FIRST CALLUPS

As someone who has been typing “the Oilers have to make a move now” for about 6 years non-stop, it is with a sense of wonder that I watch the Oilers addressing need and adding depth. Balance is a wonderful thing, and the Edmonton Oilers are gaining it seemingly by the day.

A few recent transactions:

  • Added D Mark Fistric via trade: Improves the Oilers D to 8 names when Theo Peckham is ready to return. By that time someone else will be injured no doubt and having Fistric in the 5-7D rotation with Whitney, Potter and Peckham will help both the Oilers and the Barons.
  • Added D Brett Clark via AHL signing: This is a player some pretty smart cookies (speeds for one iirc) were suggesting as a possible Oiler signing before the Fistric deal. I think it is completely reasonable to put Clark in the same company with Taylor Fedun and Colten Teubert as possible first callups.
  • Added F Jonathan Cheechoo via AHL signing: Huge upgrade on RW for the club, this guy scored 25 goals in the AHL a year ago. The current W’s for the Barons might include Josh Green, Phil Cornet, Toni Rajala, Kristians Pelss, Curtis Hamilton, Dane Byers and Erick Lizon.

The Barons needed the help, and don’t rule out Clark or even Choochoo having their contract purchased by the big club. I’d like to see them trade for Ben Bishop and send Danis back to OKC sometime this week, but credit where due there’s been good work this week.

pitlick2

(Tyler Pitlick photo courtesy Rob Ferguson. All rights reserved).

Tyler Pitlick injured his knee this weekend and could miss 6 weeks or more. Tend The Farm has the story here and this quote sums it all up:

  • Tyler Pitlick is having an MRI done today on his right knee. Coach Nelson, again via Oilers Now this morning, suggests that it might be severe enough that Tyler misses six weeks of play.

Ouch.

written by

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

39 Responses to "FIRST CALLUPS"

  1. striatic says:

    I’ll second trading for Bishop and either sending Danis back down or playing Bishop in OKC.

    feels like it may be the end of the road for Khabibulin, and the team needs to move quickly.

  2. Lowetide says:

    Exactly. This is my feeling toward getting Bishop

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeuGxqTZ584

  3. wheatnoil says:

    Can Bishop be sent down to the minors without clearing waivers?

  4. Lowetide says:

    He’s waiver eligible. But the Oilers would keep him here imo, he has a very nice resume.

  5. Ben says:

    What would you give for him?

    Does Marincin get it done?

  6. doritogrande says:

    Speaking of injuries, Matt Greene’s done for the year after one game. Always liked him but Smid ate his lunch.

  7. Lowetide says:

    Ben:
    What would you give for him?

    Does Marincin get it done?

    I’m not sure what Buffalo needs. I mentioned over at ON that I’d send a 2nd rd pick over, suspect I’d still do that over Marincin to be honest (prefer Marincin).

    I would not go as high as Paajarvi, however. Maybe a year from now, but I still believe that guy will find a way to push his way into the lineup as a 2-way winger.

  8. wheatnoil says:

    Bishop would be a great addition to the organization, but is he a better NHL back-up than Danis this year? That would be my concern with trading for him and then hoping you can clear Danis through waivers. Mind you, Danis only has 50 NHL games under his resume, so it’s not like he’s a veteran NHL back-up or anything.

  9. Zipdot says:

    WHAT? We got Jonathan Cheechoo? Dude, I am out of the country for two days and this happens? HAS THE WORLD GONE MAD??

    CHEEEEEEEEEEECHOOOOOOOOOOOO

    YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY

  10. Jesse says:

    Doesn’t Bishop play for OTT?

  11. Lowetide says:

    He’s one of three goalies on the roster.

  12. wheatnoil says:

    Lowetide:
    He’s one of three goalies on the roster.

    I’m a little surprised that they haven’t sent down Lehner. I mean, he’s on an ELC so he should be waiver exempt. It’s got to be better for the both Bishop and Lehner’s development for one of them to be playing games in the AHL than trying to split games 3-ways like the Oilers did in the past.

  13. Lowetide says:

    I don’t think they’ll go too long, this goalie thing has to break eventually. Matt Greene being hurt and Scrivens letting in a couple in Toronto tonight might break the situation wide open. Once Luongo goes, it’ll be guys like Quick and Bishop going too imo.

    Edmonton should be in on the group below Luongo.

  14. LMHF#1 says:

    Lowetide:
    Once Luongo goes, it’ll be guys like Quick and Bishop going too

    Quick??? What?

  15. Lowetide says:

    LMHF#1: Quick??? What?

    Meant Bernier. I always get them mixed up, it was that damn euro game a few years ago.

  16. LMHF#1 says:

    Lowetide: Meant Bernier. I always get them mixed up, it was that damn euro game a few years ago.

    Thought so. Certainly take a shot at Bernier.

  17. jp says:

    Zipdot:
    WHAT?We got Jonathan Cheechoo?Dude, I am out of the country for two days and this happens?HAS THE WORLD GONE MAD??

    CHEEEEEEEEEEECHOOOOOOOOOOOO

    YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY

    Have you been out of the country for 6 years? You do know that Cheechoo played his way out of the NHL and has spend the past 2+ seasons in the AHL, right? It’s a great addition for the Barons, but it will take an extreme (Seth Jones inducing) run of injuries/ineffectiveness for him to see the Oilers roster.

    So first off, sorry for being a dick about that. Honestly.

    I like the move too, ChooChoo should score some goals in OKC and help give them a chance to keep their heads above water. I’m happier with the Clark signing though. I think he instantly slots in above Teubert and Fedun on the depth chart making it probable he’ll be called on by the Oilers at some point. Obviously helps the Barons tremendously too.

    LT, as you say this “depth” thing is quite a revelation after all this time. That it’s being addressed properly now makes it pretty clear that Fail for Nail and previous incarnations were in full swing in previous years.

  18. jp says:

    wheatnoil: I’m a little surprised that they haven’t sent down Lehner. I mean, he’s on an ELC so he should be waiver exempt. It’s got to be better for the both Bishop and Lehner’s development for one of them to be playing games in the AHL than trying to split games 3-ways like the Oilers did in the past.

    That is odd. Could signal an impending Bishop trade possibly? Lehner’s been the backup for both games so far, so possibly also a minor injury to Bishop that they don’t want to bother to IR him for?

    In any case, agreed that another relatively young goalie to push Dubnyk would be great.

  19. Ryan says:

    Interesting debate on the prior thread regarding puck possession tracking.

    With respect to VOR, his internal debate on the complexity of this task is not relevant.

    It would be quite easy to do. Hate to say it but dsf is right in one regard.

    Last I checked hockey is a team game, so tracking individual puck possession data by player would not only be too complex, but completely useless data as well.

    It’s either one team, the other, or neither as dsf mentioned.

    Couple team possession plus minus while a player is on the ice and that should be one more indicator of who’s driving the bus.

    On ice team possession plus minus per sixty min for individual players…

  20. raventalon40 says:

    Ottawa needs more size on the back end (if you watched the game against Winnipeg), and we have prospects to get rid of.

    Plante, Peckham (once healthy), 3rd round pick 2014, 5th round pick 2014

    for

    Bishop, 4th round pick 2014

    Alternatively,

    Teubert for Bishop, straight up. I just wonder if Plante has any value right now.

  21. Bar_Qu says:

    Cogliano seems to have found his niche on the Ducks. Second game in a row he is doing an admirable 2/3 line job (this is with a full 10 seconds of research, so feel free to correct me). At any rate, he is noticeable in replays and boxscores.

    Sorry for the OT.

  22. raventalon40 says:

    wheatnoil: I’m a little surprised that they haven’t sent down Lehner. I mean, he’s on an ELC so he should be waiver exempt. It’s got to be better for the both Bishop and Lehner’s development for one of them to be playing games in the AHL than trying to split games 3-ways like the Oilers did in the past.

    The Ottawa Senators and St. Louis Blues agreed to a trade on Sunday morning, sending coveted goaltending prospect Ben Bishop to Ottawa in exchange for a second-round pick in the 2013 NHL Entry Draft.

    Immediately after the deal, Ottawa signed Ben Bishop to a one-year extension on a one-way contract.

  23. Ryan says:

    Of course, you would do this broken down by EV’s, PP, and Pk if you wanted. Team data could also be compared.

  24. Ducey says:

    Notes from the Flames game:

    1) The Sportsnet broadcast crew are way too much like Bart Simpson’s dad.
    2) Jay Bouwmeeter continues to struggle (-3 on the night)
    3) Flames suck

  25. Bar_Qu says:

    Ducey,

    This is a team designed to not succeed. I have trouble figuring out how they think they are going to score enough to hang with other teams, or what their plan is if anyone gets hurt for more than a day.

  26. gogliano says:

    I think management in Cowtown is waiting for a bad enough season to sell their fans on a rebuild/sell off. I think this year will do it. Hard to see them anywhere but 5th in the division when trade deadline comes.

  27. bookje says:

    gogliano:
    I think management in Cowtown is waiting for a bad enough season to sell their fans on a rebuild/sell off.I think this year will do it.Hard to see them anywhere but 5th in the division when trade deadline comes.

    Just don’t tell them about the new lottery rule.

  28. gogliano says:

    My ideal Oil result for this season is a 9th place finish plus the lotto ball, just to see Tambo’s troll face.

    I’ll now add that Calgary finishes 30th to this best case scenario.

  29. Ribs says:

    Bar_Qu:
    Cogliano seems to have found his niche on the Ducks. Second game in a row he is doing an admirable 2/3 line job (this is with a full 10 seconds of research, so feel free to correct me). At any rate, he is noticeable in replays and boxscores.

    Sorry for the OT.

    Amazing what happens when you play him at the proper position!

  30. godot10 says:

    I’m at the 1812 lounge in the Thonpson Hotel in Toronto tonight. PK Subban is here too trying real hard to sign a new contract! -)

    Probabably a couple of other players here, but I don’t recognize anyone specifically,

  31. jp says:

    Weekend update: GP G A TP +/- Sh PIM
    McCarron 2 1 2 3 2 9 4
    Bigos 2 1 1 2 0 5 2
    Khaira 2 0 1 1 1 1 4 0
    Simpson 2 0 1 1 -2 4 0
    Laleggia 2 1 0 1 -2 4 0
    Rieder 3 3 1 4 -2 ? 0
    Zharkov 2 0 0 0 -1 ? 0
    Musil 2 0 2 2 2 ? 2
    Gernat 2 0 1 1 0 ? 6
    Moroz 2 0 0 0 0 ? 4
    Ewanyk 2 0 0 0 0 ? 7
    Gustafsson 1 0 1 1 2 0 4
    Omark 2 0 0 0 -1 10 0

  32. VOR says:

    Ryan,

    You suggest that all you need to do is to track puck possession by team and combine that with +/- to get a statistic relevant to individuals. I am fascinated – tell me how this would work and why it would be better? I am having trouble with understanding how taking a flawed statistic like plus/minus and looking at team minutes of puck possession would allow you to correct the flaws in plus/minus. It would be very neat if you actually have a way. I just don’t grasp why plus/minus plus team possession gives you any better an idea about who is driving the bus.

    Plus minus is flawed specifically because it is a group statistic that is assigned to individuals even if they had no role in a goal for or a goal against. Tom Awad has a lovely if complicated way for taking out those flaws and his results actually correspond reasonably well with individual Corsi as a way of ranking individuals. Dave Staples has been tracking actual scoring chances. Then there is Fenwick etc. If your approach is less complicated than Adjusted Plus Minus and the other advanced math techniques and provides as much useful insight every hockey stat guy will love you forever.

  33. Ryan says:

    VOR, that’s not at all what I meant.

    I apologize for not adequately explaining myself.

    What I meant was to record puck possession on a team level like a +/- . This has nothing to do with combining it with the plus minus stat.

    i.e. when player x steps on the ice, the number of seconds his team has puck possession minus the number of seconds the other team does.

    Individual puck possession numbers have no meaning themselves. For example, if defenseman a skates the puck from behind the net to the red line then turns it over vs. defenseman b who holds the puck for five seconds then fires a crisp outlet pass that leads to a scoring chance.

    Obviously, this is only one of an infinite number of examples… In this scenario, defenseman a holds the puck longer and would look better on an individual metric. What I’m saying is that players that make decisions that lead to team possession is what matters not how long a given player carries the puck.

    There would be limitations like any stat. Numbers would be affected by zone starts, qoc and qot.

  34. Ryan says:

    It would also be interesting on a team level. A reasonable hypothesis would be that playoff teams possess the puck more than fifty percent of the time (at evens) vs non playoff teams which do not.. I agree that some stats have flaws at the individual level, but have more meaning at a team level. This is especially true for plus minus. I haven’t looked at the data in years, but most teams that get killed on the ledger at evens over the course of the season (like the Oilers last year) don’t make the playoffs unless they have red hot special teams.

  35. khildahl says:

    Ryan,

    Seems like a good idea on the surface, but there are some big questions with it, like “When does possession start and end?”. If the D-man makes a stretch pass to a streaking forward and misses him, when do you stop the clock? What if his teammate beats out the icing call and comes up the puck; do you start counting again or do you include the time between the pass and the player getting the puck again?

    What about when the attacking team dumps the puck into the corner and then forechecks like crazy, keeping the D bottled up and pinning the play in the zone for 20 seconds until they finally gain “official” possession? This could easily appear in the numbers to be 20 seconds of defensive puck possession; we all know as Oilers fans that the “dump it around the boards and have it kept in at the blue line” panic play isn’t all that effective. You can easily argue that even though they didn’t have the puck, the attacking team was driving the play for that stretch. (Of course, Corsi misses this too).

    It could be a good stat, but I think the logistics of tracking it would be a nightmare.

  36. Ryan says:

    khildahl,

    All good points, but I think for the intended purpose, it would be best to keep it as simple as possible.

    If you wanted a really simple definition, you could just track it by zone and completely ignore which team actually has the puck.

    This would be more useful on a team level, but even a comparison of time spent inside the blue line at evens for each team would give you some idea of the flow of a game.

    Otherwise, you would need some set criteria to simplify the concept of team possession. For example, the last team to touch the puck has possession until it’s touched by the other team. You could either choose to ignore situations where there’s a puck battle in the corner or alternately credit the team on the good side of the ice.

    I would think it would probably make more sense to just credit the team in the offensive zone with possession if there’s a puck battle in the corner. The same decision could be made for puck battles in the neutral zone. In this case, you would have to make the same decision and perhaps it makes more sense not to count a puck battle just over the red line as team possession.

  37. khildahl says:

    Ryan,

    I was actually thinking some more on this and going down the same path. Offensive zone time minus defensive zone time as a pretty simple metric.

    You could take it a step further and make it player-specific by measuring the above for a players TOI.

  38. VOR says:

    Ryan,

    I think I am closer to understanding. So all you care about is where the puck is? Or do you care about which team is in possession. Do I understand correctly that you are also going to look at which players or on the ice at which point in the game?

    I still get the feeling that you are making some underlying assumptions that haven’t been tested. That would include the idea that all possessions are equal. You also seem to be saying that where a puck is during the game is more important than how it got there, which player is in posession, and what the status of the game is at that moment. That all may be true but it also may be false or partially true.

    My key single question is this – what does the output of your idea look like – describe if you would the sort of numbers you would produce and how you see them being used. Doesn’t have to be complicated. So shots per game is the number of shots the goaltender has to stop per 60 minutes by player or team. How would you describe your new statistic?

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca