CHIARELLI’S TRADES

I don’t go to Vegas often but always play the slot machines. The first time I visited, played the card tables (blackjack) and barely had time enough for the free drink. Man those folks know how to count to 21. My plan in Vegas is to bleed out slowly, and the slot machines are just my style.

Peter Chiarelli is a riverboat gambler in the trade market. Not only is he unafraid to lose a trade’s value in order to correct his roster, he is willing to do it again and again as a member of the Edmonton Oilers. You can see the reasoning, there is enormous pressure to balance the roster in order to improve, but the asset cost is going to break the bank in a quick hurry.

Based on observation, Chiarelli appears to be making massive trades for specific need, and trying to grab back value from smaller deals. That is a risky way of doing business because you can only lose so many deals before you have compromised the roster. Chiarelli is building to win one Stanley Cup in my opinion. Short sighted? A bad idea? If he delivers a Stanley to Edmonton by 2020, I doubt it will matter.

PETER CHIARELLI TRADES 2015-16

  1. June 26, 2015: Traded No. 16 (Mathew Barzal) and No. 33 (Mitchell Stephens) to the NY Islanders for D Griffin Reinhart. The reason for making this deal is to move up the development time line. If Reinhart had been able to come into camp fall 2015 and establish himself as an NHL defensemen we could argue the merits of the deal. That didn’t happen, this was a major loss in assets.
  2. June 27, 2015: Traded No. 57 (Jonas Siegenthaler), No. 79 (Sergei Zborovsky), No. 184 (Adam Huska) to the NY Rangers for G Cam Talbot and No. 209 (Ziyat Paigin).  The day after a devastating deal, Chiarelli solved a massive problem when acquiring Cam Talbot to play goal. I count this as a win, all four prospects are progressing nicely. A quality trade.
  3. June 27, 2015: Traded Martin Marincin to Toronto Maple Leafs for No. 107 overall, traded No. 107 overall (Christian Wolanin) and Travis Ewanyk to Ottawa Senators for Eric Gryba. I prefer Marincin and believe he is the better defender, but Eric Gryba has filled a role for coach Todd McLellan and that has value. One new item: Wolanin is progressing very nicely and may end up being a bigger part of this deal.
  4. June 27, 2015: Traded No. 206 pick in the 2016 draft (Otto Somppi) to the Tampa Bay Lightning for No. 208 pick in the 2015 draft (Miroslav Svoboda). Both prospects have progressed nicely, probably won’t impact the NHL but you never know.
  5. June 30, 2015: Traded Boyd Gordon to Arizona Coyotes for L Lauri Korpikoski. This was a bad, bad trade. Gordon had one year left and Korpikoski two, with both veterans struggling in the years after the deal. Edmonton eventually bought out their end of the trade. A strange little deal.
  6. July 6, 2015: Traded Liam Coughlin to the Chicago Blackhawk for Anders Nilsson. A brilliant trade from the moment it was made. Coughlin is a distant bell prospect, Nilsson stepped right in and helped the Oilers in goal. This was the first of several “value winners” by Chiarelli that somewhat offset the big Reinhart deal.
  7. December 28, 2015: Traded Ben Scrivens to the Montreal Canadiens for Zack Kassian. There was risk but this trade has worked out extremely well for the Oilers. I’ll count this as a second “value winners” by Chiarelli during his first season in Edmonton.
  8. February 24, 2016: Traded Phil Larsen to the Vancouver Canucks for the No. 126 choice in the 2017 draft. This pick ended up being dealt to Arizona Coyotes in order to move up and get Stuart Skinner. I count the trade as a win on the front end, we’ll talk back end later.
  9. February 27, 2016: Traded Anders Nilsson to the St. Louis Blues for No. 149 overall (Graham McPhee) selection in 2016 draft. Good value at the time, might have been tempting to sign Nilsson but the value is fair at the deadline.
  10. February 27, 2016: Traded Justin Schultz to the Pittsburgh Penguins for No. 91 overall pick in 2016 draft (Filip Berglund). I was in favor of this trade and was pleased with the return. Schultz has thrived in his new surroundings and the Oilers received a solid prospect. Both teams a winner.
  11. February 27, 2016: Traded Edward Purcell to the Florida Panthers for No. 84 overall pick (Matt Cairns). Another good deadline deal, the Oilers add two third-round picks at the deadline plus a fifth and sixth.
  12. February 29, 2016: Traded Martin Gernat and No. 93 (Jack Kopacka) in the 2016 draft to the Anaheim Ducks for Patrick Maroon. A monster win, the kind of trade that can alter careers (and has in the case of Patrick Maroon). Maroon’s range of skills has proven to be a fine addition to the top line and this represents the third “value deal” of Chiarelli’s first Edmonton season.
  • Significant losses: Mathew Barzal, Mitchell Stephens.
  • Significant gains: Cam Talbot, Patrick Maroon, Zack Kassian, Anders Nilsson

The nature of being a fan is remembering the negative and the Reinhart deal hurt this franchise. On the other hand, Peter Chiarelli made a series of smaller trades that gave the team more depth and structure. The Talbot trade is still underrated by many in my opinion, a quick glance at the Flames struggles in net since 2015 reminds us of what might have been.

PETER CHIARELLI TRADES 2016-17

  1. June 29, 2016: Traded Taylor Hall to New Jersey Devils for Adam Larsson. Deal was one-for-one. In what felt like deja vu all over again, Peter Chiarelli gave up an enormous amount in order to acquire an immediate upgrade on defense. Larsson’s performance during the 2016-17 eased the pain for many Oilers fans, while the loss of Hall fractured the portion of the fan base that finds itself twisting in the wind to this day. The Oilers are a ridiculous money maker but may never have the universal appeal enjoyed the morning of this trade. Fracture. From Chiarelli’s point of view, the trade accomplished what the Reinhart deal could not: Give balance and structure to the defense.
  2. October 7, 2016: Traded Nail Yakupov to the St. Louis Blues for No. 82 selection (Cameron Crotty) in the 2017 draft and Zach Pochiro. I don’t think there can be a winner in this deal but I don’t blame Chiarelli or McLellan for Yakupov’s exit. The selection ended up being packaged with the Phil Larsen pick in the Stuart Skinner trade-up at the June 2017 draft.
  3. February 1, 2017: Traded Mitchell Moroz to the Arizona Coyotes for Henrik Samuelsson. This was a low-level deal designed to jumpstart one or the other, or both.
  4. February 28, 2017: Traded Brandon Davidson to the Montreal Canadiens for C David Desharnais. I might be the only one who considers this a worthwhile trade. Peter Chiarelli’s job is to improve his playoff team at the deadline and Desharnais was effective in limited playing time. My only real complaint is that Desharnais should have played more.
  5. March 1, 2017: Traded Taylor Beck to the New York Rangers for Justin Fontaine. A small deal.
  • Significant losses: Taylor Hall, Brandon Davidson
  • Significant gains:  Adam Larsson

Fewer trades is a good sign, the roster functioned very well all winter. The weights and measures available to us via analytics suggest Chiarelli lost the Hall-Larsson trade in a major way. The trade had the potential to derail Peter Chiarelli’s run as Oilers general manager but the 103-point season and playoff success turned it into a (mostly) non-story one year later. Whatever measure you use, Adam Larsson helped calm the blue and contributed to an efficient, value-wise top pairing.

PETER CHIARELLI TRADES 2017-18

  1. June 22, 2017: Traded Jordan Eberle to NY Islanders for Ryan Strome. Last week of June is Peter Chiarelli’s sweet spot for these kinds of trades. Barzal/Stephens, Hall, Eberle in exchange for Griffin Reinhart, Adam Larsson and Ryan Strome. There is a segment of Oilers fan who may not forgive PC even if he wins Stanley. I believe that to be true.
  2. June 24, 2017: Traded No. 82 (Cameron Crotty) pick and No. 126 (Michael Karow) to Arizona Coyotes for No. 78 (Stuart Skinner), all picks in 2017 draft. The price was dear, too dear, but I’ve always liked an organization to have the courage of their convictions. Skinner is a very interesting goalie prospect, we’ll see how it works out.
  • Significant losses: Jordan Eberle
  • Significant gains:  Ryan Strome

Another trade in the last week of June that sends tremors across Oilers Nation. Chiarelli didn’t have to make the trade for cap purposes, although wiggle room is clearly preferable. I think this trade was made for utility (Strome can play center) and for style (Eberle is a smaller winger who doesn’t match the Chiarelli style ala Brad Marchand). I don’t think we can argue this trade makes Edmonton better on the surface, but then again Strome is going to get a major push (better linemates, zone starts, power-play opportunities) and his boxcars may surprise. If Strome plays half the season (or more) with Connor McDavid, his boxcars could shine like a diamond. This trade could look very good a year from now, depending on how much wind-aided offense we see.

SUMMARY

If Peter Chiarelli had been more patient, allowing deals to come to him, the No. 16 pick in 2015, Taylor Hall and Jordan Eberle might still be on the team. Chiarelli isn’t that kind of general manager and there was a great deal of urgency to turn north when he arrived in town.

The trades that come in the final week of June are spectacular in their eye popping value gaps but the smaller deals (and the Talbot trade) bring Chiarelli’s record closer to even. Bottom line is that he can’t keep losing those June deals and cobble a winning roster, so the Eberle trade has to be the last one we see.

No matter where you come down on the Chiarelli trade record, I think we can agree that if he can bring Stanley to Edmonton by 2020 PC will be here for the long term. If you are hoping for multiple Stanley’s, you may be disappointed. I think this first one is going to be terribly expensive. Already is.

written by

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

129 Responses to "CHIARELLI’S TRADES"

  1. Richard S.S. says:

    Yes, but just wait until RNH gets traded for Picks and nothing else.

  2. verite says:

    Hall and Eberle were heartless and gutless
    Like RNH
    Flushing them was essential

  3. rickithebear says:

    Sather staed Mact arranged the trade.
    That means Mact
    1. identified Talbot as the Target.
    2. Arranged the assets
    3. Finalized the assets with the petry trade.
    4. Had sather honour the trade cause he was still with the org.

    pc
    1. Said yes when sather said do want this deal that Mact completely set up?

