THAT’S ENTERTAINMENT!

While the Oilers young stars played, the real entertainment was Dallas Eakins. He delivered a fascinating interview about rookies, camp, and the big club.

ON THE OILERS YOUNG STARS PERFORMANCE

  • “To be honest, I didn’t like much.”

Great answer, because it’s blunt and honest. Eakins is more credible with this kind of answer, and although he added things like a lack of practice the point was made.  If I’m Eakins, my notes from this tournament are short and sweet: “Don’t expect any help from any player in this group for at least a year.” If Klefbom and Marincin show well in main camp–and that’s possible because there will be more structure there–it’s still a tell when a player like Klefbom (at age 20) can’t impact the game consistently. Not a lot of “calming the waters” by the highly touted blue last night or against Calgary. Klefbom hasn’t played a lot, better to let him play in OKC for half a season or more (I have him playing 60 games in the AHL in the RE) before letting him defend NHL sorties.

ON THE NHL DEFENSE BATTLE AT TRAINING CAMP

  • “I think we have 8 guys with NHL experience, and a highly touted European player coming over from the KHL which makes the 9 who are really going to compete for the jobs at camp.”

This is maybe the best part of a very intense press conference (Eakins can hold the room’s attention I’ll give him that; I think reporters are going to have to actually write down their questions and have a point) and tells you where he’s heading–PROVEN players, ACTUAL players, are going to be the key. In order for a rookie to knock off a veteran with NHL experience, he’s going to need to grab that job by the nuts and pull hard.

For Smid, Petry, Ference, the unrelated Schultz’s, Grebeshkov, Larsen, Potter and Belov that’s good news. If the Oilers begin the season with 8 of those guys and another on IR (that’s what will probably happen if the battle is close), that should be considered the reasonable, most likely and best result. Don’t let the ultimate tournament of small sample sizes (TC) fool you.

A FEW NOTES ON THE WINNIPEG GAME

  • It went as expected, the Oilers best players up front are the kids (Khaira, Chase, Roy) and the twin towers (Marincin, Gernat) are showing well among the touted blue. The goaltending is no name, the struggles appear to be coming from the 20+ year olds and that is incredibly discouraging. At this point, I think Andrew Miller should fake an injury, as each shift gets him closer to Bakersfield.
  • In the two games so far, Edmonton’s SP is .813
  • Khaira, Chase, Platzer and Betker–all new to this tournament–are +1, the only players in the black.
  • Klefbom, Kessy and Miller are all -5, the worst number in the tournament.
  • Shots on goal leaders: Marco Roy (8–tied for 3rd in the entire tournament); Khaira (6); Gernat (5); Fyten (5); Chase (4); Ewanyk (4); Leach (4).
  • Point leaders: Platzer (1, 1-0-1); Khaira (2, 1-0-1); Chase (2, 1-0-1); Ewanyk (2, 1-0-1); Klefbom (2, 0-1-1); Marincin (2, 0-1-1); Gernat (2, 0-1-1)

I’ll have more later this morning as we get ready for an early afternoon game. There are positives from this camp (incredibly) but I think it’s reasonable to suggest Edmonton came here with a roster that should have been expected to get these results. The Oilers brought a knife to a gunfight, or more accurately, their tough forwards are ready to intimidate and they’ll get right to it as soon as the other team stops scoring on them.

written by

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

30 Responses to "THAT’S ENTERTAINMENT!"

  1. Woodguy says:

    C’mon LT, did you see how fast the WIN players went back to their bench after the 7th goal?

    They were cowed into a shell by all the truculence on the ice.

    Also,

    Here’s a link to the Eakins Q&A

    http://video.oilers.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=4&id=443365

    Millhouse asks a meandering question at the 11:55 mark and Eakins owns his soul.

    I loved this entire Q&A

    Straight talk, real answers, no bullshit.

    Same you get from the GM.

    I’m really looking forward to this group (players and management) being together for a while

  2. jake70 says:

    He mentions “looking at body language” oh oh. ;-)

    Like his words on choosing the next captain. No rush.

    He owns Tencer on the “hommage to past” …lol. Awkward.

  3. gr8one says:

    Woodguy:

    Here’s a link to the Eakins Q&A

    http://video.oilers.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=4&id=443365

    Millhouse asks a meandering question at the 11:55 mark and Eakins owns his soul.

    That was epic.

    Looked about like this.

    http://behance.vo.llnwd.net/profiles11/1094951/projects/7211137/af5135b6429c30437f8c6f00c38de7d2.jpg

  4. Marc says:

    LT

    This is relevant only to the extent that Paul Weller is one of the featured songwriters, but here’s an interesting piece – the journalist spoke to many of the best British songwriters of the last 50 years about how they wrote what they wrote:

    http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/sep/05/british-songwriter-interviews-secrets

    Enjoy

  5. Clarkenstein says:

    Loved the Tencer question… rambling on “Staufferlike” then getting it stuffed back in his yap. You can hear a nervous little giggle from the “self-anointed” one!
    Early, very early observations on Klefbom… maybe there has been too many expectations on this kid. Same with Marincin… was a pylon on one goal last night.
    Prediction for OKC… cellar dwellers this year.

  6. Lowetide says:

    Marc: Brilliant piece, thanks so much! Davies: . It was a joy to have a hit with “Sunny Afternoon”. England won the World Cup and we knocked “Paperback Writer” off the No 1 spot. It’s not one of their greatest singles but … it was quite significant.

  7. Lowetide says:

    Haha. Rotten: No. I wouldn’t do that. Urrgh, no I’m not one of the Clash. I remember Joe Strummer used to sit in front of The News at Six and wait for titles and slogans that he could write down. Then he’d rush off and write a song around it: “sten guns in Knightsbridge” and “White Riot”. It’s all fucking ridiculous. It’s too manufactured.

  8. DawnM says:

    Ouch. That’s all I can say about the tournament as I haven’t watched any of it since period 2 Thursday. Cue Oil fans running around in circles screaming like their hair’s on fire.

    It does bring up a situation I hadn’t considered while enjoying the benefits of a few firsts in a row. While our primo prospects were graduating directly to the NHL, there were no grade A prospects moving into the feeder system. Now we’ll have to work with a lull while we wait for the development system to catch up. The consolation is that the guys we might have had moving up are already putting up points in the big club.

    As much as I don’t want to hear it, it’s still time to preach patience as the rebuild consequences filter down through OKC. I can only hope they stay the course and allow the development system to come to a balance.

  9. Bos8 says:

    I expect games of highs and lows until Christmas before things stabilize. That’s three different coaches in a short time. I like the structure and possession game that they are trying to implement. High time.

    Eakins’ intensity does come through. Short and to the point – This, is what we will do. Never mind motivational orating.

  10. Marc says:

    LT,

    Though you might like it. :)

    One other tangential connection to hockey – Noel Gallagher articulates (in the last three sentences in particular) very well what I suspect is the reason that some fans, MSM and Toronto Maple Leafs are so hostile to advanced stats:

    Do you think in traditional structures when you’re writing?
    I only listen to music derived or from the 60s. I’m not interested in jazz or hip-hop or whatever’s going round at the minute; indie shit. I don’t loathe it but I don’t listen to it. My education as a songwriter was from listening to the Kinks and the Who and the Beatles. I don’t listen to avant-garde landscapes and think, “I could do that.” I’m not a fan of Brian Eno. It’s Ray Davies, John Lennon and Pete Townshend for me.

    Where would that education take you? Was it listening and absorbing or thinking, “What’s Ray Davies doing here?”
    No, I’m not that clever. I would play along at home to “Dead End Street” and “Waterloo Sunset” but that’s it. I taught myself to play the guitar; it’s just a tool for me to write songs. I’m not a great guitarist. I don’t study it. It frustrates me sometimes. I’ll never be the super session guy: I can do sessions for Oasis. It would take all the magic out of it to break down “I Am the Walrus” to its basic components. I listen to it and go, “It’s fucking amazing; why is it amazing? I don’t know, it just is.” That’s why I find journalists such joyless fucking idiots. They have to break music down and pull it apart until there’s nothing left, until they know it all; they analyse it down until it’s bland nonsense. They don’t listen to music like the rest of us.

