WHERE HAVE YOU GONE, WAYNE CASHMAN?

When I was a young man, I received an education in the truth of “there’s more than one way to win” from crusty baseball men Whitey Herzog and Earl Weaver. Herzog’s signature team arrived in 1981 with the St. Louis Cardinals. Herzog’s men played on a fast track (astroturf) and had a spacious outfield. So, Whitey found three guys with CF speed and an ability to get on base and the jackrabbit era of baseball was born (or really re-born, there’s nothing new in baseball). Over in the junior loop, Earl Weaver in Baltimore was using on-base percentage and the three-run homer to get the job done.

I loved both styles of play, and both were successful. Weaver had more success, but a lot of that had to do with a consistent starting rotation (Whitey’s pitchers always had some issue—some were crazy, some didn’t have a fastball, some needed to hurt themselves with electric fans) but both men were effective. They used what they had and married it to their ballpark.

Hockey doesn’t have ballpark effects, but we do have the style of opponent and in the Pacific Division that style is decidedly large and defensive. Make no mistake, there are outstanding skill players (Doughty at the Olympics) but much of the mindset in the division is taking care of the store. Defense. And puck possession. The Oilers have all kinds of young talent and are trying to add useful pieces to that foundation in order to compete next season and in the future.

In acquiring Matt Hendricks, Mark Fraser are the Oilers helping themselves against teams like Los Angeles? Mark Fraser’s Corsi for 5×5 % is 36. Will that improve as the sample gets larger? Will he eventually enter Matt Greene (57.9) territory once the team improves? How many Matt Hendricks types does it take? Could he play on a piss-cutter defensive 4line like Dowd-Devereaux-Laraque 15 years ago?

Are the Oilers going to fail with the Jacks and Kings because they can’t find Marchant-Moreau-Grier?

WHERE HAVE YOU GONE, WAYNE CASHMAN?

cashmanThe list of possible deadline players is concerning. Ales Hemsky can help with possession, we have over a decade’s worth of evidence. Ryan Smyth too—even at his advanced age Smyth’s Corsi for 5×5 % is 47.1, tops among Oiler forwards not currently in the minors. If these men exit while Hendricks and Luke Gazdic enter, how does that improve the Edmonton Oilers?

  • Eakins on Hendricks: “He’s preaching all the stuff that we need here. He’s been a good penalty-killer for us, but definitely a guy that’s very vocal. I think a lot of our guys need to be listening to that because he certainly knows what he’s talking about.”

MATT HENDRICKS PLAYER CARD (EXTRA SKATER)

hendricks extra skaterNow, we know the fourth line folks aren’t going to push the river, so the CF REL isn’t a huge surprise. However, does Hendricks bring enough to the game? Is he somewhere between Ethan Moreau and Dan Lacouture? Does the coach believe in him so much we can consider him an own-zone 4line savant? Is that the appeal?

VOLLMAN SLEDGEHAMMER

vollman 2014 feb 24Is this the Hendricks role? Less sheltered 4th line guy who can take own-zone faceoffs? OR is he a 3rd line guy who will take a lot of own-zone faceoffs? The role Edmonton chooses for Hendricks next season tells us a lot about the Oilers in 2014-15. Frankly, I believe Ryan Smyth is better for that role and closer to the Wayne Cashman even at this age.

Keeping Hendricks while trading Smyth is a net loss. I don’t see any other way to frame this situation.

 LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

harry1Many Canadians spent at least part of yesterday looking a little like Ms. Harry here, and we’ll discuss the gold medal game among other things today on the Lowdown. 10am, TSN 1260 and scheduled to appear:

  • Tyler Dellow, mc79 hockey. We’ll talk Olympics but also about possession players and Smyth/Hendricks, trading Hemsky, etc.
  • Travis Yost, Hockeybuzz. Travis will discuss Team USA at the Olympics (or maybe he’ll hang up!) and the Senators at the deadline, plus some NFL.
  • Jeff Hauser from Radio Hauser. The NFL combine is on and some of these draft eligibles are  kicking out the jams.
  • Corey Pronman from ESPN and Hockey Prospectus. I thought the NHL draft was fairly clear 1-6, and then Sam Reinhart went super nova. We’ll talk to Corey about the top five.

10-1260 via text, @Lowetide_ on twitter. Nice to be back!

written by

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

113 Responses to "WHERE HAVE YOU GONE, WAYNE CASHMAN?"

  1. Ben says:

    I would feel a lot more comfortable going into this deadline if I had any confidence at all in the Oil’s pro scouting department. If there’s office surgery to be done this summer, that’s where it needs to happen.

    Also, trading Gagner in-season does not seem like clever management.

  2. DBO says:

    ESPN talking about Parkatti and the Oilers level of suck.

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/10476332/edmonton-oilers-use-crowdsourcing-find-new-metric-espn-magazine

    Good read. Is there a method to the Oilers madness in acquisitions?

    Maybe they should just get actual players.

  3. Pouzar says:

    Yes Lowdown is back! Normalcy!

  4. edwards_daddy says:

    ‘some needed to hurt themselves with electric fans’

    You can’t just leave that story hanging in the interweb…

  5. Ducey says:

    So we can’t trade Gagner, Hemsky and now Smyth? I could have sworn this team needed to make some changes. Adding Arco and Lander and getting rid of Jones and Nultz isn’t going to do it, I am afraid

    The Oilers need to keep Smyth for the next 22 games, why?

    Is he likely to play as well next year as this year at age 39?

    I don’t see any rational reason the Oilers wouldn’t trade him, other than LT’s mental health :) Smyth has made it clear he wants to be here. He traded himself here before. Trade him, get something for him, and then re-sign him in the summer. The only reason you don’t is out of respect for the player if he asks you not to.

    As for Hemsky? Ditto. Get something for him now. Sign him in the offseason if you can’t find someone better.

  6. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    I remain convinced MacT and Eakins are stuck in a Janus situation.

    Both have said the right things and the wrong things at times. Made the right moves and the wrong moves.

    For every time we hear about puck possession, or carry ins, or de-emphasizing hitting, or no playing B2Bs, or size WITH skill…

    we hear about teaching Hall to dump it in, riding the hot hand, sticking with the roster that won the last game, growl, you need that toughness on the 4th line…

    you can’t list them all on both ledgers. Needless to say, the battles going on in the hockey world at large happen within individuals. This shouldn’t be surprising.

    Few people can legitimately claim allegiance to one side here (and this binary is to an extent fallacious). Even really smart teams, with smart people who use Corsi to track potential draft targets like SJS trade 4th rounders for Mike Brown.