    Luckily pc recognized Mact,s great work!

    Good Day!

  4. Lowetide says:

    Richard S.S.:
    Yes, but just wait until RNH gets traded for Picks and nothing else.

    If he does, that will mean some impressive seasons from men like Strome, Puljujarvi and Slepyshev. Because if those men don’t score this coming season, Nuge will need to be dealt for a proven scorer.

  5. Lowetide says:

    rickithebear:
    Sather staed Mact arranged the trade.
    That means Mact
    1. identified Talbot as the Target.
    2. Arranged the assets
    3. Finalized the assets with the petry trade.
    4. Had sather honour the trade cause he was still with the org.

    pc
    1. Said yes when sather said do want this deal that completely set up?

    Luckily pc recognized Mact,s great work!

    Good Day!

    As is the case for the group who blame Bob Green for the Griffin Reinhart deal, I once again state the general manager gets credit or blame for all deals under his watch. I understand this irks you but it is the most efficient way for me to do these and I am going to stick with it. Thanks for understanding. 🙂

  6. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Significant losses: Mathew Barzal, Mitchell Stephens.

    I understand why you mention Barzal and Stephens as those were the two players taken with those two picks.

    As per Stauffer the Oilers had Eriksson-Ek on their list for 16 and Brandon Carlo at 33.

    So in an alternate universe where Peter still makes the trades I liked, but not the trades I didn’t like, and he trades Nurse for Hamonic (deal was on the table as per Friedman) the roster would be:

    Maroon-McDavid-Sleppy
    Hall-RNH-Eberle
    Eriksson-Ek – Draisaitl-Puljujarvi
    Khaira-Letestu-Kassian

    Klefbom-Hamonic
    Sekera-Benning
    Davidson-Carlo

    Talbot
    Brossoit

  7. Lowetide says:

    Woodguy v2.0:
    Significant losses: Mathew Barzal, Mitchell Stephens.

    I understand why you mention Barzal and Stephens as those were the two players taken with those two picks.

    As per Stauffer the Oilers had Eriksson-Ek on their list for 16 and Brandon Carlo at 33.

    So in an alternate universe where Peter still makes the trades I liked, but not the trades I didn’t like, and he trades Nurse for Hamonic (deal was on the table as per Friedman) the roster would be:

    Maroon-McDavid-Sleppy
    Hall-RNH-Eberle
    Eriksson-Ek – Draisaitl-Puljujarvi
    Khaira-Letestu-Kassian

    Klefbom-Hamonic
    Sekera-Benning
    Davidson-Carlo

    Talbot
    Brossoit

    If Carlo was at No. 33, I wonder if there were any names above Carlo still on the board. These post-draft stories surrounding Edmonton have existed forever, I have come to believe they are mostly issue framing. Sounds like Bob isn’t a fan of Chiarelli’s trades, and that is interesting.

  8. Richard S.S. says:

    Then someone else of sufficient value must be traded to satisfy the Cap.
    Nuge goes out and nothing comes back salary-wise or someone else must go.
    Lucic, Sekera and Russell have NTC/NMC and will turn down trade requests.

  9. Scungilli Slushy says:

    I hope your wrong about Stanleys. Of course I have no proof, but I don’t think it is only coincidence and vagaries of dealing that determined who isn’t on the team anymore.

    You value players differently than I do. I also thought the Hall trade was a loss when it was made, and said at the time the team may still be better, and I think that is the case. For me the only clear loss under Chia was Reinhart, that was a bloodletting and a half. I still find what they paid for a failing prospect inexplicable and baffling.

    I believe the team is being molded into what Chia et al think a winner looks like. Whether they are right or not will determine the success more than the deals he’s made, so far. The real kicker here is what is between the perennial also rans and those that get over the top, and that is enough elite players. The Oilers have that, by good luck, but have them non the less.

  10. Scungilli Slushy says:

    JDi

    I didn’t mean to get all up in your grill yesterday, not worded well, apologies.

  11. Lowetide says:

    Richard S.S.:
    Then someone else of sufficient value must be traded to satisfy the Cap.
    Nuge goes out and nothing comes back salary-wise or someone else must go.
    Lucic, Sekera and Russell have NTC/NMC and will turn down trade requests.

    That’s not completely necessary. Nuge can be dealt for a $2.5M scorer in a deal similar to Eberle for Strome.

  12. fifthcartel says:

    This is a nice way to put it, Lowetide. He keeps losing significant value and that’s a huge concern.

    Maybe he can make it up in other moves, but I struggle to think of the last trade he, without a doubt, won. Yakupov for a 3rd? Scrivens for Kassian? The Talbot tade?

    Those were all made almost a year (some more) ago. I’m expecting RNH for a lesser, cheaper RW/C next June.

  13. rickithebear says:

    Lowetide: As is the case for the group who blame Bob Green for the Griffin Reinhart deal, I once again state the general manager gets credit or blame for all deals under his watch. I understand this irks you but it is the most efficient way for me to do these and I am going to stick with it. Thanks for understanding.

    What you are refering too is get it done guys.
    Do zero work but unethically steal all the credit.
    Ethical people give credit to the persons who do the work

    You made a mistake giving PC
    The get it done credit.
    The real get it done guy is Katz.

    So what you are saying is katz is the mastermind of all!

  14. frjohnk says:

    When we talk about the trade wins/losses, Chia gets the credit/shit on and that’s fine.

    But in the case of Maroon and Kassian, these two were castaway by their former clubs. Their former clubs did not want them on their team. At. All.

    Chia definitely took a gamble on these two and it has paid off in spades. And he should get credit for these two moves.

    But I think these two transactions should have an asterisk to them as the majority of credit for the Oilers winning these trades is up to the players themselves.

    If Maroon came into camp in 16-17 like he did in 15-16 for the Ducks, there is a possibility he could have been put on waivers.

    If Kassian reverted back to his partying ways, he is out of the league.

    A huge credit to these two individuals to turning their life and playing careers around is warranted.

    Glad they are Oilers.

  15. barry.moore23 says:

    I don’t get to see the Oilers live very often (usually when they are in St. Louis), but every time I see how focused and determined Adam Larsson looks in the pregame skate I’m damn glad he’s on our side. Love that guy.

  16. fifthcartel says:

    My biggest gripe is you’d rather see Chiarelli be on the receiving ends of the deals he’s been making as Oilers GM.

    Former top-5 pick who hasn’t progressed as hoped for the 16th and 33rd pick? Yes please.

    Young LW who scored 0.75 ppg last 3 years (similar to Couture, Monahan, Forsberg, Schwartz, Huburdeau, H. Sedin, Perry) for a young top-4 defensemen whose value is on the defensive side of the game? Yupp, I’d do that.

    27-year-old RW who scored 0.69 ppg last 3 years (similar to Nash, Foligno, Simmonds, Turris, Hornqvist, Zuccarello, Schenn, Duchene) whose contract isn’t a discount, for a top 5 pick that has an uneven career, looks more like a middle-6 guy, but might be able to play center/RW? Yupp.

    If these were the moves being made for Edmonton, I’d be ecstatic. Instead, Chiarelli is the GM you hope your team is dealing with because you’re probably getting a really good player for much less than full value.

  17. Chris says:

    rickithebear: What you are refering too is get it done guys.
    Do zero work but unethically steal all the credit.
    Ethical people give credit to the persons who do the work

    You made a mistake giving PC
    The get it done credit.
    The real get it done guy is Katz.

    So what you are saying is katz is the mastermind of all!

    I usually don’t come to the defence of people on this blog (they wear big boy underwear I’m sure) but in this case I’m making an exception. Lowe tide has given you reasonable and rational explanation behind his evaluations. If you disagree, fine. Feel free to write a blog and tell the world how you would do it. At this point, you’re coming across like a jerk. Be a jerk somewhere else.

  18. rickithebear says:

    LT:
    I am not calling you unethical!

    I have many family members who are were JW.

    One was a ranking Elder in Georgtown
    And advised the Elders in warwick
    On his Door to Door tracking program with potential profiling.
    He advised on other aspects computer profiling and bottlenecking.

    Until he he was Excommunicated ( not sure of this term) for falling in love with a chinese shintou buddist.
    He is tachnical leader IEEE
    With honourary chairs in france, china,s, version of MIT.

    Current elders get the credut!
    I get it!

  19. Johnny says:

    Lowetide: “Chiarelli is building to win one Stanley Cup in my opinion.”

    I disagree. He has not flipped any assets (firsts, Darnell Nurses’, puljujarvi’s etc.) to load up for this year. If he wanted one cup, this is the year to take a run at it. He will have $10M less cap space starting 2018.

    Also, maybe the Larsson trade became a non-story amongst the analytics community. It was a big enough story in NHL circles to nominate him for GM of the year.

  20. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Lowetide: If Carlo was at No. 33, I wonder if there were any names above Carlo still on the board. These post-draft stories surrounding Edmonton have existed forever, I have come to believe they are mostly issue framing. Sounds like Bob isn’t a fan of Chiarelli’s trades, and that is interesting.

    Its always a foundation built upon “what ifs” and we can never be sure.

    Its reasonable to assume they go F then D. Eriksson-Ek was their pick and that came from multiple sources. Bob was the only one to mention Carlo.

    Given that Peter has been chasing RHD since he got here Carlo is a reasonable assumption given that he was the highest rated RHD (and a giant) on the board.

    Central Scouting had him 25, McKenzie had him at 22.

    I like Meloche a lot in his draft year. RHD taken at 40.

    That said, this is my alternative universe and my phone knows handedness and the beer is cheap and doesn’t make you fat.

  21. Nuclear leak says:

    Why wasn’t Ebs able to receive the aid of the wind… changing out a small winger that’s past his peak for a larger centre that hasn’t hit his peak at half the price., seems like a quality bet.

  22. frjohnk says:

    Woodguy v2.0: this is my alternative universe and my phone knows handedness

    Mind blown

  23. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    fifthcartel,

    This is a nice way to put it, Lowetide. He keeps losing significant value and that’s a huge concern.

    One could also describe it as “pissing away value with a fire hose”

  24. OriginalPouzar says:

    verite:
    Hall and Eberle were heartless and gutless
    Like RNH
    Flushing them was essential

    That is just factually incorrect!

  25. OriginalPouzar says:

    The trades are uneven – a couple huge wins (Talbot, Maroon, Kassian), one big loss (the Reinhart trade) and one big controversial (Hall trade) but, at the end of the day the GM did plug the two biggest holes on the team – #1 goalie and minute munching RD.

    Its tough to evaluate Peter on the trade’s alone as the signings are a huge part of his overall body of work – Benning, Caggulia, Jokinen, Auvitu, etc.

    He seems willing to lose value in a trade in order to fix gaps and look for value signings in order to receive, well, value.

  26. Revolved says:

    Love ’em or hate ’em, we are much closer to the balance photo than we were when Chiarelli got here.

    I give him a lot of credit for identifying the weakness of our defence and lack of skilled physicality. He let them play, and lose, another season before putting the big money on the table. There were bad moves and good ones, but I’ll definitely take the gambler over the dithering decade.

  27. frjohnk says:

    If we are looking at a team that has a chance to win multiple Cups, it pains me to say but Toronto is the one Id rate higher than Edmonton.

    While I hope we win at least one Cup, I wouldn’t be surprised we don’t win any during McDavids tenure here.

  28. Lowetide says:

    Woodguy v2.0: It

    That said, this is my alternative universe and my phone knows handedness and the beer is cheap and doesn’t make you fat.

    How much is admission? 🙂

  29. jm363561 says:

    “Chiarelli is building to win one Stanley Cup in my opinion.”

    I do not understand why you have this view. I get the feeling he is close to having his core in place, and for the next few years he will be adding and subtracting value contracts to the roster.

    If statistics are the only measure in evaluating trades Hall was the more valuable player than Larsson; I have never knowingly seen Strome play but this may well be a loss on a backward looking spreadsheet. If you place value on having a tight locker room, a team that can be physically intimidating, and resilient when things are not going well, to say nothing of additional cap space, Chia’s deals, including locking up Kbom and bringing in Benning and Caggs, are well into the plus column IMHO.

  30. Lowetide says:

    rickithebear:
    LT:
    I am not calling you unethical!

    I have many family members who are were JW.

    One was a ranking Elder in Georgtown
    And advised the Elders in warwick
    On his Door to Door tracking program with potential profiling.
    He advised on other aspects computer profiling and bottlenecking.

    Until he he was Excommunicated ( not sure of this term) for falling in love with a chinese shintou buddist.
    He is tachnical leader IEEE
    With honourary chairs in france, china,s, version of MIT.

    Current elders get the credut!
    I get it!

    It is so nice that you understand.

  31. Pouzar says:

    Lowetide: Because if those men don’t score this coming season

    Just hold Slepy’s Russian beer.

  32. Pouzar says:

    Woodguy v2.0: As per Stauffer the Oilers had Eriksson-Ek on their list for 16 and Brandon Carlo at 33.

    That’s how I rememeber it as well.
    F6ck that hurts. Worst move by him and it’s not close imo.

  33. Captain Smarmy says:

    frjohnk:
    When we talk about the trade wins/losses, Chia gets the credit/shit on and that’s fine.

    But in the case of Maroon and Kassian, these two were castaway by their former clubs.Their former clubs did not want them on their team.At. All.

    Chia definitely took a gamble on these two and it has paid off in spades.And he should get credit for these two moves.

    But I think these two transactions should have an asterisk to them as the majority of credit for the Oilers winning these trades is up to the players themselves.

    If Maroon came into camp in 16-17 like he did in 15-16 for the Ducks, there is a possibility he could have been put on waivers.

    If Kassian reverted back to his partying ways, he is out of the league.

    A huge credit to these two individuals to turning their life and playing careers around is warranted.

    Glad they are Oilers.

    Your post speaks to something that is often forgotten in evaluations. That is that a lot of people are involved in making these decisions and a lot of people are involved to insure they are successful.

    Reinhart trade was bad and a lot people thought so at the time, but who failed past the trade? Certainly the organization and the player can wear some blame for it not working out?

    Yakupov failing didn’t happen just because he was the wrong draft pick. The next number of years established that and there is lots of blame to spread around for that one.

  34. Revolved says:

    Woodguy v2.0:

    So in an alternate universe where Peter still makes the trades I liked, but not the trades I didn’t like, and he trades Nurse for Hamonic (deal was on the table as per Friedman) the roster would be:

    Maroon-McDavid-Sleppy
    Hall-RNH-Eberle
    Eriksson-Ek – Draisaitl-Puljujarvi
    Khaira-Letestu-Kassian

    Klefbom-Hamonic
    Sekera-Benning
    Davidson-Carlo

    Talbot
    Brossoit

    This is a nice roster, but there are a lot of rookies. Do you think this roster would have outperformed last year’s?

    Edit: Also notable that you identify the desperate need to give up value for an established RHD

  35. Revolved says:

    frjohnk:
    If we are looking at a team that has a chance to win multiple Cups, it pains me to say but Toronto is the one Id rate higher than Edmonton.

    While I hope we win at least one Cup, I wouldn’t be surprised we don’t win any during McDavids tenure here.

    Stanley is promised to no one, but Toronto is coming on strong. Although you may be right, I think that we have to wait till next summer to judge, as there rookies may regress or squeeze the cap beyond breaking.

  36. Johnny says:

    Mind blown reading this thread.

    103 points. Game 7 loss in second round. Our future is bright (Nurse, Larsson, Benning, Klefbom, Pulju, Strome etc.).

    Formerly the biggest problems with the team were lack of NHL players, size, toughness, zero defense, goaltending and a horrific locker room. 10 years of that; ALL FIXED in two seasons.

    And Chiarelli is “pissing away value with a fire hose”. Do you know what pissing away value would have been? Trading for a defenseman instead of signing Kris Russell.

    He finished second for GM of the year folks.

    I am going away now. Unreal.

  37. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Revolved: This is a nice roster, but there are a lot of rookies. Do you think this roster would have outperformed last year’s?

    The roster I put up would have been 17/18.

    Take away Ek, add Pouliot, take away JP add Hendy, take away Carlo, add Russell for last years.

    I think it would have significantly out-scored last year’s team. +10 goals more.

    The biggest hole on the roster last year was lack of secondary scoring.

    RNH’s line was poor until the last 8 weeks.

    The 3rd line all year scored at a 4th line pace, the 4th line scored at a good 4th line pace.

    A higher scoring tough minutes 2nd line that outscores the competition would make this team a perennial contender.

    Here’s the 5 highest scoring teams at 5v5 last year: (EDM was 8th)

    PIT
    WSH
    MIN
    NYI
    TOR

    Here are their GF% rates with their star on/off:

    PIT 58.5 and 55.6
    WSH 60.7 and 59.7
    MIN 60.0 and 55.0
    NYI 52.8 and 48.9
    TOR 51.1 and 51.1

    EDM was 62.1 and 48.9

    If they can move that to 62.1 and 52% (probably higher with my roster) they are up among the best teams.

    In terms of Goal Share by the Star on/off, here are the same teams:

    PIT 35.2 – 64.8
    WSH 30.3 – 69.7
    MIN 36.7 – 63.3
    NYI 34.4 – 65.6
    TOR 28.6 – 71.4

    EDM 46.7 – 53.3

    All these teams don’t rely on the best player’s line for the majority of the goals whereas EDM does.

    Given the yuge amount of goals that McDavid creates, a 2nd line that outscores the toughs and a 3rd line that dominates the softs would have them up near the top of the NHL imo.

    I wrote about NHL teams with their stars on/off here: http://becauseoilers.blogspot.ca/2017/07/a-look-at-nhl-teams-results-with-and.html

    EDM is a middle of the road team when their best player is not on the ice.

    The best teams are very good still when their star isn’t on the ice.

  38. Lowetide says:

    Hi Johnny!

  39. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Johnny,

    If a GM trades Hall, Eberle, Eriksson-Ek, Carlo and Davidson and all that is on the roster in 17/18 in return are Larsson and Strome then “pissing away value with a fire hose” is a pretty apt description.

    I surprised how many fans consider “almost making it to the 3rd round of the playoffs” as a finish line with the best player in the NHL on the roster.

  40. vangolf says:

    I’m with Johnny here…the rinse repeat of this dead horse is too much. I almost get the sense that the view is if you repeat an opinion often enough it will get accepted as fact. Posting on chiarelli trade history is really saying let’s talk in circles about the hall trade again.

  41. HenryDrix says:

    Folks, the idea is to win the Stanley Cup. For a decade, our beloved team was not even in the playoffs, that means zero chance for Stanley. Hall, Ebs, Nuge and Jultz were not moving the dial enough. if we rightly consider them all to be stars (which is questionable), then I have to believe something else was terribly wrong, Why could a team with 4 stars not even reach the playoffs? The answers are numerous. My take? Incompetent management and coaching.

    Enter PC as GM and TM as coach. We cannot know for sure what choices PC had as far as trades all down the line, so it is difficult to speculate. The pressure must have been enormous for him to start to win immediately,(thanks to us fans). The entire league knew the Oil were desperate to make significant improvements. Desperation cripples negotiation. PC had to pay for the sins of the past regimes incompetence.

    Year one was tough, but McDavid gave The hopeless hope.

    Year two has been glorious, and the most fun I have had as an oiler fan ever.

    We are knocking on the door in year 3.

    I toast the GM, McDavid, and coach for ending our misery as Oiler fans. The games are so much fun to watch now.

    I Loved those stars while they wore our crest, but that drifting ship never got a glimpse of the land that awaits us now. We head there full steam ahead. Cheers!

  42. Revolved says:

    Woodguy v2.0,

    I can agree they would have scored more goals, but I also think that roster would have given up more. I rank Larsson quite a bit higher than Hamonic, though I know it wasn’t so stark last summer.

    There is certainly no questioning that Carlo and Eriksson-Ek would be great options for next year. The health of 16-17 vs 15-16 can also not be understated.

  43. frjohnk says:

    Woodguy v2.0: If a GM trades Hall, Eberle, Eriksson-Ek, Carlo and Davidson and all that is on the roster in 17/18 in return are Larsson and Strome then “pissing away value with a fire hose” is a pretty apt description.

    “Not to beat a dead horse” but Bruin fans are pissed they have nothing to show for Seguin 4 years after he was traded.

  44. Pouzar says:

    frjohnk: “Not to beat a dead horse” but Bruin fans are pissed they have nothing to show for Seguin 4 years after he was traded.

    They literally have nothing to show now. Not even a bottom pairing D-man.

  45. frjohnk says:

    Revolved: The health of 16-17 vs 15-16 can also not be understated.

    This is Yuge.

    I dont think there would be a significant gap in points if the 15-16 roster was as healthy as the 16-17 roster while the 16-17 would have been as injury riddled as the 15-16 one.

  46. Jethro Tull says:

    This has got to be the most bat shit insane ‘Aunt had balls’ thread ever.

    Bas a guy for a trade you disagree with, sure. But bash him because he didn’t keep a couple of prospects are now ‘Zetterberging’ is insane. It presupposes that these prospects were known that they would have been good before they were picked.

    Balls. They’re made of gristle not crystal.

  47. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    Revolved:
    Woodguy v2.0,

    I can agree they would have scored more goals, but I also think that roster would have given up more. I rank Larsson quite a bit higher than Hamonic, though I know it wasn’t so stark last summer.

    There is certainly no questioning that Carlo and Eriksson-Ek would be great options for next year. The health of 16-17 vs 15-16 can also not be understated.

    Hamonic has a much longer and better history of playing the best competition than Larsson.

    Last year was the first year that Larsson’s results were better than Hamonics imo.

    Hamonic was injured for most of last year and Larsson played with Klef.

    So I rate Hamonic higher than Larsson.

    YMMV.

  48. Woodguy v2.0 says:

    “Here’s a thread where we talk about Chia’s trades”

    “WTF ARE YOU GUYS TALKING ABOUT TRADES FOR!! ”

    “YOU’RE CRAZY OILERS ARE DOMINATE AFTER WINNING 7 WHOLE PLAYOFF GAMES!!!! JUST LIKE THE OTTAWA SENATORS!!!!””

  49. Bag of Pucks says:

    I’ve made this point before and it still stands imo: if you’re beating up your financial advisor over individual trades whilst your overall portfolio has significantly outperformed the market, you probably don’t deserve the success you’re enjoying.

    Chiarelli’s moves have:

    1) Balanced the roster
    2) Eliminated the losing culture
    3) Fixed the goaltending
    4) Substantially improved the D core
    5) Made headway on restocking the prospect pipeline, despite the league stealing vital picks
    6) Turned a weakness (lack of size) into a strength (big skilled team)

    But, by all means, let’s beat him up for eternity over those 2 lost lottery tickets…

  50. season not played says:

    piece

  51. Jethro Tull says:

    “OMG, ARE YOU PEOPLE TOO STOOPID TO REALISE CHIA IS DESTROYING THE OILERS THROUGH POOR ASSET MANAGEMENT WORSE THAT TAMBO AND MACT EVER COULD?”

    “OMG, HALL WOULD BE SO AWESOME ON THIS TEAM, AND THOSE TWO PICKS WE TRADED FOR REINHARDT WHO TURNED INTO NHL PLAYERS, ARE YOU ALL IDIOTS.”

    When discussing anything of value, the important question is “what is this asset worth to you, right now, in this time and place?” If the thought of Chia making trades you personally wouldn’t upsets you, i would suggest cheering for somebody else.

  52. Bag of Pucks says:

    LT, cap space is an asset. Imo, I think you do both the Strome and Larsson acquisitions a disservice by not factoring that into the returns.

  53. Jethro Tull says:

    Bag of Pucks:
    LT, cap space is an asset. Imo, I think you do both the Strome and Larsson acquisitions a disservice by not factoring that into the returns.

    Bingo. The is the age of the cap, and it’s starting to make it’s presence felt.

  54. vangolf says:

    Woodguy v2.0:
    “Here’s a thread where we talk about Chia’s trades for the millionth time without adding new analysis”

    “WTF ARE YOU GUYS TALKING ABOUT TRADES FOR!! ”

    “YOU’RE CRAZY OILERS ARE DOMINATE AFTER WINNING 7 WHOLE PLAYOFF GAMES!!!! JUST LIKE THE OTTAWA SENATORS!!!!””

    FTFY

  55. Bag of Pucks says:

    Woodguy v2.0: Hamonic has a much longer and better history of playing the best competition than Larsson.

    Last year was the first year that Larsson’s results were better than Hamonics imo.

    Hamonic was injured for most of last year and Larsson played with Klef.

    So I rate Hamonic higher than Larsson.

    YMMV.

    My key takeaway in reading this is to credit Chiarelli for properly identifying the player trending in the right direction.

  56. jtblack says:

    Bag of Pucks,

    +1. “because you can only lose so many deals before you have compromised the roster. ” – LT, I think you’re correct to say that the hall deal created a fractured fan base. But saying that PC loses the hall and Ebs deals is just a matter of opinion.
    there is a percentage of the fan base that thinks these were great deals for the Oilers and I am I am one of them!

    Part of the fan base seems to make excuses for Hall and Ebs and Yakupov on why we couldn’t win and now that we are winning that same fan base flips it around and makes excuses of why we are winning; it’s all McDavid blah blah blah ….

    Love the work PC has done. He had no Bias to players of the past and therefore was willing to do what the past GM’s would not.

    The Hall deal has been beat to death. Now the Ebs deal will take shape. If Strome fails (less than 13 Goals or whatever) the pundits will say “I told you so”. If Strome scores 20+ the Pundits will give all the credit to McD.

    Lets Go Oilers

  57. mumbai max says:

    Bag of Pucks,

    Bag of Pucks:
    I’ve made this point before and it still stands imo: if you’re beating up your financial advisor over individual trades whilst your overall portfolio has significantly outperformed the market, you probably don’t deserve the success you’re enjoying.

    Chiarelli’s moves have:

    1) Balanced the roster
    2) Eliminated the losing culture
    3) Fixed the goaltending
    4) Substantially improved the D core
    5) Made headway on restocking the prospect pipeline, despite the league stealing vital picks
    6) Turned a weakness (lack of size) into a strength (big skilled team)

    But, by all means, let’s beat him up for eternity over those 2 lost lottery tickets…

    I completely agree with this. Seems obvious somehow.

  58. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    – Great post LT! Expressing Hall/Larsson as significant loss and significant gain = brilliant.

    – We are just sharing opinions, because there is no way to value of the equity in and out of all those trades. Each win and loss is not equal weighted: its not 5 good trades 3 bad trades for example

    – I can’t reconcile though the notion that Chia is losing equity while the team improves so much. The improvement of the team is a fact. What you assign to trades vs growth vs luck = opinion.

  59. Bag of Pucks says:

    For me, Tambellini will always own part of the blame for the Hall trade by not drafting Larsson over RNH in the first place.

    Chiarelli was paying for the sins of the father, a father that couldn’t figure out the basic math that if D take longer to develop, you should probably draft a blue chip D sooner in your rebuild rather than later.

  60. jtblack says:

    mumbai max,

    Thank You Bag of Pucks. Well laid out. Looks like a GM who has checked off many boxes and fixed many of the past problems.

  61. season not played says:

    Bag of Pucks:
    For me, Tambellini will always own part of the blame for the Hall trade by not drafting Larsson over RNH in the first place.

    Chiarelli was paying for the sins of the father, a father that couldn’t figure out the basic math that if D take longer to develop, you should probably draft a blue chip D sooner in your rebuild rather than later.

    They were doubling down on the initial mistake of not taking the centre in 2010.

    Painted themselves into a corner. Had to take the centre in 2011.

  62. Thinker says:

    I wouldn’t reverse the Hall trade. Suspect NJ would. Plus The cap implications of another 9m player (in 2 years)on this team are fairly substantial if the 6m isn’t. Reinhart deal reflects how poor pro scounting in the organization was at the time. Seems it came down to aguy who hadn’t seen him play in 2 years!!! It could have been a good trade if they got the right player. Eberle might as well have been a buyout because Strome is a bum.

    Not sure how Schultz is a win for both teams, and maroon/ kassian are huge oiler wins. They are tge same circumstance. Schultz highlights what I said for a long time in that culture is created by management and works it’s way down. You can win with “losers” on the team, but you have to have a strong culture to pull them up, not let them drag you down.

  63. Bag of Pucks says:

    season not played: They were doubling down on the initial mistake of not taking the centre in 2010.

    Painted themselves into a corner. Had to take the centre in 2011.

    Agree. The problems started in not building down the middle from the very beginning.

  64. Sanderson says:

    Insightful post LT, thank you.

    I used to work with a guy who was a huge history buff. He always loved to harp on the whole idea of history being complex. It is a rare thing for historians to agree on the impact of a particular figure or event.

    I think we as Oiler fans are trying to skirt around this idea. Maybe the whole living in the land that knew Gretzky and Sather makes it easier to see the figures in this organization as either angels or devils, I dunno. Regardless, I don’t think anyone’s point is served by throwing out comments such as “Hall is a whiny garbage baby” or starting an all caps war in response. Just a few days ago I did the same damn thing (though I don’t even post that often so it really lowers the average of my already meager post quality).

    I think this post highlights well Chia’s strategy of taking a value-hit on a blockbuster to address a need and trying to mitigate that value loss by smaller value deals. I personally don’t think he is currently winning enough smaller deals to offset the losses in value in order to build more than a one-off Stanley Cup team. Will his trade win:loss ratio improve? I think so, or maybe just hope so.

  65. leadfarmer says:

    It is an impressive feat to get fleeced by an Islander GM in back 2 back trades. It’s actually really hard to do. Chia made the mistake of identifying assets he was willing to let go for Hamilton and not regrouping when that trade fell through. He made up his mind that he was ok with letting those assets go. Unfortunately it was in the deepest draft in years and is made even worse by our scouting staff actually identifying the right second rounder to go after.
    The Eberle trade while effectively a cap dump brought a lesser player who I don’t think will be with this team very long.

  66. BlueNoteNorth says:

    I find it difficult to assess the difference in value between some of the trades. Hall for Larsson is one. Different positions. Fills different needs. Hard to use analytics to compare value.

    In cases like Eberle for Strome, while it is tempting to call it a loss in value, the freeing up of cap is a big part of the trade. Chairelli stated afterward that he no longer felt vulnerable to a Draisaitl offer sheet. That was a significant statement for me. So the trade should be evaluated along the lines of Eberle for Strome plus a retained Draisaitl. Again, difficult to place a measurable value.

    Bottom line: The players who were traded collectively could not get the job done. The players who were acquired have to date proven to be a better mix. That is where the true value is – winning.

  67. haters says:

    Interesting post.
    I’m starting to think this blog and its followers are on the side of not being able to forgive Chia for losing perceived value in these trades of the past few years.

    If you want to follow a perineal loser every year Las Vegas seems like a good place for you to land.
    Part of winning means you stop identifying with losers. Bye guys 🙂

  68. rickithebear says:

    Chris: I usually don’t come to the defence of people on this blog (they wear big boy underwear I’m sure) but in this case I’m making an exception. Lowe tide has given you reasonable and rational explanation behind his evaluations. If you disagree, fine. Feel free to write a blog and tell the world how you would do it. At this point, you’re coming across like a jerk. Be a jerk somewhere else.

    I will never steal credit for someone else,s work!

    I fear the generation the next generations children you are influencing.

    LT:
    Thanks fior creating woodmoney!

    Your PuckIQ site is a good basic reference sight!

    Woodguy quit taking credit for it!
    It was largely presented under Lt,s site!

  69. Thinker says:

    LT writing last night: “Haven’t had a shitstorm in awhile. Should go well now that woodguy is back and the quality of posters has dropped considerably.”

  70. Gordies Elbow says:

    Bag of Pucks:

    Chiarelli’s moves have:

    1) Balanced the roster
    2) Eliminated the losing culture
    3) Fixed the goaltending
    4) Substantially improved the D core
    5) Made headway on restocking the prospect pipeline, despite the league stealing vital picks
    6) Turned a weakness (lack of size) into a strength (big skilled team)

    But, by all means, let’s beat him up for eternity over those 2 lost lottery tickets…

    Excellent post.

    Team performance (as opposed to individual performance) is a tricky thing. Google did research into team performance (Project Aristotle) and found that team culture had a significant impact on overall team performance.

    Montreal “is the closest (of) any team I’ve played for. There aren’t cliques going in their own direction. Everybody is all-in and has the same goal.” – Jeff Petry, which says a great deal about the room in Edmonton. Maroon’s glove drag celebration on January 12th said something as well.

    This is a team that needed a significant cultural change, and in a very short time, has had a huge shift.

    There is more to composing the best team than assembling players with the best individual stats.

  71. Nuclear leak says:

    If Strome gets 35 points or more, it’s the islanders that lose out in value if Ebs is now a 50pt player.

    If Ebs hits 70, and Strome hits 50.. Islanders still are the team losing value on the trade.

    Harmonic is not on Larsson’s value level, Hamonic in his career has never had a stretch of games like Adam had in the playoffs.

    Chia traded two picks for Reinhart.. absolute terrible deal, but for anyone to say we lost on player A,B,C in the draft is nuts, no one truly knows who the Oilers would of picked. Surely the 2nd round pick would be a player that no one is mentioning or a bust cause that’s what Oilers do after round 1.

    If Pitlick stayed Healthy the Oilers would of scored 10+ more goals last season with the players they had.

    If Eakins didn’t kill all the offence in RNH, Oilers would of had 20+ goals last season.

    Was it Chia that casted Seguin in the corner in bean town.. or was it the evil empire that employed him..

  72. rickithebear says:

    I would expect anyone giving credit to PC,s for Mact or tambo,s work to give all the woodmoney credit to LT.

    Just curios about consitent positions of peoples aproach.

    Individuals discorse I value.

  73. Bag of Pucks says:

    leadfarmer:
    It is an impressive feat to get fleeced by an Islander GM in back 2 back trades.It’s actually really hard to do.Chia made the mistake of identifying assets he was willing to let go for Hamilton and not regrouping when that trade fell through.He made up his mind that he was ok with letting those assets go.Unfortunately it was in the deepest draft in years and is made even worse by our scouting staff actually identifying the right second rounder to go after.
    The Eberle trade while effectively a cap dump brought a lesser player who I don’t think will be with this team very long.

    Shame that Bill Torrey gets painted with this brush now cos of Snow & Milbury. He was a helluva GM for the Isles, but I appreciate that’s ancient history now : )

  74. Johnny Larue says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux:
    – Great post LT!Expressing Hall/Larsson as significant loss and significant gain = brilliant.

    – We are just sharing opinions, because there is no way to value of the equity in and out of all those trades.Each win and loss is not equal weighted: its not 5 good trades 3 bad trades for example

    – I can’t reconcile though the notion that Chia is losing equity while the team improves so much. The improvement of the team is a fact.What you assign to trades vs growth vs luck = opinion.

    Bingo the facts are we made the playoffs for the first time in 10 years and came 1 win from the conference finals( and in my opinion deserved better)The team now is a team willing to fight for one another and finally has balance across the roster. The team is now one of the odds on favourites to win the cup. How about we look forward instead of backwards I see no reason why we couldn’t win multiple cups over anyone else we have the best player in the game. Of course we cannot continually lose trades but other than The Reinhart trade opinions vary. Results matter and in that regards I am pleased. Also I could give 2 flying farts as to Bostons legacy to the Seguin trade.

  75. Bag of Pucks says:

    Nuclear leak,

    Excellent point. Everyone will compare Eberle’s points to Strome’s in evaluating this deal, when the real formula should be comparing points realized for $6mil cap hit per annum.

    For instance, is Strome+Jokinen>Eberle ?

  76. rickithebear says:

    when discusding draft picks andholding them up as proof forbother teams faimngs.
    Look at that teams players picked before hin.

  77. Fuge Udvar says:

    Boy people are fiesty today and heavy on the hyperbole.

    I don’t think we can talk about these trades in a vacuum and ignore the circumstance. The Reinhart trade was objectively bad but it’s worth mentioning that they offered a better pick package than Calgary for Hamilton. Which I can only assume was only turned down out of spite. It was a bad knee jerk reaction. Which is a lot better than if he had been the primary target.

    You can make a lot of arguments for and against the Hall trade. The return value was low but they traded from an area of strength to fill a massive obvious area of weakness. That’s something you want your GMs doing.

    Asset value is the most important factor in a trade but it is just ignorant to think that is the only factor. In an ideal world it would be the only factor. But GMs are not their own bosses, they have multiple bosses they need to keep happy.

    If we are going to only judge trades by asset value then trade Maroon. This is the most value on the trading block he will ever have and is pretty replaceable

  78. digger50 says:

    1. McDavid covers all sins. Responsible for Chiarrelli GM nomination

    2. Eberle was our trade chip this summer and it brought in Strome. Not good enough. Should have been a Hamonic c and Peter should have got it done, the player was available.

    3. At the deadline Peter states the team “deserves some help” then brings in DAVID D. Montreal was laughing at us. David was and is not even an NHLer anymore. Wasting talent for that help and misreading the player was a big mistake. How did you think he was going to make a difference? Where is he this year?

    4. Expansion draft opportunities- whiffed on them all

    5.. Trading Nuge. Oilers cannot afford to bleed any more talent!!

  79. Pescador says:

    verite:
    Hall and Eberle were heartless and gutless
    Like RNH
    Flushing them was essential

    Reminds me of a poster that I wish we could flush

  80. Revolved says:

    I may be in the camp that believes Chia has done well from where he started, but I think that even the strongest of supporters have to be able to understand where WG and LT are coming from. Certainly, disdain for their opinions is not productive.

    Everyone is happy with the results last year, but they do not mean we will be perennial contenders. WG accurately points to our lack of support for McDavid as a team weakness that Hall would have helped. Now, I don’t think Larsson would be available for draft picks, but LT and WG may be right that a Hamonic/Demers may have been enough with that forward group. Regardless, we’re all just guessing for fun!

    I hope Chia finds a way to spread out the scoring and contracts to allow us more than one shot at Stan, but we won’t know until all the fun is over, so let’s enjoy it while it’s here.

  81. DaveWatchesHockey says:

    Woodguy v2.0:
    Significant losses: Mathew Barzal, Mitchell Stephens.

    I understand why you mention Barzal and Stephens as those were the two players taken with those two picks.

    As per Stauffer the Oilers had Eriksson-Ek on their list for 16 and Brandon Carlo at 33.

    So in an alternate universe where Peter still makes the trades I liked, but not the trades I didn’t like, and he trades Nurse for Hamonic (deal was on the table as per Friedman) the roster would be:

    Maroon-McDavid-Sleppy
    Hall-RNH-Eberle
    Eriksson-Ek – Draisaitl-Puljujarvi
    Khaira-Letestu-Kassian

    Klefbom-Hamonic
    Sekera-Benning
    Davidson-Carlo

    Talbot
    Brossoit

    One thought I have on this:

    Does Benning come here with Carlo in the org? We know that depth factors into these college kids desicion making. We don’t know how close the choice was and this could have tipped it.

    Obviously it’s part of the issue with looking back on things we would have done differently – just can’t say for certain how it would have turned out.

    Either way I believe the Benning add was a good (partial) save of situation made crappy by the Reinhardt trade.

    Dave

  82. Georges says:

    1. Who are Matthew Barzal and Mitchell Stephens? Are they small forwards? Did the 2015-16 Oilers need more small forwards?

    2. Why, if Brandon Carlo was so obvious, did Boston decline to take him with any of their three earlier picks? Why have their three earlier first round picks yet to play a game in the NHL?

    3. How much of a threat did Jordan Eberle pose to the Ducks and the Sharks in the playoffs? Did he represent more opportunity than threat?

    4. Would trading Larsson (1RD) for Hall (2LW) represent a massive loss in value for the 2017-18 Oilers?

    5. After we win that one Cup, are we selling CMD to the LA Kings? Is that part of PC’s plan? Is that why we don’t get any more Cups?

  83. Georges says:

    This is a Cry ‘Havoc’ and let slip the dogs of war post. Props to all the dogs who have shown up. The overall list of significant losses and significant gains. It’s an optical illusion, right? Like the Young Girl-Old Woman picture?

  84. Georges says:

    Woodguy v2.0:
    Johnny,

    If a GM trades Hall, Eberle, Eriksson-Ek, Carlo and Davidson and all that is on the roster in 17/18 in return are Larsson and Strome then “pissing away value with a fire hose” is a pretty apt description.

    I surprised how many fans consider “almost making it to the 3rd round of the playoffs” as a finish line with the best player in the NHL on the roster.

    You’re way too hard on the team. We would’ve made it to the 3rd round if the best player in the NHL played as such. The team played well. CMD will obviously play better.

  85. Johnny Larue says:

    Georges: best

    Georges:
    1. Who are Matthew Barzal and Mitchell Stephens? Are they small forwards? Did the 2015-16 Oilers need more small forwards?

    2. Why, if Brandon Carlo was so obvious, did Boston decline to take him with any of their three earlier picks? Why have their three earlier first round picks yet to play a game in the NHL?

    3. How much of a threat did Jordan Eberle pose to the Ducks and the Sharks in the playoffs? Did he represent more opportunity than threat?

    4. Would trading Larsson (1RD) for Hall (2LW) represent a massive loss in value for the 2017-18 Oilers?

    We
    5. After we win that one Cup, are we selling CMD to the LA Kings? Is that part of PC’s plan? Is that why we don’t get any more Cups?

    Life doesn’t happen in a vacuum. We have the best player in hockey (my opinion) locked up for 8 years and a young team with the majority of players returning with no gaping holes and we want to come up with fantasy teams to prove I don’t know what.

    George your take on things is greatly appreciated always look forward to your posts.

  86. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    Georges:

    4. Would trading Larsson (1RD) for Hall (2LW) represent a massive loss in value for the 2017-18 Oilers?

    – This is a great post George IMO.

    – You are better at taking a combo of stats and good intuition to argue your point than I am

    – Hall was not a good LW for CmD. Maroon at sub $2MM = way better.

    – We would rightly freak/be pooched if we traded our #1 RHD for Hall. We already have a great winger for CmD that is cheap. We would be screwed if we replaced Larsson for”more goals”

  87. Thinker says:

    Anything can happen in the playoffs. The oilers were playing with house money from game 1. Could have easily been knocked by the sharks. Does anybody really think ottawa is a perenial contender? Last years team was a couple key injuries away from missing entirely. We got hot at the right time, hopefully that carries over, but no guarantees. As it stands we are betting on medicre players to turn a corner (strome, slepyshev, caggiula). I have no idea how people are writing us as cup favorites.

  88. defmn says:

    It seems to me that in the past it was common knowledge around here that it was difficult to win trades – or acquire good free agents – because we were bottom feeders in the league.

    From that perspective I think it is important to credit Chiarelli with raising the value of all the team members because that stigma is no longer applicable so when assessing player value per trade you have to factor in increased value for the remaining roster as part of the individual trades that led to collective success.

    Other than that I pretty much agree with Bag of Pucks.

    And you couldn’t get Larrson for Hall this summer imo. Two players trending in different directions. Injuries are a thing.

  89. maudite says:

    This thread feels like 2006-2007 when the cracks were showing and people tried to badger or bully anytime you started questioning Lowe.

    Value is value. In a cap world you can’t keep losing value. Most importantly in a cap world you need a feeder tube full of prospects ready to cheaply slide in or you are likely going to never get to the top.

    LT, I think the organization (by proxy Chia) deserves more credit for their work in the college FA market.

  90. Scungilli Slushy says:

    frjohnk:
    If we are looking at a team that has a chance to win multiple Cups, it pains me to say but Toronto is the one Id rate higher than Edmonton.

    While I hope we win at least one Cup, I wouldn’t be surprised we don’t win any during McDavids tenure here.

    I take the Oilers best 5 players over the Laughs. They have some nice things though.

  91. Yegfoundation says:

    Woodguy welcome back! I’ve learned a lot about analytics the last 5 years here on this blog and I enjoy the conversation.

    Woodguy it is reasonable to explain the hall and eberle trades by the following.

    – Coach and GM identified the players were not supporting the team system, and as a result, would be traded. You are a successful business owner and know the value of a cohesive team

    – Tbe players acquired in the trades were good fits for the roster and provided the required cap relief.

  92. Scungilli Slushy says:

    There isn’t one way to win Cups. The last three winners are all different except in that they have a core of dominant top level players, still those cores differ.

    The Oilers have a generational and two very good very young forwards, a good group of skilled forwards after that.

    They currently have a n excellent goalie, and have in a few years stocked the system with multiple quality goaler prospects from nothing.

    They have a big minutes top comp defensive anchor right side which is hardest to fill and a great developing guy right behind him and replenished the system there.

    They have quality and youth on the left side D, and two good vets.

    I don’t see any other team as well set, they only need to augment as all of the pieces for the future are in place.

  93. Scungilli Slushy says:

    It isn’t easy to dump cap and replace quality on par. The undeniable fact is that cap has to be cleared, and the best reg season team and Cup champs had to gut themselves this summer.

    The key is to get key support players in place at the right price and have a good system developing replacements. Quality effective players are lifeblood. The unsexy type as Chiarelli calls them are the most important as I see it.

    Everyone can see the flashy players and high scorers and they get paid. IMO very few defenseman had better years overall than Larsson and he cost half than the others. They need forwards like that and D, so that they can keep a roster that is more stable which aids winning along with good fortune.

  94. Lowetide says:

    maudite:
    This thread feels like 2006-2007 when the cracks were showing and people tried to badger or bully anytime you started questioning Lowe.

    Value is value.In a cap world you can’t keep losing value.Most importantly in a cap world you need a feeder tube full of prospects ready to cheaply slide in or you are likely going to never get to the top.

    LT, I think the organization (by proxy Chia) deserves more credit for their work in the college FA market.

    Oilers absolutely had a tremendous summer in 2016 signing college free agents.

  95. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    As much as buy low sell high and other stock market adages apply the running of an NHL team isn’t like a portfolio.

    You CAN lose value in the individual trade but improve the team.

    That’s not possible in the stock market. I think that’s where posters like Kinger and others are having trouble seeing the perspective of folks like Woodguy and me.

    I’ve been a huge fan of Larsson as a buy low candidate for years. Just a couple of years ago he was being made a healthy scratch by DeBoer and even sent to the AHL.

    That’s why he was signed to such a cheap deal by Jersey.

    What Chia did was not buying low. It was buying high. Hall was a top 3 left winger in the NHL behind Benn and Ovechkin at the time and he was coveted by a number of teams. All you have to do is look at the shock expressed by the hockey universe and comments from other GMs that they would have offered more for Hall to know that the value of the deal at the time was a major loss for Chia.

    But and I said that day the trade was made, Larsson is going to surprise some folks. I also said to give him time. He changed countries, teams, systems, defense partners, conferences, everything. It’s going to take him time.

    He will be even better this year, as he will be comfortable and locked in. And the trade and team will continue to look better.

    All that can be true while also admitting that the value at the time the deal was made was poor for the Oilers. Everyone asked what else was coming with Larsson. Zacha? A 1St?
    Nothing.

    Shero saw desperation in Chia and held firm for a straight one for one with Hall or bust. He sold HIGH on Larsson, getting the Oilers’ most valuable non McDavid chip at the time (Drai hadn’t taken that next step quite yet).

    Again, huge fan of Larsson. Always have been. And a lot of these same folks saying Hall sucks and Larsson is better were the same people telling me I was crazy when I said I’d trade Yak for Larsson in 2013-2014.

    This isn’t the stock market. You can lose the value in a trade but make the team better.

    The problem is if you do too many of those you run out of higher value assets to trade. Everything changed because of McDavid and I would argue that having him covers up for a lot of mistakes like the Reinhart deal where we can say 2015 was a grand slam no matter what.

  96. defmn says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker),

    The stock market is and always has been the wrong analogy. This was a business transaction and in business timing is everything. Chiarelli knew that Lucic would sign in Edmonton. To me it is ludicrous to suggest otherwise. He had Lucic’s word if not his signature.

    So he had Hall’s replacement in place if he made the move before free agency. Both Lucic and Hall could not be making $6 mil to play LW.

    Chiarelli traded Hall for Lucic and Larsson. Any businessman will tell you that is what the trade was and that is a value trade for Edmonton. Those who claim otherwise are simply refusing to connect the dots for their own reasons. It’s the kind of decision businessmen make all the time.

  97. maudite says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker),

    I wanted Larsson when he likely would have cost you Yak.

    I wanted Simmonds and Couterier when they likely would have cost you Eberle and Shultz.

    (Note these were actually plausible deals after the shortened season and I was dismissed when I brought them up…I think that’s probably about the point I stopped posting here very often)

    Woodguy,

    I’ve really been enjoying your perspective and the way you have integrated the statistics into your posts the last couple years. Feels like we really are starting to fully round a newer corner in how these conversations are conducted with the statistics embedded in it.

  98. treevojo says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker):
    As much as buy low sell high and other stock market adages apply the running of an NHL team isn’t like a portfolio.

    You CAN lose value in the individual trade but improve the team.

    That’s not possible in the stock market. I think that’s where posters like Kinger and others are having trouble seeing the perspective of folks like Woodguy and me.

    I’ve been a huge fan of Larsson as a buy low candidate for years. Just a couple of years ago he was being made a healthy scratch by DeBoer and even sent to the AHL.

    That’s why he was signed to such a cheap deal by Jersey.

    What Chia did was not buying low. It was buying high. Hall was a top 3 left winger in the NHL behind Benn and Ovechkin at the time and he was coveted by a number of teams. All you have to do is look at the shock expressed by the hockey universe and comments from other GMs that they would have offered more for Hall to know that the value of the deal at the time was a major loss for Chia.

    But and I said that day the trade was made, Larsson is going to surprise some folks. I also said to give him time. He changed countries, teams, systems, defense partners, conferences, everything. It’s going to take him time.

    He will be even better this year, as he will be comfortable and locked in. And the trade and team will continue to look better.

    All that can be true while also admitting that the value at the time the deal was made was poor for the Oilers. Everyone asked what else was coming with Larsson. Zacha? A 1St?
    Nothing.

    Shero saw desperation in Chia and held firm for a straight one for one with Hall or bust. He sold HIGH on Larsson, getting the Oilers’ most valuable non McDavid chip at the time (Drai hadn’t taken that next step quite yet).

    Again, huge fan of Larsson. Always have been. And a lot of these same folks saying Hall sucks and Larsson is better were the same people telling me I was crazy when I said I’d trade Yak for Larsson in 2013-2014.

    This isn’t the stock market. You can lose the value in a trade but make the team better.

    The problem is if you do too many of those you run out of higher value assets to trade. Everything changed because of McDavid and I would argue that having him covers up for a lot of mistakes like the Reinhart deal where we can say 2015 was a grand slam no matter what.

    Which GM’s?

    Do you have any links?

  99. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    defmn,

    I don’t think there is anyone debating that Chia knew Lucic was coming.

    Where we disagree is this: Hall goes, fine. I understand that. What comes back, however is the value coming back REGARDLESS of Lucic signing.

    They are, in fact, two separate transactions. Lucic +Larsson is better than a just Hall. No doubt.

    But it is not better than Lucic + Larsson + another asset to make up for the value difference between Hall and Larsson.

    I would say to suggest otherwise is ludicrous but I don’t want to paint people with brushes that border on extreme generalizations.

  100. Jaxon says:

    I’m not sure why Oilersnation isn’t letting me comment. I tried posting on your Nuge destination article. No go. I had a comment all ready to post, but it doesn’t show up. So I’m going to post it here. It is somewhat related.

    NUGE DESTINATIONS:

    Targets with some term left on a value contract (in order of preference):
    PHI: RD Radko Gudas $3.35M x 3yrs – wow, that is a value contract!
    MTL: RW Brendan Gallagher $3.75M x 4yrs – shoots, shoots, shoots, gritty, pesky, Edmonton-born.
    MIN: CRW Charlie Coyle $3.20M x 3yrs – big, versatile, Massachusetts kid, so Chiarelli is probably quite familiar.
    CBJ: RD David Savard $4.25M x 4yrs – would be a great addition to the right side.
    PIT: LW Carl Hagelin $4.00M x 2yrs – so much speed to keep up with McDavid.

    Not quite a fit for timing:
    CBJ: LW/C Boone Jenner $2.90M x 1yr – no term, but he’s a versatile player with speed, who shoots a lot and scores, too. If the trade happens in the summer, it won’t be Jenner. If they were allowed to talk to him about salary before a trade and it happened now, hmmmm…maybe? Maybe a rental not involving Nugent-Hopkins, but I doubt CBJ has a terrible year. I think they’ll be competitive.

    Others to consider: Anders Lee, Brock Nelson, Jacob Silfverberg, Jacob Trouba (is there any animosity left over between club and player to exploit?), Carolina has Victor Rask, Justin Faulk, Brett Pesce, and Trevor Van Riemsdyk so they may have some interesting matches.

    NOT NUGE, but possible deadline rentals:
    Interesting players to watch at the deadline if they haven’t re-signed as rental players (not involving Nugent-Hopkins of course) that could possibly be signed next summer before free agency.

    VAN: RD Erik Gudbranson $3.50M x 1yr – you can pretty much guarantee VAN will be sellers and Gudbranson’s most recent contract doesn’t scream “I wanna stay!” He’d be a good fit if he signs in the $4.16M range as #2RD.

    BUF: LW Evander Kane $5.25M x 1yr – I know, BUF shouldn’t be nearly as bad next season, so they won’t be sellers, but you never know with BUF. His next contract will be hella-expensive, though, so would kinda defeat the purpose. Warts and all, it could still be pretty special to see Kane on McDavid’s wing. He’s fast, big, gritty, and an elite sniper.

  101. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    treevojo: Which GM’s?

    Do you have any links?

    Trying to dig it up now. Of course no GM named himself.
    There was a tweet from Friedman or someone saying a GM said he would have given a top 4D and a couple of other assets.

    Also this article by Friedman shows how Shero read Chia like a book and stayed firm until Chia caved.

    http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/23-minutes-shook-hockey-world/

    Where I do defend Chia is Larsson as the target. I think that was a better choice than Shattenkirk or Barrie.

    I am having trouble finding the link to the quote. It does exist. Please be patient.

  102. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    maudite,

    – There are some “big breakfast” comments in this thread. I hope we get to explore more before the season starts. I enjoy these tangents.

    – NYC is out to lunch if he thinks I equate hockey trades to the stock trades. But he’s a former trader so he doesn’t know better. Its a portfolio: not a bunch of stock trades

    – DEFMN: I think you are spot on.

    – Anyway I’m a day late here, but I love these threads.

  103. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux,

    Ha ha ha. Okay. I’m also a former PM, but I don’t know any better. Sure.

  104. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux,

    Building a more balanced portfolio does not absolve you from blame if you sell an asset for below market value.

    You have 4 energy stocks (scoring wingers)
    You lack healthcare stocks (good D-men).

    Sending out one of your energy stocks for a healthcare stock while buying a different energy stock is fine. But if your energy stock is worth $50 in the market and you sell it for $40 because the healthcare stock is worth $40 then you’re still failing at your job. Sell it for a $40 and a $10.

    Possible to lose the trade but make the team better is what I have said all along.

    You suggest that it doesn’t work that way–that the team being better is proof that the trade was not a loss. Am I wrong in saying that’s your stance?

  105. treevojo says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker): Trying to dig it up now. Of course no GM named himself.
    There was a tweet from Friedman or someone saying a GM said he would have given a top 4D and a couple of other assets.

    Also this article by Friedman shows how Shero read Chia like a book and stayed firm until Chia caved.

    http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/23-minutes-shook-hockey-world/

    Where I do defend Chia is Larsson as the target. I think that was a better choice than Shattenkirk or Barrie.

    I am having trouble finding the link to the quote. It does exist. Please be patient.

    It’s ok if you don’t find it.

    I seem to remember something similar being referenced by an anonymous gm at the time.

    I equate that kind of talk by gms with the “we had him ranked in the first round and got him in the third” kind of talk.

    Just because one gm values his assets higher then the perceived return in a trade he wasn’t involved in doesn’t mean that the trading gm values those assets the same.

    I was hoping you had a link to a specific gm so at least we could try to connect the dots.

  106. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker):
    Kinger_Oil.redux,

    Ha ha ha. Okay. I’m also a former PM, but I don’t know any better. Sure.

    – You sat on global equity desks, was my recollection. Certainly you weren’t managing clients money” firm capital sure.

    – Anyway, to suggest that I naively equate trades in hockey to the stock market, when I’ve been meticulous over the years to try to frame Chia’s moves to those of a portfolio manager who is trying to change the performance attributes of his team I think is unfair.

    – But one of the things I enjoy is this narrative about Chia losing trades and team improving

  107. treevojo says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker):
    Kinger_Oil.redux,

    Ha ha ha. Okay. I’m also a former PM, but I don’t know any better. Sure.

    And now you make portfolios.

    So currently you are an MP?

  108. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux: – You sat on global equity desks, was my recollection.Certainly you weren’t managing clients money” firm capital sure.

    – Anyway, to suggest that I naively equate trades in hockey to the stock market, when I’ve been meticulous over the years to try to frame Chia’s moves to those of a portfolio manager who is trying to change the performance attributes of his team I think is unfair.

    – But one of the things I enjoy is this narrative about Chia losing trades and team improving

    I also worked buy side for a notable asset manager as a PM and did the same for a smaller hedge fund. I don’t talk about all the things I did.

    I didn’t mean to portray you as naive. I apologize for that as I wasn’t trying to insult you the way you did me.

    Can we call it even?

  109. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    treevojo: And now you make portfolios.

    So currently you are an MP?

    Took me a second to get that. Well played, sir. I’m having a hard time finding the quote where one of the more reliable reporters quoted a GM as saying he would have offered at Top 4D a 1St and something else for Hall.

  110. jm363561 says:

    Wow. Good morning from Manila. You could debate the civility but this has been a fantastic thread. Interesting question for LT and WG – would you trade Larsson back to NJ today for Hall if given the chance?

  111. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    treevojo: It’s ok if you don’t find it.

    I seem to remember something similar being referenced by an anonymous gm at the time.

    I equate that kind of talk by gms with the “we had him ranked in the first round and got him in the third” kind of talk.

    Just because one gm values his assets higher then the perceived return in a trade he wasn’t involved in doesn’t mean that the trading gm values those assets the same.

    I was hoping you had a link to a specific gm so at least we could try to connect the dots.

    I hear you, and I don’t recall any named GM saying he had that offer on the table.

    Chia got his guy. And Shero knew Larsson was his guy and waited him out and, in my opinion, “won the deal” but Chia made his team better because of the balance.

    That’s all I’ve been trying to say. Lose the deal, win the balance and improve the team.

  112. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker),

    – how did I insult you? I’ve don’t insult people knowingly.

    – I disagree with the narrative that Chia pisses away value when making trades. This is a topic of great interest to me and worthy of further discussion.

  113. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux:
    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker),

    – how did I insult you?I’ve don’t insult people knowingly.

    – I disagree with the narrative that Chia pisses away value when making trades. Thisis a topicof great interest to me and worthy of further discussion.

    There was at least the implication of being dumb: former trader who doesn’t know any better. Thinly veiled insult? Better?

    Anyway, let’s move past that.

    So yes, we disagree on this point.

    Lost the value trade, but made the team more balanced.
    You live in the bitter winter of Toronto. You have two cars:
    A formula one car (McDavid)
    A 911 GT3 (Hall)

    You have no car to handle the icy streets.
    So you trade your GT3 in straight up for a Range Rover.

    Your garage is better balanced now. Your F1 car is dynamite but now you can also handle winter in comfort.

    You lost value in the GT3 for Range Rover swap but your driving life is better in all situations.

  114. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    Some of the gaps we have might come down to how much intangible value we can put on the 1.8m difference in cap space between the two assets. Is that enough to cover the difference?

    My belief is no. And I would have told Shero it’s Eberle+ for Larsson (Jersey says no) or it’s Larsson + for Hall. And waited. Maybe Chia did that and he blinked first because Shero knew Lucic was signing there and so Chia would have to move one of the Austins.

    If Chia is an average GM at trades then Shero is better than average at trades.

  115. treevojo says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker):
    Some of the gaps we have might come down to how much intangible value we can put on the 1.8m difference in cap space between the two assets. Is that enough to cover the difference?

    My belief is no. And I would have told Shero it’s Eberle+ for Larsson (Jersey says no) or it’s Larsson + for Hall. And waited. Maybe Chia did that and he blinked first because Shero knew Lucic was signing there and so Chia would have to move one of the Austins.

    If Chia is an average GM at trades then Shero is better than a
    average at trades.

    I thought Shero made out well with his trade with Washington this summer.

  116. treevojo says:

    Actually if I were to grade I would say Washington had the worst offseason followed by Chicago with a close second.

    The power is shifting in both conferences.

  117. Georges says:

    LT: The weights and measures available to us via analytics suggest Chiarelli lost the Hall-Larsson trade in a major way.

    Georges: You make a trade based on what you project to get and give up in the future. We’re one year into the future of this trade. Larsson is our 1RD. Taylor Hall is the 20th highest scoring LW in the league on points, 15th highest scoring LW in P/GP. I can’t figure out which weights and measures you’re using. And, if you’re this confident, please please tell me what happens when you put a defenseman in one scale and a forward in the other? How does it work?

    NYC: You CAN lose value in the individual trade but improve the team.

    Georges: PC subtracted Hall from the team. He lost value. PC added Larsson to the team. He added value. You say the team improved. So the value added is greater than the value lost. That, I get. How do you lose value and improve the team?

    EDIT: NYC, reading your reply to Kinger. Give me a bit to digest.

  118. Georges says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker): There was at least the implication of being dumb: former trader who doesn’t know any better. Thinly veiled insult?Better?

    Anyway, let’s move past that.

    So yes, we disagree on this point.

    Lost the value trade, but made the team more balanced.
    You live in the bitter winter of Toronto. You have two cars:
    A formula one car (McDavid)
    A 911 GT3 (Hall)

    You have no car to handle the icy streets.
    So you trade your GT3 in straight up for a Range Rover.

    Your garage is better balanced now. Your F1 car is dynamite but now you can also handle winter in comfort.

    You lost value in the GT3 for Range Rover swap but your driving life is better in all situations.

    If I’m reading this correctly, you have two ways to assign value here: market price and utility. You’re saying PC lost the trade in terms of market price but won on utility. So I guess your perspective on win/loss depends on whether you weight the buy low, sell high principle over the increase utility principle. You believe it’s possible to increase utility and still lose the trade because you think prices matter. I don’t think it’s possible because I think utility is all that matters. Whenever you increase utility, you win. You can fault PC for not increasing utility more than he did. But that’s missing a bigger win; that’s not the same as losing.

    Also, the GT3 had a few miles on it and doesn’t run like it used to. It’s often in the shop. And you didn’t trade it for a Range Rover. That vehicle has very low customer satisfaction.

  119. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    Georges,

    Land Rover Defender then. My point wasn’t about the reliability of Larsson.

    And yes, I figured you would arrive at marginal utility as the explanation of value.

    And that’s one interpretation of value. You’re seeing it from the perspective of more valuable to this current team.

    But we are talking about the trades themselves. At least that’s what LT’s post is entitled.

    In that case with respect to the trade Chia did not get enough value back for Hall. However for the team’s marginal value a solid top 4 RHD on a bargain contract was more valuable than a number 1 LW.

    I’ve never argued otherwise. We just define value differently. Doesn’t make me wrong, though, for seeing it that way. Just like it doesn’t make you wrong for focusing purely on marginal value to the team rather than the value of the pieces traded, if in a vacuum.

  120. Georges says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker):

    If Chia is an average GM at trades then Shero is better than average at trades.

    By trading Larsson for Hall, Shero brought circa 2010-11 Oilers sexy back to NJ. He’s got his first 1OV pick. Only thing he doesn’t have is circa 2010-11 Hall.

  121. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    Georges: By trading Larsson for Hall, Shero brought circa 2010-11 Oilers sexy back to NJ. He’s got his first 1OV pick. Only thing he doesn’t have is circa 2010-11 Hall.

    Sexy? Taylor Hall? I don’t swing that way but judging by the ladies’ opinions if he wanted sexy he would have traded for Klefbom? Or Souray?

    Circa 2010-2011 Hall was worth way more than Larsson. No doubt Chia made the move in part because he was 60-pt, injury prone Hall rather than PPG + Hall.

  122. Georges says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker),

    So, in your opinion, did PC A) lose the trade or B) win the trade but missed out on a bigger win.

    Curious on your position after reading your posts this evening.

  123. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    With respect to mano a mano vs. Shero, player value lost the trade.

    With respect to improving the team he accomplished that, but he missed out on a bigger win.

    What I am also saying is having McDavid means you can lose the market value battle in a trade because you’re improving the balance on the team. But you don’t want to do that too often because you are expending your best value chips.

    We as fans hang onto those valuable chips for longer because we suffered for ten years. It’s hard to let go of that or see that a 1st overall isn’t worth more than a 3rd. Or that a 25 goal 55-65 point winger isn’t worth more than a 45 point winger who isn’t really physical despite his size either.

    And we will go through the same with Nuge when he goes.

    By your argument there is no way to disprove your stance unless the team is worse, and even then it might be due to Talbot being a little worse or something else.

    So I can’t disprove your position and I am not trying to. What I am positing is this: taken to an absurd extreme:

    You have 6 McDavids skating. No goalie. You trade one McDavid to acquire Anders Nilsson.

    The team improves in the standings because not every shot on goal against is a goal against.

    Yes. Absurd. But that’s basically where the disconnect is.

    IMO Hall was worth more than Larsson at the time of the trade but both teams addressed areas of need and so they both got marginal value from the deal.

    I would have preferred someone with a more all around game than Larsson coming back but I have always loved Larsson. If Larsson was coming back I would have also expected an additional significant asset, given his on ice results at that time did not suggest he was living up to his top pair potential.

    Larsson + 1st
    Larsson + Zacha for Hall + 3rd?

    Something like that.

  124. NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker) says:

    By the way I am wrong much of the time.
    I thought Nuge would be a 25-45-70 type player with good defensive acumen. I was enamored with those damn edges.

    I thought Yak, if he learned from the Brett Hull tapes could be a 35 goal guy from 3/4 swing one-timers but he never learned to take a little bit off the shot for accuracy and maybe didn’t ever learn to find the open seams.

    I’m often wrong.

    Larsson though I wasn’t wrong on. Liked him even in the dog days as I watched on MSG+ network in New York.

    Not saying I’m an eye test guy. But it’s helpful in projecting what someone might become. The flashes, the tool kit. Even when the stats are looking rough.

  125. Georges says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker),

    I’m also wrong most of the time. But I can’t hold a candle to Chachi. He’s wrong about everything.

    It’s been fun, NYC. Good night or good day to you, wherever the sky finds you at this moment.

  126. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    Georges,

    – Fun to read this exchange! I go back to your original point: we would be in trouble if we traded our #1RHD for a #2LW, an increased our salary by $1.8MM

    – My query was along the lines of” I can’t reconcile the notion that Chia does bad trades yet the team improves so much”.

    – I’m not as sure as LT or NYC or others that we lose all these trades: what measure are we using to conclude this?

    – Sure if Chia does only Griff for 2 high drafts he’s going to blow up, but if he does only Maroon or Talbot trades he’s going to be the GM of the decade

  127. Georges says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux:
    Georges,

    – Fun to read this exchange!I go back to your original point: we would be in trouble if we traded our #1RHD for a #2LW, an increased our salary by $1.8MM

    – My query was along the lines of” I can’t reconcile the notion that Chia does bad trades yet the team improves so much”.

    – I’m not as sure as LT or NYC or others that we lose all these trades: what measure are we using to conclude this?

    – Sure if Chia does only Griff for 2 high drafts he’s going to blow up, but if he does only Maroon or Talbot trades he’s going to be the GM of the decade

    Maybe it’s deals he did in BOS. Maybe it’s his clear lack of love for our Austins. The talk of we can’t keep pissing away value and losing June deals… It feels like the endowment effect. The talk of analytics being clear on this in the direction LT cites is just head scratching. I like to think I’m capable of recognizing when data clearly favors a specific conclusion. Looking at the numbers, I’m much closer to the opposite conclusion, that PC won the trade for his team and Shero lost the trade for his. But, either way, life goes on.

  128. Chachi says:

    Georges:
    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker),

    I’m also wrong most of the time. But I can’t hold a candle to Chachi. He’s wrong about everything.

    It’s who I am. 🙂

  129. defmn says:

    NYC-Back-to-Tokyo Oil (Gentleman Backpacker),

    Sorry but I totally disagree that Larsson and Lucic were two separate transactions. That is like saying the rook sacrifice was not connected to the knight’s checkmate two moves later.

    Lucic and Larsson for Hall. That was the transaction that Chiarelli made.

Leave a Reply

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