2013 ENTRY DRAFT POST 23: THE FINAL 30

This year’s draft follow has been a lot of fun. Mostly because there are so many brilliant people to read and talk to about the draft, but also due to the high quality of this year’s edition. We began looking at things last September as Bob McKenzie gave us the top 10 and it’s been a wild ride since. Here’s the final final.

TOP 30 FOR 2013

  1. L Jonathan Drouin: The most offensive potential in the draft. Outstanding prospect.
  2. C Nathan MacKinnon: Nice range of skills, not enough to make up for the gap in offense.
  3. D Seth Jones: Franchise defender. Offensive is not outstanding, rest of the package off the charts.
  4. C Sasha Barkov: Complete player, may step into an NHL lineup immediately.
  5. C Elias Lindholm: Impressive offense, nice range of skills. Getting lost a little, incredibly.
  6. L Valeri Nichushkin: A man among boys, scoring winger with an explosive quality.
  7. C Sean Monahan: Two-way C with the ‘perfect fit’ skill set for the Oilers.
  8. D Rasmus Ristolainen: Very little negative, across the board talent.
  9. D Darnell Nurse: He’s an excellent prospect, 2-way guy with plenty of room to grow.
  10. C Bo Horvat: Two-way C, he’s a bull in the middle (6.01, 203) and I bet MacT loves him.
  11. C Curtis Lazar: Scoring C who may end up being a winger. A load, skilled.
  12. D Ryan Pulock: Defender can do it all, plus shot. Wide range of skills.
  13. C Max Domi: Skilled C with pluck. Offense is very good.
  14. C Hunter Shinkaruk: Pure scorer, lacks in other areas.
  15. C Fredrik Gauthier: 6.05, 210 C with skill, intimidating size and he’ll likely play on a skill line.
  16. L Anthony Mantha: Goal scorers go high, Mantha hit 50 last season.
  17. L Kerby Rychel: A trending player, he’s skilled and mean.
  18. C Alex Wennberg: Lanky skill center with speed and quickness; playing in Swe2 league.
  19. L Artturi Lehkonen: Skill winger has some outstanding potential but lacks size.
  20. C Nicolas Petan: Small and extremely skilled.
  21. D Josh Morrissey: Fast, skilled, impressive.
  22. D Nikita Zadorov: Huge defender with speed, shutdown player.
  23. C JT Compher: Skill C, agitator with talent.
  24. D Mirco Mueller: Smart defender with plenty of skill.
  25. L Adam Erne: Skill W has some toughness.
  26. R Valentin  Zykov: Solid offensive player with good size, plays a physical style.
  27. C Ryan Hartman: Good skater very good awareness a player who is no fun to play against!
  28. D Madison Bowey: Smooth. Fine skater, lots of potential.
  29. L Morgan Klimchuk: Scoring winger has some nice things.
  30. C Laurent Dauphin: A very nice skill player.

In a way, this draft reminds me of the 2007 Entry draft. That season, Edmonton chose a London Knights C (Sam Gagner) and passed on an Ottawa 67s pivot (Logan Couture) and history (so far) favors the Ottawa junior. This time, the Oilers appear ready to take the Ottawa 67s C (Monahan) while passing on the London Knight. I think they would happily draft either.

THE LIST

  1. Sign Sam Gagner to a multi-year deal that has begins with a number in the 4′s.
  2. Get Paajarvi signed and then find a role that suits him (suspect it’s 3line).
  3. Deal Hemsky for immediate help (even if its a checker).
  4. Deal Horcoff or slot him into the 3line job for which he is actually ideal.
  5. Find a 2line L who can complement Gagner-Yakupov with puck retrieval, blocking out the sun, etc
  6. Find a 3line C and L to play with Paajarvi
  7. Find a 4line C to play with Smyth/Brown
  8. Decide on Lander/Belanger or other for 13F (and 14F if they go with 7D).
  9. Top 4 defender (a genuinely effective one, no ‘almosts or sortas’)
  10. Better blue depth (MacT has done this with Belov, plus Klefbom/Fedun/Marincin)
  11. Backup goalie
  12. AHL #1/NHL #3 goalie
  13. Sign Paul Ranger

PREDICTING THE WEEKEND

This was a pretty easy item during the Tambellini era, not so much with the new guy. I asked Terry Jones yesterday if he thought 8 or 9 changes were too much, and Jones said ‘you’d think that but every time MacT speaks he talks about doing that much” so I suspect the summer will bring much turnover. However, the draft weekend should see only a few items taken care of by MacT.

  1. Sign Gagner to a long term deal close to or over $5M per season.
  2. Draft a center in the first round (in order MacKinnon; Barkov; Lindholm; Monahan; Horvat; Lazar; Domi)
  3. Find a home for Hemsky (with immediate return)
  4. Find a home for Horcoff
  5. Find a replacement for Horcoff
  6. Use the second round to either deal for immediate help or draft solid talents like Tristan Jarry and Dillon Heatherington.

I’d say that’s more than enough for one weekend.

LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

SHAWSHANK

At 10 this morning we kickstart the long weekend, hope you can tune in. Among those scheduled to appear:

  • Steve Lansky from Big Mouth Sports. We’ll talk about Steve’s memories of the 1984 Oilers, the draft and the impact of a new generation of media personalities like Elliotte Friedman. 
  • Scott Taylor from the huddle.co We’ll talk about the Jets trading up, the Blue Bombers debut in that terrific looking new stadium and the big weekend for the Blue Jays.
  • Tom Lynn from Veritas Hockey. Current agent, former NHL GM and NHL assistant GM brings a wealth of knowledge to draft weekend so we’ll ask about players and teams and the biggest weekend of the off-season.
  • Andreas Morse from FC Edmonton. Another big Sunday game for the Eddies, we’ll preview and talk about FC’s season.
  • Jungle Jim Hunter. We’ll talk about Calgary cleanup, the work athletes do to prepare for major events, and the focus required to stay on course after draft day.
  • Adam Rosenke is a member of Canada 2 bobsled and getting ready for Sochi. We’ll talk about how much effort it takes to get there.

 

written by

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

130 Responses to "2013 ENTRY DRAFT POST 23: THE FINAL 30"

  1. sliderule says:

    Big day on Sunday.

    Lindholm,Horvat or Monahan would make me happy.

    Second round Theodore and Hayden.

  2. GordM says:

    posted this in the Letang thread moments ago:

    Smith/Bucky retained as per Rishaug’s twitter.
    I know very little about what makes a good NHL assistance coach. I do know it’s extremely rare for one to survive this many head coaches.
    Didn’t Smith get hired because he Ran into Lowe at an airport?
    Or is keeping them a ‘bold’ move?!?!?!

  3. Ivan says:

    I am predicting a significant deficiency of productivity for the guy behind my desk for the next 48hrs. I’ve followed this team since Day 1, and I have to say, the anticipation for great things is building. LT, your draft/prospect coverage is beyond perfection, and you’ve dragged a lot of us along with you. I’ve said it before, but this is the absolute best hockey blog/discussion board there is. Thanks again for the deets, and I think I’ll hit F5 now…..

  4. theres oil in virginia says:

    How much dough is it worth to have a NTC in your contract? $0.5M?

    I liked the suggestion of a NTC for the early part of the contract, in exchange for a lower rate.

    Who’s the next captain? Hall or Gagner? I’m not sure any more.

  5. Lowetide says:

    I think we might get something today.

  6. Gret99zky says:

    Ryan Rishaug ‏@TSNRyanRishaug 1m
    Sources confirm Keith Acton will be named associate coach in Edmonton.

  7. Bar_Qu says:

    I think you have Horvat listed twice in#2. Great player, just not twice the guy we think he is. ;-)

  8. Lowetide says:

    Keith Acton the new assistant coach. He was a fine 2-way C, and I know he’s been a coach for a long long time. Smith and Buchberger return for another year.

  9. DBO says:

    Too excited to sleep! A few coffee fueled thoughts.
    - if they love Horvat 7 is a reach. Hope they move to 10 or 11 and get another asset. And yes I still hope for Coburn.
    - one of Hemsky or Horcoff will be moved this weekend. Expect we keep back some salary for Horc and possibly both.
    - Gagner will be signed or dealt this weekend. MacT will not open him to an offer sheet.
    - I fear that Paajarvi will be lost in the shuffle and could be dealt for something shiny. No idea why, just get the feeling something unexpected will happen and we will be kinda pissed about it.
    - no to Bolland. Yes to Peverley.

  10. Kitchener says:

    Lights, camera, Acton!

  11. Lowetide says:

    Pelss ruled accidental death. The poor kid. He was partying with friends, told them he’d lke to go for a swim but they talked him out of it. He tracked back after they left and went in alone. As a parent, I am so sorry for that kid and his parents. Cruel fate.

  12. SoxandOil says:

    If Lindholm and Monahan are gone Horvat at 7 would not be a reach. Horvat at 4 or 5 would be – but not at 7. I hope one of those 3 pull a oildrop over their head. I honestly don’t think Horvat would be around at 11.

  13. Kitchener says:

    Draft boards are full of optimism. If we take the pessimistic view (assume the player achieves the lower-end of his potential), how does that change our wish list?

    IF:
    – Monahan – can’t translate his offense to the NHL…
    – Nuchushkin – is a lazy backchecker and cocky SOB…
    – Lindholm – tops out as a mid-tier smallish forward…
    – Nurse – can’t translate his offense to the NHL…
    – Horvat – is a 3C at best in 5 years…
    – Lazar – tries hard but can’t fill a defined NHL role…
    – Domi – turns into his father
    – Shinkaruk – contributes to many goals for both teams…
    – Gauthier – tops out as a big defensive C…
    – Zadorov – can’t bring any offense to the NHL…

    THEN:
    – Domi suddenly looks pretty good
    – Lindholm would be very tradeable
    – I’d rather get stuck with a mediocre C than a D (Teubert/Plante)
    – Monahan would still be a useful player

    Fun exercise. By this stage in the Oilers cycle, I think it’s more important that we take players with low downside than explosive upside. A cupboard full of blue-chip prospects in 2-3 years will allow us to make trade deadline deals for Cup runs.

  14. Bad Seed says:

    Can’t figure out how each successive coach who comes in here wants Smith & Buchberger on their staff. Can anyone here think of any other organization’s assistant coaches stick around so long when there has been such a head coaching turnover? Is each head coach so impressed interviewing these two guys that they just have to have them on their staff?
    On another note, Tampa Bay has talked about enticing someone to take Malone off their hands by another draft pick. How about this – we take Malone & his contract and the number 3 for our number 7 & Hemsky? Maybe we even take back some of Hemsky’s salary? I think number 3 can be gotten because I’ll bet that buying out Lecavalier has got to hurt enough & I can’t seen them having deep enough pockets for both.

  15. DBO says:

    One of Horvat, Lazar, Domi, or Shinkaruk will be there at 11. No real seperation between them and none of them will play in the NHL next year so if you want playoffs you move back to 10 or 11 and get an NHL player to help right now.

  16. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Lowetide:
    Pelss ruled accidental death. The poor kid. He was partying with friends, told them he’d lke to go for a swim but they talked him out of it. He tracked back after they left and went in alone. As a parent, I am so sorry for that kid and his parents. Cruel fate.

    That’s horrific and terribly sad.

    When I was 9 some friends from my brother’s grade (they would have been 13) went camping alone at Goldstream park just outside Victoria. They were drinking and went for a hike. One of the them slipped and drowned. It was the like the whole community hit the pause button. It was terrible. I still remember my parents’ weird combination of affects: sad, anxious, angry, helpless, etc.

  17. speeds says:

    SoxandOil:
    If Lindholm and Monahan are gone Horvat at 7 would not be a reach. Horvat at 4 or 5 would be – but not at 7. I hope one of those 3 pull a oildrop over their head. I honestly don’t think Horvat would be around at 11.

    I don’t know if I agree. To me there is less difference between players 5 and 7 in this draft than between 7 and 8. There’s enough of a drop off after 7 that anyone outside it is a reach, IMO. Some players would be less of a reach than others.

  18. Lowetide says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: That’s horrific and terribly sad.

    When I was 9 some friends from my brother’s grade (they would have been 13) went camping alone at Goldstream park just outside Victoria. They were drinking and went for a hike. One of the them slipped and drowned. It was the like the whole community hit the pause button. It was terrible. I still remember my parents’ weird combination of affects: sad, anxious, angry, helpless, etc.

    Same thing with me. A bunch of guys left their grad party maybe 1975 and had been drinking. They went off the road and ran into a approach (there’s one every two miles in SK) and one of the guys from my school went through the windshield.

    I’ll never forget it. Changed the town. My Dad–MY DAD–spent about 6 months checking up on me, making sure I was okay. It was kind of weird, I remember being irritated by it. Now that I’m a father? totally get it.

  19. hodgkins says:

    Bad Seed,

    Re: Smith and Bucky. It is kind of strange isn’t it? Is there some goading from Lowe/MacT/Old boys to the Oilers coaches that says, “trust us, you’ll want these guys”? If the playing field is absolutely level, I can’t imagine these guys surviving like they have.

    Re: Hemsky. Would the lightning like Hemsky enough to drop down from a potential franchise player to something less certain? (going from 3 to 7). I know that if I were the Lightning I wouldn’t make that trade. I hardly think that they would want to get rid of Malone that badly.

  20. russ99 says:

    SoxandOil:
    If Lindholm and Monahan are gone Horvat at 7 would not be a reach. Horvat at 4 or 5 would be – but not at 7. I hope one of those 3 pull a oildrop over their head. I honestly don’t think Horvat would be around at 11.

    Ludicrous. If we pick Horvat at 7, with at least one (maybe 2) of the consensus top 7 elite top-of-the-draft talents plus Nurse on the board it would be a worse homer coke-machine Oil King reach than Moroz last year.

    If we do that, Stu should resign, as he’s obviously being ignored by our pinheaded management that just forced two “boys on the bus” assistants on our supposedly “rethink the philosophy” new coach.

  21. gcw_rocks says:

    GordM,

    Clearly this is not a new era. This is more of the same old shit we have seen since Lowe moved into management. When you bullet 3 head coaches in 5 years, you cannot give the assistants a pass. And you certainly cannot make the argument that these are the best assistant coaches available. This is why I hate Lowe and MacT. Cronyism before excellence. These schmucks wouldn’t know how to run a proper selection process even if someone tattooed instructions on how to on their dicks.

  22. Bad Seed says:

    hodgkins,

    I’m not thinking of them valuing Hemsky that much as wanting to be rid of Malone’s contract more. Who knows, they may gamble & think they can get the Russian at 7. They seem to love him with what their head scout was saying about him. Hey, maybe we sweeten the pot too.

  23. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    SoxandOil:
    If Lindholm and Monahan are gone Horvat at 7 would not be a reach. Horvat at 4 or 5 would be – but not at 7. I hope one of those 3 pull a oildrop over their head. I honestly don’t think Horvat would be around at 11.

    BM has Horvat at 13.

    http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=9421

    Using the walkabout numbers against the BM list set down here

    http://lowetide.ca/blog/2013/06/2013-entry-draft-post-3-edm-lak-and-walkabout.html

    picks 4-8 get roughly 5 picks of range against the BM list. So, you are “risk averse” picking at 7 if you pick anyone on BM’s list from 1-11. So, the “walkabout” of 2 spots is pretty mild, but I think we can safely say you are leaving “consensus talent” on the table with that pick.

    It’s not Niinimaki. Not by a long shot. But it would probably force a considered explanation out of MacT.

  24. Lowetide says:

    And we’re off! :-) I felt the ‘line in the sand’ drawn by many in Oilers Nation would result in a lot of anger if they kept both Bucky and Smith. I don’t believe that is reason enough to fire them, though. If you have been hired to GM the team and the coach you hired gives the thumb’s up, then proceed.

    There’s always next summer.

  25. hodgkins says:

    Bad Seed,

    True, the Russian is the wild card in this draft.

  26. theres oil in virginia says:

    It’s all optics. Is it better to fire people because there is an impression amongst the community (the fans in this case) that the people are incompetent, even if they aren’t? In some cases it might be. I think some element of change would probably have been wise. Also, I remember hearing from somewhere (or reading in a Krueger interview) that Ralph gave the impression that the two assistants were a little short on the coaching side of asst. coach.

  27. hodgkins says:

    Lowetide,

    You know, if the last two coaches had had a decent roster to play with we probably wouldn’t be discussing this at all. I know this is an obvious statement, but how well can you expect coaches to perform without good players?

  28. Smarmy says:

    Eakins had plenty of coaching opportunities elsewhere from the sounds of it. And now he has a four year deal. I don’t think Kevin Lowe is forcing anything on him at this point.

    The Oilers have been bad for a long time so it makes sense for fans to transfer some of that failure to Buchy and Smith but if Eakins is fine with them then we should let it be.

  29. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    One of the interesting items I’ve been considering is draft year sliders. That is, not players that slide from their ranking on draft day (see Forsberg last year). But… players that throughout their draft year slide down.

    We tend to pay a fair amount of attention to risers, i.e., players with strong finishes to their season, or a deep playoff run get a lot of buzz and rise. It makes sense insofar as these players lend themselves to storylines.

    But I often wonder if teams can extract value out of draft year slide picks. Maybe the scouts’ initial take on these players is closer to the value of the player then their final take, which sees the player buried by risers getting better press?

    What got me thinking about this was the case of Jacob de la Rose. On BM’s first list in Sept. he’s got him at 8th:

    http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=9600

    the warning signs are already there in Button’s scouting report: “may not be a natural scorer”

    But that is pretty damn high all the same. At midseason BM has him at 26:

    http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=9842

    In the final list, he’s at 29:

    http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=9422

    (at least they found a picture of him!). Here are the other rankings:

    Craig Button: No. 57 | NHL CS: No. 7 IS | ISS: No. 33 | The Hockey News: No. 29 | McKeen’s: No. 31

    LT has him at 40

    http://lowetide.ca/blog/2013/06/2013-entry-draft-post-9-31-60.html

    Blue Bullet at 29

    http://lowetide.ca/blog/2013/06/blue-bullets-top-100-2013.html

    Spoiler didn’t have him in the top 30.

    Exit question: does his Sept. ranking (8th) have any value for us? Does it suggest he may have (even if only slightly) more value than his final rankings? Does his slide mean he might continue it on the actual draft day? Can you folks think of other draft year sliders that maybe turned out from the past?

  30. Martin Lundén (dohfOs) says:

    - RT: @TSNRyanRishaug Feaster says they would consider it a factor if the player they wanted at six wasn’t going to come over right away.

    Could mean Lindholm is there for the taking at 7.

    On another (none Oiler) note. Alfie has confirmed he will be back for another season with the Sens.

  31. gcw_rocks says:

    Lowetide,

    “I don’t believe that is reason enough to fire them, though. If you have been hired to GM the team and the coach you hired gives the thumb’s up, then proceed.
    There’s always next summer.”

    We don’t know if the coach really had an option or we were treated to some media spin.

  32. Rondo says:

    I still find it odd from the information I have read MacT really has not talked about Lindholm, MacT has been fairly open when asked question and open giving information.

    In the top 8 MacT has left out Lindholm and Nichushkin. Odd or just not interested?

  33. Kitchener says:

    hodgkins,

    Fun TB question. They know the difference between elite and very good better than anyone (Stamkos, St. Louis, Lecavalier; Yzerman.) I would be shocked if TB traded out of range of McKinnon/Drouin/Barkov.

  34. nelson88 says:

    Only mock drafts but the 3 of them over at NHL.com have some interesting trends.
    - top 7 players are all pretty much the same (not really a surprise)
    - all 3 have the flames taking Monahan
    - 2 of the 3 have the oilers taking Nurse
    - 2 of the 3 have Lazar falling out of the 1st round and the other has him at 27(?)th. Have to think the Oil would be willing to offer a fair amount to trade up and get him if he falls deep into the 1st or even into the 2nd.

    please no to Letang if he is looking for that type of term and money.

    fun times to be a hockey fan.

  35. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    On the coaches.

    Smith and Bucky. I’m not thrilled, but I wonder if this is Eakins trying to give the players some continuity? These two aren’t exactly Xs and Os kind of guys but “sweet-talking during the game” guys, guys that “get” the personal side of hockey, or something. Maybe the impact is minimal.

    Acton. any idea why him? Is the Howson connection what did it? what about Maurice, Lamb or someone from the Marlies?

    Can someone give me the notes on Acton as an Assoc. Coach? is he a technical wizard or something? How important is fitness to him ;)

  36. Kitchener says:

    Question: Do we have a full list of the prospects who’ve visited Edmonton in recent weeks? I seem to remember hearing Nurse and Monahan were invited, but a full list would interesting. Or, if any have dined at Chez Katz.

    Specifically, I wonder about Lindholm and Nichushkin.

  37. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Martin Lundén (dohfOs):
    - RT: @TSNRyanRishaug Feaster says they would consider it a factor if the player they wanted at six wasn’t going to come over right away.

    Could mean Lindholm is there for the taking at 7.

    On another (none Oiler) note. Alfie has confirmed he will be back for another season with the Sens.

    Interesting that the wording is “come over” rather than “play” right away.

    What is the word from Lindholm? Is he going to stay in Swe. for another year?

  38. hodgkins says:

    nelson88,

    Safe to say that Lazar is off the radar (at least at 7)? No one really believes this, right?

  39. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Rondo: In the top 8 MacT has left out Lindholm and Nichushkin. Odd or just not interested?

    has MacT said who’s in his top 8?

  40. Jesse says:

    Hey, that’s neat. Adam Rosenke was my assistant coach when I was playing minor hockey. Neat to see him have success as an athlete.

  41. Maverick says:

    Exciting weekend ahead, the draft in only two days!! Plus 20+ temps in Edmonton, life is good. :-)

    If the comments from Calgary are true and they pass on Lindholm, I think its a tough decision for MacT, I would say he has Nurse and Horvat ahead of Lindholm. The fire and fight in both players excites MacT but if a well rounded, 2nd line centre who does everything right fails to you, you have to take him right??

  42. bookje says:

    I think MacT is learning its hard to be bold and I suspect that his summer will fall somewhere between the Boldness he predicted and the nothingness that Tambellini delivered.

    Being bold includes having trading partners – if MacT find that he can’t get value for what he is offering in terms of Horcoff, Hemsky and others – then he will keep them (like Tambellini did).

    It was bold on the coaching front to fire the ‘New Guy Outsider’ Krueger, but its not so bold to keep Buchburger and Smith after years of them being a part of mediocrity. Sure, its easy because Katz and Lowe and MacT like them personally and they are Old Oilers, but I simply cannot believe that they are the best coaches for the job (note that Krueger complained that they were lacking experience). I don’t think Eakins had full control over this. I suspect that it was full control with a strong ‘Keep them if you can’ message.

    We heard lots of boldness about moving the pick for a player early on, but in his last press conference MacT suggested that they would pick 7th and then look at moving 2nd round picks (faded boldness).

    I am not complaining, I am just suggesting that MacT is facing the reality of his options now and his ‘tough talk’ early on is sounding more realistic as we proceed. Sometimes standing pat with things is fine and indeed the best option.

    I hope that the one area where he is bold is in locking down one or two quality free agents without massive overpayments.

    It will be interesting to see what the summer holds. I suspect it will be less than many of us hope for.

  43. Maverick says:

    As for the coaching staff, Acton is a good addition, knows Eakins, same off ice philosophy, good add. Smith and Buchberger, Meh. If the chemistry doesn’t work out this year they will change them. The two boss in charge are Eakins and Acton.

  44. hodgkins says:

    Maverick,

    I’m not sure exactly where the aversion to Lindholm comes from. His numbers seem to say that he’d be a no-brainer if he was left on the board at 7. Can someone enlighten me?

  45. LMHF#1 says:

    So, either our shiny new coach just failed his first major test of judgement or we were all lied to.

    Great…

    Please start acquiring some hockey players already.

  46. Botts182 says:

    Lowetide,

    LT,

    Do you mean the coaching announcement? Or a trade or sign?

  47. Ice Sage says:

    Yep, lots of intrigue this year – drafting mid-pack creates so many more narratives.

    I like MacT and admire his maturation as an Oiler stalwart but there’s no way he can deliver enough fresh meat to this rabid blog-fanbase. Despite some speed-dating at the draft, have we forgotten the inertia of the NHL? It’ takes 2 (or 3) to make a deal and this team simply doesn’t have enough ‘tens and jacks’ to play the long con at the big table right now.

    The team is already better with the kids becoming men, prospect D’s on the verge (and in a good development situation in OKC), a better coach and no Whitney / Khabi / Belanger.

    I guess I’m bracing for a quiet few days and ‘the best moves were the ones we didn’t make / our core is untouchable’ comments.

    Edit – In other words, what bookje said!

  48. hodgkins says:

    bookje:
    I
    I am not complaining, I am just suggesting that MacT is facing the reality of his options now and his ‘tough talk’ early on is sounding more realistic as we proceed.Sometimes standing pat with things is fine and indeed the best option.

    We had this guy that ran for President in 2008 here in the States… sounds familiar.

    I hope, however, that MacT will find a way to make the team better. I think that with the buyouts, cap issues and deep draft this summer, this is the perfect opportunity to make those moves.

  49. Ice Sage says:

    hodgkins: We had this guy that ran for President in 2008 here in the States… sounds familiar.

    I hope, however, that MacT will find a way to make the team better.I think that with the buyouts, cap issues and deep draft this summer, this is the perfect opportunity to make those moves.

    ‘Oil Change we can Believe In’

  50. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    For what it’s worth:

    https://twitter.com/TSNRyanRishaug/status/350624917651333120

    Am told Eakins had total 100 percent autonomy to make his decision on coaching staff. No management involvement.

  51. hockeyguy10 says:

    Ryan Rishaug ‏@TSNRyanRishaug 13m
    Am told Eakins had total 100 percent autonomy to make his decision on coaching staff. No management involvement.

    People here put way to much importance on what Buchberger and Smith do. With the hiring of Acton Bucky will be in charge of coffee. Smith obviously works with the defence. And with how Petry and Smid have developed over the last couple of years he looks to be doing a fine job.Much ado about nothing.

  52. Maverick says:

    hodgkins:
    Maverick,

    I’m not sure exactly where the aversion to Lindholm comes from.His numbers seem to say that he’d be a no-brainer if he was left on the board at 7.Can someone enlighten me?

    Everything we have read and heard from MacT; pressers, the season ticket luncheon etc, he has made comments about Nurse and then Horvat fits his player profile.

    Many of us here, Lowetide, Woodguy (i think) or maybe it was Speeds, either way, many of us, would be blessed to have Lindholm at 7. I made a comment a few days ago about the top end of Lindholm and what happens and (yes I know, perfect world) he becomes Zetterberg, is that something you can pass up?

  53. Maverick says:

    video is up at Oilers site about the coaching staff.

    http://video.oilers.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=4&id=261010&lang=en

  54. LMHF#1 says:

    hockeyguy10:
    Ryan Rishaug ‏@TSNRyanRishaug 13m
    Am told Eakins had total 100 percent autonomy to make his decision on coaching staff. No management involvement.

    People here put way to much importance on what Buchberger and Smith do. With the hiring of Acton Bucky will be in charge of coffee.

    Then why won’t they go out and hire someone smart who can break down game film and work on positioning etc.

    When I heard they had Buchberger working with Yakupov last season…it is no wonder he had no idea where he should be on the ice.

  55. BlacqueJacque says:

    What the hell does it take for Smith and Bucky to get fired? Do they have to get caught with their dicks up the ass of Kevin Lowe’s wife?

  56. squeezboks says:

    I don’t fully understand the hate on for Buchberger or Smith here. The head coach / associate coach formulate systems. It is the role of the assistant coaches to ensure the players understand those systems.

    A lot of the coaching criticism this past year seemed to revolve around two issues:

    1) a system that demanded too much of the centers and had the wingers flying the zone too early
    2) failure to match lines both home and away

    In both cases, these are decisions made by the head coach, not the assistants.

    Clearly they have some input, but the burden of responsibility lies with the guy at the top.

    It’s like blaming teachers for a poor curriculum. Best teachers in the world won’t succeed if the curriculum is crap.

    2cents

  57. LMHF#1 says:

    squeezboks:
    It is the role of the assistant coaches to ensure the players understand those systems.

    I don’t think at least one of the assistant coaches can understand modern systems play. How is he supposed to teach the players?

  58. Rondo says:

    It is about a fresh start, getting new eyes on the situation. That is why I don’t like the decision on keeping the assistant coaches.

  59. hockeyguy10 says:

    LMHF#1,

    They just did. Yak was a rookie last year that got better as the season went a long. He improved at what normally would have been 1/3 of the way through a full season. Would have been fun to to how he was playing at the 60-70 game mark.

  60. LMHF#1 says:

    hockeyguy10:
    LMHF#1,

    They just did.

    They just did….what?

  61. Jesse says:

    Acton looks like John Malkovich. I sure hope he acts and speaks like John Malkovich.

  62. squeezboks says:

    LMHF#1,

    In that vein, I wonder to what extent the Oiler’s lack of success last year was a failure of the system itself (as has been asserted by some), a failure of the players to understand the system, or a lack of ability to implement it?

    Not sure how to tease that out using advanced stats, etc. but it would an interesting project.

  63. Нинтендо⁶⁴ says:

    Stanley Cup Ring with the Oilers? CHECK
    Son played in the AHL for Eakins? CHECK
    Faceoff wizard as a NHL players? CHECK
    Bonus: 15 years on NHL coaching staffs

    http://www.legendsofhockey.net/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SearchPlayer.jsp?player=10002

  64. blackadder says:

    If we take Horvat at #7, it means we’re leaving one of Monahan, Lindholm or Nichuskin on the table, all potential first line players. Honestly, I would take Domi before him because his offensive upside is so much higher. You need to get top 6 players when drafting where the Oilers are, not character third liners.

    And, I would absolutely go after Letang. He is an elite puck moving defenceman that can play 25 minutes a night. Defensive zone coverage in the Boston series was bad, I know, but you can say the same about virtually all of the Penguins stars. Could say the same for Paul Coffey, too, but the old Oilers don,t score over 400 Goals without him in the lineup.

    Like the addition of Acton, not so sure about keeping Bucky and Smith. Can’t believe there isn’t at least one ass’t coach out there who wouldn’t be an upgrade on them.

  65. LMHF#1 says:

    hockeyguy10:
    LMHF#1,

    They just did. Yak was a rookie last year that got better as the season went a long. He improved at what normally would have been 1/3 of the way through a full season. Would have been fun to to how he was playing at the 60-70 game mark.

    And yet his positioning wasn’t improving. Imagine what he could have done if he knew when to fly the zone and didn’t need to be told to go to the net in the hat trick game.

  66. Нинтендо⁶⁴ says:

    LT, All the right guys in your top 10. But Horvat needs to be nailed to the #10 spot.

  67. LMHF#1 says:

    squeezboks:
    LMHF#1,

    In that vein, I wonder to what extent the Oiler’s lack of success last year was a failure of the system itself (as has been asserted by some), a failure of the players to understand the system, or a lack of ability to implement it?

    This is an interesting question. I didn’t support a number of aspects of Krueger’s system. It didn’t fit the strengths of our players. The players were also deployed incorrectly.

    Our players also were not good enough and that, of course, was the real issue.

  68. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Looks like Eakins is preaching “stability” within the organization.

    Ironically, working under a heavy rotation of bosses has saved their jobs.

  69. rickithebear says:

    LMHF#1: When I heard they had Buchberger working with Yakupov last season…it is no wonder he had no idea where he should be on the ice

    Yakupov Rover in junior.

    first 25 games 6G 7A -13
    last 23 games 11G 7A +9

    Less preaching!

    More product trending! Facts!

  70. Нинтендо⁶⁴ says:

    LMHF#1: This is an interesting question. I didn’t support a number of aspects of Krueger’s system. It didn’t fit the strengths of our players. The players were also deployed incorrectly.

    Our players also were not good enough and that, of course, was the real issue.

    Short training camp. Short season. Compressed schedule cutting back practice time. Best before date set by years as an assistant. But the flip side of all that is he needed to simplify and stage his changes. He swung for the fences and lost. Probably had good cause.

  71. russ99 says:

    I don’t buy it. Two years, two different head coaches, two different systems, the only constant was the core players and the assistants, both seasons as abject failures.

    You do have to wonder if Bucky and Smith either can’t grasp the nuances of the system or can’t communicate with the players, which is their primary jobs.

  72. Нинтендо⁶⁴ says:

    Romulus Apotheosis:
    Looks like Eakins is preaching “stability” within the organization.

    Ironically, working under a heavy rotation of bosses has saved their jobs.

    Or their staying on has cost a run of Oilers coaches coaches theirs. Suspect Eakins is around next summer to turn them over if warranted.

  73. Wes Mantooth-11 says:

    Lowetide,

    Lt

    Does Gagner asking for a NMC or a NTC and around 5 per as have been reported mean he gets delt at the draft?

    I’m thinking the NMC by Gagner camp was to ensure the player wont get signed then traded.

    The Oilers not wanting to give the NTC has me thinking the Oilers were moving Gagner all along?

    Am I reading to much into that?

  74. knighttown says:

    I really think a Columbus/Edmonton deal makes too much sense not to happen.

    -Edmonton has loads of first line talent but have the worst depth in the NHL.
    -Columbus has a glut of players who can play bottom line minutes or 3-7 minutes on D but no real elite talent.
    -Columbus picks 14th, 19th and 27th.

    General consensus is that the true first line guys will be gone in the Top 10 so they’ll be left with a boom-bust pick like Domi, Mantha or Shinkaruk or another 3/4 defenseman like Zadorov. They won’t take Nichuskin because of Zherdev but a guy with true Top 3 or top pairing potential like Monahan, Lindholm or Nurse should mean a lot to them.

    Sure the Oilers could use Nuchuskin or Lindholm but their huge holes are elsewhere. If they could get #14 and #19 or even #14 and #27 I do that any day of the week.

    Take your 2/3 center with whomever is left of Horvat, Gauthier (love him), Wenneberg or even Lazar at #27.

    Take your 2/3 massive defenseman in either Nurse (unlikely), Ristolainen, Zadorov or Morin.

    Would you rather have Monahan or Wenneberg and RIstolainen?

  75. commonfan14 says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: Can you folks think of other draft year sliders that maybe turned out from the past?

    One recent example off the top of my head of a big slider is Angelo Esposito, who was once thought of as a potential #1 OV pick.

    Just one example, but one that doesn’t help the case for looking at de la Rose.

  76. slopitch says:

    Oilers should really make a deal with Carolina. All it takes is one off the board pick and they get Barkov, otherwise they go in front of Calgary to get Mohanan.

    I’ll be happy if they do that then move one of the 2nds for an NHL player.

  77. LMHF#1 says:

    rickithebear: Yakupov Rover in junior.

    first 25 games 6G 7A -13
    last 23 games 11G 7A +9

    Less preaching!

    More product trending! Facts!

    This is the kind of improvement he shows with incomplete support and instruction. He’s a player.

    I wish I had a powerful video machine and the rights to the broadcasts so we could go through the video, but I don’t.

  78. Ribs says:

    Lowetide:
    Keith Acton the new assistant coach.He wasa fine 2-way C, and I know he’s been a coach for a long long time.Smith and Buchberger return for another year.

    Worth noting that Acton is an “Associate” Coach, not an Assistant. It sounded like MacTavish wanted to move away from that type of setup when they fired Krueger. Guess not!

  79. Rondo says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    Why did Fllip Forsberg fall so much? BM Corey Pronman and most mock drafts had him in the top3

  80. hockeyguy10 says:

    LMHF#1,

    One thing I have learned from reading your posts is that it seems very little if anything meets your approval.Can’t be a lot of fun being Mr. Negative all the time.

  81. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    commonfan14: One recent example off the top of my head of a big slider is Angelo Esposito, who was once thought of as a potential #1 OV pick.

    Just one example, but one that doesn’t help the case for looking atde la Rose.

    Hmmm… interesting.

    Couturier is another interesting recent example. Preseason BM had him at 1

    http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=29823

    final ranking was 5th and he was taken 8th

    http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=47549

    Still waiting to see how he develops obviously… but he’s the kind of guy I’m taking about. Someone who loses traction over the year for whatever reason that might end up being a value pick.

  82. LMHF#1 says:

    hockeyguy10:
    LMHF#1,

    One thing I have learned from reading your posts is that it seems very little if anything meets your approval.Can’t be a lot of fun being Mr. Negative all the time.

    I have some specific things that annoy me greatly and this organization happens to do a lot of those things.

    I try to strike a much more positive tone in my game reports. Not a negative guy. Just a frustrated Oilers fan.

  83. Ribs says:

    Brownlee had something up on Acton on the 9th. Good call.

    http://oilersnation.com/2013/6/9/keith-acton-connecting-the-dots

  84. Gerta Rauss says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: Interesting that the wording is “come over” rather than “play” right away.

    What is the word from Lindholm? Is he going to stay in Swe. for another year?

    He said as much at the combine-he’s got another year on his pro contract and said he intends to honor it.

  85. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Rondo:
    Romulus Apotheosis,

    Why didFllip Forsberg fall so much? BM Corey Pronmanand most mock drafts had him in the top3

    I really don’t know. It looks like this is a case of him being overhyped. Interestingly LT’s system heavily weighted by NHLE got much closer to the final pick number. LT had him at 8

    http://lowetide.ca/blog/2012/06/draft-week-post-6-final-top-30.html

    L Filip Forsberg NHLE 3-3-6. PF with skill, he’d rank higher on my list if Forsberg had posted better offense in Sweden’s 2nd league or at the WJ’s. Martin Lunden knows a lot about the Swe-2 league and told me his offensive chances (or rather being placed in high offensive situations) would probably be very low. Forsberg’s agent feels he needs another year of development in Sweden.

    Looks like two issues: 1) lack of offense; 2) not ready for the show

    BM’s write up

    Filip is a blend of high end skill and indomitable will. Skill that allows him to produce offensively and a will that makes it very challenging for opponents to stop him. He’s a very strong skater with power in his stride and combined with speed, he’s capable of opening up ice for himself and backing up defenders. Possessing very good agility, he uses this to maneuver in the tight areas around the net and make himself dangerous. His shot is hard and accurate and he can score from 35-40 feet. His release is outstanding which doesn’t allow goalies to get an accurate read on it. He can shoot off the pass as well as being able to shoot in stride. He recognizes opportunities and he has a hunger to score. He’s not one-dimensional though and is capable of making plays and creating offensive chances with his passing. He gets involved in the physical game and while he may not be punishing, he’s assertive in establishing his presence and gaining valuable space for himself. With a playmaking center, he could be a prolific scorer in the NHL.

    http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=9825

    that final line “could be a prolific scorer” is radically at odds with LT/Lunden’s assessment. Something went wrong here.

    The other rankings: NHL Central Scouting: 1 ES, International Scouting Services: No. 2, The Hockey News: No. 2, Button’s Ranking: No. 7

    Interesting that Button had him at 7.

  86. Kris11 says:

    Red Rover, Red Rover,

    We call Nail Yakupov over.

    *Infant Yakupov grins at the thought of bolling tthe other kids over.”

    OMG, Can we call Yakupov “Red Rover?”

    It works on so many levels. Russia and red. Roving and being an offensive-minded player. The game Red Rover is one where people try to hold ypu and your break through by running insanely, which is srot fo Yakupovs mindset on the ice.

    Oh, and will Red Rover wear #10 when Horcoff goes?

  87. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    LT…

    On weddings. It really depends on the “cultural” whatnot of the people getting married. As someone marrying a Greek lady this Summer I can tell you the Mediterranean types expect envelops stuffed with $$$. They don’t think of it as “cold and impersonal” or whatever. Seems weird to me… but different strokes and so forth.

    But if Connor wants to get a gift there should be a registry… free-wheeling it isn’t a great idea.

  88. speeds says:

    knighttown:
    Sure the Oilers could use Nuchuskin or Lindholm but their huge holes are elsewhere.If they could get #14 and #19 or even #14 and #27 I do that any day of the week.

    Take your 2/3 center with whomever is left of Horvat, Gauthier (love him), Wenneberg or even Lazar at #27.

    Take your 2/3 massive defenseman in either Nurse (unlikely), Ristolainen, Zadorov or Morin.

    Would you rather have Monahan or Wenneberg and RIstolainen?

    (1) It’s unlikely Wennberg and Ristolainen would both be available at 14 and 19, even more unlikely at 14 and 27.

    (2) It’s also not likely EDM would take them even if they were available.

    (3) I don’t know that I wouldn’t prefer Monahan in any event.

  89. Kris11 says:

    Acton seems like a good call. I’ve always thought Steve Smith should be a good coach for young Dmen, given his knowledge of the game and he hasn’t been around in the Oilers system for that long.

    If it weren’t for Buchberger being here through a whole lot of losing (and being responsible for some awful performances on special teams he coached, IIRC), there would be no good charge of nepotism on the coaching staff. But Buchberger is there, despite a lot of failure and a lot of coaching changes, and the best explanation is nepotism over the best choice.

    I’m going to pretend the staff is Eakins, Acton, and Smith and that Buchberger is just a mascot and teller of old Oiler stories for the kids.

  90. Kris11 says:

    Don’t ever get wedding gifts without a registry or just telling people cash is fine.

    You will get more knives than a butcher/ninja. I’m not sure why people like to give knives to Newlyweds. Perhaps they are trying to foment a murder for local TV.

  91. Bag of Pucks says:

    To take the devil’s advocate position for a moment, I would think one of the benefits of Eakins retaining Buchberger and Smith is it helps to reduce his learning curve as a first time NHL HC particularly as it pertains to the players themselves. Eakins indicated in his presser that he’s all about dealing with each player individually. With that in mind, I would suspect that Buchberger and Smith impressed enough in their interviews with their knowledge of individual player strengths and weaknesses and Eakins saw something there he could use for immediate reference.

    When an organization is not succeeding, it can be a little too easy and tempting to paint everyone with the loser brush. Just because the hockey team is losing doesn’t mean everyone single person associated with those efforts is a loser. There are ALWAYS more experienced people out there with better resumes, but in my experience, successful organizations don’t take a view of people as ‘easily disposable’ as soon as something better comes along but rather they put the onus on themselves to stay committed to the professional development of their human resources.

    Sometimes the most effective people in an organization are those who were simply not empowered to thrive under a previous regime, and once proper leadership arrives, they blossom. Possibly Eakins sees that opportunity here?

    Further, if Eakins saw some deficiencies or skills lacking, then potentially he’s addressed those with the Acton hire and now has the range of skills he’s looking for? And of course, it goes without saying he can turf either Bucky or Smith down the road if their walk doesn’t match their talk.

    As always, the primary criticism here is the cronyism, and there’s some validity to that. For better or worse, Lowe, MacT etc. believe there’s an “Oiler way” and it works. If anything, I would suspect the Tambellini debacle has only reinforced that belief in their mind and they likely see those years as the lost weekend when the org slipped off the path. For better or worse, we’re committed to the “Oiler Way” one last time with this owner, management team, coaching staff, and player nucleus.

    Personally, I’d rather hope that the Oiler way works one more time because the alternative ends in nothing but failure and disappointment. At this point, we’re pretty much ‘pot committed’ with this philosophy.

  92. TheOtherJohn says:

    Lowetide:
    And we’re off! I felt the ‘line in the sand’ drawn by many in Oilers Nation would result in a lot of anger if they kept both Bucky and Smith.I don’t believe that is reason enough to fire them, though. If you have been hired to GM the team and the coach you hired gives the thumb’s up, then proceed.

    There’s always next summer.

    Expect there is NOT next summer

    Eakins would have liked Bucky becaiuse they are both fitness nuts. Serious fitness nuts. Dumb as a post but a fitness nut.Am sure he was also assured he was a competent coach ALL evidence to the contrary

    Eakins will have a pretty good idea just how completely bleeping useless those two tools are about November 15th but by then Lowe will have already resigned them to 2-3 year contract extensions. Presser will say something along lines: “Coach Dallas Eakins chose to rehire these fine assistant coaches and the organization wanted to give them some security”

    Will be very amused to see Eakins try to implement multiple styles of attack, depending on opponent, and relaize neither Bucky or Smith know what that means

  93. FastOil says:

    russ99: Ludicrous. If we pick Horvat at 7, with at least one (maybe 2) of the consensus top 7 elite top-of-the-draft talents plus Nurse on the board it would be a worse homer coke-machine Oil King reach than Moroz last year.

    If we do that, Stu should resign, as he’s obviously being ignored by our pinheaded management that just forced two “boys on the bus” assistants on our supposedly “rethink the philosophy” new coach.

    Agreed. It makes no sense to draft bottom half of the roster type players which are the easiest to find by other means. They should be looking for skill at every stage in the draft, the later the round, the more “diamond in the rough” like Khaira or guys that may have more than they’ve shown because of circumstance like Davidson.

  94. DeadmanWaking says:

    Cleaning house?

    Old Fortinbras, Yorick, and King Hamlet are all dead at the start of the play. During the play itself, Polonius is killed, followed by Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (offstage), Ophelia, Gertrude, Claudius, Laertes, and finally Hamlet.

    Who’s left in High River? Fortinbras and Horatio. Let the reconstruction begin. While it’s a certainly a departure from the established template, I really don’t think our problems here stem from Bucky Rosencrantz and “Steve” Guildenstern.

  95. jonrmcleod says:

    The consensus top-7 is MacKinnon, Jones, Drouin, Barkov, Nichushkin, Lindholm, and Monahan. If the Oilers don’t take one of those 7, I think it’s a mistake.

  96. Professor Q says:

    FastOil,

    Except Horvat played for the London Knights. Perhaps he meant Lazar?

  97. Lowetide says:

    More on that: – fundraiser is at the Billiard Club, starting at 3:00 on Monday July 1 for ‘meet a Canadian athlete day’. Billiard Club is on the corner of Whyte avenue and 105 St. (10505 82 Ave). 10 dollars is the cost, which goes directly to helping neville and Adam achieve our goal of competing and succeeding at the Olympics next feb.

  98. commonfan14 says:

    Kris11: Buchberger is just a mascot and teller of old Oiler stories for the kids

    And really, aren’t most of Bucky’s stories about the glory days just ones he’s repeating second-hand that Mess and Lowe used to tell?

    For first-hand accounts, most of Bucky’s stories go like this:

    “So we were getting killed one night and I could see the boys needed a spark, so I started a fight with a way bigger guy and got my butt kicked real bad.”

    “The next day they put the C on me. It was awesome.”

  99. SoxandOil says:

    speeds: I don’t know if I agree. To me there is less difference between players 5 and 7 in this draft than between 7 and 8. There’s enough of a drop off after 7 that anyone outside it is a reach, IMO. Some players would be less of a reach than others.

    I agree 100% I just don’t know if I would invest my dollars and resources on Nichushkin. If he interviewed great and seems committed to spending a long time in Edmonton (or North America) then its a no brainer. But he is already leaving money on the table by leaving the KHL and when his ELC runs out and if he isn’t getting the ice time he wants he will go back home for multi millions.

    How do you see the drop off from 8 on?

  100. Truth says:

    I’m out of here for the weekend and am going to make my predictions. Not that anyone cares, just for fun:

    Oilers draft Nurse at #7.

    Oilers trade 1 or 2 high valued D prospect not named Klefbom and the first of the two 2nd round picks for immediate help at Center.

    Clutterbuck gets traded, 50% chance it’s to the Oilers. Oilers give up Pitlick and a 2nd round pick. My guess is that the trade is on the table and is executed only if there is a certain name still available with that pick for Minnesota.

    MacKinnon – Colorado
    Drouin – Florida
    Barkov – Tampa
    Jones – Nashville
    Nichushkin – Carolina
    Monahan – Calgary
    Nurse – Edmonton

  101. spoiler says:

    Lowetide: More on that: – fundraiser is at the Billiard Club, starting at 3:00 on Monday July 1 for ‘meet a Canadian athlete day’. Billiard Club is on the corner of Whyte avenue and 105 St. (10505 82 Ave). 10 dollars is the cost, which goes directly to helping neville and Adam achieve our goal of competing and succeeding at the Olympics next feb.

    Remember when we used to call it “the Old Post Office”?

    Took a bus by it twice a day 1985-86 in the pre-Whyte Ave revitalization days and used to muse out loud to my roomie about how I wished I had the money to put a bar in the, at that time, decrepit old building.

  102. sliderule says:

    The way I look at the assistant coaches is to consider what you would do if you were hired to coach an NHL team.

    Would you look to a team that has had success and try to hire their assistants or would you look to a team that was 30th 29th and 24th.If you found that the same team had defensive systems that baffled everybody including the players would that influence you.

    I ask you what would you do?

  103. freedomisamyth says:

    When I heard they had Buchberger working with Yakupov last season…it is no wonder he had no idea where he should be on the ice.

    LMHF#1: This is the kind of improvement he shows with incomplete support and instruction. He’s a player.

    I wish I had a powerful video machine and the rights to the broadcasts so we could go through the video, but I don’t.

    No offense meant, but this is a ridiculous post. You have 0 evidence for your position at all, and tons of evidence for the opposite conclusion.

    Fact 1: At the beginning of the season Yakupov’s positioning was a disaster. All over the place, never in the right spot, doing weird things with the puck that you never see any NHL’ers do, completely ineffective except for when he got the puck around the net and all he had to do was shoot.

    Fact 2: By the end of the season (a 48 game season, with a compressed schedule, with barely any training camp at all for the coaches to teach no less) Yakupov looked like a completely different player. He looked like an NHL player, he was in position, he was playing ok defence, he was creating chances by carrying the puck and passing.

    You conclusion from these is that he improved like this despite lack of support and instruction…so he taught himself? How does that make any sense?

    Fact 3: In Oil Change, Krueger specifically raved about the work ethic and preparedness of his coaching staff.

    Fact 4: In his press conference, Eakins said he did his homework, he talked to the players, he talked to the other staff, and he ended up seeing “great value in them” and that it was “amazing how respected these guys are by the players”

    How does any of this point to the fact that these assistants are useless and that the players developed despite them and they are only around because they are part of the OBC? That’s just believing something because it’s what you want to believe, with no basis in reality. You aren’t in the room, you have no idea what these guys bring. What reason do you have for feeling so strongly in something like this?

  104. Woodguy says:

    freedomisamyth:
    No offense meant, but this is a ridiculous post. You have 0 evidence for your position at all, and tons of evidence for the opposite conclusion.

    Fact 1: At the beginning of the season Yakupov’s positioning was a disaster. All over the place, never in the right spot, doing weird things with the puck that you never see any NHL’ers do, completely ineffective except for when he got the puck around the net and all he had to do was shoot.

    Fact 2: By the end of the season (a 48 game season, with a compressed schedule, with barely any training camp at all for the coaches to teach no less) Yakupov looked like a completely different player. He looked like an NHL player, he was in position, he was playing ok defence, he was creating chances by carrying the puck and passing.

    You conclusion from these is that he improved like this despite lack of support and instruction…so he taught himself? How does that make any sense?

    Fact 3: In Oil Change, Krueger specifically raved about the work ethic and preparedness of his coaching staff.

    Fact 4: In his press conference, Eakins said he did his homework, he talked to the players, he talked to the other staff, and heended up seeing “great value in them” and that it was “amazing how respected these guys are by the players”

    How does any of this point to the fact that these assistants are useless and that the players developed despite them and they are only around because they are part of the OBC? That’s just believing something because it’s what you want to believe, with no basis in reality. You aren’t in the room, you have no idea what these guys bring. What reason do you have for feeling so strongly in something like this?

    I agree with this.

    Also,

    Bucky coached a very meh Springfield Falxons team to a .500 record.

    Here was his roster: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0003042008.html

    I’m no fan of keeping Smith and Bucky if it was a directive of the org.