    I think we have to acknowledge two things:

    1) MacT and Eakins get enough of the new thinking to be susceptible to getting more of it and putting it to work. that’s good.

    2) MacT and Eakins still inhabit a lot of the old thinking, it’s ingrained and we can’t expect to grind it out of them quickly and without a fight.

  7. Ducey says:

    edwards_daddy:
    ‘some needed to hurt themselves with electric fans’

    You can’t just leave that story hanging in the interweb…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tudor_(baseball)

  8. RBB says:

    LT, I’m not sure you can definitively say that trading Smyth instead of Hendricks is a “Net Loss” because the return in that trade is not known. While I suspect the return would be meager, there are various scenarios where the oilers benefit from such a trade

  9. RexLibris says:

    Romulus Apotheosis:
    I remain convinced MacT and Eakins are stuck in a Janus situation.

    Both have said the right things and the wrong things at times. Made the right moves and the wrong moves.

    For every time we hear about puck possession, or carry ins, or de-emphasizing hitting, or no playing B2Bs, or size WITH skill…

    we hear about teaching Hall to dump it in, riding the hot hand, sticking with the roster that won the last game, growl, you need that toughness on the 4th line…

    you can’t list them all on both ledgers. Needless to say, the battles going on in the hockey world at large happen within individuals. This shouldn’t be surprising.

    Few people can legitimately claim allegiance to one side here (and this binary is to an extent fallacious). Even really smart teams, with smart people who use Corsi to track potential draft targets like SJS trade 4th rounders for Mike Brown.

    I think we have to acknowledge two things:

    1) MacT and Eakins get enough of the new thinking to be susceptible to getting more of it and putting it to work. that’s good.

    2) MacT and Eakins still inhabit a lot of the old thinking, it’s ingrained and we can’t expect to grind it out of them quickly and without a fight.

    Half a step forward is still forward.

    The encouraging bit for me is that I believe the best managers are perceptive enough and humble enough to surround themselves with good people, even smarter people. I’ve seen some of this in what MacTavish has done so far. Eakins is a smart man, Bob Green is no slouch, and we’ve heard rumblings about some members of the Oilogosphere doing some work for them gathering data.

    The big question is how will this management group respond to failures by their own assembled employees. Sather stood by Barry Fraser for about five years too long because of loyalty and his early track record. I don’t believe MacTavish will hold the same sentimental attachment to those who cannot perform in their respective tasks. This includes Olcyk, Buchberger, Smith, Gare, Semenko, Chabot, and so on.

    I think it will help having a large group involved in player acquisition and development (from local bird-dogs and the scouts on up to Todd Nelson, Mike Sillinger and Rick Carriere) as one can sometimes more easily determine who is accomplishing their tasks by contrast with those who are struggling.

  10. Pouzar says:

    So what’s the O/U for Oiler trades?

    Let’s say 3.5…I take Under with Gagner staying put till the summer.

  11. G Money says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: I remain convinced MacT and Eakins are stuck in a Janus situation.

    If you are going to use analogies from ancient mythology, perhaps the top of the list is us Oiler fans and our team and our Sisyphian rebuild …

  12. hunter1909 says:

    Wayne Cashman’s the first basic absolute goon-style NHLer the Red Machine faced; Game Two in 1972.

    Several of the Soviet players were heard saying “Cashman”… “Cashman”… walking to their Maple Leaf Gardens dressing room at the end of the 1st period.

    It’s not for nothing he played on Esposito’s astonishing 76 goal season line.

  13. hunter1909 says:

    I hope to see Smyth gone, fuckers a shadow since his return.

  14. hunter1909 says:

    ps: I hope you aren’t calling the 3 1st overall dudes + Eberle mere jacks, Lowetide.

    They’re aces.

    Fuck Lowe, MacT, Eakins to the depths they’ve all dragged this team down to where apparent star players in 29 NHL cities other than Edmonton are all looking set to bust.

    lol

  15. Mr DeBakey says:

    Look,
    There’s a gold-medal coach in that picture of Ryan Smyth Esq!

  16. Hammers says:

    Boy would Cashman look good on this team but wishful thinking is just that and no more . For me there should be no sentimentality in making decisions . Hemsky & Smyth have been reasons to support this team in the past, but this is the here and now . McT cleaned house last year , made some good decisions but he must again start from scratch and clean out what is not beneficial going forward . If he wants to resign them in July is up to him .

  17. TheOtherJohn says:

    Hammers

    Realize the Oilers are a truly shitty hockey team but not sure Wayne Cashman could help this team very much. He is, after all, 68 years old

  18. RexLibris says:

    Pouzar:
    So what’s the O/U for Oiler trades?

    Let’s say 3.5…I take Under with Gagner staying put till the summer.

    I’d take the over.

    With Belov, N. Schultz, Jones, Potter, Fraser, Smyth, Hemsky and even Bryzgalov all UFAs I think the Oilers probably move most of those names at the deadline. What might be different this year from previous is that I’m not certain they’ll accept just picks in return.

    Out of those eight, if six are traded you could see a warm body come back in one or two of them, either as a player or a prospect.

    The Oilers have Fedun, Klefbom, Hunt and Davidson they could call up to replace any of Schultz, Potter, Belov or Fraser, and Pitlick, Arcobello, Lander or Horak to replace Smyth, Jones or Hemsky. Given what the team has done with the current roster this year I don’t see MacTavish hanging on to a player with the same excuse that Tambellini did last year, that they were owed an opportunity to see if they could help push the team into a playoff position. So we are more likely to see an “out with the old, in with the new” approach.

    It could hamstring Nelson down in OKC, but I think NHL considerations win out after the deadline.

  19. russ99 says:

    I know Whitey gets a lot of credit for the SB revolution, but other teams use that strategy before 1981:

    Look at the 76 A’s, 3 guys over 50SBs, 6 guys with over 30 SBs, and 8 with over 20. And that was before Rickey Henderson.

    Also, the late 70s Astros teams played a similar style as the 81 Cards, but weren’t as successful with it.

  20. Woodguy says:

    Oilers practice: Hall-RNH-Yakupov, Hemsky-Gagner-Eberle, Hendricks-Gordon-Perron, Gazdic-Smyth-Jones/Joensuu

    Interesting the Hemsky gets 2LW rather than Perron.

    Last minute evaluation for signing Hemsky or letting teams see him with offensive players before trading for him?

    Dpairs:

    Oilers D: N.Schultz-J.Schultz, Marincin-Petry, Fraser-Ference, Belov-Potter, Larsen

    Man that’s a week Dcorps.

  21. Truth says:

    Belov, N. Schultz, , Potter, Jones, Smyth, Fraser , Hemsky and Bryzgalov all UFAs.

    How many are not regular scratches on any other NHL team?

    Hemsky and Smyth? Plus Bryzgalov may get a look as insurance going into the playoffs.

    Can’t see N. Schultz, Potter, Jones, or Fraser getting anything more than a 5th or 6th round pick in return. Everyone knows the Oilers are desperate. How bad would another team need an additional fringe NHL player to overpay a desperate team?

    I sure hope they don’t trade Gagner for a coke machine.

  22. RexLibris says:

    Woodguy,

    Fraser-Ference seems like a very bad idea. But when weighed against all the other options…

  23. Ducey says:

    Woodguy:
    Dpairs:

    Oilers D: N.Schultz-J.Schultz, Marincin-Petry, Fraser-Ference, Belov-Potter, Larsen

    Man that’s a week Dcorps.

    Longer than that likely. A week and a half until Mar 5.

  24. gd says:

    RexLibris,

    I truly hope you are right that MacT will identify the deadwood in management and clear them out, but I am fairly pessimistic he has the managerial acumen and experience to make these calls. Then I hope he finds some young fresh blood in some of these positions.

    I hope he puts the development team on the spot for what has happened with guys like PRV, Pitlick and Tuebert, and questions the amateur scouting for both the hits and misses. Examples of things I would do, is I would question the OHL scouts on what they saw in someone like Saad and have they learned from that. The pro scouts should be majorly cleaned out for obvious reasons.

    We keep talking about the right and wrong way to do a rebuild. I think Katz’s biggest mistake is not realizing that getting the right management in place should have been the first order of business. To me the decisions made on management, development and scouting personnel are way more important this off-season than hockey personnel. I fear Katz and MacT do not realize this.

  25. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    RexLibris:
    Woodguy,

    Fraser-Ference seems like a very bad idea. But when weighed against all the other options…

    … it is still the worst one?

    Any of Ference with Belov, Potter, Larsen, Fedun, N. Schultz, Klefbom, Grebs is going to be better. A lot better.

  26. RexLibris says:

    Truth,

    They may be regular season healthy scratches on some nights, but one has to consider playoff depth. Defenseman always have value that outstrips their contributions. Even smart GMs make this error. As for Jones, if the Leafs were looking for a winger he’s the kind of guy a coach like Carlyle would like.

    These aren’t worthless assets, and while the return for some may be in the range of a 3rd to 5th round pick, that isn’t altogether something to ignore.

  27. RexLibris says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    Absolutely.

    I’m holding on to dear hope that Fraser is flipped at the deadline. I don’t care what for, but please let him be one of the last nails in the coffin of “we need big strong men on the blueline regardless of their hockey ability”.

    Ference should be the wingman in any defensive pairing, not the marquee name.

  28. Ducey says:

    Truth:
    Belov, N. Schultz, , Potter, Jones, Smyth, Fraser , Hemsky and Bryzgalov all UFAs.

    How many are not regular scratches on any other NHL team?

    Hemsky and Smyth? Plus Bryzgalov may get a look as insurance going into the playoffs.

    Can’t see N. Schultz, Potter, Jones, or Fraser getting anything more than a 5th or 6th round pick in return.Everyone knows the Oilers are desperate. How bad would another team need an additional fringe NHL player to overpay a desperate team?

    I sure hope they don’t trade Gagner for a coke machine.

    Fraser won’t get anything but Nultz should bring at least a third rounder. You are on the mark about Jones.

    The question isn’t about the desperation of the Oilers. Everyone knows these guys are up for grabs. The question is whether other teams are interested. Lots of teams will be interested in a durable vet defenseman like Nultz.

  29. RexLibris says:

    gd,

    GMs make a lot of those calls as well. The scouts could have liked Saad but were given a different set of skillset priorities. It happens all the time and in better organizations than the Oilers.

    Many people believe that a draft list is a simple compilation of players from best to worst. If it were that easy drafting would proceed along established lines and lists and prospect busts would be more closely associated with injury than missed scouting reports or bad information. Best Player Available is a very subjective term, especially when considering the extreme difficulty in projecting the career paths for highly specialized athletes at the age of 17 or 18 years old.

    The test is how quickly can a management group identify organizational failings and address them. MacTavish is clever, intelligent, educated. Let’s see if he is ruthless enough to cull his own Hockey Ops group when the time comes.

  30. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Ducey: Fraser won’t get anything but Nultz should bring at least a third rounder.You are on the mark about Jones.

    The question isn’t about the desperation of the Oilers.Everyone knows these guys are up for grabs.The question is whether other teams are interested.Lots of teams will be interested in a durable vet defenseman like Nultz.

    D at the deadline are worth something. I could see Fraser getting a 4th or 5th rounder.

    Clearly him off the books would be worth something too… hahaha

  31. gd says:

    RexLibris,

    I have no doubt MacT is ruthless. He showed it with RK. As a coach he had to cut a lot of players, I’m assuming if you can do that, you can fire some underperforming scouts. My question is, is he astute enough to know who needs to go, and how to find and hire strong people from outside the organization?

  32. hoser313 says:

    The Hendricks and Fraser signings are about deterrence, truculence, call it whatever you want. If Gazdic sits or gets injured, then who will stand up to the Kassian-types in the Pacific? Not saying this is right, just that this is clearly what management is thinking.

    The Fraser signing bothers me a bit. In my view, this is ice time this season that is better spent on Fedun, Klefbom or even Belov.

  33. Mr DeBakey says:

    gd: I hope he puts the development team on the spot for what has happened with guys like PRV, Pitlick and Tuebert

    Teubert?
    Seriously, Teubert met his potential.

  34. hunter1909 says:

    When do the jerkoffs…err…oilers return to dazzle everyone with Rob Schremp free hockey?

  35. TheOtherJohn says:

    LAK had 5 prospect D men on their AHL roster in 2011 when we traded them Penner. Voynov, Martinez, Muzzin, Hickey and Teubert. We got Teubert. He is the only 1 of the 5 of them not playing in the NHL

    Teubert is, though, 13th in scoring on the Iserlohn Roosters

  36. Ryan says:

    TheOtherJohn:
    LAK had 5 prospect D men on their AHL roster in 2011 when we traded them Penner.Voynov, Martinez, Muzzin, Hickey and Teubert. We got Teubert. He is the only 1 of the 5 of them not playing in the NHL

    Teubert is, though, 13th in scoring on the Iserlohn Roosters

    At the time of the trade everybody and their dog wanted voynov though we all knew he wasn’t available in this deal.

    Hard to know if one of the others were available, but tuebert had draft pedigree and played with some edge, so that’s all that mattered, right.

  37. Ryan says:

    gd:
    RexLibris,

    I have no doubt MacT is ruthless. He showed it with RK. As a coach he had to cut a lot of players, I’m assuming if you can do that, you can fire some underperforming scouts. My question is, is he astute enough to know who needs to go, and how to find and hire strong people from outside the organization?

    It was easy to be ruthless with RK since he was a tambellini hire with zero ties to the org.

    Can MacT be ruthless when it comes to the winningest assistant coaches in the NHL?

  38. Ryan says:

    hoser313:
    The Hendricks and Fraser signings are about deterrence, truculence, call it whatever you want.If Gazdic sits or gets injured, then who will stand up to the Kassian-types in the Pacific?Not saying this is right, just that this is clearly what management is thinking.

    The Fraser signing bothers me a bit.In my view, this is ice time this season that is better spent on Fedun, Klefbom or even Belov.

    Welcome to the endless parade of incompetent truculent…it’s a revolving door where players enter on their way out of the NHL thru the Oilers.

    Hendricks is probably the best in awhile of this lot though he can’t fight very well and his contract will only look worse with time

  39. DeadmanWaking says:

    Reviewing the Greatest Hits: Sound & Vision DVD for Pitchfork Media, Jess Harvell wrote that while “owning your own copy of ‘Heart of Glass’ may not seem as cool [anymore]… there’s the always luminous Deborah Harry, who would give boiling asparagus an erotic charge, all while looking too bored to live.”

    I’ve had a Glass earworm for the past few days, only when I’m tired and drifting off to sleep the chorus switches to Dancing Queen, which startles me awake again in a cold sweat.

    The annoyance of other musicians over Harry dabbling at disco made me wonder if Picasso had ever tried his hand at Normal Rockwell. “Pablo is ruining everything!”

    Garcon a la Pipe was as close as I could find–and artistically just fine. Then, as you’re nicely drifting off, the boy in your mind’s eye lifts his pipe and all hell breaks loose.

    Not for Debbie, though. With barely a crossed eye, she just purses her lips and flutes billowing cover-boy into skunk orbit.

  40. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: I think we have to acknowledge two things:
    1) MacT and Eakins get enough of the new thinking to be susceptible to getting more of it and putting it to work. that’s good.
    2) MacT and Eakins still inhabit a lot of the old thinking, it’s ingrained and we can’t expect to grind it out of them quickly and without a fight.

    Have you considered the best option might be a marriage between the new thinking and the old thinking? I don’t see it as the “either/or” scenario that many seem to.

  41. Ducey says:

    hoser313:
    The Hendricks and Fraser signings are about deterrence, truculence, call it whatever you want.If Gazdic sits or gets injured, then who will stand up to the Kassian-types in the Pacific?Not saying this is right, just that this is clearly what management is thinking.

    The Fraser signing bothers me a bit.In my view, this is ice time this season that is better spent on Fedun, Klefbom or even Belov.

    I think Hendricks has been a good add. Fraser was a trade, not a signing. They gave up a complete bust in Abney and a guy who will never play in the NHL (and if he does, not any better than Fraser) in Hartikanen.

    I remain convinced (based on my own assumptions) Fraser is just in for a look see and to cover off the loss of some guys who will go at the deadline. I bet Nonis was just calling around trying to unload his contract and MacT thought he would take a flyer on him for no cost.

  42. Ryan says:

    Woodguy:

    Dpairs:

    Oilers D: N.Schultz-J.Schultz, Marincin-Petry, Fraser-Ference, Belov-Potter, Larsen

    Man that’s a week Dcorps.

    Three and a half third pairings :)

  43. Pouzar says:

    So what do people think here…

    On Stauffer they are talking One of Hall or Nuge in a package for Shea Weber.

    I say NO.

  44. Ryan says:

    Pouzar:
    So what do people think here…

    On Stauffer they are talking One of Hall or Nuge in a package for Shea Weber.

    I say NO.

    Those are the only two you can’t trade.

    Weber’s a stud but he’s about as much use to us without Hall and Nuge as he is to Nashville right now.

  45. Pouzar says:

    Ryan: Those are the only two you can’t trade.

    Weber’s a stud but he’s about as much use to us without Hall and Nuge as he is to Nashville right now.

    Agreed. The #1 Center and the Franchise player already a top PPG river pusher ( most of the time).

  46. Ducey says:

    Pouzar,

    That contract is just too big. $7.8 million for the next 14 years. Ouch.

    I’d rather go after someone like Seth Jones. Eberle for Jones?

  47. TheOtherJohn says:

    Ducey:
    Pouzar,

    That contract is just too big.$7.8 million for the next 14 years.Ouch.

    I’d rather go after someone like Seth Jones.Eberle for Jones?

    So you are Nashville do you do that deal?

  48. Pouzar says:

    TheOtherJohn: So you are Nashville do you do that deal?

    Like us they would consider it b/c they have been doin a lot of D-Man stockpiling and it hasn’t exactly been working out. Can we name one star forward they’ve had in their franchise?

  49. Caramel Obvious says:

    Pouzar:
    So what do people think here…

    On Stauffer they are talking One of Hall or Nuge in a package for Shea Weber.

    I say NO.

    I think that’s a bad trade for both teams.

    For the Oilers the price would be so high that it would offset the gain and yet Weber is paid a ton and isn’t one of the top five defensemen in the world (in my opinion).

    I’d rather have Subban.

    For Nashville, with a long term real cash budget, having already paid $28 M of that crazy contract, the later years are actually a somewhat good thing, as they will help them get to the cap floor without having to spend real money.

  50. Ducey says:

    TheOtherJohn: So you are Nashville do you do that deal?

    I think they might. They need a sniper or three and don’t seem to have any coming down the pipe.

    As much as the Oilers need defense, NAS needs offense. Eberle would help their PP quite a bit.

    First line right winger,likely their leading scorer for Seth Jones? They would really have to consider it.

  51. hunter1909 says:

    TheOtherJohn: So you are Nashville do you do that deal?

    Who cares? They’re the ones going nowhere without offense. They’re the ones with Shea freaking Weber on defense.

    Eberle’s a blue chip player.

  52. Pouzar says:

    hmmmmm….Offer Sheet for P.K.?????

  53. G Money says:

    hunter1909: Who cares? They’re the ones going nowhere without offense. They’re the ones with Shea freaking Weber on defense.

    Eberle’s a blue chip player.

    Reverse that and it still reads the same.

    Who cares? They’re the ones going nowhere without defense. They’re the ones with Jordan freaking Eberle on offense.

    Weber’s a blue chip player.

  54. hunter1909 says:

    Pouzar:
    hmmmmm….Offer Sheet for P.K.?????

    Assuming this is serious…

    I doubt if he’d be in E Town long enough for the 4 1st rounders he’s going to cost.

  55. hunter1909 says:

    Yakupov is the freaking perfect prototypical 21st century oiler…anyone but the fuckwitz down Rexall Place knows that.

  56. TheOtherJohn says:

    Jones is 4 years younger than Eberle making $3.5 w bonuses and is on ELC for 2 more years, is playing 21 TOI and has 21 pts which projects to 30 pts . At this age both Weber and Eberle were still in junior

    If I’m Poile I am tempted but pass

  57. hunter1909 says:

    Does anyone else remember Katz’s big empty promises of making a ‘world class’ sic oilers, with all kinds of wonderful things spinning into the community, from Ice rinks to the Fountain of Youth?

    Then instead of the hype, the reality is more like this: we all get to basically live out the weak fantasies of Kevin(I’m not good enough to do jack without Messier) Lowe…as he reels like an angry bitter old drunkard from hiring a coach a year, to re-hiring his buddy buddy…

    Who in turns sacks an NHL coach on a whim, the hires an AHL rookie on another whim…

    So. It’s Reinhart or Ekblad at the draft…to make this past season bearable, ha ha ha.

  58. Pouzar says:

    hunter1909: Assuming this is serious…

    I doubt if he’d be in E Town long enough for the 4 1st rounders he’s going to cost.

    Why wouldn’t I be serious?
    If PK is as good as we think he is how much value do you think those latter 1st rd picks will have?

  59. Caramel Obvious says:

    There is no price too high for Subban. None. Other than maybe the Olympic version of Drew Doughty he’s the best defenseman in the world. Getting him for four first round picks is an obvious yes.

    It’s an easy syllogism.

    Either adding Subban without any cost in real players is enough to make this team a real contender , or adding Subban is not enough. If adding Subban is enough then this is a good deal. If adding Subban is not enough, then this team is so far away that by the time the first rounders come to harvest Hall and Eberle, anyway, are long gone. In which case, it was still worth the effort.

  60. Pouzar says:

    PK and Stastny would be heckuva an offseason :)

    *dreaming*

  61. Lynas1 says:

    My thought is they need some new asst coaches. Defense, offense, and goalie. Hall or nuge for weber is a no for me. I’d send ebs away for a big name damn.

  62. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Caramel Obvious: There is no price too high for Subban. None. Other than maybe the Olympic version of Drew Doughty he’s the best defenseman in the world. Getting him for four first round picks is an obvious yes.

    Mike Babcock, Ken Hitchcock, Lindy Ruff & Claude Julien say hi.

  63. FastOil says:

    Kreuger is the new director of Southampton?? Looks like MacT did him a favour.

  64. gogliano says:

    MacT really has a nice setup this trade deadline day. 25 teams have a realistic shot at the playoffs, only 5 teams are really out. It’s shame we don’t have more than a handful of NHL players.

  65. Caramel Obvious says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Mike Babcock, Ken Hitchcock, Lindy Ruff & Claude Julien say hi.

    1) They made a choice based upon the perceived needs of winning a short tournament. That isn’t indicative of anything else unless you think they think that Hamhuis is better than Subban.

    2) That they think something is not prima facie evidence that said thing is true.

  66. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Have you considered the best option might be a marriage between the new thinking and the old thinking? I don’t see it as the “either/or” scenario that many seem to.

    Did you see where I wrote this just above the part you quoted?

    Few people can legitimately claim allegiance to one side here (and this binary is to an extent fallacious).

    FWIW I wasn’t trying to say people fall into one camp or the other, or that one camp is all good or bad. I wanted to suggest such purity is unrealistic and more than likely undesirable, maybe that didn’t come out so clear.

    It was simply a matter of convenience to put it this way: old/new. But I think it reflects a reality often missed in our conversations about hockey decisions, i.e., that people are likely to have mixed views on these matters.

    Going forward, I think the best bet is on whoever is most likely to test their assumptions and allow novel ideas to challenge them. That cuts across the old/new distinction I suggested above. To a large degree, though, that looks like it’s going to mean old ways of thinking need an overhaul or at the very least a lot of sober second thought.

  67. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Caramel Obvious: That they think something is not prima facie evidence that said thing is true.

    No of course not. But if I was weigh the combined hockey acumen of those four gents against yours, well, I know which way I’m leaning. Sorry. ;)

  68. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: Did you see where I wrote this just above the part you quoted?

    Few people can legitimately claim allegiance to one side here (and this binary is to an extent fallacious).

    Yes I read it, but I don’t think I understood it. ;)

    Romulus Apotheosis: Going forward, I think the best bet is on whoever is most likely to test their assumptions and allow novel ideas to challenge them. That cuts across the old/new distinction I suggested above. To a large degree, though, that looks like it’s going to mean old ways of thinking need an overhaul or at the very least a lot of sober second thought.

    Yes to all of this.

  69. Caramel Obvious says:

    Bruce McCurdy: No of course not. But if I was weigh the combined hockey acumen of those four gents against yours, well, I know which way I’m leaning. Sorry.

    These same men took Chris Kunitz. Shall we automatically defer to that decision as well?

  70. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Yes I read it, but I don’t think I understood it.

    It’s no secret I struggle with clarity around here… I tend to rambly on occasion.

    I was just saying that the distinction I was making is false in the broader sense.

    Anyway, glad we agree.

  71. Pouzar says:

    I am going to go out on a limb and suggest subbing Subban for Vlasic or Hamhuis would not have not cost the Olympic team a Gold Medal. There. Back on Track.

    I agree with C.O. that PK is worth the 4 first rounders.

  72. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Caramel Obvious: These same men took Chris Kunitz.Shall we automatically defer to that decision as well?

    Narrative notwithstanding, taking Chris Kunitz was a pretty good decision if you ask me. I don’t see how you can continue to suggest otherwise, today, after the way he played in the semi-final and final especially.

  73. Ducey says:

    Caramel Obvious: These same men took Chris Kunitz.Shall we automatically defer to that decision as well?

    Now you are catching on. Very good.

  74. gvblackhawk says:

    Pouzar:
    I am going to go out on a limb and suggest subbing Subban for Vlasic or Hamhuis would not have not cost the Olympic team a Gold Medal. There. Back on Track.

    I agree with C.O. that PK is worth the 4 first rounders.

    He said ‘no price was too high. None’. That implies that he would trade any or all of Hall, RNH, draft picks, etc, to obtain Subban. I agree that 4 first round picks would be a no brainer, but I wouldn’t gut the team to acquire one player.

  75. gvblackhawk says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Narrative notwithstanding, taking Chris Kunitz was a pretty good decision if you ask me. I don’t see how you can continue to suggest otherwise, today, after the way he played in the semi-final and final especially.

    His philosophy professor told him that the decision was a poor one. Case closed.

  76. Henry says:

    Pouzar:
    I am going to go out on a limb and suggest subbing Subban for Vlasic or Hamhuis would not have not cost the Olympic team a Gold Medal. There. Back on Track.

    I agree with C.O. that PK is worth the 4 first rounders.

    Pouzar,

    Do you want to see Montreal draft McDavid though?

    A team as weak as the Oilers should be very careful with next year’s first. Sad to say.

  77. Racki says:

    A scratched Canadian Olympic team D man is still miles ahead of what we have here. I’d aim for the ceiling when it comes to acquiring a D man. This is one position that can drag the team forwards with one guy.

    If you’re paying that much for PK though, I’d ask around the league first and hit the prime targets. Not that these guys are likely to be traded, but Pronger was traded 4 times during some prime years, and I don’t think it is cause he was a douche. (save for the one trade demand)

    Four 1st rounder is pretty serious biz and will have teams listening when you’re a habitual bottom feeder

  78. Racki says:

    Henry: Pouzar,

    Do you want to see Montreal draft McDavid though?

    A team as weak as the Oilers should be very careful with next year’s first.Sad to say.

    There are going to be great players in many drafts.. Do we want to keep setting our sights low and hope we draft first overall every year? No thank you. It’s long past the time where the Oilers should be doing their best to not make the one bit of excitement for fans the draft.

  79. auzy11 says:

    There should be some moves on fre agent front,as per hemsky,on Smyth what are you going to get for him from a team whe they know his heart is here?,,,,better yet trade coaches with the Peg,,,thats who should of been hired not this celery eating herbivore

  80. Pouzar says:

    Racki:
    A scratched Canadian Olympic team D man is still miles ahead of what we have here. I’d aim for the ceiling when it comes to acquiring a D man. This is one position that can drag the team forwards with one guy.

    If you’re paying that much for PK though, I’d ask around the league first and hit the prime targets. Not that these guys are likely to be traded, but Pronger was traded 4 times during some prime years, and I don’t think it is cause he was a douche. (save for the one trade demand)

    Four 1st rounder is pretty serious biz and will have teams listening when you’re a habitual bottom feeder

    I am as patient as they come when it comes to this rebuild. I don’t want to trade any of our top assets and that includes this years 1st rd pick. But after an offseason that nets you Subban, a signed Ben Scrivens, a decent top pairing d-man, Winnik/Moss and if we’re lucky a #2 Centerman (let’s shoot low and say a defensively responsible Marcel Goc) where exactly do you think the Oil will finish in McDavid’s draft year? If MTL drafts McDavid it won’t because EDM finished last.

  81. Racki says:

    Pouzar,

    You quoted me but maybe meant to quote Henry? I would agree with your post though. I am not concerned about McDavid anyways. I bet he’s a hell of a player, but it’s loser mentality to be hoping for a #1 pick 2 drafts from now.

  82. prairieschooner says:

    Sorry to thread jack but maybe this is worth discussing on your Saturday show LT

    Paul Lawrie has confirmed that he will miss next month’s Trophee Hassan II so he can watch Aberdeen play in the Scottish League Cup final on 16 March.

    The 45-year-old had previously said it was a dilemma as he was still chasing points needed to qualify for Europe’s Ryder Cup team.

  83. Pouzar says:

    Racki,

    Yes sorry about that chief!

  84. OilClog says:

    Regardless of Kunitz play in the final two games, he should never of gone over Taylor Hall. Only Canada would do such a absurd thing, too many jewels, sensible decisions went out the window.

  85. hunter1909 says:

    Racki: it’s loser mentality to be hoping for a #1 pick 2 drafts from now.

    That’s what they said in 2010.

  86. hunter1909 says:

    Racki: Do we want to keep setting our sights low and hope we draft first overall every year?

    Given the performance of Eakins, having regressed nearly every bloody player with his inane “coaching” …I’d say the team’s already thinking past the original 1st overall picks, and is now targeting the next generation of 1st overalls.

    Lowe’s addicted to picking anyone he wants. He’s not giving it up just for any old reason either.

  87. Jordan says:

    OilClog:
    Regardless of Kunitz play in the final two games, he should never of gone over Taylor Hall. Only Canada would do such a absurd thing, too many jewels, sensible decisions went out the window.

    For the style of game Team Canada was playing, Kunitz was a better choice because of his experience, his size and his endurance. Hall is the overall better player, but he’s riskier too. Hall would have been treated the same as PK Subban had he gone, and not played.

    Lesson for all players – offense wins games, defense wins championships. It’s not what you create, it’s about what you give up. The sooner Hall et. all pick up that lesson, the sooner this team starts winning.

    That’s why Gagner won’t be here next year – he gives up too much.

    my 2 cents…

  88. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Kunitz played fine, as did Vlasic and J-Bow.

    That doesn’t mean better options weren’t available. It also doesn’t mean those better options wouldn’t have played very poorly over a short stretch of games.

    We don’t need to bronze (pun!) the decision making of Hockey Canada because they won Olympic Gold, just as we don’t need to trash it because Hockey Canada lost WJC all medals.

    Post facto rationalizations don’t serve anyone.

  89. Henry says:

    Pouzar,

    I see your point, and it is valid. I’ll be very disappointed if the OIlers finish DFL again. I’m frequently disappointed. They can still improve significantly and easily miss the playoffs in the Pacific division. Therefore they have a shot pick first. I cite McDavid as an exaggerated potential loss.

    I feel four firsts is a big a risk to take for one player. Perhaps too much for PK, good as he is.

  90. Captain Smarmy says:

    Team won gold and it might not of been optimal but that probably doesn’t matter in a small tournament sample size anyways.

    A healthy Stamkos and Taylor Hall instead of Duchene and Kunitz seems like a cooler team though.

  91. Bruce McCurdy says:

    OilClog:
    Regardless of Kunitz play in the final two games, he should never of gone over Taylor Hall. Only Canada would do such a absurd thing, too many jewels, sensible decisions went out the window.

    I get that folks are Oilers fans here (and I am one too) but I don’t understand this narrative. Kunitz is a first team all-star who had great numbers across the board — scoring, plus, possession, whatever — and backed them up by playing solid two-way hockey on a team that played solid two-way hockey. Yet somehow his inclusion was absurd? That’s, uhm, absurd.

    Jordan: For the style of game Team Canada was playing, Kunitz was a better choice because of his experience, his size and his endurance. Hall is the overall better player, but he’s riskier too. Hall would have been treated the same as PK Subban had he gone, and not played.

    Seems a very likely scenario to me.

    Romulus Apotheosis: Post facto rationalizations don’t serve anyone.

    Post facto? I’ve been on this bus all along.

  92. Lowetide says:

    Damn McCurdy, offering proof! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!

  93. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Lowetide:
    Damn McCurdy, offering proof! OFF WITH HIS HEAD!

    All.
    Along.

    ;)

  94. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Post facto? I’ve been on this bus all along.

    Ah, but you’re saying it’s a “defensible choice,” not that it’s a slam dunk.

    https://twitter.com/BruceMcCurdy/status/420598997611315200

    FWIW, I think it is a defensible choice — one could do worse than Kunitz and he clearly played well so bridge meet water — but I also think better choices existed and would have been just fine as well.

    My position re: your’s above is that saying either “they won” or “they’ve got authority on their side” aren’t good arguments AND that the Kunitz choice is both defensible and other options are both better and HC is entirely open to critique on this point.

  95. spoiler says:

    Sayin’ Hall should have been on the team is saying Babcock and Yzerman after careful deliberation made a mistake. I don’t believe that either hockey mind is foolish or ignorant or unclever, But that’s kind of what the naysayers are saying.

  96. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    spoiler:
    Sayin’ Hall should have been on the team is saying Babcock and Yzerman after careful deliberation made a mistake.I don’t believe that either hockey mind is foolish or ignorant or unclever,But that’s kind of what the naysayers are saying.

    This is just more of the absurd hyperbole we’ve been getting on this issue.

    Saying Hall should have been on the team isn’t anywhere near saying so and so’s “hockey mind is foolish or ignorant or unclever.” It’s saying you disagree with this particular hockey decision (maybe mildly, maybe strongly).

    We can disagree about decisions without calling into question broader intelligence.

  97. Racki says:

    hunter1909: That’s what they said in 2010.

    That’s what a small select of people said in 2010. This is 4 years later….. apples and oranges here. It’s a good idea for a couple/few years, perhaps, then it becomes moronic. We are definitely at/past that point.

    Unrelated to the topic in the quote, but… only us diehard sportsfans will critique a championship team and say “they should’ve taken this guy..”.

    Hall, or Thornton, or whomever else people come up with might have been good/great options too, but the fact of the matter is the team won gold with the team Yzerman, et al put together.

  98. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: Ah, but you’re saying it’s a “defensible choice,” not that it’s a slam dunk.

    In the other link — the broken one (sorry) — I called it a no brainer. Means same thing as “slam dunk” without the basketball connotations. :)

    Romulus Apotheosis: FWIW, I think it is a defensible choice — one could do worse than Kunitz and he clearly played well so bridge meet water — but I also think better choices existed and would have been just fine as well.

    Eh, Canada went with three forward pairs in Crosby-Kunitz, Getzlaf-Perry and Toews-Sharp. A proven strategy. They stuck with two of those pairs throughout, and to be frank I was a bit surprised to see Sharp get the short shrift. Maybe better choices existed. :|

    Romulus Apotheosis: My position re: your’s above is that saying either “they won” or “they’ve got authority on their side” aren’t good arguments AND that the Kunitz choice is both defensible and other options are both better and HC is entirely open to critique on this point.

    I didn’t say “they have authority on their side” I said they have expertise on their side. They made their choices from a management perspective, they made their choices from a coaching perspective, and they won convincingly. If you want to continue to criticize Hockey Canada for their work on This team, be my guest, but I won’t be joining the chorus.

  99. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Bruce McCurdy: In the other link — the broken one (sorry) — I called it a <a href="https://twitter.com/BruceMcCurdy/status/419528906987692032&quot; no brainer. Means same thing as “slam dunk” without the basketball connotations.

    Fair enough. I missed that one. You are clearly more bullish on Kunitz than I thought. I roundly disagree.

    Bruce McCurdy: I didn’t say “they have authority on their side” I said they have expertise on their side. They made their choices from a management perspective, they made their choices from a coaching perspective, and they won convincingly. If you want to continue to criticize Hockey Canada for their work on This team, be my guest, but I won’t be joining the chorus.

    You’ll have to split that hair a little finer between authority and expertise. It’s not amounting to distinction that I can find.

    Yes, I think it is entirely reasonable to critique a very successful team. I also think this very successful team could have been even more successful. This does not diminish from their accomplishments. Nor, is this critique some mortal blow against their intelligence (As some are suggesting).

    I haven’t raised the stakes here. I’m fighting for a pretty reasonable space to say: “hey, good job HC. Now, have a look at your decision making process. I think a few tweeks couldn’t hurt.”

    There is a lot of danger in becoming too comfortable with one’s method of doing business and one’s decisions, esp. after success… just as there is a lot of danger in becoming too quick to overhaul things when something doesn’t turn out.

  100. Pouzar says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    Very well said R.A.

    It’s asinine to think we can’t critique a successful operation because it can be seen as “criticizing”.
    Love your point on the danger of becoming too comfortable as well. It’s what happened to my beloved Red Sox when we started overpaying for guys like Carl Crawford. Thank you Los Angeles BTW.

  101. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Bruce McCurdy: If you want to continue to criticize Hockey Canada for their work on This team, be my guest, but I won’t be joining the chorus.

    I should add… in case it’s not clear, that I agree with the sentiment that the haranguing over the Kunitz choice was over the top and likely poisoned the well of the debate.

    But, we need to separate bitchy chatter on twitter (which we all enjoy and I like to also take part in) and actual arguments made. It seems to me the actual arguments made re: Kunitz were pretty fair.

  102. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    My case on “expertise” was that career coaches like Babcock, Hitchcock, Ruff and Julien know a thing or two about the game. I referred to it in specific response to Caramel Obvious’ case that Subban is the best or second best d-man in the world. Clearly those four gents think otherwise or he would have gotten more than one game as the seventh defender.

    CO immediately raised (lowered?) the bar with “These same men took Chris Kunitz. Shall we automatically defer to that decision as well?”

    To which I say yes, it was the correct decision, I thought so before the team was chosen & continue to think so now. He played well, the team won the gold medal, and still some cling to the notion that he was somehow a poor choice.

    The decision making process worked fine. Could they have picked a few different guys than the ones they did pick? Of course, Canada is deep in talent. But I’m not sure what needs to be tweaked.

    FWIW, I wrote this piece taking an analytics angle on the team selection last month, and I stand by it today as well.

  103. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Pouzar:
    Romulus Apotheosis,

    Very well said R.A.

    It’s asinine to think we can’t critique a successful operation because it can be seen as “criticizing”.
    Love your point on the danger of becoming too comfortable as well. It’s what happened to my beloved Red Sox when we started overpaying for guys like Carl Crawford. Thank you Los Angeles BTW.

    Well, I’ll let Bruce speak for himself, but I think he’s saying the criticism in this case is unwarranted, not that criticism is off-limits… though his deference to expertise here needs clarification.

    thanks though and I completely agree about comfort and bad decisions.

  104. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Bruce McCurdy: My case on “expertise” was that career coaches like Babcock, Hitchcock, Ruff and Julien know a thing or two about the game. I referred to it in specific response to Caramel Obvious’ case that Subban is the best or second best d-man in the world. Clearly those four gents think otherwise or he would have gotten more than one game as the seventh defender.
    CO immediately raised (lowered?) the bar with “These same men took Chris Kunitz. Shall we automatically defer to that decision as well?”

    I’ll let you and CO disentangle from this. But, I appreciate the context here.

    I still think you are stuck hanging on to authority here.

    If I say x is the best and you say y says z is the best and y is super smart, that is an appeal to authority.

    Now, no one has bothered to offer tangible arguments here. Just opinions.

    Bruce McCurdy: FWIW, I wrote this piece taking an analytics angle on the team selection last month, and I stand by it today as well.

    This is an argument and it’s a sound one.

    It is not, however, a challenge to what I’ve argued. That other choices would also have been defensible, and in my opinion better.

    It is a challenge to the idea that HC has no clue what it’s doing, or that the Kunitz pick was absurd. But it’s not a challenge to the idea that HC could have gone another way and done just fine and perhaps better.

  105. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: I still think you are stuck hanging on to authority here.

    Well, spin that how you want. I am saying I have a ton of respect for those four coaches who made the decision on Subban. I do not feel competent to sit in my armchair and call them out, especially given that the choices they did make worked out spectacularly well.

    That’s not to say all the armchair coaches and GMs out there couldn’t have done a better job in their alternate universes. In this real one, this fan is prepared to accept that our dominant, undefeated, gold medal teams have been successfully if not perfectly managed. If that’s deference to authority, well, I guess that’s just another entry on the laundry list of personal character flaws. Just another cross to bear. :)

  106. Pouzar says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Well, spin that how you want. I am saying I have a ton of respect for those four coaches who made the decision on Subban. I do not feel competent to sit in my armchair and call them out, especially given that the choices they did make worked out spectacularly well.

    That’s not to say all the armchair coaches and GMs out there couldn’t have done a better job in their alternate universes. In this real one, this fan is prepared to accept that our dominant, undefeated, gold medal teams have been successfully if not perfectly managed. If that’s deference to authority, well, I guess that’s just another entry on the laundry list of personal character flaws. Just another cross to bear.

    So….do you think Subban is worth the price of an accepted offer sheet (i.e. 4 – 1st round picks)?

    That’s where this all began I think. I say yes.

  107. spoiler says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: This is just more of the absurd hyperbole we’ve been getting on this issue.

    Actually this is parodying the absurd hyperbole on the subject, ie that when people here disagree with coaches and GMs, the GM or coach is an idiot. And notice I use the word “like”. Subtlety is lost here I guess.

    But since you pursued the topic, I am curious to know on what basis you disagree with Babcock and Yzerman… where you feel their error was after months of those two experts deliberating the issue… where you feel you were smarter than they were?

    Or is this just a matter of taste?

  108. Racki says:

    You know it’s an Oilers off day when we spend so much effort into figure how we could have won the gold medal more. “This team won it all, but really they could have won it all… More!”

    On the subject of Subban , not sure who would really consider him better than Weber, Keith, and Doughty.. But he’s quite good. Being invited to the Olys shows this. He didn’t play because Babcock had Subban’s skillset filled with better or equal guys. Not Dan Hamhuis or ME Vlasic.. But the top end guys. Subban is a heck of a talent but how can you compete with Weber, Doughty and Keith? These guys are the best of the best. That doesn’t lessen how good Subban is.

  109. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Team Canada’s game was built on disciplined two-way play and puck support. Guys like Kunitz and Vlasic had that in spades. Rightly or wrongly, guys like Hall and Subban have questions about the completeness of their games at this stage of their still-young careers.

  110. Racki says:

    Just to clarify, if you were replying to me Bruce, I think we are in agreement… But what I was saying was Subban was there to fill a certain role if needed.. Say an option for if Weber or Doughty were hurt, while Hamhuis and Vlasic were there to fill a completely different need. I think Subban is better on the whole than those two, but Canada’s needs were for the reliable defensive guys like Hamhuis and Vlasic to fill the rest of the blue.

    I. E. It’s not about who is the best player all the time but who fits a certain type of player best.. I think that’s what you are also saying.

  111. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Bruce McCurdy,

    I’ve already noted that you, in the totality of your writing on this topic, are NOT deferring to authority. You went out of your way to provide a sound argument for the decisions made.

    That argument exists in parallel to some of the comments made here, which absent the arguments your made elsewhere, are simply arguments from authority.

    I hope that is clear.

    And, if it isn’t… Again, I’m not challenging the credentials or results of these folks.

  112. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    spoiler: Actually this is parodying the absurd hyperbole on the subject, ie that when people here disagree with coaches and GMs, the GM or coach is an idiot.And notice I use the word “like”.Subtlety is lost here I guess.

    The word “like” is completely absent from your original comment:

    spoiler:
    Sayin’ Hall should have been on the team is saying Babcock and Yzerman after careful deliberation made a mistake.I don’t believe that either hockey mind is foolish or ignorant or unclever,But that’s kind of what the naysayers are saying.

    I guess you meant the “kind of” clause here?

    At any rate, it remains hyperbolic, which you seem to be acknowledging here. Good.

    spoiler: But since you pursued the topic, I am curious to know on what basis you disagree with Babcock and Yzerman… where you feel their error was after months of those two experts deliberating the issue… where you feel you were smarter than they were?

    What’s with this smarter shit?

    This is like Godot and his constant “smartest man in the room” bs.

    Can’t we disagree about things without raising the stakes to these childishly absurd levels?

    Suddenly disagreement about hockey decisions equates to demeaning the intelligence of others and some posture of extreme hubris?

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca