,000, Neal
    $232,143, Gaborik
    $58,848, Kucherov
    $107,955, Nyquist
    $93,000, Palmieri
    $187,500, Brouwer
    $76,271, Zuccarello
    $241,667, Stafford
    $97,727, Frolik
    $101,190, Hornqvist
    $170,000, Smith
    $128,788, Gionta
    $74,554, Oshie

    EDIT: Some of these players’ (e.g., Kessel) total cap hit per point will be higher if they were traded recently and the team they were traded from retains a part of their cap hit.

  42. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Georges,

    If this is really important to you. As I said, it looks like a bunch of work. May require programming.

    Its not really that important, was just curious and wanted a baseline for comparison,

    Got that more or less so I’m happy.

  43. Georges says:

    Georges,

    Ha! The players with the lowest cap dollar hit per point:

    $9,840 CMD
    $11,082 Arvidsson
    $11,285 Panarin
    $11,905 Maroon
    $12,500 Drai
    $12,837 Sheary
    $13,265 Gagner
    $13,603 Pastrnak
    $14,015 Matthews
    $14,422 Ehlers

    The mind boggles. I guess I’ve never thought about cap management before.

  44. digger50 says:

    I am in favour of bigger ice surface, despite what I have just learned tonight.

    Connor changes everything. Power skating camps have filled up first now over skill camps among the minor hockey associations. As everyone gets faster the game will need to develop to accommodate.

    Looking way forward I think the game needs a major adaptation.

  45. Oilanderp says:

    Apparently playing on a big ice surface against team fargin CANADA means more offense is not generated.

    Haha.

    I am so pissed that they aren’t going to the Olympics in 2018. Booooo NHL.

  46. dustrock says:

    Is there an easy way to find a statistical comparable for RNH whose salary is smaller?

    He plays a valuable role on the Oilers, I’m just not sure it’s a $6m role.

    I’m happy to be proven wrong though.

  47. Side says:

    Woodguy v2.0:
    Professor Q,

    You’re a smart person. Figure out how it applies. I believe in you.

    I asked an honest question and you were an asshole about it.

    Seriously dick answer and it leads me to believe you don’t have one.

    Also, you’re ass backwards about your last point. It would actually open the game up more and become more exciting, as seen in International Hockey.
    Smaller Ice = More Trapping and Boring Hockey.
    There have been many calling for the increasing of the size. Less injury to players and more space. It’s too crowded as it is right now.

    From everything I’ve read, you’re the one who’s ass backwards.

    Not a fan of Ken Campbell, but he quotes some people in this piece that should be listened to:

    http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/big-ice-a-big-failure-when-it-comes-to-creating-offense

    but, by far, the biggest culprit in dragging the tournament down was the international-sized ice surface. After watching Sochi 2014, it would be impossible for anyone to continue to perpetuate the myth that a larger ice surface would create more offense. The Canadian team, which allowed three goals in the tournament and outchanced its opponents badly, proved beyond any doubt that the extra 3,000 square feet afforded by the big ice is largely wasted space.


    “People make a big deal of the big ice,” said Canadian defenseman Jay Bouwmeester. “They think it’s going to be a more offensive game and it’s kind of the opposite because all the extra room is on the outside of the rink.”

    Duncan Keith remarked after Canada won the gold medal that much of the reason for its defensive success was that any time they were in trouble, they were able to put the puck into an area of the ice where it was a safe distance from the net. And only when Canada learned to adapt by basically playing within the faceoff dots did it really begin to excel in the tournament. In fact, at one point in the tournament, Corey Perry talked about “shrinking the ice…more like an NHL-size rink.”

    Also here’s a piece all the way back to 1998 that talks about the same thing:

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1998-02-10/sports/9802100072_1_neutral-zone-trap-corners-nhl-hockey

    The fact that you actually think big ice means more offense tells me that you haven’t read much about it because everyone who know anything about pro hockey comes to the opposite conclusion.

    I’m not one to appeal to authority, but they are pretty universal in this.

    Are they pretty universal in it?

    https://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/2014/03/14/bigger_ice_in_nhl_arenas_its_a_conversation_worth_having_feschuk.html

    “James van Riemsdyk, the Maple Leafs forward, said earlier this season that he’d put in a vote for the 90-foot-wide sheet that’s currently in use at Boston University. Brian Burke, the Calgary Flames honcho, has said he would like to see 90- to 92-foot-wide rinks, a so-called hybrid size that’s common in Finland. Pierre McGuire, the NBC analyst, has cited Finland’s hybrid rinks as one of the reasons why “a country that size, a little over five million people, can develop so many good players — they still have hitting in their game but you still can get to the net in ”

    “But if there was five more feet, I think with how big guys are now and how fast guys are, that extra bit of room would be great. It doesn’t completely alter the game. You’ve got that extra time where you can spread the defence out a little bit more. If you’re trying to dodge a hit you have a little bit of extra room to play with. It just creates more lanes to make more plays. But all the rinks are in, so it’d be tough to do that.”

    ““I’d love to see it,” said Chris Kunitz, the Pittsburgh Penguins forward. “But any time the business side takes over, you take seats from arenas — it’s something that’s not going to happen during my lifetime.””

    “Still, a handful of NHLers surveyed at the Olympics expressed enthusiasm for the idea. Patrick Sharp, the Chicago Blackhawks centreman, said he’s “all for” it. Bruins goalie Tuukka Rask said “it would maybe play to the skill players’ advantage a bit more, rather than the fourth-line grinders.” Islanders star John Tavares called it a “conversation I’d like to see in the near future.”

    Seems like there’s definitely professional players interested in larger rinks. Not as big as the Olympics, but bigger rinks =/= more boring hockey, if we are going by the authorities on the matter.

  48. spoiler says:

    ESPN PbP: “Worst officiated basketball game I have seen this year.”

  49. Centre of attention says:

    Side,

    Uhm.

    The authorities that matter are the fans.

    The players want less flying elbows to the head, less time on IR and longer careers and more money.

    Of course they want bigger rinks, it means less contact related injuries according to some studies.

    But it does not lead to more goals according to actual goals being counted on both types of ice.

    The Sochi olympics were a snooze fest. If you found that entertaining well I can’t argue with your personal opinion but a 2-1 game where half the time they are skating in huge circles doesn’t entertain me at all.

    You can’t argue against the facts, which state that smaller ice=more goals. Feel free to share your opinion though 🙂

  50. Side says:

    Centre of attention:

    Going off of Woodguy’s quote here:

    “The fact that you actually think big ice means more offense tells me that you haven’t read much about it because everyone who know anything about pro hockey comes to the opposite conclusion.

    I’m not one to appeal to authority, but they are pretty universal in this.”

    He described the authorities as being the players and other professionals and said it was “universal”. I’m not sure why you are challenging my use of the word “authority” when Woodguy used it in the first place to describe pro hockey players?

    Wait, are we arguing about the amount of goals scored by team Canada who is playing on a different ice surface once every 4 years?

    What actual goals are we counting here? Do we have stats of the same Canadian team playing the same games but on NA Ice size and European ice size? Honest questions.

    EDIT: Since I see you edited your comment, I will reply to your edit as well. I would argue that Sochi was a “snooze” fest because you have a Canadian team that plays with eachother once (with a bunch of turn over on the team every Olympics) every 4 years on a new ice surface, against very good teams from other countries in a new environment as the reason why there wasn’t more goals.

    I’ll be convinced about smaller rinks producing more goals when you have the same teams competing on both ice surfaces. If there is data on this, please let me know.

  51. Centre of attention says:

    Side,

    I am talking the goal scoring rate on international sized ice sheets in general is lower than smaller rinks. Not just Team Canada games.

    Studies have been done, the numbers have been crunched.

    I’m fine with the NHL skipping the Olympics if it means they are going to go all-in on the World Cup and make it great again™.

    A World Cup that brings the best-on-best hockey plus actual profit (TV deals, etc) to the league helps everyone and raises the salary cap.

  52. Side says:

    Centre of attention:
    Side,

    I am talking the goal scoring rate on international sized ice sheets in general is lower than smaller rinks. Not just Team Canada games.

    Studies have been done, the numbers have been crunched.

    I’m fine with the NHL skipping the Olympics if it means they are going to go all-in on the World Cup and make it great again™.

    A World Cup that brings the best-on-best hockey plus actual profit (TV deals, etc) to the league helps everyone and raises the salary cap.

    “I am talking the goal scoring rate on international sized ice sheets in general is lower than smaller rinks. Not just Team Canada games.”

    “Studies have been done, the numbers have been crunched.”

    Have any links? I’m not trying to be a jerk here but I’m genuinely curious what you and Woodguy are going off of here. Woodguy has already stated that smaller ice rinks is “universally” preferred by authorities on the matter, but after a quick Google search I found that wasn’t the case.

  53. Scungilli says:

    The space in front of the net doesn’t get bigger, that’s where goals are scored. More room slows the game down as players stick handle more, the D just let them do it.

    NA ice speeds tempo so more entertaining. Injuries can be dealt with other ways. I do believe making more room behind the net might increase goal scoring, but that isn’t going to happen. Making the nets bigger as well, I’m against that, make pads smaller.

  54. Centre of attention says:

    What a lot of pro-olympic people are missing is that the league is seriously getting shafted in the current format.

    An international entity is asking a league made up of individual owners with their own separate opinions to come together and decide as a group on whether or not they should lend their best players to play in a separate, non NHL event on the international stage with risk of injury?

    Heck, they had to fight tooth and nail just to get the insurance covered.

    Oh, by the way, you can’t show clips of the players you lend on your team websites. McDavid scores for Canda? Won’t be on anything NHL related. You also hardly make any profit.

    If the IOC let the NHL have just a simple media deal, I’m sure there could have been an agreement. Instead we get no Olympics.

    This isn’t completely on Bettman or the owners. It takes two to tango. Seems to me the IOC are the ones being jerks here.

  55. Centre of attention says:

    Side,

    I think WoodGuy is onto something and there are a lot of very smart people who agree with him. I’m about to go to bed as I work tomorrow, don’t have the time to do all of the research but maybe if I remember in the morning before work I’ll find a link or two.

    I can tell you one thing about the quotes you provided:

    The players have their own selfish interests, just as the owners do.

    Heck us fans do as well, we just want to watch some damn best on best stick puck damnit! Haha.

  56. Chachi says:

    Centre of attention:
    What a lot of pro-olympic people are missing is that the league is seriously getting shafted in the current format.

    An international entity is asking a league made up of individual owners with their own separate opinions to come together and decide as a group on whether or not they should lend their best players to play in a separate, non NHL event on the international stage with risk of injury?

    Heck, they had to fight tooth and nail just to get the insurance covered.

    Oh, by the way, you can’t show clips of the players you lend on your team websites. McDavid scores for Canda? Won’t be on anything NHL related. You also hardly make any profit.

    If the IOC just let the NHL have just a simple media deal, I’m sure there could have been an agreement. Instead we get no Olympics.

    This isn’t completely on Bettman or the owners. It takes two to tango. Seems to me the IOC are the ones being jerks here.

    The reason the IOC can extract billions of dollars from television networks across the globe is because they religiously keep other entities from broadcasting video of their events unless huge sums of money have greased their pockets. NBC doesn’t want the NHL to be able to show clips of games on their website because it will take eyes (and advertising dollars) away from NBC media platforms. At this point I do not believe the IOC would be able to give the NHL even limited broadcast rights to hockey without potentially breaching their agreement with NBC and exposing themselves to massive liability. Now if NBC felt that having NHLers at the Olympics would juice the ratings in the U.S. high enough to make up for a loss of exclusivity maybe something can be worked out, but I honestly doubt that it will make much of a difference to them. NBC barely promotes the NHL games that squeak onto the main network from time to time.

  57. Lloyd B. says:

    Side: Going off of Woodguy’s quote here:

    “The fact that you actually think big ice means more offense tells me that you haven’t read much about it because everyone who know anything about pro hockey comes to the opposite conclusion.

    I’m not one to appeal to authority, but they are pretty universal in this.”

    He described the authorities as being the players and other professionals and said it was “universal”.I’m not sure why you are challenging my use of the word “authority” when Woodguy used it in the first place to describe pro hockey players?

    Wait, are we arguing about the amount of goals scored by team Canada who is playing on a different ice surface once every 4 years?

    What actual goals are we counting here?Do we have stats of the same Canadian team playing the same games but on NA Ice size and European ice size? Honest questions.

    EDIT: Since I see you edited your comment, I will reply to your edit as well.I would argue that Sochi was a “snooze” fest because you have a Canadian team that plays with eachother once (with a bunch of turn over on the team every Olympics) every 4 years on a new ice surface, against very good teams from other countries in a new environment as the reason why there wasn’t more goals.

    I’ll be convinced about smaller rinks producing more goals when you have the same teams competing on both ice surfaces. If there is data on this, please let me know.

    1972. The only time I can think of where two teams with the same players played the same amount of games on both ice surfaces.

    Talk about small sample size ! Even then, Bobby Clarke made sure the two teams with the exact same players didn’t happen.

    What you are asking for is impossible.

  58. godot10 says:

    Side: I too, struggle to see how more space would encourage boring trap hockey as well.

    More space benefits the skilled players. I could only imagine what Connor and Drai could do with more space and time.

    The “more space and time” is far away from the net. I don’t care how long Connor has the puck if he is far away from the net. If they want to go out there, you tell your defenders to let them, and don’t chase them.

  59. dustrock says:

    What would happen if you kept the width the same but made the rink longer?

  60. Zelepukin says:

    so I guess we now know the real reason why Hendy is in the lineup so frequently. He shares DJ responsibilties:

    https://www.nhl.com/oilers/indepth/levels

  61. Centre of attention says:

    Chachi,

    Great point and I didn’t even know about that binding agreement between NBC and the IOC

    There are many revolving doors in this cluster-fuck

    I’m not shocked at all that the owners simply walked away.

    Shame, really.

    I’ll repeat my hope that this forces the NHL to go all-in on the world cup though and make it awesome.

    There was epic international hockey before 1998 and there will be after 2018. I think we were getting a bit spoiled tbh.

  62. godot10 says:

    Georges:
    Georges,

    Ha! The players with the lowest cap dollar hit per point:

    $9,840 CMD$11,082 Arvidsson$11,285 Panarin$11,905 Maroon$12,500 Drai$12,837 Sheary$13,265 Gagner$13,603 Pastrnak$14,015 Matthews$14,422 Ehlers

    The mind boggles. I guess I’ve never thought about cap management before.

    A lot of those guys are really triple that because they are going to trigger bonuses.

    McDavid is going to be more like $33K per point.

  63. Jaxon says:

    dustrock:
    Is there an easy way to find a statistical comparable for RNH whose salary is smaller?

    He plays a valuable role on the Oilers, I’m just not sure it’s a $6m role.

    I’m happy to be proven wrong though.

    Players who had similar ice time and similar points to Nugent-Hopkins
    RYAN NUGENT-HOPKINS – 23YRS, 17:46, 78GP-16G-23A-39P, $6.00M
    MARTIN HANZAL ————- 30YRS, 18:35, 68GP-19G-18A-37P, $3.10M
    VALTTERI FILPPULA ——– 29YRS, 17:12, 76GP-12G-30A-42P, $5.00M
    DERICK BRASSARD ——– 29YRS, 17:19, 77GP-13G-25A-38P, $5.00M
    ALEX KILLORN ————— 27YRS, 18:03, 77GP-18G-16A-34P, $4.45M
    ADAM HENRIQUE ———– 27YRS, 18:16, 78GP-20G-19A-39P, $4.00M
    MATT DUCHENE ————- 26YRS, 18:15, 73GP-17G-20A-37P, $6.00M
    SEAN COUTURIER ———- 24YRS, 18:23, 63GP-13G-18A-31P, $4.33M
    VICTOR RASK —————- 24YRS, 17:24, 78GP-16G-27A-43P, $4.00M
    MARKUS GRANLUND —— 23YRS, 17:18, 69GP-19G-13A-32P, $0.90M

    I would say Couturier and Rask are good comparables. and they’re in the $4.0-4.3M range. Duchene and Henrique are decent matches as well. Duchene makes $6M, but Henrique makes a more reasonable $4.0M.

  64. Lloyd B. says:

    dustrock,

    dustrock:
    What would happen if you kept the width the same but made the rink longer?

    Women of the world have been asking that question for years. OH..you said rink!

  65. J-Bo says:

    My wish list would likely include an Eberle trade for RHD if possible and a Pouliot salary dump to Vegas. I really like Eberle but I like the flexibility of keeping Nuge. I think this summer is the ideal time to trade Eberle contract wise and with the expansion. I would then sign a short term scoring right winger to go along with Draisaitl Puljujarvi Kassian and Patrick. I would then look to sign a free agent 3rd line centre.

    Maroon – McDavid – Draisaitl
    Lucic – Nuge – Vrbata
    Caggiula – Hanzal – Puljujarvi
    Khaira – Letestu – Kassian
    Pitlick – Slepyshev

    Klefbomb – Larsson
    Sekera – Manson
    Nurse – Benning
    Reinhart
    I know getting Manson is pie in the sky but this would be my wish list.

  66. godot10 says:

    Shouldn’t one make Caggiula earn the 3LW spot next year than just cede it to him. Keep Pouliot. Make Caggiula take it away from him on merit.

    Pouliot is a sunken cost. It is cost inefficient to buy him out and replace him. He will be difficult to trade without taking a similar contract in return, and one is NOT likely to get as good a player.

  67. Regretzky says:

    I’ll start by saying that I do not possess the big hockey brain some posters here have so please go gentle on me if I’m out to lunch. All the talk about increasing offence always leads me down a different road than Olympic ice; I’m wondering how everyone is feeling about the trapezoid all these years later?

    A) How would encouraging goalies to go on more hikes hurt offence?

    B) Did it not increase injuries from the race to the end boards it encouraged?

    …and now we have no touch icing. On the surface it seems like they’ve added rules to fix problems caused by adding rules, do enlighten me if I’m way off. If we need to change the game to add offence I’d start by changing it back the way it was.

  68. Professor Q says:

    godot10:
    Shouldn’t one make Caggiula earn the 3LW spot next year than just cede it to him.Keep Pouliot.Make Caggiula take it away from him on merit.

    Pouliot is a sunken cost.It is cost inefficient to buy him out and replace him.He will be difficult to trade without taking a similar contract in return, and one is NOT likely to get as good a player.

    I think all the College Pros should battle it out for spots, yes. No gifts.

    Unfortunately it seems the latter might be in their agreements in some form.

  69. treevojo says:

    dustrock:
    What would happen if you kept the width the same but made the rink longer?

    It’s my opinion that if you kept the ends the same length and added it to the neutral zone that it could potentially create more offence.

    My thinking is that you need more room in the neutral zone to break down the trap and gain speed. By adding width you also add width to the end zones keeping the puck further from the net.

    Length in the neutral zone is the answer.

    Would love to see it in practice but unfortunately owners have no intentions on cutting out a row of seats on each end of the rink.

  70. Lowetide says:

    dustrock:
    What would happen if you kept the width the same but made the rink longer?

    Public skating.

  71. digger50 says:

    Isn’t three on three a representation of having more time and space on the ice. So is four on four and I love it.

    Why wouldn’t five on five playing larger ice surface open the ice up in similar fashion?

  72. treevojo says:

    Lowetide: Public skating.

    I bet Connor would be the best public skater in the league.

  73. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Professor Q,

    While the “wider, but not longer” ice surface is interesting, that was not the conversation.

    You said:

    Also, you’re ass backwards about your last point. It would actually open the game up more and become more exciting, as seen in International Hockey.

    You specifically mention International Hockey and therefore that size of ice so that was the conversation.

  74. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    The most interesting rule change proposal I’ve seen on this is from Dellow.

    He suggests that once a team gains the ozone, the ozone then extends all the way to the center line.

    This would reduce a lot of the half wall board grinding as there would be much more ice for the offensive team to work with.

    The defending team would have a tougher time pushing the play to the boards as well.

    Stretching the zone would also open up more cross ice passing lanes, and those are pretty key to scoring 5v5.

  75. Centre of attention says:

    Woodguy v2.0:
    The most interesting rule change proposal I’ve seen on this is from Dellow.

    He suggests that once a team gains the ozone, the ozone then extends all the way to the center line.

    This would reduce a lot of the half wall board grinding as there would be much more ice for the offensive team to work with.

    The defending team would have a tougher time pushing the play to the boards as well.

    Stretching the zone would also open up more cross ice passing lanes, and those are pretty key to scoring 5v5.

    He also mentioned teams that box up really well and grind defensively would be owned by teams with skaters who can wind up with that extra space and come at the defenders with speed.

    Speed is the ultimate trap buster.

  76. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Centre of attention: He also mentioned teams that box up really well and grind defensively would be owned by teams with skaters who can wind up with that extra space and come at the defenders with speed.

    Speed is the ultimate trap buster.

    Agreed.

  77. Pouzar says:

    Woodguy v2.0: He suggests that once a team gains the ozone, the ozone then extends all the way to the center line.

    The ol ball hockey floating blue line. I like it.

    http://www.playersballhockey.com/league/rules.asp

  78. Pouzar says:

    This is an interesting one too. Changing the icing line from the red line to respective blue lines.

    http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/this-radical-rule-change-would-increase-scoring-in-the-nhl

  79. Lloyd B. says:

    Pouzar,

    If you combine the two suggestions it would appear the game has been backwards all these years.

    The blue line becomes the icing or red line and the red line becomes the outer marker of the offensive zone.

    Interesting concepts.

  80. Pouzar says:

    Lloyd B.:
    Pouzar,

    If you combine the two suggestions it would appear the game has been backwards all these years.

    The blue line becomes the icing or red line and the red line becomes the outer marker of the offensive zone.

    Interesting concepts.

    Yup. Very interesting indeed. I would at least try the latter since it effectively increases the size of the neutral zone. Having to defend more NZ is a good thing imo.

  81. Woogie63 says:

    Pouzar: Yup. Very interesting indeed. I would at least try the latter since it effectively increases the size of the neutral zone. Having to defend more NZ is a good thing imo.

    You could add, teams defend the end so they have two long shift periods.

  82. Scungilli says:

    Lowetide: Caggiula has played C for much of the year, Slepyshev has played L and R and Simpson has played a ton on RHD. All three men can be listed in multiple positions, especially since they are not established.

    It’s true, for me the last thing I want is rookies playing out of position. Caggiula didn’t succeed, I’d play Sekera off had before Simpson. Wingers matter less, I think the coach agrees with you based on usage.

  83. The Trade Guy says:

    I’m all for making the nets bigger. People laugh at the goaltending in the 80s but look how much more net there is to shoot at with that equipment.

    Make the nets bigger and force goaltenders to have reflexes again.

  84. GCW_69 says:

    You want more offense, the NHL only needs to do two things:

    1) Take Ken Dryden’s recommendation on increasing the size of the nets. I believe he suggested 4 inches higher and 8 inches wider
    2) Eliminate offside. Jamie McLellan made this suggestion, noting all offsides does is eliminate goals. Taking out the blue lines for offside would create some interesting strategy challenges. Of someone is goal sucking do you hold back a defender, or take the odd man situation and hope no one can pass out to the goal suck. It certainly would make zone entries more fluid as well. Players could hit the line with speed without having to worry about timing, pushing the defense back.

    The NHL is the only major sports league that doesn’t really try to create more offense.

  85. GCW_69 says:

    The Trade Guy:
    I’m all for making the nets bigger. People laugh at the goaltending in the 80s but look how much more net there is to shoot at with that equipment.

    Make the nets bigger and force goaltenders to have reflexes again.

    When I was a kid my favorite players were all goalies because of how they had to move and use their reflexes. Now the position is boring. I would love to see bigger nets.

  86. rickithebear says:

    Speed!
    Speed!

    You metro men need to get mani/pedicures..

    the first sport to turn there game into a collection of metro wimps!
    the 3 pointer in basket ball.

    Detriot pistons played a beautiful game.

    I do not want your pussified NHL.

  87. rickithebear says:

    😉

  88. supernova says:

    For the 50 man list I think it’s very likely we see a Veteran D acquired for Bakersfield.

    Looks like we could have 3 or 4 AHL rookie D available to them with Jones, Bear, Mantha and Paigin.

    Someone in the Mark Fraser role who likely spends the season there but is also capable of NHL spot duty.

    For the big club Pouliot, RNH and Ebs all have targets on their backs due to contracts. Oilers need to look long and hard at finding a RH Center that can either play soft minutes and score at a good rate. Or play Hard minutes for the coaches to try and play matchups against.

    This is a huge variance is skill and cap hit. Florida has Bjustad. Minnesota has cap issues and has Coyle that fits a Chia type player.

    On RW they can either go the PA Parenteau type road, or Craig Smith out of Nashville will likely be available for very little.

    I would like a couple gambles on the Veteran C or W that is just cap space around $1 M

  89. Lowetide says:

    supernova:
    For the 50 man list I think it’s very likely we see a Veteran D acquired for Bakersfield.

    Looks like we could have 3 or 4 AHL rookie D available to them with Jones, Bear, Mantha and Paigin.

    Someone in the Mark Fraser role who likely spends the season there but is also capable of NHL spot duty.

    For the big club Pouliot, RNH and Ebs all have targets on their backs due to contracts. Oilers need to look long and hard at finding a RH Center that can either play soft minutes and score at a good rate. Or play Hard minutes for the coaches to try and play matchups against.

    This is a huge variance is skill and cap hit. Florida has Bjustad. Minnesota has cap issues and has Coyle that fits a Chia type player.

    On RW they can either go the PA Parenteau type road, or Craig Smith out of Nashville will likely be available for very little.

    I would like a couple gambles on the Veteran C or W that is just cap space around $1 M

    I actually just posted on that, kind of a Mark Fayne without the big contract. A mentor type. Good points all
    http://lowetide.ca/2017/04/05/it-dont-come-easy/

Leave a Reply

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