  11. Lowetide says:

    I hope Noel Gallagher knows a George Martin. Sincerely.

  12. iHockeyWpg says:

    Hi has Ty Bilcke played in this tournament? Looks like a good fighter but does he have a future in pro hockey?

  13. Lowetide says:

    iHockeyWpg:
    Hi has Ty Bilcke played in this tournament?Looks like a good fighter but does he have a future in pro hockey?

    He’s looked good in that role.

  14. PaperDesigner says:

    Marc:
    LT,

    Though you might like it.

    One other tangential connection to hockey – Noel Gallagher articulates (in the last three sentences in particular) very well what I suspect is the reason that some fans, MSM and Toronto Maple Leafs are so hostile to advanced stats:

    Do you think in traditional structures when you’re writing?
    I only listen to music derived or from the 60s. I’m not interested in jazz or hip-hop or whatever’s going round at the minute; indie shit. I don’t loathe it but I don’t listen to it. My education as a songwriter was from listening to the Kinks and the Who and the Beatles. I don’t listen to avant-garde landscapes and think, “I could do that.” I’m not a fan of Brian Eno. It’s Ray Davies, John Lennon and Pete Townshend for me.

    Where would that education take you? Was it listening and absorbing or thinking, “What’s Ray Davies doing here?”
    No, I’m not that clever. I would play along at home to “Dead End Street” and “Waterloo Sunset” but that’s it. I taught myself to play the guitar; it’s just a tool for me to write songs. I’m not a great guitarist. I don’t study it. It frustrates me sometimes. I’ll never be the super session guy: I can do sessions for Oasis. It would take all the magic out of it to break down “I Am the Walrus” to its basic components. I listen to it and go, “It’s fucking amazing; why is it amazing? I don’t know, it just is.” That’s why I find journalists such joyless fucking idiots. They have to break music down and pull it apart until there’s nothing left, until they know it all; they analyse it down until it’s bland nonsense. They don’t listen to music like the rest of us.

    I have to disagree with your entire line of thinking, as someone who studies music in university and has been poking around the advanced stats bloggers for a while.

    The interesting thing is that pop stars, and those that write for them, often fall into the same chord progression repeatedly, even if they think themselves free of the “dictates” of music theory. I remember a quote from Mariah Carey saying she felt like it was beneficial to not know theory, so she could do whatever she wanted and not be told it wasn’t the correct way. But that’s not how it works. What happens is that there is the one, extremely common chord progression that sells, that musicians unknowingly keep going back to, or they knowingly go back to because they know the public won’t notice.

    Does this take away from the magic? No, I think it does two things–increases appreciation for music outside that standard pop progression and begs a question that I think is filled with a lot more intrigue than blind approval; why do we respond so much to that progression?

    A good education inevitably breeds deeper, more probing questions, and a greater sense of awe. A bad one pretends that there are simple cut and dried answers. It’s the difference between saying we need to get rid of every player with a bad RELcorsi and, say, Dellow’s investigation into what happened to Gagner and Hemsky last year.

  15. jfry says:

    Klefbom definitely looked like a more confident player with consistent reps when he was here for the Wjc.

    There’s obviously a lot of rust. It feels like he’s afraid of getting hit, because I’m shocked at how many times he’d just wheel around our net and pass blindly up the side wall to no one, causing an icing.

    At this point he’s a shell of his former self. Hopefully some ice time fixes that. If klefbom isn’t a guarantee, it changes our depth chart quite a bit.

  16. jfry says:

    Also, did anyone notice a difference in the attack yesterday? From what I saw it looked like a classic one man forechecking, not two like Nelson said they’d use.

  17. jfry says:

    I have a masters’s degree in English literature and the whole process of deconstructing every piece of writing I liked has resulted in me hating literature and also to stop writing on my own. There’s definitely something to be said for analysis destroying the “beauty” in something. That said, I haven’t played hockey in years, and the analytics has definitely made being a fan easier (although I might not need it if my team wasn’t a perennial loser).

  18. Hammers says:

    Blunt & to the point . Reporters of all ages and experience need to learn something from that interview . Dumb questions get short shrift and good questions are expanded on . I like Eakins allready . Gets straight to the point and is believable .Players from both the Oil & OKL better be ready or we will see some shock moves .

  19. commonfan14 says:

    jfry,

    Imagine combining that with having to deal on a daily basis with the authors you’re writing about, many of whom hold you with a healthy amount of disdain and can’t always hide it very well, and it’s easy to see why so many sports writers get jaded.

    Still annoying though. I wish more of them would remember that their audience actually likes sports and wants to have fun following it.

  20. TheOtherJohn says:

    Did anyone explain to Jack Michaels that Calgary & Winnipeg had the same amount of practice time as the Oilers? Eakins blunt talk juxtaposed with excuses from the PBP.

    How did Nic Pétan look? He was, after all, going up against the prospect equivalent of the 1975-79 Montreal Canadiens D: Klefbom, Marincin, Nurse, Gernat

  21. Lowetide says:

    Petan looked great to my eye, very good player.

  22. wheatnoil says:

    Interesting to hear Eakins specifically point out in reference to tactics that the Oilers will have a “definite plan in the neutral zone when we don’t have the puck and a definite plan in the offensive zone when we don’t have the puck”. That seems to match up well with what Tyler Dellow had found in his Big Data Series, does it not? (Trouble preventing shots against when losing the neutral zone draws and trouble creating multiple shot attempts after the first one in the offensive zone)

  23. justDOit says:

    PaperDesigner,

    Pachelbel’s Canon in D major?

  24. Lois Lowe says:

    I really like how frank both MacT and Eakins are. It’s refreshing after listening to Kruger’s relentless optimism.

  25. Dead Cat Bounce says:

    Edmonton Oilers ‏@EdmontonOilers 44m
    #Oilers fwds today vs. VAN:

    Baddock-Schaber-Abney,

    Kessy-Ewanyk-Bilcke,

    Platzer-Khaira-Miller,

    Fyten-Roy-Chase

    Edmonton Oilers ‏@EdmontonOilers 43m

    #Oilers D is

    Nurse-Davidson,

    Gernat-Betker,

    Leach-Musil

    with Palazzese starting in net, Rimmer backing him up

  26. hunter1909 says:

    Love the way MacT fired Krueger.

  27. hunter1909 says:

    I’m prepared to stick my neck out:

    Nurse has a monster game today.

  28. Lowetide says:

    NEw thread is up for the game.

  29. oliveoilers says:

    PaperDesigner: I have to disagree with your entire line of thinking, as someone who studies music in university and has been poking around the advanced stats bloggers for a while.

    The interesting thing is that pop stars, and those that write for them, often fall into the same chord progression repeatedly, even if they think themselves free of the “dictates” of music theory. I remember a quote from Mariah Carey saying she felt like it was beneficial to not know theory, so she could do whatever she wanted and not be told it wasn’t the correct way. But that’s not how it works. What happens is that there is the one, extremely common chord progression that sells, that musicians unknowingly keep going back to, or they knowingly go back to because they know the public won’t notice.

    Does this take away from the magic?No, I think it does two things–increases appreciation for music outside that standard pop progression and begs a question that I think is filled with a lot more intrigue than blind approval; why do we respond so much to that progression?

    A good education inevitably breeds deeper, more probing questions, and a greater sense of awe. A bad one pretends that there are simple cut and dried answers. It’s the difference between saying we need to get rid of every player with a bad RELcorsi and, say, Dellow’s investigation into what happened to Gagner and Hemsky last year.

    So why bother studying music. Just learn the chord progression and save yourself at least 4 years and thousands of dollars.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca