OMARK TO ZUG

Linus Omark tweeted a couple of hours ago that he’s off to Zug of the Swiss League.

Zug is a German speaking city in Switzlerland. We were JUST talking about this in the previous thread! The name ‘Zug’ comes from the middle ages, apparently meaning right to fish and right to pull up fish nets. Typical German word, economy and that guttural sound.  The French and Italians may know about love, wine and poetry, but the Germans get their point across.

The city’s name is pronounced “Z-oh-G” according to Wikipedia. 26,045 people live in Zug, or about half the size of St. Albert. The Zug hockey club won a championship in the late 90′s and Jussi Markkanen played for the team in 09-10. He’s listed on their current Wiki roster along with a few former NHL fringe players. They play their games in the very nice Bossard Arena.

Best of luck, Linus Omark.  I sincerely hope you get the opportunity to fulfill your dream of playing in the NHL.

Update: Martin Lundén of Swedish Oil has more on the story here. Martin also tells us the Oilers own his rights for two more seasons.

written by

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

68 Responses to "OMARK TO ZUG"

  1. ehuisman says:

    Markkanen plays for Zug this year as well, it’s not just the Wikipedia roster.

  2. bookje says:

    Somebody hates Linus.

  3. spoiler says:

    Smart move by Linus to get paid in CHF rather than EUR. He’s a tweener and was having difficulty finding a role in the NHL, so I don’t really see why he’d stick around in the A, and pray for cups of Joe.

    Not to mention, Oil may have been forced to threaten Omark with Stockton while the NHL lies in the gutter comatose from lawyers arguing.

  4. hunter1909 says:

    Omark’s highly developed sense of entitlement = doesn’t compute well in a foreign environment.

    Toffee nosed English actors leave their glorious roots behind, then go to Hollywood playing nothing but butlers.

    Same diff.

  5. PhrankLee says:

    Hmm. Smallish forward who is soft on the puck… Get rid of him entirely. Bag o’ pucks. When we look at the system we need to address roles that need filling. Do we need a dazzling shootout specialist who cannot win a battle along the boards? Do we need a one way player who back checks like Yashin? Do we need an unproven kid with a chip on his shoulder that takes swipes at his team on every social media device at his fingertips? For me from the very start this guy has been a waste of resources.

  6. bookje says:

    PhrankLee:
    Hmm. Smallish forward who is soft on the puck…

    Labeling Omark as soft on the puck suggests that you don’t actually watch the games. Omark has some clear weaknesses, but being soft on the puck is not even close to being one of them.

  7. justDOit says:

    bookje,

    You beat me to it, bookje – watching Omark turn his back and shoulder off NHL defensemen was a surprise to me. Seeing him do it in Europe was one thing, but I didn’t think that trick would work over here. If he had had more support out there from his linemates, I still think he could have been a useful player, in the right circumstance. But the embarrassment of riches that the Oilers possess in young, talented forwards was a hurdle too high for even a youtube sensation like Omark.

    I think Spoiler nailed it – with a lockout looming, Omark would have likely been bumped out of OKC, even though he had talked to a European news outlet about playing in the AHL and wait out his opportunity. I would rather make decent money playing in Switzerland vs playing in Stockton too.

    So with Omark scoring at 1.0 ppg in the AHL, he should put up some good numbers in the NL A Swiss league. The leading scorer for the 09/10 season (most recent I could find), was Randy Robitaille, who put up 65 points in 50 games. Good luck Cunning Linus! Hope you score in bunches this season.

  8. justDOit says:

    And what is all this about O! ripping the OIlers organization every chance he got? I remember his statements after he was sent down last season, and they were to be expected. The guy is driven and didn’t want to ride the bus after a pretty good showing the year before. In fact, I remember reading an interview with him afterwards and he said that the demotion was probably the right thing to do, and he set about working his butt off down there, before his ankle injury, and became a gym rat during his recovery from that injury.

  9. loosemoose says:

    I don’t get the hate for Omark. Guy had hustle and hands. With some better linemates, he could have stuck. Either way, is he not what everyone but coaches should want? Works his ass off on the forecheck and in the offensive zone retrieving pucks, always looks for the creative, all-offense play, and just marginally backchecks, and has lackluster defensive zone coverage, helping the other team with their chance……offense all around!

    I guess everybody wants everyone to be two way players now a days…..

  10. Ribs says:

    justDOit: In fact, I remember reading an interview with him afterwards and he said that the demotion was probably the right thing to do….

    I think you might be confusing Linus with Magnus.

  11. oilersfan says:

    I wonder why he didnt go to the KHL wouldnt the moiney be better there?

    Maybe he doesnt like the planes

  12. Moosemess says:

    Let us toast and raise a mug
    To youtube’s most popular pug
    He was quick with his feet
    But an offensive tweet
    Punched Omark’s ticket to Zug

  13. justDOit says:

    Ribs,

    Pretty sure it was the same article that told of his gym-rattiness during recovery from his ankle injury, but don’t have time to look for it now. Not that I never make mistakes…

  14. PhrankLee says:

    bookje,

    I guess you mean he isn’t soft on the puck for a guy his size. Crafty and slippery are different from rugged and powerful. The guy is all of 175 lbs. Not his fault. An shortish isomorph in a mesomorph game. Almost everyone he came in physical contact with pushed him off the puck. I did watch the games. We took him when we thought the rules would favour agile, speedy wingers. To my mind this never materialized. We ended up with a stable full of Schremps and Omarks. Plus the odd coke machine. My point is if we have his rights we should deal them and get something out of it. We need to show a return on investment with our system and Omark is not going to deliver that. Heart and work ethic and pluckiness and the like are nice. Physics are a big part of this game. Genetics as well. If he was the love child of one of the boys on the bus you can be sure he would have a job for life. He did’nt choose the Zug life, the Zug life choose him.

  15. Moosemess says:

    A Limerick for Lil Linus

    There’s a myth that small men do chatter
    A claim that size does not matter
    The girl’s agree it is so
    But in secret they know
    That a big bat can stir a thick batter

  16. russ99 says:

    PhrankLee,

    Please. The “Zug life” was a direct result of the Oilers brass misusing him, primarily due to the kid doing everything they wanted in 2010-11 including working his way to the NHL from OKC (and he put up decent numbers for a rookie) and then was banished to the press box and the AHL last season due to his headstrong mentality and because Renney had no room for him due to his love of grindy system players who bring nothing else – and not Omark’s perceived lack of hockey skills.

    Dude is not going to get a fair shot from the Oilers, and they don’t want to give up his rights, so this is his best career move.

  17. Undisclosed_Personal_Reasons says:

    PhrankLee:
    bookje,

    Crafty and slippery are different from rugged and powerful.

    Mind=blown.

  18. jake70 says:

    Random thoughts:

    -Not 100% certain but didn’t the Oilers want him over here in 2009-10 and he wanted a guaranteed spot? If true, this may turn out to be his fatal mistake as he would have had a great opportunity with all the MASH admissions that season.

    -Bad asset management.

    -Didn’t help himself with his mouth, whether you agree with him or not.

  19. Suntory Hanzo says:

    Zug in German means Train. So it would be similar to a Lokomotiv type team name.

  20. Jordan says:

    O/T

    Was just over at Down Goes Brown, and if you haven’t read their post about nhl thank you newspaper ads.

    Do yourself a favour and go read it.

    Unless of course you want to be miserable (your choice)

    In which case, I’m sure Art, Tractor and DSF would love the company. ;-)

  21. Szach says:

    Suntory Hanzo,

    Suntory – actually Zug is the name of the town and Lokomotiv is the name of a number of teams in ex Russian states and Russia…. EV is the ZUG team name and the logo is of a bull…

  22. justDOit says:

    Suntory Hanzo,

    Dissimilar in how they travel though – mostly by train. And I’ll bet Swiss trains are kept running like clocks.

  23. Ducey says:

    Suntory Hanzo,

    The town is Zug; the team name is EV.

    I love the periodic Omark discussion: That he is small doesn’t matter. He wasn’t given a fair shot. The Oilers misused him. The Oilers should have done the pump and dump. He could of been a contender. He doesn’t deserve this treatment. Blah, blah, blah.

    As William Munny said to Little Bill; “Deserve’s got nothin to do with it”.

    Bottom line: There is no place for him on this team.

    He is responsible for his own ouster from the league. If he was really interested in playing in the NHL he would have signed a contract (for more than he is getting in Zug), kept his mouth shut, and spent some time on the farm. As the Oilers would have had to waive him, if there was interest from other teams he would get picked up.

    I doubt the Oilers could get a bag of pucks for him. If they could have, they would have.

    He is just another failed prospect. Every team in every sport has them, but as the Oilers are 29th we need to beat them up over theirs. He got his at bats in the show and didn’t do enough to stick. Is he any better than Nilsson, Shremp, or Brule? I don’t think so. All of those guys are playing in Europe, and likely will never play in the NHL again. Neither will Omark.

  24. uni says:

    PhrankLee: Almost everyone he came in physical contact with pushed him off the puck. I did watch the games.

    From that comment I can only conclude that you didn’t watch the games very closely or had selective vision. Omark was extremely difficult to knock off the puck. He was even referred to as Sedin light by more than one commentator for his ability to maintain possession against opposition players regardless of the size discrepancy.

    He had his shortcomings but puck possession and winning one on one battles in the corners was not one of them. Omark is a pitbull on the puck.

  25. Woodguy says:

    In the 14 games he played last year, Omark’s most common linemates last year:

    Potter, Belanger, Whitney, Smyth, Horcov

    I’m suprised Renney didn’t make him play with the wrong handed stick as well.

  26. justDOit says:

    Woodguy,

    Zona suggests it was MPS, Belanger, with Potter, Barker and Sutton on the back end. Not much difference, I guess.

    What really burns my britches is that he could have been given some good linemates, and a chance to put up some numbers, in a bid to get value from him. But crushing Lander’s confidence for 50+ games was more important, seemingly.

  27. hunter1909 says:

    Go back to 2001 and Omark instantly becomes a top six Oiler.

  28. bookje says:

    I enjoy seeing people who level the exact same types of criticisms at Omark, Nilsson, Pääjärvi, and even Schremp despite those four players having entirely different character, build, strengths, weaknesses and style of play.

    My dog does this, watches the game and occasionally barks at players regardless of what they are actually doing. Sometimes I think that he doesn’t actually understand the subtilties of hockey and just randomly barks so that others pay attention to him.

  29. Captain Obvious says:

    Ducey and Phranklee are on another planet. Omark’s best feature is being strong on the puck and he doesn’t have anything in common with Nilson or Schremp.

    Omark never had a chance as an Oiler. He played well in his only extended opportunity and for that was relegated to permanent farmhand.

    And don’t talk to me about how there was no room for him on the roster. Omark wasn’t competing with Eberle and Hall, he was competing with Lennert, freaking, Petrell.

    The fact that the Oilers thinkg Lennert Petrell is a better hockey player than Linus Omark tells you a lot. Any team that thinks Petrell is more useful than Omark deserves to lose. Any person who thinks Petrell is more useful than Omark deserves to be ignored.

  30. Captain Obvious says:

    bookje:
    I enjoy seeing people who level the exact same types of criticisms at Omark, Nilsson, Pääjärvi, and even Schremp despite those four players having entirely different character, build, strengths, weaknesses and style of play.

    My dog does this, watches the game and occasionally barks at players regardless of what they are actually doing.Sometimes I think that he doesn’t actually understand the subtilties of hockey and just randomly barks so that others pay attention to him.

    Quoted for truth.

  31. justDOit says:

    bookje,

    lol!

    Arf (look at Omark), arf arf arf (forgetting his check while he cheats for offense), ARFARFARF (SQUIRREL!).

  32. Moosemess says:

    Captain Obvious:

    And don’t talk to me about how there was no room for him on the roster.Omark wasn’t competing with Eberle and Hall, he was competing with Lennert, freaking, Petrell.

    The fact that the Oilers thinkg Lennert Petrell is a better hockey player than Linus Omark tells you a lot.Any team that thinks Petrell is more useful than Omark deserves to lose.Any person who thinks Petrell is more useful than Omark deserves to be ignored.

    RE: Omark v Petrell.

    Omark as 4th line defensive forward and PKer? I guess I missed that part of his game.

    The problem with the ‘absolutes’ you’re stating is that NHL rosters aren’t fantasy team depth charts. There is an aspect of the ‘right tool for the job’ in roster composition and slotting Omark into a role requiring defensive responsibility would be folly indeed. Lil Linus has shown nothing to make us think we’ve just cut loose the second coming of Mike Peca.

    Hemsky resigning and drafting Yakupov was the one/two punch that effectively scuttled Omark’s chances with the Oil. To stick with this club, he’d have to reinvent himself as a legitimate two way forward without the defensive shortcomings that are so obvious in his game.

    I thought the Sledgehammer showed us nearly everything we needed to know about this player?

    http://lowetide.ca/blog/2012/07/sledgehammer-3.html

  33. Ducey says:

    Captain Obvious: Ducey and Phranklee are on another planet. Omark’s best feature is being strong on the puck and he doesn’t have anything in common with Nilson or Schremp. Omark never had a chance as an Oiler. He played well in his only extended opportunity and for that was relegated to permanent farmhand. And don’t talk to me about how there was no room for him on the roster. Omark wasn’t competing with Eberle and Hall, he was competing with Lennert, freaking, Petrell. The fact that the Oilers thinkg Lennert Petrell is a better hockey player than Linus Omark tells you a lot. Any team that thinks Petrell is more useful than Omark deserves to lose. Any person who thinks Petrell is more useful than Omark deserves to be ignored.

    Good you stopped by. We have had a shortage or personal attacks recently.

    Petrell is likely the 13th forward on a lot of nights. Does Linus then get to sit closer to the ice in the pressbox?

    Further, the criticism of the Oilers is that they didn’t give Little Linus a real shot – that they played him on the 4th line for limited minutes and with poor linemates. Surely you are not sugesting they do that again? This would mean he needs to play in the top 9. I notice you are not alleging he is better than anyone in the Oilers top 9.

    Just to refresh your memory. The top 9 will be Nail, Hall, Ebs, RNH, Gagner, Horcoff, Hemsky, Smyth and one of Jones, Hartikanen or MPS.

    I also notice you have not made any suggestion he could play on anyone elses NHL team. To me this is the clincher. If he is so great, then why aren’t other NHL teams giving him a chance? Why doesn’t someone in the SEL, or Finnish Elite League or KHL give him a shot? He is playing in the Swiss league for cripes sake.

    Its possible the Oilers are wrong. It gets tougher to believe that the whole hockey world is wrong.

  34. justDOit says:

    Ducey,

    According to his agent, he picked the Swiss offer out of many from other leagues, including the KHL. Could have been because of money, or living conditions, or that fact he doesn’t have to ride a Russian airplane on road trips or carry his own EMT personnel and defib jacket.

    The Swiss NLA league has the 2nd most attendance of the Euro leagues, and the atmosphere at every game is kind of like a big party. Their average salary is over 100K in Euros per season, and I think they pay for your housing while you’re there.

    There was also purported interest from other NHL teams as well, but as usual, Tambo’s asking price was too high.

  35. Moosemess says:

    justDOit:
    Ducey,

    There was also purported interest from other NHL teams as well, but as usual, Tambo’s asking price was too high.

    Should it have been anything less than a 4th round pick? If yes, why?

  36. delooper says:

    This is good for Omark. There’s too much talent in front of him on the Oilers roster. I think he can be an effective NHL player but he’s not likely to get there via Edmonton. Too bad because he’s a really fun player to watch. If Edmonton had a 25-year-old Jason Arnott things might be different.

  37. Captain Obvious says:

    Moosemess,

    I disagree in principle. Fourth line defensive forward is not a position in hockey and teams do not need to find the “right tool for the job.” What they need to find is players who score more than they give up. That is all that matters. Petrell is terrible at this. Now Omark, isn’t a star and he may even be below average, but he doesn’t need to be above average, he needs to be above replacement. He needs to contribute more than they guy that replaces him.

    Replacing Omark with Petrell hurts the Oilers goal differential, which is the only thing that matters.

    Ducey,

    I’d be fine with Omark on the fourth line. There is nothing wrong with having good hockey players on your fourth line and then if someone gets hurt or plays poorly you move him up. In fact, I’d dispense with the fiction of numbered lines altogether. The job of every line is the same (to score more than you give up) and I’d use them that way. Guys that play are playing well would get more icetime than guys that weren’t but everyone would have the same job (score and prevent goals).

  38. Moosemess says:

    Captain Obvious:
    Moosemess,

    I disagree in principle.Fourth line defensive forward is not a position in hockey and teams do not need to find the “right tool for the job.”

    Would love to hear a GM using this rationale to explain to a coach why he’s given him no players on the roster suitable for staffing the penalty kill or winning a faceoff.

  39. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Captain Obvious: What they need to find is players who score more than they give up.

    Linus O! (love that short form) played 16 hours of hockey with the Oilers and went -21. So I guess maybe the Oilers didn’t find what they needed to find.

  40. Captain Obvious says:

    Moosemess: Would love to hear a GM using this rationale to explain to a coach why he’s given him no players on the roster suitable for staffing the penalty kill or winning a faceoff.

    What makes you think these are special skills? Ilya Kovalchuk kills penalties without being a “defensive” forward. Center is already a position. You don’t need “guy who wins faceoffs” in addition to needing centers. If you have centers you have guys who win faceoffs. And if they aren’t particularly good at that one skill they need to compensate for it by being good at other things. Which kind of proves my point since in the big scheme of things winning faceoffs isn’t particularly important.

  41. Mr DeBakey says:

    RE: Omark v Petrell.
    Omark as 4th line defensive forward

    That’s interesting as I find Petrell’s play offensive.

    ***
    why aren’t other NHL teams giving him a chance?

    Because they’re busy signing Huselius, Arnott & Doan, silly.

    ***
    I don’t get the personal attacks on Ducey, the man is just doin’ his job. Is that a sin?

  42. Captain Obvious says:

    Bruce McCurdy,

    This is a pretty disingenuous comment. You should know better.

  43. justDOit says:

    Bruce McCurdy,

    I put a shiny new muffler and tailpipe on my ’82 Lada, but it still won’t start. Stupid muffler!

  44. Moosemess says:

    Captain Obvious:
    Moosemess,

    ”What they need to find is players who score more than they give up.That is all that matters. Petrell is terrible at this.

    Where’s the EVIDENCE to support this opinion? The Sledgehammer shows Omark drowning with favourable zone starts AND against lesser competition.

    You’re assuming that because Omark has more offensive skill than Petrell, that somehow makes up for the fact that Lil Linus is an absolute disaster defensively. Omark is not an outscorer despite your strident claims to the contrary.

  45. Bruce McCurdy says:

    I agree with whoever it was who said Omark missed his chance in 2009-10, when he would have been fighting for a job with the likes of Patrick O’Sullivan, Robert Nilsson, and Ryan Potulny. Coming in the next fall at the same time as Hall, Eberle, and Paajarvi — all of them first-round talent, all much younger, and most importantly, all wingers — he never had a prayer. He did show something in the back half of the 2010-11 season, but did he convince you that he’s better than any of those three guys?

    Now there’s Yakupov to seal his fate; he’s everything an optimist might see in Omark, plus a whole lot more.

    Besides, who needs H.O.P.E. when we have H.Y.P.E.?

  46. justDOit says:

    I think claims about Omark’s abilities or Petrell’s, for that matter, are meaningless. Bad teams usually produce bad stats for most players, or at the very least can be misleading.

    What isn’t debatable, is that Omark was given poor linemates, and not much time to do the impossible – create offense with Belanger on the ice (and keep goals out with Potter and Barker as dmen). Oh yeah, and he also had to adjust to a new language and smaller rink while doing this.

    So cunning Linus was yet another player who didn’t fit the mold that the Oilers made for him – see Cole, Oates and others. His AHL production matched Eberle’s, but he did not find himself on a line with Hall, Hemsky, Gagner or RNH for any considerable length of time.

    We’ll have to keep close watch on Zug EV this season, as the story unfolds.

  47. justDOit says:

    Bruce McCurdy,

    I believe I was the first to use O!, but my favorite handle for him is Cunning Linus.

  48. Ducey says:

    justDOit: Ducey, According to his agent, he picked the Swiss offer out of many from other leagues, including the KHL. Could have been because of money, or living conditions, or that fact he doesn’t have to ride a Russian airplane on road trips or carry his own EMT personnel and defib jacket. The Swiss NLA league has the 2nd most attendance of the Euro leagues, and the atmosphere at every game is kind of like a big party. Their average salary is over 100K in Euros per season, and I think they pay for your housing while you’re there. There was also purported interest from other NHL teams as well, but as usual, Tambo’s asking price was too high.

    I may be wrong, but I don’t think the Swiss league is in the same category as the KHL or SEL. If he is trying to make it back to the NHL why doesn’t he bite the bullet and play in the league best able to highlight his skills? Even if he lights it up isn’t your average NHL GM going to say “He’s playing in Zug?”

    And my point still holds about him having to clear waivers. Surely if there is a demand for him he would not clear or would get nabbed on re-entry for 1/2 price?

    Perhaps his agent is dressing the situation up a bit?

  49. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Captain Obvious:
    Bruce McCurdy,

    This is a pretty disingenuous comment.You should know better.

    I’m interested in how you define a player who scores more than he gives up, and especially how Linus Omark meets your definition but Lennart Petrell doesn’t.

    Yes I know +/- is a flawed stat, a team result applied to an individual player that tends to be shy on context, but it is nonetheless a measurement of outscoring (or should I say, getting outscored) which was exactly what you referred to. How is it disingenuous to bring it up in that context?

  50. Bruce McCurdy says:

    justDOit,

    justDOit: I believe I was the first to use O!

    Good one! Although maybe O? would be closer to the, uh, mark.

  51. Captain Obvious says:

    Bruce McCurdy,

    Because, as you yourself point out, it doesn’t measure, even as a rough indication, what it purports to measure. You know this, which is what makes the comment disengenous.

    Further, the point isn’t that Omark is an outscorer (these are pretty rare) but that he is “less bad” than Petrell. Omark doesn’t have to be an outscorer to be useful, he just needs to be better than Petrell (or Hartikainen, or Paajarvi, or Jones).

  52. Lois Lowe says:

    Bruce McCurdy:

    Besides, who needs H.O.P.E. when we have H.Y.P.E.?

    You have been on fire lately Bruce! Well played sir.

  53. art vandelay says:

    Random pile of 175lb Euro fluff, never to be heard from again. Every team’s got one hiding somewhere. Oilers draw a blank on the guy. Just like every other team does once in a while. Put away the cryin’ towels.

  54. Moosemess says:

    Captain Obvious:
    Bruce McCurdy,

    Omark doesn’t have to be an outscorer to be useful, he just needs to be better than Petrell (or Hartikainen, or Paajarvi, or Jones).

    So where’s the data to support the assertion that he is?

  55. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Captain Obvious: Because, as you yourself point out, it doesn’t measure, even as a rough indication, what it purports to measure. You know this, which is what makes the comment disengenous.

    I did not myself point out that it doesn’t give even a rough indication of what it purports to measure. That’s exactly what it gives, a rough indication. I do think it is flawed, I do NOT think it is useless.

    So maybe I don’t “know” what you think I should know, but please don’t put words in my mouth.

    It’s also worth pointing out that while process is important, it is actual results which often take precedence when decisions are made. And Omark’s were poor in a scoring context. He was on the ice for 23 (EV+SH) goals for and 44 against during his 56 games here, virtually a 1:2 ratio of good results to bad. Sure some of that is bad luck and bad linemates and bad goaltending and bada yada, but if the guy is going to be a positive difference maker he needs to step up and make a positive difference. In his limited opportunity, Omark didn’t do enough of that.

  56. bendelson says:

    Captain Obvious,

    I’m surprised by the assertion that PRV is somehow less of a player than Linus.
    I was under the impression that PRV wasn’t a major liability on the ice, even when not scoring.

    Linus had his moment in the sun here in Edm. He is respOnsible for the most memorable moment in Oiler shootout history. Not bad, considering his draft position.

    Best of luck Linus.

  57. Cactus says:

    justDOit:
    I think claims about Omark’s abilities or Petrell’s, for that matter, are meaningless. Bad teams usually produce bad stats for most players, or at the very least can be misleading.

    What isn’t debatable, is that Omark was given poor linemates, and not much time to do the impossible – create offense with Belanger on the ice (and keep goals out with Potter and Barker as dmen). Oh yeah, and he also had to adjust to a new language and smaller rink while doing this.

    That first paragraph hurt my brain. Badly. If claims about players on bad teams are meaningless why the hell are we having this debate at all? Someone just break out a set of dice and we’ll roll for our analytical results. Man.

    But then you go on to say that he had bad linemates. According to Woodguy, those were:

    Potter, Belanger, Whitney, Smyth, Horcov

    According to Zona (from Justdoit), those were:

    MPS, Belanger, with Potter, Barker and Sutton

    I will happily give you Barker as a bad player. 1st half Whitney was terrible as well. But Potter put up the 3rd best Corsi last year and Sutton kept his head almost about water. Both were against easy comp, but neither was a disaster by any means.

    As for the forwards, Smyth and Horcoff are quality vets going against tough opponents. MPS managed to post great possession numbers regardless of his teammates (only Hall was better). That leaves only Belanger as a problem and at least he has an established track record. In other words, these are not bad teammates. Moreover, Omark’s Corsi QoC was the EASIEST among all Oiler forwards. If the only circumstance in which Omark can do well is with easy minutes and top linemates, then maybe he’s not the player we need, especially given our alternatives.

    People need to stop blaming management for misusing Omark. He did reasonably well as a rookie in 2010-11, but very poorly this year. Part of this is bad luck due to injury, but that’s not management’s fault. Maybe instead of blaming his teammates, people should look at Omark as the culprit.

  58. bookje says:

    art vandelay:
    Random pile of 175lb Euro fluff, never to be heard from again. Every team’s got one hiding somewhere. Oilers draw a blank on the guy. Just like every other team does once in a while. Put away the cryin’ towels.

    All I hear is woof woof euro woof.

  59. Suntory Hanzo says:

    Szach,

    my bad. My German is poor. Wasn’t thinking on how it is the town name, not the team’s. I should go back to lurking instead of posting.

  60. Lowetide says:

    Suntory: Screw that. Post at will.

  61. justDOit says:

    Cactus,

    Sorry to hear that you bruise easily.

    Yes. I’m saying arguing which player is the worst, between Omark and Petrell is meaningless. They are apples and pineapples, and hardly interchangeable. They both bled in their NHL stats, but one of them was a useful penalty killer and got more games to prove or disprove himself.

    The other point – that the quality of teams can heavily influence a players performance is hardly a mystery. Playing on a bad team can crush an average player, and playing on a great one can mask a lot of problems (Fraser).

    Omark’s lack of support on the Oilers isn’t exactly a new theory, but you’re fighting an uphill battle trying to prove otherwise. MPS had some good numbers… which was why he was eventually demoted? Potter’s corsi is 3rd best? What, in the league? Or 3rd best on the worst team in the league? Politely agree to disagree there.

    Stop blaming management? Tell you what – if every one else here will stop as well, then I’m with ya. Until then, I say Omark got shafted (not quite a Souray shaft, but way bigger than an Eric Cole shaft) and I think he’ll do well if/when he gets a proper chance in the league.

    I’ll let you get back to your ice pack now.

  62. DeadmanWaking says:

    There’s a big difference (too often lost around here) between a boat with an improper hull design (a floating coffin) and a boat with a good hull design taking on water through a couple of gaping holes. We’re gradually becoming a boat of the second kind. This is still problematic for the players tasked with the brunt of the bailing duties, but not so much of an impediment to posting good numbers for the players who aren’t. Some of our players are playing for a bad team, and some aren’t.

    I put the handling of Omark down to a fielder’s choice on Renney’s part. He had many agendas to juggle. The primary agenda was to maintain progress with our world-beating rookies. It’s easy to rationalize not giving your born-to-fame prospects top drawer attention from the coaching staff. Easy and wrong. Their success seems fated until one of them stumbles, and that’s a tire you can’t easily patch.

    Do you want one of the talented kids playing with Omark attaining good results on bad habits? I think Renney wanted to see Omark at least tread water lashed to a veteran he couldn’t corrupt with his creative yet questionable instincts.

    Searching for Bobby Fischer explores the dynamic of a kid being taught by two masters. One (Laurence Fishburne) is a street player (a speed-chess hustler and probably a drug user) who thrives on “playing the man”. His gambit is to throw his queen out there and make things happen. The other (Ben Kingsley) is a conventional master who plays the position, conservatively. He believes that throwing your queen out there is a way to beat inferior opponents, then lose badly to the first player you meet who is anywhere closely matched.

    If you throw one of our talented kids out there with Omark, isn’t that a bit like raising Josh Waitzkin on the street chess scene? As it happens, the real Waitzkin somehow managed to straddle both worlds, but many chess prodigies don’t. They pick up bad habits beating weaker opponents. This is the chess equivalent of the San Jose Sharks. For a good team, they sure seem to hit the showers a lot in the first and second rounds.

    In a way, it’s a credit to Renney that he made it so easy to draw a circle around the sheep he sacrificed. He could have shifted a bunch of players around into risky or sub-optimal roles to find a seat on front of the boat for poor Linus. Ultimately Renney had to respect his own limits. There was no perfect seat assignment, so it ends up becoming a fielder’s choice.

    Perhaps Renney underestimated himself, or really couldn’t juggle more balls, or maybe Krueger is more adept than Renney, or maybe what a difference a year makes.

    Omark is like that situation where your flight is late, but you still have time to make your connection, only your connecting flight gets switched from gate B to gate Z, and you miss your connection trying to run two miles in under ten minutes while fat spouses in loose orbit around their fat luggage straddle-blockade corridor constriction points while distributing with their fat thumbs jumbo mocha frappuccinos to their fat children–all the while completely oblivious to the ball sailing six inches over the fence for the gate Z connecting traffic.

    With so many talented young players entering the system at roughly the same time, we just had too many flights switching from one gate to another in a distant terminal. Part of your brain thinks there must have been a way to make it all work. I mean, good teams don’t have these problems. Precisely. We’re not yet a good team. It’s the price of not-yet-being-a-good-team to lose some talent in the airport gate-assignment shuffle.

    The debate tends toward rancour because no-one who flies believes airports are any better managed than bad hockey teams. The airport gate assignment manager at O’Hare pays well and it’s a cushy job. None of the airlines ever call you up to chew your ass because they had to reroute 100 passengers at extra cost. Well, maybe they do call, but not more than once every ten minutes whenever weather happens anywhere in Europe, Asia, or the continental U.S.

  63. Cactus says:

    justDOit,

    Whether or not MPS was demoted is immaterial to whether Omark had decent linemates. He did. Moreover, even if you think that he should’ve had better linemates, the only alternatives are guys like RNH, Gagner and Hall, if Omark is already playing with the Horcoffs of the world. I don’t think anyone here is crazy enough to suggest that they should’ve bumped Hemsky down the lineup so Omark could have better linemates. Potter’s Corsi may have been 3rd on a bad team among defencemen, but Omark’s was 11th among forwards on the same team – barely above Darcy Hordichuk.

    If you want to argue in favour of Omark’s 2011-12 season you will lose every single time. There’s basically nothing redeeming there between the poor results and the injury. As I said in my initial post, some of that is bad luck, but Omark showed nothing to change that either. The best an Omark-booster can do is (as LT does) highligh the successes of 2010-11 and say on the basis of that he deserves another chance. As sensible as that is, however, I don’t believe this team has room for him and it seems no other NHL team wants to trade for him either. In other words, through bad timing, bad luck and a poor recent performance he’s missed his chance. It’s not management’s fault that Eberle and Yakupov are better top 6 options.

  64. Lowetide says:

    Cactus: I don’t really disagree with any of what you’re saying. I do believe Renney should have been held accountable for the handling of Paajarvi and Lander, but Omark’s case is unique in that:

    1. He wa injured for much of the season, so there was little chance for a re-set
    2. There were better AND younger options for the position.

    I still maintain Sam Pollock would have found a way to turn him into a tradeable asset.

  65. Cactus says:

    Lowetide:
    Cactus: I don’t really disagree with any of what you’re saying. I do believe Renney should have been held accountable for the handling of Paajarvi and Lander, but Omark’s case is unique in that:

    1. He wa injured for much of the season, so there was little chance for a re-set
    2. There were better AND younger options for the position.

    I still maintain Sam Pollock would have found a way to turn him into a tradeable asset.

    I’m 100% with you on Renney’s handling of Lander and Paajarvi. I still can’t understand how Lander continued to get minutes even after Magnus was sent down. How did that make sense to anyone?

  66. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Speaking of apples and pineapples, Omark’s primary linemates up front were Belanger and Smyth. Petrell’s were Lander and Eager.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca