TAKE YOUR PROTEIN PILLS AND PUT YOUR HELMET ON

Every summer, weary Oilers fans are met by a blast from the sun, signaling the annual trek to find water in enough supply to be called a lake, and the realization that hope springs eternal when it comes to the local hockey team’s transactions. Allow me to take you back through the past, darkly:

  • June 30, 2009: Word tonight from multiple sources: Dany Heatley is an Edmonton Oiler. Senators get three NHL players in return: Andrew Cogliano, a very good young player; Dustin Penner, an inconsistent winger who does bring some things; Ladislav Smid, a young defender who has been developing at the NHL level. A lot of young talent heading the other way. Source
  • July 2, 2011: Did Cam Barker ever–at any time–play tough minutes in the NHL? No. He didn’t in Minnesota and in Chicago they always had a better option. Whatever Barker’s value–real or imagined, it doesn’t appear in the secondary disciplines (that I can find). Source
  • June 20, 2014: Edmonton acquires a window of opportunity to acquire Nikita Nikitin. Source
  • June 26, 2015: In terms of value, Peter Chiarelli gave up too much. Reinhart—if everything works out—projects as a second-pairing guy and the price paid was dear, too dear. Oilers fans will grind themselves into a fine white powder on this issue, I choose not to do it. Source
  • June 29, 2016: The Edmonton Oilers have traded Taylor Hall to the New Jersey Devils. It is a terrible trade. Defenseman Adam Larsson is the returning piece in the deal, and addresses the need for help at RHD for the organization. Source

I have zero interest in going back in time (except to acknowledge that fantastic photo by Rob Ferguson, all rights reserved) and if Peter Chiarelli brings Stanley to this town most of us will bask in the glow and allow history to fade (I think).

That said, Peter Chiarelli can do himself (and the Oilers) an enormous favor by making the kind of trade that will catapult this team into the highest reaches of NHL teams. What would it look like? A 2018 second-round pick for Alex Petrovic might do it, or maybe a one-year contract for Kevin Shattenkirk.

We’ve established the needs (second pair RHD, short term but effective replacement for Andrej Sekera, cap compliance, a forward who moves the needle and 3C would be best in terms of position) now it’s left to PC to find the deals.

  • Three for one? I don’t see it. If the Oilers want a major piece (Ryan O’Reilly, Matt Duchene, Drew Doughty) it’s going to mean a major piece going out. You might get a two-for-one in the case of Doughty, but that’s high rent both ways.
  • Prospect for immediate help? This I can see happening, in a Caleb Jones for Jason Demers kind of way. Edmonton doesn’t have that kind of cap room, but if the $77 million outer markers are true, then maybe this happens.
  • Buy Low? I’ve looked at some of the overrated (based on cap investment) players who might be available for very little, and it’s not a promising bunch. You could buy low on Cody Eakin (who we have talked about before), Matt Calvert, Brandon Pirri, Joonas Donskoi, Zemgus Girgensons, but are you sure you want to? One player who might be worth asking after is Adam Lowry, he of the 1.12/60 5×5 scoring this past season.
  • One for one? The most likely scenario.
  • Picks for Player? Could work, especially with LV in the picture. Florida’s protected list should be very interesting to Edmonton.

PC needs to grab a $6 million talent and pay 60 cents on the dollar in asset cost, and baby that’s a difficult thing to do. Idea being acquiring a player who can drive a line or anchor a pairing while also giving up something other than McDavid, Leon, Nuge, Oscar, Larsson or Talbot. That’s the task.

IDEAL SUMMER

I think it’s go time for the Oilers, so an aggressive stance is the correct one. It isn’t time to blow your brains out, and the big contracts are going to get signed (Leon’s cap number impacting this year). I would like to see:

  • Vegas selects Griffin Reinhart in expansion draft.
  • Golden Knights also select Mark Pysyk from Florida, and trade him to the Oilers in exchange for (one of) Anton Slepyshev, Caleb Jones or Ethan Bear.
  • Oilers sign Brian Campbell in free agency.
  • Oilers sign Spencer Foo to an entry-level deal.

Projected Roster

  • Maroon-McDavid-Eberle
  • Lucic-Draisaitl-Puljujarvi
  • Pouliot-RNH-Foo
  • Caggiula-Letestu-Kassian
  • Khaira, Pitlick
  • Klefbom-Larsson
  • Campbell-Pysyk
  • Nurse-Benning
  • Oesterle
  • Talbot (Brossoit)
  • Sekera-LTIR

I think you can get them under a $77 million cap and run that group until the deadline. Lack of experience on RW is a concern, but Kassian can move up, Caggiula can move over and Leon is at the ready. I like this defense, especially when Sekera comes back. Thoughts?

KEY DATES THIS MONTH

  • June 15: The first day the Oilers can tell us they are buying out Benoit Pouliot.
  • June 17: Oilers submit their expansion protected list.
  • June 21: We find out if LV took Letestu, Khaira, Reinhart or Brossoit. I say Reinhart.
  • June 23: Oilers draft Robert Thomas No. 22 overall.
  • June 24: Oilers pick five forwards, a defenseman and a goalie in later rounds of entry draft.
  • June 29: Oilers acquire Mark Pysyk from Vegas Golden Knights.
  • July 1: Oilers sign Brian Campbell.
  • July 10: Oilers sign Spencer Foo.

How many of these things actually happen? I’ll bet two (Pouliot, Reinhart).

LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

Friiiday! A fun, crazy morning with the normal circus. 10am, TSN1260. Scheduled to appear:

  • Steve Lansky, BigMouthSports. Steve predicting Pekka Rinne’s dive a week ago, and we are here.
  • Frank Seravalli, TSN. SCF’s look to be winding down and the wild ride trade summer is just around the corner.
  • Matt Iwanyk, TSN1260. Who will the Oilers lose in the expansion draft? Plus, with Edmonton getting the Grey Cup (announcement today) should the season start mid-June?
  • Paul Almeida, SSE. Oilers summer.

10-1260 text, @Lowetide on twitter. See you on the radio!

written by

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

147 Responses to "TAKE YOUR PROTEIN PILLS AND PUT YOUR HELMET ON"

  1. trencan says:

    Where is Russel? I expect Russel will sign with LV and Reinhart stays. And I would like also Eberle for Pesce.

  2. Lowetide says:

    trencan:
    Where is Russel? I expect Russel will sign with LV and Reinhart stays. And I would like also Eberle for Pesce.

    I didn’t sign Russell. The Oilers will. Carolina is extremely unlikely to trade Pesce.

  3. Rondo says:

    Not all trades are equal regarding wins and losses. The Reinhart trade has big repercussions. Arguably they could have 2 good players fighting for a spot on the team this year. Now they are in need of draft picks because the stock is low.

  4. Rondo says:

    LT,

    If you were to trade up in the draft what player would you go after?

    I would trade up for Miro Heiskanen

  5. trencan says:

    Rondo:
    LT,

    If you were to trade upin the draft what player would you go after?

    I would trade up for Miro Heiskanen

    Liljegren

  6. who says:

    Don’t know how you can consider the Hall trade a loss but good for you for sticking to your guns.

  7. 36 percent body fat says:

    Rienhart wasnt ready! True!

    But also was never good enough either.

    We Traded nail yakupov, who had his deficiencies, but was in the nhl, had accomplished the NHL, and somewhat in point totals still with in range of some of his draft peers. We got a third round pick.

    Griffin Reinhart, fell off huge to his peers, never did anything in the NHL, dominated junior because of his size and physical maturity relative to the players who haven’t put on size and was able to look good playing his game. His game only translates if you can skate well and are a great first passer. Not how we define Reinhart. So a Defenseman who has been passed by younger players on the Islanders, fallen of huge relative to his draft class (probably wasn’t a first round pick anymore) was statistically equivalent to a mid 2nd round pick in the 2015 draft, and was a left handed. For this we gave up the ability to draft a big power winger, or a right handed center with tonnes of skill who had fallen down from extremely high value drafting position to our lap. St. Louis was ecstatic when this happened with tarasenko. Than to top it all off, the second round pick could have been the big all around right handed defenseman that the oilers need in Brandon Carlo, who at draft day was ahead of Reinhart in development.

    The oilers need to stop shopping at home for talent and executives. Green and MacTavish WERE responsible for this trade. (watch the video again and see their faces) and obviously reinhart was an oil king. TERRIBLE TRADE. And on top of all of that, as a bubble prospect he shows up out of shape for training camp. He dropped the puck at the oil kings opener and he had a GUT!.

    This will only be let go when MacT is fired, Chia admits his mistake and Reinhart is salvaged for some non replacement level asset.

  8. Ducey says:

    How is trading Phil Larsen for a 4th/ 5th not a win??

    The Oilers traded the rights to a guy who had been playing in the KHL and was not in their plans, for a conditional 4th/ 5th.

    It was pretty clear he was not coming back if he had to play in the AHL, and he sure was not making the Oilers.

    The Canucks wound up getting only 26 games, 6 points and a -8 from him, and now he has gone back to Europe.

    This was a flat out steal for EDM.

  9. TO10801 says:

    Carolina will protect Trevor Carrick and Ryan Murphy as their 2nd and 3rd Dmen in the draft. I wonder if a deal could be made where Carolina acquires a Dman (Braun, Tanev, Demers) and then protects them in the expansion draft. After the draft we would flip Nuge or Eberle to them for the dman. It would allow us to lose Reinhart in expansion while solidifying our top 4. I would be fine throwing in a pick as compensation for using a spot on their expansion protection list.

  10. Ducey says:

    36 percent body fat,

    We Traded nail yakupov, who had his deficiencies, but was in the nhl, had accomplished the NHL, and somewhat in point totals still with in range of some of his draft peers. We got a third round pick

    Yak was looking like a bust at the time of the trade. His subsequent experience in STL (40 games, lots of press box time, 9 points) confirmed it.

    Had the Oilers hung onto him for another year, they would be letting him walk now for nothing.

    The odds of Reinhart playing another 100 NHL games are higher than Yak playing another 100 NHL games (although the odds of either of them doing it are likely less than 70%).

    And Green has a terrific record of identifying talent. As far as I can tell he has had two nice drafts and has been instrumental in signing guys like Caggiula.

  11. who says:

    Regarding a Russell signing, there are positives and negatives. I think he signs here. Management likes him and the player wants to stay in Alberta. The only thing stopping him from signing here would be Calgary.
    If he signs here for 3 years or less at 3 mil per year I can live with it. None of our rookies in Bakersfield will be ready in less than two. And it buys Nurse and Benning time to grow into top 4 guys. When they are ready for bigger minutes Russell can slide to third pairing. It would probably eliminate the need for Chia to go chasing down another top four guy.
    The negative is that signing Russell probably limits any improvement except for the continued development of our young dmen. There will be no room to sign another proven vet long term.
    I can see Chia using one of the d prospects as trade bait but it is just as likely to be Bear as Jones. With the Sekera injury, Davidson trade, and if Reinhart is lost to expansion, the leftorium doesn’t feel like such a big deal anymore.
    If it’s a one for one trade I still feel Eberle is the one to go.
    Buying out Pouliot this summer would be a terrible move.

  12. Scungilli Slushy says:

    who:
    Don’t know how you can consider the Hall trade a loss but good for you for sticking to your guns.

    It’s not a loss in terms of team needs. It is a loss based on player type and typical value. At the time of the trade, moving a league top younger offensive player for a defense first low offense defenseman isn’t good value for the team trading the guy with the higher skill level.

    Think of it like trading a Ferrari for a Tacoma. Maybe the Tacoma helps you more with what you need, they are both good vehicles, but you traded a Ferrari for a Tacoma, straight up. An outside observer would probably say you lost that deal when you made it, even if the outcome works for you.

    Maybe the Tacoma is still running in ten years and the Ferrari isn’t, but the point is about the day you made the deal, not what turns out down the road, so to speak. Ferrari for Cayenne Turbo, different story.

  13. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    – Great post LT! You havne’t entered the Hunter inspired contest, but I can cobble together most of your entries.

    – Here’s the arm-chair GM pool: winner gets a LT contribution (entries untill end of cup/first transactions:

    1) Which Oil player will Vegas select?:
    2) Who is our first pick in the Entry Draft?
    3) Does Ebs get moved? (bonus if you pick for who)
    4) Does RNH get moved (bonus if you pick for who)
    5) Who is our back-up G on game 1?
    6) Total $ amount/years for Russell (0 is an answer)
    7) Total $ amount/years of McDavid’s contract?
    8) Total $ amount/years of Drai’s contract?
    9) Which 2 D dress with Larsson/Klef/Nurse/Benning on game 1?
    10) Biggest off-season F acquired in terms of salary?:
    11) Is Jessie playing in NHL game 1?
    12) How many roster trades does Chia make?

    Please in the following format:
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    12

    p.s. While LT says Hall > Larsson, that $1.8MM paid for Benning and Cagullia. Ricki says Larsson is elite box-surpression

  14. Ducey says:

    who:
    Regarding a Russell signing,there are positives and negatives. I think he signs here. Management likes him and the player wants to stay in Alberta. The only thing stopping him from signing here would be Calgary.
    If he signs here for 3 years or less at 3 mil per year I can live with it. None of our rookies in Bakersfield will be ready in less than two. And it buys Nurse and Benning time to grow into top 4 guys. When they are ready for bigger minutes Russell can slide to third pairing. It would probably eliminate the need for Chia to go chasing down another top four guy.
    The negative is that signing Russell probably limits any improvement except for the continued development of our young dmen. There will be no room to sign another proven vet long term.
    I can see Chia using one of the d prospects as trade bait but it is just as likely to be Bear as Jones. With the Sekera injury, Davidson trade, and if Reinhart is lost to expansion, the leftorium doesn’t feel like such a big deal anymore.
    If it’s a one for one trade I still feel Eberle is the one to go.
    Buying out Pouliot this summer would be a terrible move.

    If they signed Russell for 3 yrs, could they not trade him after 2?

  15. John Chambers says:

    TO10801:
    Carolina will protect Trevor Carrick and Ryan Murphy as their 2nd and 3rd Dmen in the draft. I wonder if a deal could be made where Carolina acquires a Dman (Braun, Tanev, Demers) and then protects them in the expansion draft. After the draft we would flip Nuge or Eberle to them for the dman. It would allow us to lose Reinhart in expansion while solidifying our top 4. I would be fine throwing in a pick as compensation for using a spot on their expansion protection list.

    Chia’s not jockeying.

    Not gonna jockey.

  16. 36 percent body fat says:

    Ducey,

    This is true but that does not mean the Reinhart will play more nhl games than Yak which is the general overall measure. I also missed a line in my statement. Yak did not accomplish the NHL he had accomplished something in the NHL.

    The whole point is Snow fleeced us!

  17. John Chambers says:

    Re: Russell

    Why not give him a 5-year deal for like $11M.

    3-3-2-1.5-1.5

    AAV is only $2.2M, and if he can’t deliver after 4 years his buyout is only $700K / yr.

  18. TO10801 says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux:
    – Great post LT!You havne’t entered the Hunter inspired contest, but I can cobble together most of your entries.

    – Here’s the arm-chair GM pool: winner gets a LT contribution (entries untill end of cup/first transactions:

    1) Which Oil player will Vegas select?:
    2) Who is our first pick in the Entry Draft?
    3) Does Ebs get moved? (bonus if you pick for who)
    4) Does RNH get moved (bonus if you pick for who)
    5) Who is our back-up G on game 1?
    6) Total $ amount/years for Russell (0 is an answer)
    7) Total $ amount/years of McDavid’s contract?
    8) Total $ amount/years of Drai’s contract?
    9) Which 2 D dress with Larsson/Klef/Nurse/Benning on game 1?
    10) Biggest off-season F acquired in terms of salary?:
    11) Is Jessie playing in NHL game 1?
    12) How many roster trades does Chia make?

    1. Reinhart
    2. Brannstrom
    3. No
    4 Yes. Nuge straight across for Faulk after expansion.
    5. Brossoit
    6. 0
    7. 5 yrs x 10M
    8. 8 yrs x 7 M
    9. Faulk and Oduya
    10. Nick Bonino (4 x 3.75)
    11. Yes
    12. 2 (Nuge and Pouliot)

  19. 36 percent body fat says:

    Ducey,

    Deharnais, Cairns were not good picks. There was a lot of scoring talent still on the board, which means they have a much higher value and chance to play nhl than and defender with and NHLE of 2.

    Benson was an ok pick, but if you separate the edmonton connection, Raddysh, and Debrincat were much better picks.

    The exact point I was making was the connection to other things edmonton leads the club to make horrible decisions. It has been this way for 20 years.

    Drafting and trading for ex oilers kids, Drafting and trading for oil kings, Hiring former players. etc
    HOW OFTEN HAS THIS WORKED?

    -nillson father and son
    -reinhart
    -Musil father and son
    -MacTavish
    -Bringing Back Howsen
    -Moroz
    -Samuelsson
    -Ewanyk

    The smartest person was Keagen Lowe who knew what was up and didnt wanted to be drafted here.

    Green Good or Bad, you need to sever this connection.

    The rest of 2015 and 2016 look good, but we said that about 2010 and 2011 as well.

  20. UnjustEnrichment says:

    The guy I would aim for is Drew Doughty, but the price will be considerable. It would give Doughty the chance to be the offensive defenseman that he has always dreamed of being.

  21. HALFWALL says:

    Appreciate the comprehensive rearview mirror view and forward looking line in the sand. It provides a baseline to judge the upcoming frenzy over the next 2 months.

    Rearview mirror view looks pretty good to me overall. Some exceptions/quibbles:
    – I think free agent acquisitions (e.g. Lucic, Letestu, Sekera, Benning, Caggulia) deserve a place on the GM scorecard as these are (and were) key ingredients in building the team
    – I think beyond player to player value, the impact a transaction has to roster balance and depth should be taken into consideration as it: 1) Improves the performance of the team on the ice (beyond the sum of the parts) 2) Improves the GM’s leverage and flexibility at the negotiating table by being able to walk away from crap deals. In this light, I would look upon Hall-Larsson and Marincin-Gryba more favorably.
    – I would be maybe “Meh+” on Desharnais-Davidson. With the Sekera injury it sure would be nice to have Davidson now but being a natural LHD 3/4 on the depth chart and susceptible to expansion, was he ever in the long term plans? Desharnais clearly didn’t light it up while he was here but having 6 centers on the ice (DD, Cags, RNH, LD, CMD) gave the Oilers tons of flexibility during the playoffs that paid off in the 1st 2 rounds.

    Looking forward to the next 2 months!

  22. Scungilli Slushy says:

    Signing Russell isn’t the problem, a NTC / NMC is.

  23. TO10801 says:

    36 percent body fat,

    I think they are done going down that path. It is important to remember that when Griffen Reinhart was drafted PC had just taken the job. It was not a good trade, but it would seem likely that he was relying on the intel from previous staff. I would be more concerned if this past season PC did not sign Russell and forced Reinhart to play minutes he couldn’t handle.

  24. Scungilli Slushy says:

    UnjustEnrichment:
    The guy I would aim for is Drew Doughty, but the price will be considerable. It would give Doughty the chance to be the offensive defenseman that he has always dreamed of being.

    For sure. I have mentioned him a few times. The new GM is Rob Blake, I’ll hazard a guess Doughty is at the top of his list of players he wants to keep.
    Edit: Unfortunately.

  25. TO10801 says:

    HALFWALL,

    If Vegas selects Davidson from MTL it would be fairly entertaining if EDM traded for him for a pick.

  26. jtblack says:

    I have to claim the yak trade a win; if only for Addition by Subtraction. Even if its an organizatuonal fail; YAK needed to move on.

    Trading Schultz for a 3rd is a win. SCHULTZ has been excellent in Pitt.
    Yak was horrible in St Louis and will most likely be in Russia in a year or two.

  27. who says:

    Ducey: If they signed Russell for 3 yrs, could they not trade him after 2?

    That would be ideal and if he is the same player in two years he would be very tradeable. However, I suspect any deal would include a no move clause as this player really wants to stay in Alberta.
    Chia could use the NMC and the fact that Russell wants to stay home as leverage in negotiations.

  28. Lowetide says:

    Rondo:
    LT,

    If you were to trade upin the draft what player would you go after?

    I would trade up for Miro Heiskanen

    If I could trade up to No. 3? Owen Tippett

  29. HALFWALL says:

    TO10801,

    Yes, I’m wondering about this scenario myself but what would happen when Sekera gets back?

  30. 36 percent body fat says:

    TO10801,

    the exact problem with what you stated is MacTavish had kept a job.

    Second of all Like russel or not, his age and contract demands are not a fit with Edmonton. Unless he takes a 1 year deal on an overpayment he needs to go or he will hurt the long term plan for the oilers.

    Lucic, Eberle, Pouliot, and Nuge all have over valued contract right now with years on them. We cant take on more now that their are good players with contracts coming soon.

  31. McNuge93 says:

    who:
    Don’t know how you can consider the Hall trade a loss but good for you for sticking to your guns.

    +1 on this. It was not a lost trade

  32. CrazyCoach says:

    Scungilli Slushy: Think of it like trading a Ferrari for a Tacoma. Maybe the Tacoma helps you more with what you need, they are both good vehicles, but you traded a Ferrari for a Tacoma, straight up. An outside observer would probably say you lost that deal when you made it, even if the outcome works for you.
    Maybe the Tacoma is still running in ten years and the Ferrari isn’t, but the point is about the day you made the deal, not what turns out down the road, so to speak. Ferrari for Cayenne Turbo, different story.

    I look at your analogy and put it this way. I’ve got a thousand cords of firewood that need hauling over logging roads, and a nice 5 mile stretch of flattop near the end of the trip. What do I need?

    And yes, it would have been nice to get 10 Tacoma’s for the price of that Ferrari, but if that Ferrari keeps breaking down and can’t tow others across the finish line, then what do you have? Plus, Ferrari’s are high maintenance cars.

  33. 36 percent body fat says:

    McNuge93,

    lost the battle won the war is what Im guessing LT is going with here.

  34. slopitch says:

    I think the ship has sailed on Campbell. Id rather do Russell and do a 1 year deal on Shattenkirk (assuming he doesnt get term and vale elsewhere). Russell can offset the Sekera injury. If no Shattenkirk then find another 1 year deal somewhere. Allow the Oilers to develop Bear and Jones.

    BPA at #22. No need to rush players in anymore. 2 years developing before playing in the NHL. Lots can change.

  35. HALFWALL says:

    Scungilli Slushy,

    Great analogy.

    We needed the Tacoma to haul out the crap in front our crease 🙂

    I also believe (hope) we are less likely to get fleeced on our sports car trade ins in the future because we have some pick up trucks to fall back on now.

  36. TO10801 says:

    HALFWALL,

    Not a huge problem I don’t think, but depends on what else they do. Having Davidson as your 7D is probably not a horrible thing considering injuries are likely to occur.

  37. T0ML says:

    36 percent body fat,

    You me yakupov, of STL fame, with 40 games and 9 points being a super productive player enough to only get just shy of half the games on a playoff team? That yakupov?

  38. TO10801 says:

    36 percent body fat,

    I don’t want to sign Russell this year I was talking about last season. I agree we cant afford him and the odds he falls off a cliff are pretty good. As for MacT, I think you simply need to look at how his role has been reduced. MacT is a smart man, but probably better in a support role than running the show, and that is where PC has him.

  39. dustrock says:

    On a totally different topic, listening to the anniversary reissue of The Joshua Tree.

    I skipped the album proper because it’s been played to death, even the deeper cuts.

    I’ve enjoyed the remixes so far – sometimes they put a different emphasis on the song, or you notice something you didn’t before.

    Spotify is great for stuff like this because I doubt I would buy this outright, but it’s fun to listen to.

  40. 36 percent body fat says:

    T0ML,

    how about the yakupov who played more games in his first season than reinhart will in his career,

    in all seriousness, eakins wrecked yakupov, nuges, eberles and halls offense hasnt been the same since, and gagner is doing much better after seperating.

    what ever the value is for the failed first round picks in 2012 the oilers didnt get it in the reinhart trade,

    And right now you cant argue who has been the better nhl player between the two, Because one has been an nhl player and one hasnt. If yak was canadian he would still be on the radar like lazar.

  41. Dominoiler says:

    Those wings look weak, especially at the second and third lines.. then, when drai goes back to 1rw the centre depth has a huge hole around 3/4C.. this team needs another rhc, letestu is done (ok, not totally done, but can’t be counted on for big 5v5 minutes).. with Leon at centre RW looks suspect; with Leon on RW then centre depth looks suspect.. this is the greatest need up front, imo.. utility rhc that isn’t a 5v5 black hole, please and thank you..

  42. admiralmark says:

    Larsson $4.1 Mill x 6 years is already a bargain. He has the potential to improve even more, Game 5 in Anaheim when he logged 45 mins of icetime showed the value that lies in this player. I agree that at least at the time of the trade Hall held more value. But I think when you factor in everything, including Larsson’s bargain contract, and the amount of time he is on the ice creating positives suggests the distance in value between these two players is a lot smaller then it originally appeared.

  43. incubo_nero says:

    Your analogy is incomplete. You traded the Ferrari for the Tacoma because you needed to tow something up the side of a mountain. Doesn’t matter how nice the Ferrari was, it wasn’t going to get the job done.

    Edit: CrazyCoach beat me to it.

    Scungilli Slushy: It’s not a loss in terms of team needs. It is a loss based on player type and typical value. At the time of the trade, moving a league top younger offensive player for a defense first low offense defenseman isn’t good value for the team trading the guy with the higher skill level.

    Think of it like trading a Ferrari for a Tacoma. Maybe the Tacoma helps you more with what you need, they are both good vehicles, but you traded a Ferrari for a Tacoma, straight up. An outside observer would probably say you lost that deal when you made it, even if the outcome works for you.

    Maybe the Tacoma is still running in ten years and the Ferrari isn’t, but the point is about the day you made the deal, not what turns out down the road, so to speak. Ferrari for Cayenne Turbo, different story.

  44. 36 percent body fat says:

    TO10801,

    nope get rid of him. That decision was his and Greens, MacT was demoted because we didnt need him screwing up the MacDavid years, and an hour into the draft he screwed up big time.

    Hey you werent good at your job so here you go. You can support your replacement, but dont screw up again. Oh wait you did. Strike 27, you swung and missed and struck out the whole time.

    No other team would put up with this crap except colorado and vancouver whose ex player is fully in charge. In edmonton Chia has no ties. Fire the man allready.

    What does this team prospect system look like if that trade is not made. we wouldnt need to do a nuge trade for a number 2 right handed defenseman because carlo would be here. Barzal would be the eberle replacementm or EK or smechnikov could replace poo.

    Oilers wouldnt need to worry about taking bad contracts back in eberle or poo deals, bucause you could trade them for less and get prospects and picks as we would have replacement players in the system that could step in. This is how Chicago stays competitive in the cap world. You trade your second crop of top players when they peak for futures or good conracts to maximize there value before those players cash in on big pay days.

  45. Dominoiler says:

    I like the pysyk trade ideas, get any decent young rhd for draft picks or prospects and we’re doing good.. then bet that Russell stays and that Campbell balks at the offer..

  46. OF17 says:

    I like that roster, LT. Three scoring lines, veteran coverage everywhere, a 2nd pair that should be good enough to hold the tides. No contracts coming in that will impact the cap in a big way. I can see that team doing some damage.

  47. TO10801 says:

    36 percent body fat,

    I understand you like Yak, but Reinhart has played 53 games and Yak had 48 in his first season. Reinhart may never be a top 4 dman, but I guarantee he will linger as a 6/7. Look at Gryba, he isn’t perfect, but provides enough to stay in the league. The problem with Yak is that you cannot play him in a bottom six role. He made it to the NHL to score goals. He doesn’t do that, so how do you see him playing in the NHL longer than Reinhart?

  48. Ducey says:

    36 percent body fat:
    Ducey,

    Deharnais, Cairns were not good picks.There was a lot of scoring talent still on the board, which means they have a much higher value and chance to play nhl than and defender with and NHLE of 2.

    Benson was an ok pick, but if you separate the edmonton connection, Raddysh, and Debrincat were much better picks.

    The exact point I was making was the connection to other things edmonton leads the club to make horrible decisions.It has been this way for 20 years.

    Drafting and trading for ex oilers kids, Drafting and trading for oil kings, Hiring former players.etc
    HOW OFTEN HAS THIS WORKED?

    -nillson father and son
    -reinhart
    -Musil father and son
    -MacTavish
    -Bringing Back Howsen
    -Moroz
    -Samuelsson
    -Ewanyk

    The smartest person was Keagen Lowe who knew what was up and didnt wanted to be drafted here.

    Green Good or Bad, you need to sever this connection.

    The rest of 2015 and 2016 look good, but we said that about 2010 and 2011 as well.

    You can’t blame the actions of Tambo, Lowe, MacT on the new regime.

    There cannot be any doubt that Chia/ Nicholson/ TMac is in charge.

    Since the Reinhart trade there has been no old boys club stuff at all. Crying about a Moroz for Sammy trade is just silly. They gave up on Moroz and took Samuelsson for a little spin to see if they could recapture some of his old magic.

    They are allowed to draft guys from Edmonton. Benson was justifiable pick. Had he not got injured, we would be really looking forward to his appearance at training camp.

    In short, Give it up.

  49. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    dustrock:
    On a totally different topic, listening to the anniversary reissue of The Joshua Tree.

    I skipped the album proper because it’s been played to death, even the deeper cuts.

    I’ve enjoyed the remixes so far – sometimes they put a different emphasis on the song, or you notice something you didn’t before.

    Spotify is great for stuff like this because I doubt I would buy this outright, but it’s fun to listen to.

    – My first name is Joshua, and I did a lot of travel around the time that album came out: Joshua isn’t the most common names in many countries: so when I’d introduce myself in foreign countries so many people would say: “Joshua”, like as in the Joshua Tree?

    – I loved that album, and U2 were the last of the great bands that mattered worldwide, IMO…

  50. N64 says:

    36 percent body fat: This will only be let go when MacT is fired, Chia admits his mistake and Reinhart is salvaged by McPhee for some non replacement level asset.

    FTFY

    ~ So what non replacement level asset should Chia send McPhee to keep Reinhart? 😉 If McPhee claims Davey AND Reinhart that mistake is on Chia. LOL ~

  51. TO10801 says:

    36 percent body fat,

    I just don’t get how getting rid of a guy who now does scouting changes this team that much. If you ask Nurse to play top pair D he would likely look like a poor defenseman. But, if he is in a 3rd pair sheltered role, he looks a lot better. I think you could apply that to management as well. If you put a guy in a position he is not capable of doing he looks horrible, but when put in a position he is capable of maybe he appears to know what he’s doing.

  52. LMHF#1 says:

    LT – trading Slepyshev for anything but a wacky overpayment would be insane.

    I know you see the player there. It’s in your commentary during games. Not sure why you dial back in pieces like this. He’s exactly the sort of winger you need around McDavid or Draisaitl, especially while his contract is cheap. He’d better get you more than Mark Pysyk if he’s shipped out. Replacing him with a college signing would be a mistake. This is a guy with multiple pro years under his belt, and an excellent playoff performance to his credit.

  53. LMHF#1 says:

    Sure would have been nice to have Debrincat headed to camp in the fall…the wings would be very crowded and trading someone plus the first for a strong RHD would be an even greater possibility.

  54. Centre of attention says:

    I’m pro-Hall. I loved him as a player.

    I didn’t like the trade the day it happened but I’ve liked Larsson since the moment I started watching him, even before he dressed for his first Oiler game I was watching video for hours.

    I do however belong to the “Peter Chiarelli lost the battle, but can win the war” group of thinkers. All is not lost, even if perhaps a misstep was made.

    The only way for that to be true and for my thoughts to be reality is if Peter moves the needle with some significant additions that push us to the cup sometime soon. If he simply sits on his hands and tweaks and the Oilers don’t even get a pennant in the next 2 years you can start to make the case that the war may be lost as well.

    My 2 cents.

  55. Dirk Dangler says:

    I’m curious about the acquisition cost for Doughty. I don’t think he is available, but if he was, what would be the cost in terms of assets?

    Doughty is 27 (turns 28 in December of the 2017-18 season). He is signed for two more years at a cap hit of $7.0M.

    Would the asset cost for a trade be in the range of Nuge, Nurse, 2017 1st Rd Pick, 2018 1st Rd Pick? Or would it take Nuge, Klefbom, 2017 1st Rd Pick?

    Or do all conversations start and end with Draisaitl? Draisaitl+?

    If you could acquire him, what does his next contract look like? 8 years at $9.0M? $9.5M?

    Is any of that worth it?

  56. highgloveside says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux:
    – Great post LT!You havne’t entered the Hunter inspired contest, but I can cobble together most of your entries.

    – Here’s the arm-chair GM pool: winner gets a LT contribution (entries untill end of cup/first transactions:

    1) Which Oil player will Vegas select?:
    2) Who is our first pick in the Entry Draft?
    3) Does Ebs get moved? (bonus if you pick for who)
    4) Does RNH get moved (bonus if you pick for who)
    5) Who is our back-up G on game 1?
    6) Total $ amount/years for Russell (0 is an answer)
    7) Total $ amount/years of McDavid’s contract?
    8) Total $ amount/years of Drai’s contract?
    9) Which 2 D dress with Larsson/Klef/Nurse/Benning on game 1?
    10) Biggest off-season F acquired in terms of salary?:
    11) Is Jessie playing in NHL game 1?
    12) How many roster trades does Chia make?

    Please in the following format:
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    12

    p.s. While LT says Hall > Larsson, that $1.8MM paid for Benning and Cagullia.Ricki says Larsson is elite box-surpression

    1) Rienhart
    2) Lind
    3) Yes, Strome
    4) No
    5) Brossoit
    6) 3 years/$4.2, PC seems to love him
    7) 4 years/$9.7 (based on CBA expiration)
    8) 8 years/$7.2
    9) Campbell/Russell
    10) Vrbata/$3.75 x 1
    11) Game 1, yes. Sent down after game 5
    12) 3 trades, 2 signings

    Everyone will be surprised at my 4 year McDavid contract, but with the CBA expiring, McDavid will obviously be the highest paid NHLer at that point and it makes sense to take full advantage of a new CBA. Maybe higher cap %, maybe longer than 8 year max, ensures he doesn’t get a roll back if cap % goes down like everyone else got last time. At this point he can sign the most lucrative contract possible for the longest term possible. It also gives the Oilers 4 years to take advantage of a $2-$3 mill lower cap to win the cup during that span. McDavid will make more money on endorsements than his NHL salary anyway.

  57. Woogie63 says:

    LT- I have seen you trade score card a few times and have time to assess. I disagree with you on the following trades;

    Reinhart – Too early to tell – If you measure against speeding up the timeline for defensemen development, maybe a loss. The Oilers’ did add a talented defensemen to a team that was really weak in this area. Other than Carlo (if we would have selected him) we really have now clue on what #16 and #33 will turn into, and we don’t know with Griff can have a 10 year career.

    Marincin – Win- Gryba has been a very effective 7D, Marincin is still struggling and maybe not strong enough … years later.

    Shultz – Loss – we need a 2RHD, who can run the PP and he is in Pittsburg about to contribute in a significant way to his second SC.

    Nilsson – Loss – He is more proven than our current 2G, he is a legit NHL player is Lundstrom, spelt with one m or two?

    Hall – Win – when Hall was here fans were throwing jerseys on the ice, we were missing the play-offs, drafting 1OV …. Dark, Dark, Bad days. Larsson playing 20 minutes a night and we win a round in the play-offs, happy times

    Yakopov – Loss, we need RW who can play with 97 that are not named Leon, and we let one go for a 3rd rounder

  58. N64 says:

    This quote is a few days old now so I’ll drop it in. McPhee signalling he wants deals he can make now the most (and ones where he shops a player after the draft the least). So if he gets an offer to flip a player you’d think he’d try to pick up the player a few days early and execute the 3 way deal. All 3 teams gain certainty.

    http://www.tsn.ca/mcphee-vegas-will-build-through-entry-draft-1.764973

    “I’m hoping that we can start doing that next week, this week’s pretty busy with the amateur draft. Then, we’re going to switch our focus to the expansion draft and we’re expecting a lot more conversation and a lot more depth to the conversations. I’m hoping that we can start getting a few deals done because I think it’s going to be a lot to ask to do them all within the expansion window.

  59. jtblack says:

    Even if Reinhart was ready, 16 & 33 was Ridic. #16 alone would have been closer to fair for a player who at Best was gonna be a #2 LHD. Not sure how 2 picks were given up, in a deep draft year.

    Oh well. Sail on Trade; sail on!!

  60. jtblack says:

    Dirk Dangler,

    With all the REAL possibilities out there, why ponder deals that wont happen?
    How much to acquire Crosby? How about Karlsson. BURNS. Marthews.

    The common theme is none are gonna be traded in the next 12 mths

  61. russ99 says:

    I don’t get the love for Brian Campbell. He was a defensive liability even when he was at the apex of his career and he’s at a Hendricks level of decline/fitness.

    The first time around in Chicago he was booed put of town, Justin Schultz style, for his frequent gaffes.

    Also, I don’t get the “day of the trade” focus for Hall, trade value is in what a player does, not how good you think he is or how good you think a trade is when it’s made.

    Screw optics, I want results.

  62. Diablo says:

    russ99:
    I don’t get the love for Brian Campbell. He was a defensive liability even when he was at the apex of his career and he’s at a Hendricks level of decline/fitness.

    The first time around in Chicago he was booed put of town, Justin Schultz style, for his frequent gaffes.

    Also, I don’t get the “day of the trade” focus for Hall., trade value is in what a player does, not how good you think he is or how good you thing a trade is when it’s made.

    This blog is in love with stars of the past.
    Campbell, Hemsky, Vanek, Jagr … the list goes on. Its a bit like HFboards around here lately.

  63. Aron_S says:

    I’m kinda in love with LT’s one year deal for Shattenkirk idea. We don’t see enough of this happen anymore, as so many guys opt for term/security.

    http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=3470849

    That’s an excellent move that provides a great stop gap. You’ve got some cap space, pay Shattenkirk something stupid like 7.5/8M on a one year deal when Sekera might be out till February.

    Also this is about the most excited I’ve been for the expansion draft yet (contemplating bringing in a player, as opposed to just losing Reinhart/Khaira). I’d give up a second round pick for one of Florida’s three D (Petrovic, Demers, Pysyk) in a heartbeat.

  64. Diablo says:

    jtblack:
    Dirk Dangler,

    With all the REAL possibilities out there, why ponder deals that wont happen?
    How much to acquire Crosby?How about Karlsson. BURNS. Marthews.

    The common theme is none are gonna be traded in the next 12 mths

    I think the GMs will start to talk, but a neophyte GM in Blake is not going to have the stones to pull the trigger on a Doughty deal after just gaining the throne.

    Doughty’s situation will play out a predictable fashion … Blake tells everyone who comes asking that Doughty is not for sale. Fake news gets generated in the MSM that Doughty could be available. Blake then has a presser stating that Doughty is not going anywhere, he’s the cornerstone of the franchise ….blah, blah, blah. Doughty says all the right things … “I’m not thinking about it …. I’m just focused on helping the team win …. my agent is looking after it …. blah, blah, blah.”

    Meanwhile the Kings continues to flounder as no one wants their old has-beens with shitty never-ending contracts.Doughty’s agent sees that Blake is backing himself into a corner, and during the season indicates that his client is not resigning for anything less than “the max”. King’s miss playoffs again, and Blake fails to move Doughty and the trade deadline. Summer 2018 arrives and Doughty is one year away from free agency and the other GMs are circling like vultures, while Doughty starts to say things like … “I’d be open to testing the market next summer …”

    After which Blake either signs him to the most ridiculous contract ever, or Doughty plays out the rest of 2018-2019 and then joins a team like the Oilers or Leafs as an unrestricted free agent.

  65. Scungilli Slushy says:

    The thing with the trade is to focus on the transaction when it occurred. When you trade a Ferrari for a Tacoma you gave up value whether you need a truck more or not. The point isn’t about what happened after, lost the battle won the war, what you needed more, the point is simply about the economics of the deal at the time.

    I like the trade and think it has been key, but Chiarelli paid a heavy price. If he keeps making those deals (I don’t think he will) the Oilers will end up worse off in losing skill for defense and not be able to score enough. Goal scoring talent is the rare thing.

    A comparable deal was Johansen for Jones which was much more even for both teams. Johansen at the time was not at Hall’s level, Jones has a higher ceiling than Larsson because offense.

  66. who says:

    Scungilli Slushy:
    The thing with the trade is to focus on the transaction when it occurred. When you trade a Ferrari for a Tacoma you gave up value whether you need a truck more or not. The point isn’t about what happened after, lost the battle won the war, what you needed more, the point is simply about the economics of the deal at the time.

    I like the trade and think it has been key, but Chiarelli paid a heavy price. If he keeps making those deals (I don’t think he will) the Oilers will end up worse off in losing skill for defense and not be able to score enough. Goal scoring talent is the rare thing.

    A comparable deal was Johansen for Jones which was much more even for both teams. Johansen at the time was not at Hall’s level, Jones has a higher ceiling than Larsson because offense.

    Good comparable. Keep in mind that Johansen was a big, right shot centerman and that has more value than a left winger with similar numbers. Hall has the better numbers but Johansen plays the more important position.
    That trade seemed to work out well for both teams as well.

  67. T0ML says:

    Good thing i’m not arguing anything about Reinhart. My argument is that Nail Yakupov, is at this time, *not* a productive NHL player, nor is there any evidence he will anytime soon. And this season proved it was not exclusively the oilers. The oilers were in a position where Benching him was hard to do (Considering he was a #1 OV…), Blues traded a 3rd for him so much easier to healthy scratch a guy. Im not a fan of rthe Reinhart trade, but lets not kid or selves by thinking Nail will end up being an amazing NHL player, it just wont happen (And I love Yak..).

    Considering Reinhart is 8 games back from the same games as Yak played in season 1, i’d say there is a better than even chance he makes the 48 game mark. He is ripe for a call up next season (Assuming he stays)…if VGK drafts him, he will get minutes there.

    How about I bet you Reinhart plays more playoff games than Yakupov?

    36 percent body fat:
    T0ML,

    how about the yakupov who played more games in his first season than reinhart will in his career,

    in all seriousness, eakins wrecked yakupov, nuges, eberles and halls offense hasnt been the same since, and gagner is doing much better after seperating.

    what ever the value is for the failed first round picks in 2012 the oilers didnt get it in the reinhart trade,

    And right now you cant argue who has been the better nhl player between the two,Because one has been an nhl player and one hasnt.If yak was canadian he would still be on the radar like lazar.

  68. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    Scungilli Slushy,

    – We don’t have the evaluation tools to compare a #1RHD to a #1 LW.

    – Hall is a top-20 LW, as Larsson is a top-20 RHD.

    – Team’s #1RHD is more critical to success than their #1 LW

    – One day we will have tools to quantify this

  69. Bag of Pucks says:

    Seeing people still gnashing teeth over the Hall trade, the mind boggles at what it would’ve been like if the Al Gore had existed during the Gretzky sale.

    There’s a tenable argument to be made that Pocklington never summons the will to do that deal if social media existed back then. As it was, the optics still killed him.

    But with social media? Never mind burning him in effigy. They would’ve crucified him.

  70. Bag of Pucks says:

    Best case scenario for Hall. He pulls a late career Phil Kessel.

    Land with a contender with two existing drivers, and be the third that pushes them over the top.

  71. russ99 says:

    Aron_S:
    I’m kinda in love with LT’s one year deal for Shattenkirk idea. We don’t see enough of this happen anymore, as so many guys opt for term/security.

    http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=3470849

    That’s an excellent move that provides a great stop gap. You’ve got some cap space, pay Shattenkirk something stupid like 7.5/8M on a one year deal when Sekera might be out till February.

    Also this is about the most excited I’ve been for the expansion draft yet (contemplating bringing in a player, as opposed to just losing Reinhart/Khaira). I’d give up a second round pick for one of Florida’s three D (Petrovic, Demers, Pysyk) in a heartbeat.

    The Shattenkirk thing and the Russell to Vegas idea has lost a key component in free agency.

    To sign a free agent deal, the player has to want to play there…

  72. Ducey says:

    Scungilli Slushy:
    The thing with the trade is to focus on the transaction when it occurred. When you trade a Ferrari for a Tacoma you gave up value whether you need a truck more or not. The point isn’t about what happened after, lost the battle won the war, what you needed more, the point is simply about the economics of the deal at the time.

    I like the trade and think it has been key, but Chiarelli paid a heavy price. If he keeps making those deals (I don’t think he will) the Oilers will end up worse off in losing skill for defense and not be able to score enough. Goal scoring talent is the rare thing.

    A comparable deal was Johansen for Jones which was much more even for both teams. Johansen at the time was not at Hall’s level, Jones has a higher ceiling than Larsson because offense.

    Johansen is a more valuable player than Hall.

    Johansen last year: 82 14 47 61 .743 p/g
    Hall: 72 20 33 53 .736 p/g

    So a healthier, tougher player who puts up the same points per game (their points per 60 5 x 5 are the same) and is a #1 C. That beats a finesse LW all day long.

    Remember that Johansens contract squabbles were part of the consideration for CLB as well.

    And Larssen was more established at the time of their trades. Jones was in his third season and still in the valley of doubt. Larsson had completed 5 and was well established.

  73. jtblack says:

    Bag of Pucks,

    I mentioned previously and was Quickly hit with ” Why would New Jersey ever trade him!”.

    My answer, in agreement with your suggestion is that NJ is rebuilding. HALL already went thru that Headache in Edm. NJ has the worst D core in the League. There is no quick fix there.

    If NJ is competitive in 2 orr 3 yrs, they may keep him. But if they are middle of the pack or worse, they prob move him for assets.

    I also see the similiarities with Hall / Kessell. Both Good players but not right personality to be THE Leader.

    Will be intersting to see how NJ does over nxt 2 or 3 yrs. Gonna get a player this year!

  74. Bag of Pucks says:

    ‘Build down the middle’
    ‘Size matters’

    These are two unalterable truths that Peter Chiarelli understands and accepts.

    It is what separates him from Skype, Dithers and SecondTier imo.

    Now, if we can get Chia to buy into this one fully and completely…

    ‘Don’t give huge cap hit AND long term to vets nearing their best buy date.’

    Then we’ll really be cooking with gas.

  75. Bag of Pucks says:

    jtblack:
    Bag of Pucks,

    I mentioned previously and was Quickly hit with ” Why would New Jersey ever trade him!”.

    My answer, in agreement with your suggestion is that NJ is rebuilding. HALL already went thru that Headache in Edm.NJ has the worst D core in the League. There is no quick fix there.

    If NJ is competitive in 2 orr 3 yrs, they may keep him.But if they are middle of the pack or worse, they prob move him for assets.

    I also see the similiarities with Hall / Kessell.Both Good players but not right personality to be THE Leader.

    Will be intersting to see how NJ does over nxt 2 or 3 yrs.Gonna get a player this year!

    Will definitely be interesting to see what he does upon approaching UFA. Definitely don’t see him re-upping in NJ. He’s already said he’s made his bank and will be looking to chase the Cup with his next contract.

    Does his Dad still live in Calgary? Wouldn’t surprise me to see him land there if they were trending towards Cup contender. Wouldn’t that be a dagger for Oiler fans?

  76. jtblack says:

    Ducey,

    Both RyJo’s wingers scored 30 Goals. How did Halls Centers do?

    Centers have way more impact on the game. Its one reason Croz owns Ovie.
    It’s also why Pitt is about to go B2B. They have the Best 4 C’s top to bottom.

    It’s not Halls fault he is a winger. That position just has the least value for a team. And isnthe most replaceable. Maroon had 27 and Lucic 23 as fill ins. Not compating any of them, just saying wingers are plug and play in my view

  77. Ducey says:

    Bag of Pucks: Will definitely be interesting to see what he does upon approaching UFA. Definitely don’t see him re-upping in NJ. He’s already said he’s made his bank and will be looking to chase the Cup with his next contract.

    Does his Dad still live in Calgary? Wouldn’t surprise me to see him land there if they were trending towards Cup contender. Wouldn’t that be a dagger for Oiler fans?

    I thought everyone was going to play with the Leaves? They are so awesome. The media there tells me that every day.

  78. Truth says:

    Ducey: Johansen is a more valuable player than Hall.

    Johansen last year: 82 14 47 61 .743 p/g
    Hall: 72 20 33 53 .736 p/g

    So a healthier, tougher player who puts up the same points per game (their points per 60 5 x 5 are the same) and is a #1 C. That beats a finesse LW all day long.

    Remember that Johansens contract squabbles were part of the consideration for CLB as well.

    Johansen played this year with Forsberg and Arvidsson

    Forsberg 82 31 27 58
    Arvidsson 80 31 30 61

    Hall played with Zajac and Palmieri.

    Zajac 80 14 31 45
    Palmieri 80 26 27 53

    I highly doubt the difference in Johansen’s linemates scoring 22 more goals than Hall’s is attributable to Johansen being the better player. There is an argument to be made, but it’s unfair to say that without considering who Hall played with vs who Johansen did. Not to mention the D corps playing in Nashville.

  79. Truth says:

    jtblack,

    beat me to it.

  80. jtblack says:

    Rondo,

    You guys all seem to like him. Are we not worried about a total of 19 Goals over 2 yrs. If he cant score in Jr.; might be Carcillo like. ES #’S Seem great. Intersting player

  81. Ducey says:

    Truth: Johansen played this year with Forsberg and Arvidsson

    Forsberg 82312758
    Arvidsson 80 313061

    Hall played with Zajac and Palmieri.

    Zajac 80 143145
    Palmieri 80 26 27 53

    I highly doubt the difference in Johansen’s linemates scoring 22 more goals than Hall’s is attributable to Johansen being the better player. There is an argument to be made, but it’s unfair to say that without considering who Hall played with vs who Johansen did.Not to mention the D corps playing in Nashville.

    Its ironic that the reason we should not hold his stats against him is that he did not have a good center.

  82. Diablo says:

    Re. Reinhart:

    Literally all of our top 6 D today were acquired or developed into NHL D-men AFTER the Reinhart deal was made AND LV was no where close to getting a franchise at the time – its time the OCD crowd stopped bitching about this. Sure I’d prefer that we had two prospects now, but that’s with the benefit of hindsight. No GM wins every deal.

    And I agree with the poster above – a tally of trade wins and losses that does not take into account free agent signings is completely missing the point of roster building in a cap world … I think it would be a better exercise to look at the actual roster that Chia inherited and look at the positions where Chia made changes either via trade or free agent signing (leaving out draft picks that were made prior to his arrival), and ask whether the changes he made were an upgrade or downgrade.

  83. Professor Q says:

    Aron_S:
    I’m kinda in love with LT’s one year deal for Shattenkirk idea. We don’t see enough of this happen anymore, as so many guys opt for term/security.

    http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=3470849

    That’s an excellent move that provides a great stop gap. You’ve got some cap space, pay Shattenkirk something stupid like 7.5/8M on a one year deal when Sekera might be out till February.

    Also this is about the most excited I’ve been for the expansion draft yet (contemplating bringing in a player, as opposed to just losing Reinhart/Khaira). I’d give up a second round pick for one of Florida’s three D (Petrovic, Demers, Pysyk) in a heartbeat.

    If you could convince him. After he’s publicly stated that he desires to sign with a NY or other Northeast Coast team, would that be likely? Even with the McDavid factor.

    Although I suppose the same would go for Kovalchuk etc.

  84. Cassandra says:

    All this talk about how centers are more important to wingers, but do we know this to be true?

    How do we know Johansen is more important than Forsberg? Why can’t it be that Forsberg is driving Johansen and not the other way around?

    This story about the relative value of centers has quickly become quite dogmatic. We don’t know it is true that centers drive shots and and goals. It occurs to me that there are multiple alternative hypothesis that are more likely. For instance, the best player on a line is most responsible for the share of shots and goals.

  85. trencan says:

    Except Spencer Foo there are still some other interesting names and options for Oilers – Darren Raddysh, Nikita Korostelev…I also like Henrik Haapala, but Panthers signed him. Any other interesting name you would like to sign ?

  86. Ducey says:

    Cassandra:

    .It occurs to me that there are multiple alternative hypothesis that are more likely.

    Does each one of your multiple personalities have a hypothesis, Batman/ Captain Obvious/ Carmel/ Mr Wayne?

  87. HALFWALL says:

    Scungilli Slushy,

    Agree with this.

    1) Price for Larsson was heavy (but probably best available)
    2) Chia couldn’t wait (no #1RHD in pipeline, further de-value assets due to losing, McD/Drai ELC)
    3) Chia (hopefully) won’t keep paying a heavy price (no obvious roster holes – just contract inefficiencies roster weaknesses like all middle of the pack teams)

  88. digger50 says:

    Love the list of wants and potential (guess) moves today.

    June 16. Edmonton announces trade. First round pick in 2017 for Kevin Hays.

  89. jtblack says:

    Cassandra,

    “Best player on a line is responsible for shots & goals.”. Lets say OK to this. Are you willing to say Best player on a team is responsible for wins and losses?

  90. stush18 says:

    Professor Q: If you could convince him. After he’s publicly stated that he desires to sign with a NY or other Northeast Coast team, would that be likely? Even with the McDavid factor.

    Although I suppose the same would go for Kovalchuk etc.

    I could honestly see hall signed big with Toronto on his next contract.

    If there is a position they are weak at, it’s defence and and left wing.

  91. Bank Shot says:

    Cassandra:
    All this talk about how centers are more important to wingers, but do we know this to be true?

    How do we know Johansen is more important than Forsberg?Why can’t it be that Forsberg is driving Johansen and not the other way around?

    This story about the relative value of centers has quickly become quite dogmatic.We don’t know it is true that centers drive shots and and goals.It occurs to me that there are multiple alternative hypothesis that are more likely. For instance, the best player on a line is most responsible for the share of shots and goals.

    Well offensively, a winger can certainly be the most important player on the line. I think that’s quite clear.

    Defensively they just can’t be because their contributions in the defensive end of the ice are limited by the nature of the position.

    Wingers just have less potential impact in the defensive end of the ice.

    Now the hard part is determining how much defensive value weighs in regard to offence. How much better offensively does a winger have to be than a center to outweigh their lesser contribution on defense?

    And lets say that both the winger and the center are equally adept at creating shots and goals….How much better does the winger have to be defensively to become more important than the center?

    Its an almost impossible question to answer with stats at this point, because today’s advanced stats just measure offence.

  92. Cassandra says:

    jtblack:
    Cassandra,

    “Best player on a line is responsible for shots & goals.”.Lets say OK to this. Are you willing to say Best player on a team is responsible for wins and losses?

    Please. You can do better than that.

    I wonder when this board will learn to separate causation from correlation.

    I also wonder when this board will learn that arguing from analogy is poor reasoning, and failing that, will learn to make good analogies.

    But I will play along. Player A, who is better than the other players, has a larger degree of impact on the game while they are on the ice. We can see this with our eyes and we can see it in the data where they appear to be the independent variable in various combinations.

    Player A, while remaining better than the other players, has no impact on the game when he is not on the ice. We see this by his not doing anything but sit there, and we can see it in the data.

    You people do know that when Player A was on the ice the Oilers scored more goals than they gave up, while playing against the best players the other team had, with a relatively poor cast of teammates. To know this with one part of your brain and then to turn around with another part of your brain and say that the recent success of the Oilers is because Player A is no longer with the team requires a kind of cognitive dissonance that beggars description.

  93. Cassandra says:

    Bank Shot,

    Really, we don’t count shots against? That sounds to me like a pretty good measure of team defense. And once you have a measure of team defense you can start attributing it to players starting by seeing how the team does when that player is on the ice.

    Now hockey is dynamic, so what you are actually measuring is the scoring environment when the player is on the ice (i.e. if a team or line plays slowly they’ll allow fewer shots but that won’t mean they are good at defense in an absolute sense, but it will mean they require fewer goals for to win, which is the only thing that matters).

    In any case, Taylor Hall has consistently played in relatively low shot environment compared to other players in his situation, which is compelling evidence that he is doing something to create that environment, regardless of what position he is playing which is more or less irrelevant.

  94. digger50 says:

    Bag of Pucks,

    Like the Oilers?

  95. Cassandra says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux:
    Scungilli Slushy,

    – We don’t have the evaluation tools to compare a #1RHD to a #1 LW.

    – Hall is a top-20 LW, as Larsson is a top-20 RHD.

    – Team’s #1RHD is more critical to success than their #1 LW

    – One day we will have tools to quantify this

    I think you would have a hard time coming up with a criteria of measuring D other than Oiler fandom that puts Larsson in the top 20 of RHD.

    I took a quick look and discounting players I know little about and giving Larsson the benefit of the doubt in every case, I count 15 or so RHD that are clear cut and above. If you put Larsson in the next group you are going to get another list of 20-30 players where he fits in nicely. Calling him top 40 of RHD (top 80 of overall D) is a much fairer assessment.

    Nothing wrong with that, but let’s not go in for mythology.

  96. russ99 says:

    Cassandra:
    Bank Shot,

    Really, we don’t count shots against?That sounds to me like a pretty good measure of team defense.And once you have a measure of team defense you can start attributing it to players starting by seeing how the team does when that player is on the ice.

    Don’t get me started.

    But I’ve moved on from that battle.

    There are a lot better defensive metrics, but harder to find than the “shots for” metrics: HDSCA%, DGAA%, Zone Entries + own zone faceoffs vs. Zone exits, etc.

    I like Woodmoney, but it makes assumptions about competition level, and doesn’t really quantify individual aptitude for defense and reducing the quality of scoring chances against, it’s more a QualComp number for defenders.

    I think the difficulty derives from defense being more a team concept and it’s not easily distillable into one metric.

    When the trackers arrive, the days of really being able to quantify defense will be upon us.

  97. Lowetide says:

    We are nearing timeouts for some, please refrain from attempting to win discussions with things other than the strength of your argument. Please and thanks.

  98. Bank Shot says:

    Cassandra:
    Bank Shot,

    Really, we don’t count shots against?That sounds to me like a pretty good measure of team defense.And once you have a measure of team defense you can start attributing it to players starting by seeing how the team does when that player is on the ice.

    Now hockey is dynamic, so what you are actually measuring is the scoring environment when the player is on the ice (i.e. if a team or line plays slowly they’ll allow fewer shots but that won’t mean they are good at defense in an absolute sense, but it will mean they require fewer goals for to win, which is the only thing that matters).

    In any case, Taylor Hall has consistently played in relatively low shot environment compared to other players in his situation, which is compelling evidence that he is doing something to create that environment, regardless of what position he is playing which is more or less irrelevant.

    Shots against is a good team proxy. It’s very tough to break it down to an individual level because players that play an offensive role are going to be afforded better opportunities by the coach to take advantage of that offense with more o-zone starts, or mismatches against inferior opponents, or will be out at the end of the PP, and never at the end of a PK. Lots of little things that add up over time.

    It’s going to amplify their shots for and decrease their shots against compared to say a Patrice Bergeron type.

    Even taking that into account, Taylor Hall has performed worse than his primary center more often than not in his career when looking at SA/60. He has led his team a couple of times in Sf/60 but never in SA/60. I’d say there is some evidence there that he is better offensively than defensively.

    Getting away from Hall though, I’d like you to answer my question about a center and a winger having identical shots for and against numbers.

    If both the shots for and against are equal for a center and a winger which position would you choose?

    Do you think they are completely equal in that situation?

    What about for a defenseman and a winger? Shots for/against completely equal. D-man scored 10 points.

    I think it’s pretty fair to say that in the last situation that the defenceman didn’t contribute as much to the shots for as the winger did, but probably contributed a whole lot more to the shots against due to the nature of the position.

    You don’t think that a centre has a greater opportunity to make an impact in all areas of the ice than a winger?

    Why do you believe this to be true? What evidence do you have that overrides common sense?

    I would think it would need to be compelling for me to be convinced.

  99. Barcs says:

    One thing that worries me about Chiarelli is his willingness to lose value in his deals.

    I suppose it depends on your idea of what makes a good GM, but for me the best at the job are essentially great asset managers. They gain as much value, or lose as little as possible, in every deal or signing they make.

    So regardless of your view on how the deals worked out, I think PC lost value with each of the Hall-Larsson, Reinhart, and Davidson deals.

    I understand that he was in a tough negotiating position with the Hall trade (not that I think that justifies it), but it’s the latter two deals that concern me more in this.

    This connects to PC buying “deadline rentals” in the future. Given how much of a crapshoot the NHL playoffs are, I would prefer that he not sell the future for rentals, and instead just make “hockey trades”.

    This way, the Oilers can continue to have young talent coming up, keeping them in contention for longer, as well as preserving assets.

    I believe it was Ken Holland in Detroit who stated that he was done with deadline rentals because it ultimately was not worth mortgaging the future for one playoff run.

    So yeah, asset management. And it’s a concern with Chiarelli, for me.

  100. HALFWALL says:

    TO10801,

    Might be a tad expensive for 7D ($1.4M) but agree that it depends on what else they do.

    Great story, great value (if played higher in the order), great guy and from one of his last interviews, it seemed like he really wanted to be here (“I love those guys” [reference to Oiler team mates]).

  101. mumbai max says:

    eberle pouliot benning picks/prospects for doughty and brown.

  102. Bag of Pucks says:

    digger50:
    Bag of Pucks,

    Like the Oilers?

    I would guess the possibility of that ended when he elbowed Kassian and then turtled.

    That’s the equivalent of the ex-wife getting pregnant with the new guy.

  103. Professor Q says:

    stush18: I could honestly see hall signed big with Toronto on his next contract.

    If there is a position they are weak at, it’s defence and and left wing.

    I was talking about Shattenkirk.

  104. Lowetide says:

    Barcs:
    One thing that worries me about Chiarelli is his willingness to lose value in his deals.

    He did this in Boston, too. I was SHOCKED with the price he paid for Kaberle at the 2011 deadline, and honestly didn’t think he was vital to the SC victory. But they won. I think that’s going to be the conversation around these parts. Frustration with deals until they win.

  105. Doug McLachlan says:

    Chia and the Oilers have lucked into the best player on the planet in Connor McDavid, how do you build around him?

    I think, because of what they also have in Leon, that the Pittsburgh model is a perfect template on how you build your team.

    Top 2 Centers in McDavid and Dria (Crosby and Malkin). Check.

    Top end, if not elite, goaltending in Talbot (Fleury and now Murray). Check.

    While Pittsburgh has a top end, if not elite, d-man in the currently injured Letang – something Edmonton is still searching for – I would argue that the Oiler d-corps as a whole looks very favourable even with the holes that need to be filled for the hoped for Russell departure and the Sekera injury.

    Where the model breaks down is in the support roles and on the wings.

    Kessel is superior to either Eberle or Lucic and while I love Nuge, his cap hit is going to be a luxury we won’t be able to afford once Mr. McDavid’s 2nd contract kicks in.

    The challenge will be continuing to add on low-cost complimentary pieces on the wings (like Maroon and Kassian and Cagullia) to allow McDavid and Dria to weave their magic each post-season.

    Chia’s history in Boston suggests that he may be prone to overpay for legacy/loyalty contracts. If he’s learned his lesson then the Pittsburgh model can really set the Oil up for years of runs if not Cups.

  106. Ducey says:

    mumbai max:
    eberle pouliot benning picks/prospects for doughty and brown.

    2 years of Doughty for 5 years of Brown – who is 32, has 5 x $5.85 left and has 27, 27, 28, and 36 points the last 4 years.

    That contract means getting Doughty in that deal should not cost you much of anything.

    There has to be a better way of disposing of Pouliot.

    So, no thanks.

    Doughty will be available as early as this deadline (and almost certainly next summer), I would think, once it becomes clear the Kings are going to have to dismantle things.

  107. McSorley33 says:

    Shattenkirk has been pretty clear for a long time now where he wants to play……

    Please people.

  108. Barcs says:

    Lowetide: He did this in Boston, too. I was SHOCKED with the price he paid for Kaberle at the 2011 deadline, and honestly didn’t think he was vital to the SC victory. But they won. I think that’s going to be the conversation around these parts. Frustration with deals until they win.

    Exactly. He has a history of both that and with overpaying his depth forwards unnecessarily. I hope that he has learned from these, but what is that saying you have?
    Sooner or later you develop a past.

    I think it’s the little things like this that make the difference between a team that contends for 4-5 years vs a team that contends for 8-10.

  109. Doug McLachlan says:

    LT, should the Oilers have any interest in adding Paul MacLean to McLellan’s coaching staff.

    I believe the two worked together under Babcock winning the 07-08 Cup together in Detroit, yes?

    He had been a Boudreau hire and I was surprised he stuck around with Carlyle but I seem to think he had some legit success in Ottawa.

  110. Doug McLachlan says:

    Barcs,

    I would look to the Maroon, Kassian and Caggulia trades/signings as a hopeful sign that he gets he can’t overpay for the complimentary pieces.

    Now where did I put those rose-tinted glasses of mine.

  111. Ducey says:

    Doug McLachlan:
    Barcs,

    I would look to the Maroon, Kassian and Caggulia trades/signings as a hopeful sign that he gets he can’t overpay for the complimentary pieces.

    Now where did I put those rose-tinted glasses of mine.

    You are wearing them! 🙂

  112. Barcs says:

    Doug McLachlan:
    Barcs,

    I would look to the Maroon, Kassian and Caggulia trades/signings as a hopeful sign that he gets he can’t overpay for the complimentary pieces.

    Now where did I put those rose-tinted glasses of mine.

    For sure. That’s why I’m not entirely down on Chiarelli. He’s miles better than anything we’ve had for years now. He’s a mixed bag for me, some great deals, and some that I thought were very poor.

    The Maroon deal template was more of what I was hoping to see at this year’s deadline.

  113. Barcs says:

    LT,

    From your projected lineup above, I would personally prefer Justin Williams on a one or two year deal than Foo. It provides a bit more maturity and playoff experience at the cost of a bit more money.

    If Foo delivers equivalent offense to what Caggiula brought this year, I would like to see a stronger option.

    No idea if that would fit under the cap, though.

  114. CrazyCoach says:

    Cassandra: This story about the relative value of centers has quickly become quite dogmatic. We don’t know it is true that centers drive shots and and goals. It occurs to me that there are multiple alternative hypothesis that are more likely. For instance, the best player on a line is most responsible for the share of shots and goals.

    I think part of it, is that centres are often asked to do more heaving lifting than wingers, in terms of faceoffs, and coverage in the defensive zone. A winger traditionally covers the points, but a centre is supposed to cover not only the slot area, but has to help out in the corners and behind the net as well. I know that in order to play centre, you have to have great skating skills and the ability to read and react plays all over the ice. I know at the youth level, you sometimes hide/protect a poor skater on the wings and give them less responsibility.

    However, as I have explained in here before, we now refer to players as F1, F2, and F3 for both forechecking systems and defensive zone entires. And whether through subconscious training or just plain dumb luck, centres often are F1 on the backcheck. Not always, but I’m willing to bet money the majority of time, centres are the first back (now, that would be a study to conduct).

    I do agree though, that some analytical work would certainly look at the relative value of wingers to centres.

    I think I did provide an interesting hypothesis in that centres require more responsibility therefore they are valued more than wingers.

    Just a few thoughts to muddy the waters further.

  115. Scungilli Slushy says:

    Ducey: Johansen is a more valuable player than Hall.

    Johansen last year: 82 14 47 61 .743 p/g
    Hall: 72 20 33 53 .736 p/g

    So a healthier, tougher player who puts up the same points per game (their points per 60 5 x 5 are the same) and is a #1 C. That beats a finesse LW all day long.

    Remember that Johansens contract squabbles were part of the consideration for CLB as well.

    And Larssen was more established at the time of their trades. Jones was in his third season and still in the valley of doubt. Larsson had completed 5 and was well established.

    I think Johansen is more valuable now, but when he was traded he wasn’t well regarded. I read plenty about defensive issues, motivation issues, and of course he was hard for the Jackets to handle, seen as a selfish player. Jones was and is one of the premium young RHD. Not developed but well regarded and very valuable.

    Hall was considered widely as a play driving chance generating player, who also scored those points on a historically bad team with barely any NHL defensmen. Larsson was considered to be underachieving for his draft pedigree and thought to have little offense and likely not even a legit first pairing D, especially around here, but elsewhere around the league. He didn’t establish the level of play he has until on the Oilers.

    Johansen is a right shot centre and that helps, my point is that the Jackets got what was considered a better player with far more upside for their guy.

    Despite the fact that the Hall trade was on the day considered poor value, again by many around the league and in media and here, the deal was done because Chiarelli had no leverage and despite trying for months was getting the same type of offers from all of the interested GM’s, and felt he had to pull the trigger.

    He isn’t in that position now and I hope he does better moving forward.

    How it has panned out isn’t the point of the statement that the trade wasn’t good value when it was made. With hindsight I would do the trade again, but Chiarelli didn’t have hindsight and was balls out on that one and Larsson covered the bet, luckily I think for him.

  116. Cassandra says:

    CrazyCoach,

    I agree with your post in its entirety. Two points in particular I would like to draw out.

    While it is certainly true that in general a center is assigned more defensive responsibility, a) as you point out the actual defensive responsibilities at any given time shift accord to circumstances (F1, F2, F3, etc), and b) even if they didn’t that the center has more responsibilities in general does not mean that any particular center is driving play, or any particular winger is not.

    Finally, if centers inherently had more value than wingers, why would you ever play Draisatl on the wing? If it were true, you would always play your best forwards at center, but no teams do this, because wingers can drive play too, just in a different way.

    To put it another way, a huge factor in limiting shots is exiting the zones in control of the puck and, typically, this is the job of the wingers. How do we know that job of defensive support is always more important than controlled zone exit? I would suggest that we do not know this.

    The task is to assess value, and you can’t do this if you determine in advance that one kind of contribution is more valuable a priori.

  117. Cassandra says:

    Bank Shot,

    It is hard to suss out individual contributions from team stats. For offensive contributions, I would suggest points. Defensive contributions are more difficult. My small suggestion was that we should not assume the center contributes more by default.

  118. Lowetide says:

    Doug McLachlan:
    LT, should the Oilers have any interest in adding Paul MacLean to McLellan’s coaching staff.

    I believe the two worked together under Babcock winning the 07-08 Cup together in Detroit, yes?

    He had been a Boudreau hire and I was surprised he stuck around with Carlyle but I seem to think he had some legit success in Ottawa.

    Great question, suspect MacLean has a head coaching job on the line.

  119. Lowetide says:

    Barcs: Exactly. He has a history of both that and with overpaying his depth forwards unnecessarily. I hope that he has learned from these, but what is that saying you have?
    Sooner or later you develop a past.

    I think it’s the little things like this that make the difference between a team that contends for 4-5 years vs a team that contends for 8-10.

    The problem with hammering Chiarelli on this is that all successful general managers have done it. I hope PC learned from his Boston experience, but teams like Chicago have traded far more in terms of quality in efforts to get under the cap. I would almost frame it as occupational hazard. Pittsburgh may have figured it out, we’ll see.

  120. Cassandra says:

    russ99: Don’t get me started.

    But I’ve moved on from that battle.

    There are a lot better defensive metrics, but harder to find than the “shots for” metrics: HDSCA%, DGAA%,Zone Entries + own zone faceoffs vs. Zone exits, etc.

    I like Woodmoney, but it makes assumptions about competition level, and doesn’t really quantify individual aptitude for defense and reducing the quality of scoring chances against, it’s more a QualComp number for defenders.

    I think the difficulty derives from defense being more a team concept and it’s not easily distillable into one metric.

    When the trackers arrive, the days of really being able to quantify defense will be upon us.

    Tracking is not going to be the golden chalice some here think it is.

    In any case all of the metrics you seem to like track very closely with shots. There is no such thing as a player who is good at limiting the quality of shots who is not also good at limiting the number of shots.

    For instance, it is quite true that Kris Russell is good at blocking shots and hence Corsi is going to underrate him. However, once you control for this by using Fenwick or Shots, using some kind of scoring chance metric doesn’t add a lot of information.

    Another classic mistake is to judge defenders on against measures alone, as if these weren’t happening in a larger environment. For all players, the environment is going to determined the results to a very large degree and hence the best that can be done is to measure their value relative to the environment, and the best measure of the environment is the opposing measure. Which is to say to presuppose that defenders don’t really “drive” scoring chances for and hence I can ignore it in evaluating their defense, and hence their individual contribution, is to ignore the environment within which they play.

    This is Ricki’s continual mistake, and why he consistently overrates the Mark Fistric’s of the world.

  121. jtblack says:

    Barcs,

    I think the minimum standard is competing for the next decade ad a True Cup Contender AND winning at least 1 Cup. Anything short of that is unacceptable.

    And I am Pro PC. Love the work to date (even with the misses). But I will not make excuses if this team does not get to the finish line. LT SAID IT, Win and all is OK. Its that simple

  122. jtblack says:

    LT. Maybe a question for another dat for Oilers Fandom.

    What would the Oil have to accomolish in the next 10 yrs to be considered a success. I would be interested to know the “average”.

    Your stuff is awesome on the draft! Thanks!!

  123. stevezie says:

    Lowetide: He did this in Boston, too. I was SHOCKED with the price he paid for Kaberle at the 2011 deadline, and honestly didn’t think he was vital to the SC victory. But they won. I think that’s going to be the conversation around these parts. Frustration with deals until they win.

    Fair enough, but he still got fired and more than earned it.

    I honestly have a hard time assessing Chia’s career. He won a cup, the ultimate goal. But boy o boy has he made some terrible trades and signed some poor contracts. Many more than a good GM should have to his name.

    Assessing his transaction record, I would say he is a mediocre at best GM. Assessing his record he looks like a good one.

    I know a lot of luck is involved in winning, but I’m not sure luck covers Chia’s record. He helped make a pretty good Ottawa team too, for whatever that’s worth.

    The best answer I’ve been able to come to is Joe Carter. A lot of home runs and RBIs, a few championships and a helluva highlight reel, but boy do advanced stats tear his career to shreds.

    But I don’t know that much about baseball.

  124. dustrock says:

    Dreger saying it looks like almost certain that Eberle will be traded.

    Which means, obviously, he won’t.

  125. stevezie says:

    CrazyCoach,
    Cassandra,

    My quick, on sort-of related, two cents:

    It drives me crazy when (even some smart) people make the blatantly ridiculous claim that “wingers don’t matter.”

    I think the thing that fools them into thinking something this obscene is, as CrazyCoach says, the center typically has the biggest opportunity to impact the game and so the best players are usually centers. When people make a quick list of the best forwards they notice most of them are centers (because the best players become centers), and conclude that wingers don’t matter that much.

    It’s one of those heuristics that probably works better than it should, fooling people into thinking it is true. You can make the claim Canada’s 10th best C is better than its 2nd best rw and probably be right (I did not look this up). BUT THIS IS NOT BECAUSE WINGS DON’T MATTER!

    It’s just that good players matter more than pretty good players (and so on).

    If your best forward is a wing, he will matter more than your C. Forsberg is an excellent example.

    Those two cents were not that quick. Ah well.

  126. Barcs says:

    jtblack,

    I agree. But to reply to your second comment, I would be happy with them being cup contenders for years, even if they only won one. As long as they win one.

    I would, however, be disappointed** if they won a cup and then became a team that fights to make the playoffs and then if they make it get bounced after a round or two. Kind of like Boston of the last few years.

    **I would obviously be ecstatic about winning even one cup. But the question is in the context of overall level of competition over the next 10 years.

  127. thebiggestmanintheworld says:

    Love it or hate it, one thing is clear cut….

    That was BOLD.

  128. stevezie says:

    jtblack: What would the Oil have to accomolish in the next 10 yrs to be considered a success.

    Great question. THE question.

    Normally I would say a cup. It is so hard to win a championship in this league that winning just one is enough to satisfy, even if you coulda/shoulda won more.

    However, I think McDavid changes things. So I’m putting the bare minimum at 2. Don’t get me wrong, I think with good management and luck (we’d need both) we could win four or five of the next ten. But if we win two, that’s still a helluva thing. Well done, everyone.

    Anything less than two cups is a failure.

    I’m also willing to give half marks for a pennant. So if the Oil play for three cups and win one, that’s okay with me too.

    Maybe I’m defining “success” too generously, but considering how many people were doing victory dances over reaching the second round I think I’m okay.

    Very curious what the group thinks on this one.

  129. stevezie says:

    Barcs,

    I’ll call one cup a C-. I think McDavid is such a tremendous opportunity that winning one is enough to keep you from being run out of town, but I think it is fair to expect more. perhaps I am being unfair.

    In the shorter term, I think it is fair to agree Chia did not design this team to win a cup right away (this year) or to be pretty good for a long tie and see what happens (Sharks/Predators method, which for most teams is a good one).

    Rightly or wrongly, this team is designed to peak next year.

    Pennant at a minimum. I’m not trying to be mean, I think they can do it.

  130. who says:

    Cassandra:
    All this talk about how centers are more important to wingers, but do we know this to be true?

    How do we know Johansen is more important than Forsberg?Why can’t it be that Forsberg is driving Johansen and not the other way around?

    This story about the relative value of centers has quickly become quite dogmatic.We don’t know it is true that centers drive shots and and goals.It occurs to me that there are multiple alternative hypothesis that are more likely. For instance, the best player on a line is most responsible for the share of shots and goals.

    Center are worth more than wingers because they have more defensive responsibility and have to cover more ice. Got nothing to do with who’s driving who. If they put up similar numbers you always take the center because he has shown the ability to play a more complete game.
    For instance, if Taylor Hall had been a center, with his skill set, he would be a more valuable player.

  131. Barcs says:

    stevezie,

    I think that you’re being completely fair.

    McDavid changes everything.

  132. rickithebear says:

    LT, Doug Mac:
    1. Mact Tradded for Picks and Selected 2011 KHL draft 1st overall pick Anton slepyshev 88th 2013
    2. MacT drafted Draisatl instead of Bennett 2014
    3. MacT traded Perron for Pit #16 pick
    4. Sather stated a trade for Talbot to the oilers was arranged March 2015
    5. The 2015 draft lottery was won April 18, 2015
    6. On april 24, 2015 Craig Mctavish was Relieved of his Duties; but retained in the org.
    7. Peter Chiarelli was hired as New GM.
    8. PC followed mact’s scout list and drafted Connar Mcdavid
    9. PC traded the pit #16 and Edm 2nd for Griffin Reinhart.
    10. Since MacT was still with the org. and mact had commited to the assets for the Talbot trade by sending petry to MTL. Sather offered the same deal to PC.
    11. PC traded (2nd comp) Top 60 HD; EVGA Dman Marincin to TOR for 4th rd Pick
    12. PC used the 4th rd pick to trade for Gryba.
    13. MacT and Bucky Signed Benning and Caggulia to Contracts Per PC interview.

  133. Doug McLachlan says:

    dustrock:
    Dreger saying it looks like almost certain that Eberle will be traded.

    Which means, obviously, he won’t.

    I can’t for the life of me understand what he would deal Eberle for that makes sense.

    Trade him to the Islanders for Hamonic – after the Vegas draft, of course – sure but is that really on offer?

    None of the verbal from Chia suggests to me that he wants to get rid of Eberle’s 20-25 goals, though he may want to get rid of the contract. Even then, it’s only for two more years.

  134. jtblack says:

    jtblack:
    LT. Maybe a question for another dat for Oilers Fandom.

    What would the Oil have to accomolish in the next 10 yrs to be considered a success.I would be interested to know the “average”.

    Your stuff is awesome on the draft!Thanks!!

  135. who says:

    Doug McLachlan: I can’t for the life of me understand what he would deal Eberle for that makes sense.

    Trade him to the Islanders for Hamonic – after the Vegas draft, of course – sure but is that really on offer?

    None of the verbal from Chia suggests to me that he wants to get rid of Eberle’s 20-25 goals, though he may want to get rid of the contract.Even then, it’s only for two more years.

    If there is an Eberle for Hamonic trade I bet it happens before expansion draft. Islanders would be much more motivated before and if the Oilers trade Eberle and go 4-4-1 they won’t lose an irreplaceable forward.

  136. Cassandra says:

    who: Center are worth more than wingers because they have more defensive responsibility and have to cover more ice. Got nothing to do with who’s driving who. If they put up similar numbers you always take the center because he has shown the ability to play a more complete game.
    For instance, if Taylor Hall had been a center,with his skill set, he would be a more valuable player.

    So now we are evaluating players on who “covers the most ice?” What if skating around a lot doesn’t correlate with goals? In any case, Klefbom covers more ice than Larsson, is he intrinsically more valuable then? (I think so!)

    But even if this were a good metric, it still wouldn’t make centers intrinsically more valuable. What do we mean by “cover more ice?” With or without the puck? Do centers always do more of this? McDavid is a transporter, but centers aren’t always. Are transporting centers intrinsically more valuable than those that don’t?

  137. Lowetide says:

    Cassandra: So now we are evaluating players on who “covers the most ice?”What if skating around a lot doesn’t correlate with goals?In any case, Klefbom covers more ice than Larsson, is he intrinsically more valuable then?(I think so!)

    But even if this were a good metric, it still wouldn’t make centers intrinsically more valuable.What do we mean by “cover more ice?”With or without the puck?Do centers always do more of this?McDavid is a transporter, but centers aren’t always.Are transporting centers intrinsically more valuable than those that don’t?

    I think the idea of drafting centers has merit. You can move them to wing but not theotherway. The defensive spectrum exists, and as Todd McLellan shows in every game he coaches, versatility is going to be utilized.

  138. russ99 says:

    Cassandra: Tracking is not going to be the golden chalice some here think it is.

    In any case all of the metrics you seem to like track very closely with shots.There is no such thing as a player who is good at limiting the quality of shots who is not also good at limiting the number of shots.

    For instance, it is quite true that Kris Russell is good at blocking shots and hence Corsi is going to underrate him.However, once you control for this by using Fenwick or Shots, using some kind of scoring chance metric doesn’t add a lot of information.

    Another classic mistake is to judge defenders on against measures alone, as if these weren’t happening in a larger environment.For all players, the environment is going to determined the results to a very large degree and hence the best that can be done is to measure their value relative to the environment, and the best measure of the environment is the opposing measure.Which is to say to presuppose that defenders don’t really “drive” scoring chances for and hence I can ignore it in evaluating their defense, and hence their individual contribution, is to ignore the environment within which they play.

    This is Ricki’s continual mistake, and why he consistently overrates the Mark Fistric’s of the world.

    Good points.

    I’m all for balance, but since shot for metrics are all the rage and there less focus on defense, which does help get you that cup, I’m a trumpeting the D metric horn a little loudly.

    A team of all puck movers with little defensive aptitude may make the shot for metrics look nice, and add a few goals for, but also wear down the goalie.

    There should be a mix of players with complementary skill sets in the D pairings, so both offense and defense are served. I’m certainly not advocating for 2-1 games, but we see how hard it is to score in the playoffs, and sometimes the clutch goals we scored to beat the Sharks and take the Ducks to the brink aren’t there.

    This is my concern with the offseason. Were losing Sekera for a large portion of the season, and it may take him up to a year to her back to his previous level. Losing Sekera and Russell and adding players with little effect on defensive coverage make us a worse team next year at the expense of a few more goals, when we’re already scoring a a decent clip.

    When you have a cup window, the idea is to get better every year, not to get worse.

  139. Bank Shot says:

    Cassandra:
    Bank Shot,

    It is hard to suss out individual contributions from team stats.For offensive contributions, I would suggest points.Defensive contributions are more difficult.My small suggestion was that we should not assume the center contributes more by default.

    Well if we want to get granular, centers do contribute more by default. If you had two wingers that were identical in every way except one of them could win more faceoffs, you would take the one that wins faceoffs.

    That doesn’t mean that faceoffs are significant contributor to wins, but all else being equal its better to start with the puck, rather than have to chase it.

    So the question isn’t really are centers more valuable, its how much more valuable are centers?

    As you mentioned in another post, Draisaitl shifted to wing. He did so seamlessly. Most centers don’t have any problem switching to wing. Over the years we have seen the Oilers try time and time again to convert wingers to center. It hasn’t worked.

    The difficulty level is higher. Centers have more responsibility in the defensive end of the rink. Whether this actually translates into meaning that centers are more valuable on the ice surface is open to debate. I think it means they are more important to on ice success. You disagree, or are at least playing devil’s advocate.

    So centers can play wing, there are twice as many wingers on a team as centers (more scarcity), and centers win faceoffs.

    Therefore centers are more valuable. If a winger is clearly better than a center, you take the winger no question.

    If its a tossup in ability, whats one good reason for taking a winger over a center?

  140. who says:

    Cassandra: So now we are evaluating players on who “covers the most ice?”What if skating around a lot doesn’t correlate with goals?In any case, Klefbom covers more ice than Larsson, is he intrinsically more valuable then?(I think so!)

    But even if this were a good metric, it still wouldn’t make centers intrinsically more valuable.What do we mean by “cover more ice?”With or without the puck?Do centers always do more of this?McDavid is a transporter, but centers aren’t always.Are transporting centers intrinsically more valuable than those that don’t?

    Cmon. I shouldn’t have to explain this to you but here goes. Centers basically mirror the puck in their own end which means they have to move all over the defensive zone. I know cause I is one.
    Wingers basically cover the point and rarely get below the hash marks. Also when their team gains possession centers generally have to skate further to join the rush.
    Don’t think I can make this any simpler for you.

  141. CrazyCoach says:

    stevezie: It’s one of those heuristics that probably works better than it should, fooling people into thinking it is true. You can make the claim Canada’s 10th best C is better than its 2nd best rw and probably be right (I did not look this up). BUT THIS IS NOT BECAUSE WINGS DON’T MATTER!
    It’s just that good players matter more than pretty good players (and so on).
    If your best forward is a wing, he will matter more than your C. Forsberg is an excellent example.
    Those two cents were not that quick. Ah well.

    Good points,

    LT beat me to it, but the versatility of Centres holds a little weight. as well.

    Hockey Canada seems to use this philosophy as the majority of their teams will have an overabundance of centres. That and the philosophy of taking the most talented players.

    I have a feeling they learned a hard lesson in taking Rob Zamner for the 98 Olympics.

  142. Philosophil says:

    Scungilli Slushy,

    Very late to this thread- To clarify the analogy- Larsson is a Tundra, not a Tacoma. Significant difference.
    jordan oesterle or Joey Laleggia is a Tacoma like D player (acknowledging that JL is now a forward).

  143. godot10 says:

    Ducey: If they signed Russell for 3 yrs, could they not trade him after 2?

    Cough…Andrew Ference…cough. Small defensemen don’t age particularly well. Russell has already been missing time with a seeming chronic something in his upper legs.

  144. godot10 says:

    John Chambers:
    Re: Russell

    Why not give him a 5-year deal for like $11M.

    3-3-2-1.5-1.5

    AAV is only $2.2M, and if he can’t deliver after 4 years his buyout is only $700K / yr.

    But there is salary cap recapture that significantly impacts the cap.

  145. godot10 says:

    Truth: Johansen played this year with Forsberg and Arvidsson

    Forsberg 82312758
    Arvidsson 80 313061

    Hall played with Zajac and Palmieri.

    Zajac 80 143145
    Palmieri 80 26 27 53

    I highly doubt the difference in Johansen’s linemates scoring 22 more goals than Hall’s is attributable to Johansen being the better player. There is an argument to be made, but it’s unfair to say that without considering who Hall played with vs who Johansen did.Not to mention the D corps playing in Nashville.

    Now compare the defensemen behind Johanssen and Hall this season.

Leave a Reply

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