    I am going to take MacT and Eakins at face value on this one.

  105. Woodguy says:

    Woodguy: I agree with this.

    Also,

    Bucky coached a very meh Springfield Falxons team to a .500 record.

    Here was his roster: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0003042008.html

    I’m no fan of keeping Smith and Bucky if it was a directive of the org.

    I am going to take MacT and Eakins at face value on this one.

    Only one player on that roster has hit 200 NHL games.

    Nilsson, but he only played 5 games that year.

    DD will do it. (139gp)

    McDonald might. (52gp)

    Pouliot 192gp
    JFJ 166gp
    Peckman 160gp
    Hockey Jesus 114gp
    Sestiti (Tim) 70gp
    JDD 62gp
    Thor 106gp
    RedOx 100gp

    Lordy.

  106. jonrmcleod says:

    Woodguy,

    Hey, that Schremp guy was pretty good–76 points in 78 games! And some kid named Marc-Antoine Pouliot had 21 goals in 55 games! Where are these guys?

  107. knighttown says:

    speeds: (1) It’s unlikely Wennberg and Ristolainen would both be available at 14 and 19, even more unlikely at 14 and 27.

    (2) It’s also not likely EDM would take them even if they were available.

    (3) I don’t know that I wouldn’t prefer Monahan in any event.

    Actually glad you chimed in. Was going to ask you specifically. As to point #1 and #2, that’s the whole idea. It seems like there are groups of players that fit the Oilers needs beautifully and it’s a sure thing that at least one person from each group will be available.

    Group 1- Two-way centre like Bergeron/Staal. Of course this group is led by Monahan but decent candidates without the top line upside are Horvat, Wenneberg and Gauthier. If it’s at #27 you look at Compher and Lazar.

    Group 2- Massive yet mobile defenseman. Group of Nurse, Ristolainen, Morin and Zadorov.

    Switch the names out how you like but you can grab one of these combos:
    - Horvat and Morin
    -Ristolainen and Gauthier
    -Wenneberg and Zadorov
    -Ristolainen and Compher

    But I guess your point is that none of these combos is worth Monahan. What if he and Lindholm are gone?

  108. LMHF#1 says:

    freedomisamyth:
    No offense meant, but this is a ridiculous post. You have 0 evidence for your position at all, and tons of evidence for the opposite conclusion.

    You conclusion from these is that he improved like this despite lack of support and instruction…so he taught himself? How does that make any sense?

    How does any of this point to the fact that these assistants are useless and that the players developed despite them and they are only around because they are part of the OBC? That’s just believing something because it’s what you want to believe, with no basis in reality. You aren’t in the room, you have no idea what these guys bring. What reason do you have for feeling so strongly in something like this?

    You can’t explain clearly how anything that you said qualifies as “tons of evidence” with regard to his positioning. Without the things I discussed, all we have is what we saw. There is no stat that quantifies positioning. A guy can also improve greatly and still have major areas for more improvement. I reach my conclusion, you reach yours. That’s fine. What I saw was that he learned to read the play at NHL speed and use his teammates more effectively.

    I’ve reached my conclusion on Buchberger specifically based on what I’ve been told about his acumen, intelligence and why he’s still there. We don’t tend to exchange in “I heard (blank) from (blank)” around here too much so I generally don’t bother to get into it. I’d also understood that most had either heard or concluded the same thing long ago. *shrug*

  109. Нинтендо⁶⁴ says:

    Hey at least Eakins is the first Oilers coach in a while not to start with his designated replacement on his staff.

    @dantencer: On Paul Maurice, Eakins says: “He’s a head coach. It’s a crime that he’s not a coach in this league right now.”

  110. sliderule says:

    If the draft goes the way of BMs listthe top centers wI’ll be gone.

    The oils at seven would have a choice of Nurse and Ristolainen.two defenders that in most drafts would be in bottom first.

    Then we have Domi a scoring small winger with defensive deficiencies and type one diabetes and Wennberg who played in the second tier Swedish league .

    Then we have Hovat who when the going got tough was the leading goal scorer and MVP in the OHL playoffs.He followed that up with an excellent m cup were he played all the tough minutes scored important goals and won most of his face-offs .Oh and he is over six foot and 210 lbs.

    So you can take one of the defenceman who have been historically hard to predict,the small scoring winger,the Swedish enter playing in a league that is hard to rate or the CHL center who has risen up the rankings by his strong play.
    Oh and he is a center who is strong on his skates and a face-off savant.

  111. LMHF#1 says:

    Woodguy: Only one player on that roster has hit 200 NHL games.

    Nilsson, but he only played 5 games that year.

    DD will do it. (139gp)

    McDonald might. (52gp)

    Pouliot 192gp
    JFJ 166gp
    Peckman 160gp
    Hockey Jesus 114gp
    Sestiti (Tim) 70gp
    JDD 62gp
    Thor 106gp
    RedOx 100gp

    Lordy.

    So…are you saying he got a lot out of a little, or that he failed to develop anyone into a hockey player?

  112. speeds says:

    knighttown,

    I think it’s possible a team could do better picking 14 and 19 vs. 7, especially if the guy left from the top 7 is a guy they don’t want to pick anyways (for whatever reason). That said, I think it’s a pretty fine line where I might like it if they picked the guys I want at 14 and 19, but depending which 2 guys they actually pick, I might much prefer Monahan/Lindholm/Nichushkin. At the same time, you need to balance that against EDM possibly picking someone I have rated a little bit lower at 7 anyways.

    I wrote about trading down at a bit more length here:

    http://hockeysymposium.blogspot.ca/2013/06/trading-down-from-7th-overall-pick.html

  113. jonrmcleod says:

    sliderule,

    Is “BM” Bob MacKenzie? I thought he had Monahan at #7?

  114. speeds says:

    Oh, one thing to add, if I were in charge and EDM traded down from 7 for 14 and 19, I would pick the BPA at both slots, but if it’s close I’d prefer to leave with 2 F’s.

  115. Professor Q says:

    sliderule,

    I think Horvat will surprise quite a few people. He definitely is the better of the two (him and Domi) from a hometown fan’s and live game perspective as well.

  116. Woodguy says:

    LMHF#1: So…are you saying he got a lot out of a little, or that he failed to develop anyone into a hockey player?

    Look at this glass.

    Is it half empty or half full?

  117. Woodguy says:

    Some McKenzie tweets:

    Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 5m
    Jonathan Drouin was runaway leader in 3 categories: best puckhandler, best playmaker, best hockey sense. And it wasn’t close in any of them.

    Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 9m
    Biggest draft day Wild Card prospect: Winger Valery Nichushkin, with 8 out of 10 votes.

    Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 10m
    Prospect with the most complete game: Aleksander Barkov with the win over Nathan MacKinnon.

    Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 12m
    Prospect most ready to step into NHL and play now: Nathan MacKinnon tops, Seth Jones runner up.

    Fastest skater: Nathan MacKinnon.

    Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 6m
    Biggest/hardest hitter: London Knight defenceman Nikita Zadorov.

    Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 35s
    Best pure goal-scorer: Anthony Mantha with the win over Drouin, MacKinnon, Shinkaruk. Mantha scored 50 this season.

    This is from his informal pool of the scouts that Bob uses to compile his list.

  118. LMHF#1 says:

    Woodguy: Look at this glass.

    Is it half empty or half full?

    50%.

  119. VOR says:

    knighttown,

    I think you will find it a very hard sell to convince Oilers fans to trade down (though the math says 7 for 14 and 19 is a statistical winner). Partly this is history but mostly it arises from a common misunderstanding amongst hockey fans. The wildly held belief is that a higher ranking in a draft poll (and or a higher selection) means that player will be better in the long run than someone taken later.

    This is not true. Mostly a higher ranking and more consensus about that ranking means that scouts or media think you are more likely to play in the NHL and that scouts and media think you are more likely to be an impact player in the NHL. They are basing that on (if they are smart) your current performance level and thus the higher you are picked the sooner you should show up in the NHL. Additionally, the higher you are picked the greater the number of at bats you will get in the big leagues. Despite that bias the scouts and media get it wrong all the time. In fact, their performance is terrible given the information at their disposal.

    I could site some studies but consider a simple thought experiment – in any draft year where there are 30 picks in the first round the total of all those picks when added up (1OV+2OV+3OV+4OV….+28OV+29OV+30OV) is 465. If you redrafted that year once you knew how their careers were turning out you could tell if the scouts even got close just by adding up the draft position of the new top 30.

    So lets try a phenomenally deep year with tons of high end talent at the top – 2003

    1. Marc-Andre Fleury
    2. Eric Staal
    3. Nathan Horton
    4. Nikolai Zherdev
    5. Thomas Vanek
    6. Milan Michalek
    7. Ryan Suter
    8. Braydon Coburn
    9. Dion Phaneuf
    10. Andrei Kostitsyn
    11. Jeff Carter
    12. Hugh Jessiman
    13. Dustin Brown
    14. Brent Seabrook
    15. Robert Nilsson
    16. Steve Bernier
    17. Zach Parise
    18. Eric Fehr
    19. Ryan Getzlaf
    20. Brent Burns
    21. Mark Stuart
    22. Marc-Antoine Pouliot
    23. Ryan Kesler
    24. Mike Richards
    25. Anthony Stewart
    26. Brian Boyle
    27. Jeff Tambellini
    28. Corey Perry
    29. Patrick Eaves
    30. Shawn Belle

    That was the top thirty in order.

    Now lets try a redraft – and yes there are some unusual names on mine and feel free to make arguments for other names

    1. Shea Weber 49
    2. Eric Staal 2
    3. Thomas Vanek 5
    4. Ryan Getzlaf 19
    5. Ryan Suter 7
    6. Zach Parise 17
    7. Patrice Bergeron 45
    8. Corey Perry 28
    9. Dion Phaneuf 9
    10. Dustin Brown 13
    11. Mike Richards 24
    12. Jeff Carter 11
    13. Brent Seabrook 14
    14. Ryan Kesler 23
    15. Joe Pavelski 205
    16. Nathan Horton 3
    17. Milan Michalek 6
    18. Marc-Andre Fleury 1
    19. Loui Eriksson 33
    20. Brent Burns 20
    21. Tobias Enstrom 239
    22. Dustin Byfuglien 245
    23. Matt Carle 47
    24. Jimmy Howard 64
    25. Braydon Coburn 8
    26. David Backes 62
    27. Matt Moulson 263
    28. Corey Crawford 52
    29. Jan Hejda 106
    30. Lee Stempniak 148

    That comes to 1768 not the perfect 465. You can see that the further down the list you get in terms of actual outcome the higher the draft numbers are becoming. It is also worth noting that (while you can argue with my exact placements) the top ten was badly botched in terms of order, never mind missing the best player in the draft. This was a really good draft year for the scouts by the way. Redrafts of other years are not kind at all to the proud members of the scouting fraternity.

    My point is simply that consensus tells you nothing when it occurs amongst a confederacy of dunces. But fans typically have great faith in the pronouncements of experts. A smidgen of scepticism would serve us all well.

  120. sliderule says:

    VOR,

    Where is MAP on that list?

  121. VOR says:

    Sliderule,

    He is right there on the first list.

    He is not on the second list but then again neither is Shawn Belle.

    MAP was the right idea horribly executed. All they had to do in order for everyone to think they had aced it was pick one of Kesler, Perry, or Mike Richards instead of MAP and then taken Clark MacArthur instead of JFJ or they could have taken Enstrom, or Pavelski. We’d be all be busy demanding the Oilers always trade down.

  122. sliderule says:

    VOR,

    I would like to see how your analysis on other drafts.

    I suspect it would be similar.

    A friend of mine who used to work with oilers said if I knew how little they pay scouts I would understand why drafting seems to be so bad by most teams.

  123. Kert says:

    VOR,

    Would it make more sense to subtract their re-rank from their original rank (or original from re-rank, which ever is greater), than add it up with an aim of perfect being zero? So Eric Staal for example has a score of 0. Vanek and Suter are worth 2, etc.
    The issue is if some hypothetical draft was re-ranked with the first round going perfectly backwards. The 30th pick should have been 1st and the first pick should of been 30th. The score with your system would still give the perfect 465 score.
    Out of order pick round picks aren’t being punished with your system.

    I suppose the point of showing how inaccurate the draft is, is being made either way.

  124. commonfan14 says:

    VOR: MAP was the right idea horribly executed.

    That brings up a good point, VOR – you’re talking about the benefits of trading down in theory, but what about how well it’s worked historically when teams have actually done it?

    I’m also curious as to whether you think the Oilers should even employ amateur scouts. Your first post could lead one to conclude that you don’t think it matters who teams pick, because nobody knows anything.

  125. Kert says:

    Kert: Out of order pick round picks aren’t being punished with your system.

    Out of order first round picks aren’t being punished with your system.

    Oops. (One missed word can do a lot of damage to the point you’re trying to make) :)

  126. VOR says:

    commonfan,

    I think a computer could do a better job than the current system of pro scouting. There is an important caveat however. What I would do is only possible because of the work of CSS, ISS, Redline, etc. as well as the work by deeply committed independents like Corey Pronman.

    The research shows that through the first two and sometime three rounds that teams don’t usually do as well at picking winners as if they just read off the CSS list. So lets start there. If we build a metalist could we do better than CSS? That is if we weighted each list by where and how it is strong and then merged the lists would collective wisdom give us a better outcome? Over time we could track how each list was performing and how our meta-list was performing and keep altering the program in small ways.

    There are two things this approach would not do for you.

    1. Spot Black Swans effectively. You would need to assign your own human resources to a hunt for extraordinary talent that has slipped through the CSS/metalist net. This year that might be Alex Forsberg who is being savaged for quitting his junior team and going home to Saskatchewan. I’d have scouts talking to his former and current coaches, his teammates past and present, his parents, his friends, his critics, etc. I would also have him do a battery of psychological tests that are task specific. If he is just a bit immature emotionally (the kid has, according to many sources, real talent) then I would use a 7th and take a flyer. I am just using that as an example of what a scout would do. Basically their task is to find the late bloomers, the smurfs, the second thoughts and make sure the Oilers have a competitive advantage late in the draft.

    I think I’ve told this story before but I was in the gym the day a US College basketball coach (lured by a letter from a high school coach) nearly jumped out of his seat watching a small forward from a private school on Vancouver Island play in a quite insignificant tournament against bigger, better teams. The kid just didn’t know when to give up and roll over. Right up to the buzzer he was throwing his body into the bleachers in pursuit of loose balls. That work ethic got the young man a full audition, which got him a scholarship to college. Nobody had much hope he would even be a starter in college but then again this wasn’t a great basketball program we are talking about. I can’t believe anyone in the gym that day was going, “wow, how neat, to see a future NBA MVP play in high school.” But one coach took a chance and began the long chain that took Steve Nash to the NBA.

    In my system that would be your scouts’ sole job. They would be responsible for spotting Pavel Datysuk, Henrik Zetterberg, etc. You get fired if even once you scout a Steve Nash and don’t recognize what you are seeing. Hell, I’d fire you if you were told about a young monster with head case issues but tons of talent but as (one scout famously did) said, “I ain’t going to fucking Orono in January.” The player that scouted passed on was of course Pancakes Penner.

    2. The other thing that scouts and even CSS are horrible at is ranking the players in the top 90 against each other. I’d but far more weight within closing matched kids (say 11-20) to their pure on ice results if they played in the same league and to their Combine scores if they didn’t. It is odd how often teams project players far beyond their natural capacities and miss kids who will grow into useful or even great careers.

    Just a little plug – if we were going to do a deal with Chicago for some reason we want to make sure we get there 79OV pick in 2012 Chris Calnan as a throw in. Highest combine numbers in his draft year, but played in one of those US High School situations that made it very difficult to determine just how much talent he had.

    I’ll take a shot at the other half of your question in a moment.

  127. Нинтендо⁶⁴ says:

    Pulock with Monahan and Lindhold on the board?

    http://www.thescore.com/nhl/drafttracker

  128. VOR says:

    Coomonfan,

    Going back to 1979 and starting there as far as I can tell (and even identifying trade downs is tough for some drafts – lack of data or many moves by the same team in same draft year – draft picks thrown in as sweeteners in multi-player deals, etc.) the team that trades down loses 70% of the time. However, I have yet to find an example where had the right players been drafted with the new assets that it wasn’t a complete triumph for the team that traded down. So the problems with scouting makes a sound strategy look bad. You really don’t want to trade down if you aren’t sure your scouting staff are up to maximizing the opportunity.

    Plus trading down is a draft specific strategy but is usually used as a player specific strategy. Usually a team does what the Oilers did with MAP. “We don’t like the best player left, he isn’t a fit, the guy we really want will still be there at XOV”. What they should be doing is,”This looks like a really deep draft for – (say forwards) – can we get better odds of picking an impact forward by trading 7 for 14 and 19?” The math says yes but you could get screwed by other teams picking strategies.

    So you need a year where the players between your pick and your new assets are likely to be fungible (interchangeable) and a deal where you get clearly better odds to make up for the increasing risk of your scouting staff screwing up and not taking CSS’ best player left. Maybe we end up with Horvat and Zykov. Is that better or worse than Lindholm or Monahan, or Nurse? Who knows. They certainly seem reasonably fungible so then the question becomes can we get enough margin (14 and 19 and something) to make it well worth doing? I’d guess the perfect storm comes along rarely – it might this year if particular players fall to 7, some team may desperately want the player left and be prepared to overpay. That is the scenario where trading down works.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca