RE 13-14 RYAN JONES: BLUE MONEY

Ryan Jones was plucked off waivers miles ago from Nashville, two days after the Oilers sent Denis Grebeshkov to the Preds for the pick that turned into Curtis Hamilton. Jones played over 200 games in an Oilers uniform, and had some good nights along the way. He will be remembered as a role player during the team’s darkest times.

Ryan Jones 10-11

  • 5×5 points per 60: 1.38 (7th among regular forwards)
  • 5×4 points per 60: 3.63 (4th among regular forwards)
  • Qual Comp: 10th toughest faced among regular forwards
  • Qual Team: 10th best available teammates among regular forwards
  • Corsi Rel: -11.1 (worst among regular forwards)
  • Zone Start: 49.7% (8th easiest among regular forwards)
  • Zone Finish: 49.4% (11th best among regular forwards)
  • Shots on goal/percentage: 126/14.3% (2nd among F’s)
  • Boxcars: 81gp, 18-7-25
  • Plus Minus: -5 on a team that was -52

Ryan Jones 11-12

  • 5×5 points per 60: 1.46 (tied for 7th among regular forwards)
  • 5×4 points per 60: 5.40 (3rd among regular forwards)
  • Qual Comp: 7th toughest faced among regular forwards
  • Qual Team: tied for 8th best available teammates among regular forwards
  • Corsi Rel: -2.9 (9th best among regular forwards)
  • Zone Start: 44.6% (3rd toughest, 12th easiest among regular forwards)
  • Zone Finish: 48.6% (9th best among regular forwards)
  • Shots on goal/percentage: 137/12.4% (4th among F’s >100shots)
  • Boxcars: 79, 17-16-33
  • Plus Minus: -7 on a team that was -26

Ryan Jones 12-13

  • 5×5 points per 60: 1.38 (7th among regular forwards)
  • 5×4 points per 60: nil
  • Qual Comp: 14th toughest faced among regular forwards
  • Qual Team: 5th best available teammates among regular forwards
  • Corsi Rel: -1.0 (5th best among regular forwards) (-13.85 CorsiON)
  • Zone Start: 45.4% (10th toughest, 6th easiest among regular forwards)
  • Zone Finish: 46.8% (12th best among regular forwards)
  • Shots on goal/percentage: 38/5.26% (8th among F’s >35shots)
  • Boxcars: 25, 2-5-7
  • Plus Minus: E on a team that was -15

Ryan Jones 13-14

  • 5×5 points per 60: 0.82 (11th among regular forwards)
  • 5×4 points per 60: nil
  • Qual Comp: 14th toughest faced among regular forwards (fourth line)
  • Qual Team: 14th best available teammates among regular forwards (fourth line)
  • Corsi Rel: -6.1 (12th best among regular forwards)
  • Zone Start: 34% (4th toughest among regular forwards)
  • Zone Finish: 42.5% (14th best among regular forwards)
  • Shots on goal/percentage: 59/3.4% (11th among F’s >50 shots)
  • Boxcars: 52, 2-4-6
  • Plus Minus: E on a team that was -51

RE 13-14: 73, 9-10-19 .260

Actual: 52, 2-4-6 .115

  1. Crappy song and your intro was brutal. Ass. It was a mistake to sign him, MacT should have been harder last summer.
  2. Blue Money! Does this mean dirty money? sonofabitch! It apparently has several meanings, but for my purposes I liked the energy of the song. It matches Jones energetic skating, but is also a simple tune and doesn’t take on any difficult subjects.
  3. You are such a colossal prick! What?
  4. What do these numbers tell us? Ryan Jones wasn’t good this season, and he had a lot of company. I’m not sure there’s much to be gained at looking more closely at his numbers. He spent his season being beaten about the face and hands, but he was not playing alongside Gretzky. How much blame does one give him?
  5. He was playing the soft parade, surely more goals would be expected. Based on his own past, yes. However, his zone start is 34% and he played 140 of his 438 minutes with Luke Gazdic. I’m not sure we can punish him for not scoring 10 goals.
  6. How did he do without Gazdic? The WOWY says that at 5×5 Ryan Jones was 44.1% without Gazdic, 38.8% with him.
  7. Will Jones be back? No.
  8. How much did Eakins play him compared to  how Krueger played him compared to Renney? Under Renney two years ago, Jones was 8th at EVs among regular forwards with 12:06 a game. He was 2nd in SH TOI with 2:28 and 10th in PP with 51 seconds a game. Under Krueger last year, he was 10th at EVS among regular forwards with 11:15 a game. He was 8th in SH TOI with 1:23 and average 19 seconds a night on the PP. Under Eakins this season, he was 14th at EVS among regular forwards with 8:29 a game. 8th in SH TOI with 0:52 and spent 28 seconds on the PP.
  9. Downward spiral. Well, I think they could have used Jones on the PK more, probably EV too. Joensuu wasn’t kicking out the jams.
  10. MacT said nice things about him. “He’s a great teammate and he’s a guy we hold in high esteem for his core values. We’re in discussions where we want to go with Ryan.” That was last year, they can’t bring him back this season.
  11. Why don’t you like Ryan Jones? We’ve been down this road before. I don’t dislike Jones, it’s just that player type we’re talking about (skill winger) doesn’t fit with team need (2-way winger). He’s a modern Stan Gilbertson, from my beloved Oakland Seals. Expansion level winger, teams flush these guys when they turn north.
  12. Should MacT have brought him back? No. No. One thousand times no. The Oilers need a Pisani, not a Jones in this role.
  13. Jones is a two-way player. No he isn’t, he’s never been that player. Not ever. Jones had some offensive flair, but not enough to play on a team’s top 6F, and because of that he was cast in a secondary role. Because he LOOKS like a hard-working guy who can drive in on the forecheck, backcheck like a demon and force the play, win battles and make life along the wall no fun at all, people think he is one. But he hasn’t been that player for the Oilers, not one time.
  14. So we’re fooled by the “look” of effort? Hey, it happens. You’ll find people in Boston who think Joe Thornton is vastly overrated. The way a player looks in making his effort sometimes tricks the eye into believing there’s more happening.
  15. What kind of player should replace Jones? Winnik, Moss, Kulemin. That kind of player. The kind of player who MacT would have been able to see on his flank just before he took an important faceoff.
  16. And that isn’t Jones. It NEVER was. Never. Not one time.

written by

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

112 Responses to "RE 13-14 RYAN JONES: BLUE MONEY"

  1. justDOit says:

    Thanks for all the effort, Chugger. Good luck in whichever league you find yourself in next year.

  2. Marcus Oilerius says:

    Second-longest serving Oiler after Gagner.

    End of an era.

    Maybe you should let Woodguy write the Sail On for him.

  3. Lowetide says:

    Lowdown with Lowetide, 10 this morning TSN 1260

    10:05 Dennis King, Oilogosphere Icon
    10:40 Corey Graham, Oil Kings PBP
    11:00 Darrin Bauming TSN 1290 Winnipeg
    11:25 Scott Mitchell Calgary Sun

  4. John Chambers says:

    Marcus Oilerius,

    I’ll happily say good riddance to the era you speak of.

  5. LMHF#1 says:

    He was only somewhat effective as a player that cheated (big time) for offense. Even then, not effective enough.

    Then he started cheating in both directions…at the wrong times…every time.

    Terrible hockey player who was kept for the wrong reasons and occupied a spot that could have given an opportunity to others that might have run with it.

  6. tcho says:

    It is interesting, however, when Oilers cast offs/problems (Colin Fraser, Mike Brown, Corey Potter) end up being used productively (albeit in minor roles) by other teams. I wonder if this will be the case with Jones.

  7. Andy P says:

    I think it’s fitting that his dog is a red setter. If ever there was a dog type that characterized Jonesy, that’s the one, and I mean that as a compliment. Happy, carefree, energetic, more than willing to do everything asked of him, not a greyhound but will run, not a pit bull but will fight if he has to, just a great person to have on a team.

  8. icecastles says:

    but is also a simple tune and doesn’t take on any difficult subjects.

    I love you LT, but seriously… that’s every song Van Morrison has ever written.

    I was always a secret fan of Ryan Jones. He just had such exuberance and energy, and those first two seasons actually managed some surprisingly good point totals, especially given where he was playing in the lineup. I guess this is the positive and the negative side of the ‘saw-him-good’ approach.

    The plus is that I was able to turn off my brain and just enjoy watching him play hockey without ruining it by questioning how sustainable it was. The negative is that it gave me what everyone on here already knew was a wrong impression of the type and quality of player that Jones was. Last season was forgivable due to the eye injury, but I certainly disembarked the love parade for him this year.

    incidentally, the term ‘saw-him-good’ – is that a Lowetide-specific term, or is it actually in broader usage? to whoever coined it, it’s a fabulous turn of phrase.

  9. Pouzar says:

    LMHF#1:
    He was only somewhat effective as a player that cheated (big time) for offense. Even then, not effective enough.

    Then he started cheating in both directions…at the wrong times…every time.

    Terrible hockey player who was kept for the wrong reasons and occupied a spot that could have given an opportunity to others that might have run with it.

    Dats how I seen him good as well

  10. misfit says:

    I don’t like the idea of Jones on this team next year either, but the RW depth is Eberle, Yakupov, and a whole bunch of non-NHL players. If they move on from Jones (which they should), then they’re going to have to add a lot of bodies to compete for the last 2 RW spots on the roster.

    If they go the trade route, Anaheim is fairly deep at RW with Perry, Silfverberg, Palmieri, Etem, Noesen, and Smith-Pelley. I wouldn’t mind seeing the Oilers add any one of those players.

  11. Woodguy says:

    Jones is a two-way player. No he isn’t, he’s never been that player. Not ever. Jones had some offensive flair, but not enough to play on a team’s top 6F, and because of that he was cast in a secondary role. Because he LOOKS like a hard-working guy who can drive in on the forecheck, backcheck like a demon and force the play, win battles and make life along the wall no fun at all, people think he is one. But he hasn’t been that player for the Oilers, not one time.

    And that’s the truth.

    Ruth.

  12. Caramel Obvious says:

    Woodguy:
    Jones is a two-way player. No he isn’t, he’s never been that player. Not ever. Jones had some offensive flair, but not enough to play on a team’s top 6F, and because of that he was cast in a secondary role. Because he LOOKS like a hard-working guy who can drive in on the forecheck, backcheck like a demon and force the play, win battles and make life along the wall no fun at all, people think he is one. But he hasn’t been that player for the Oilers, not one time.

    And that’s the truth.

    Ruth.

    It’s far too kind. He’s an offensive player who doesn’t bring any offense. Terrible pro hockey player (i.e. he’s way better than me but terrible for a pro). Always has been. It’s an indictment of the NHL (or maybe just the Oilers) that guys like Ryan Jones got paid millions of dollars while Omark is out of the league.

  13. jooks says:

    I very much agree with your assessment of Jones, LT. The play just died on his stick way too much and for all his ‘effort’ he rarely won puck battles in his own zone. And the analytics back up that assessment. Penner was the flip slide of that coin, similar to Jumbo Joe in your example.

  14. Ducey says:

    Jones never hit hard (a lot of excuse me I have to get a hit stat, hits), couldn’t fight (a lot of hugging), and didn’t really have any edge.

    Seems like a really nice guy but no defensive ability, no intimidation and not enough offense. A tweener.

    You need a guy in this role to be buzzing around causing some chaos on the forecheck while not bleeding chances against.

    I bet MacT was hoping he could reinvent himself this season. While Jones did fight more, you could tell his heart was never in it.

    Pinizzotto showed more in 6 games than Jones did in 54.

  15. LMHF#1 says:

    Caramel Obvious: .It’s an indictment of the NHL (or maybe just the Oilers) that guys like Ryan Jones got paid millions of dollars while Omark is out of the league.

    The NHL coaching culture. They still don’t get how to use certain player types. Offensive defensemen, bottom six players that produce offense, defensive D that don’t crush people…etc

  16. LMHF#1 says:

    And one more thing – his attempts at humor were a bad Marty Reasoner impression. Long live Marty.

  17. Ducey says:

    Caramel Obvious: It’s far too kind. He’s an offensive player who doesn’t bring any offense. Terrible pro hockey player (i.e. he’s way better than me but terrible for a pro). Always has been. It’s an indictment of the NHL (or maybe just the Oilers) that guys like Ryan Jones got paid millions of dollars while Omark is out of the league.

    Omark again??

    Every NHL team passed on him, multiple times, in multiple years on the waiver wire.

    He is no different than Jones. A guy who needs to play top 6 to be useful becuase he doesn’t play well enough without the puck. And he doesn’t bring enough offense to play in anyones top 6.

    He is a tweener who is unwilling to play in the minors, unwilling/ unable to learn how to play defensively, and didn’t make the most of his chance with Buffalo or Edmonton. On top of that he generally seems to have a shitty attitude.

    When does the failure of Omark to make the NHL become Omark’s fault?

  18. icecastles says:

    Caramel Obvious: He’s an offensive player who doesn’t bring any offense.

    18 goals and 17 goals in his first two seasons with the Oilers. He’s not a great hockey player and is obviously not only fatally flawed but on the steep downhill slope of his career. But to say he “doesn’t bring any offense” is overstating your case considerably.

    Caramel Obvious: It’s an indictment of the NHL (or maybe just the Oilers) that guys like Ryan Jones got paid millions of dollars while Omark is out of the league.

    So we’re going with the saw-him-good assessment on Omark then, are we? What’s your case that Omark is significantly better than Jones? Go through Omark’s corsi numbers at BTN. There’s not one positive number in one category from one season he played.

    Not.
    A single.
    One.

    Jones is no screaming hell, but I’m not sure Omark is the strongest case against him having an NHL contract or proving some sort of league-wide conspiracy.

  19. TheOtherJohn says:

    “13. Jones is a two-way player. No he isn’t, he’s never been that player. Not ever. Jones had some offensive flair, but not enough to play on a team’s top 6F, and because of that he was cast in a secondary role. Because he LOOKS like a hard-working guy who can drive in on the forecheck, backcheck like a demon and force the play, win battles and make life along the wall no fun at all, people think he is one. But he hasn’t been that player for the Oilers, not one time”

    This all day long!

  20. LMHF#1 says:

    icecastles:

    Not. A single. One. Jones is no screaming hell, but I’m not sure Omark is the strongest case against him having an NHL contract or proving some sort of league-wide conspiracy.

    This season should have answered the question of who you keep on an NHL roster: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000412011.html

    The excuse given afterwards was “it’s not Omark versus Jones because, ya see, Jones is a peg that fits”.

    He never did.

    Then the discussion shifts to culture. Remember why Omark was shunned? I’m sure someone can also supplement with the analytics stuff but as you know that isn’t my thing.

    Omark was sent down because he “didn’t fit” and he tried innovative things to score in shootouts. Ryan Jones “did fit”. That’s BS.

  21. Caramel Obvious says:

    icecastles,

    Name one thing Jones does better than Omark. There isn’t one.

    Omark is out of the league because of puckluck. It’s that simple. A few posts go into the net instead of out of it and he gets more chances. More chances=more points. It’s a virtuous cycle.

    In one of his last games in the league he played with Ennis and Stafford against the Oilers. That line was the best line on the ice by far and generated lots of chances. But they didn’t go in. A few days later Omark was in Europe.

  22. Marcus Oilerius says:

    Caramel Obvious,

    Jones hits harder.

  23. Jordan says:

    I always liked Ryan Jones. Great hockey hair. After Smyth left the team, we had Gilbert’s lovely locks, and then Ryan’s hockey hair was the focus after Tom was sent packing. Then Smyth came back! but now…

    Now? Ryan’s gone AND Smyth’s retiring.

    Who’s hair are we going to admire, now that these men are gone?

    Because really… the Oilers haven’t been playing enough good hockey to keep my attention, so now what do I do that we don’t have the hockey hair?

  24. icecastles says:

    LMHF#1: Omark was sent down because he “didn’t fit” and he tried innovative things to score in shootouts. Ryan Jones “did fit”. That’s BS.

    Some other words for it… Speculation. Heresay. Those are some pretty big leaps that ignore the fact that he simply didn’t play well.

    Caramel Obvious: Name one thing Jones does better than Omark. There isn’t one.

    Don’t shift the goalposts. I’m not the one saying one of them is better than the other. I don’t think Jones is better than Omark. You’re saying Omark is much better than Jones, so the onus is on you to demonstrate how, and the facts simply aren’t there to support such a conclusion.

    Caramel Obvious: Omark is out of the league because of puckluck. It’s that simple.

    You can’t, for one moment, possibly believe this to be true. This is an interesting thing about the defense of Omark – even the people who think he should be playing can’t seem to agree on why he’s not: it’s because of puckluck. It’s because he didn’t fit culturally. It’s bias. It’s inability to use him properly.

    Omark didn’t play well without the puck and when he had it, he didn’t show enough ability to finish to make up for his other deficiencies. He also demonstrated an unwillingness to learn these things.

    Luck plays some role in all things, I’ll grant you that. But to reduce it to puck luck and nothing else is downright silly.

    Caramel Obvious: In one of his last games in the league he played with Ennis and Stafford against the Oilers. That line was the best line on the ice by far and generated lots of chances. But they didn’t go in. A few days later Omark was in Europe.

    Ah. So our metric is now a one-game sample size.
    Against the second worst team in the NHL.
    Where he didn’t score.
    You’re right: he should be a freakin’ Hart finalist. Come on, dude. You’re a smart guy! I know you are – I usually love your posts and your clearheadedness. But this is crazy talk.

  25. dwillms says:

    misfit,

    I was just looking at their roster yesterday as well. Would the Ducks be ready to give up on Etem or Smith-Pelly? Is either one worth rolling the dice on to turn them into a potential top-6 option?

  26. LMHF#1 says:

    icecastles: Some other words for it… Speculation. Heresay. Those are some pretty big leaps that ignore the fact that he simply didn’t play well.

    You say the words like they’re a negative…then do the same for the rest of your post. Are you trying to negate or not?

  27. WeirsBeard says:

    So with Jones likely gone, is LT suggesting the club is moving out of the terrible expansion team rebuild era?

    The problem with Jones was never really Jones, but rather that he was too high in the order. How often were we able to see a Smyth-Belanger-Jones fourth line for example?

    Oh, and the guy LT has asking questions seems angrier this year. I can’t wait til we get to the defensemen.

  28. icecastles says:

    WeirsBeard: The problem with Jones was never really Jones, but rather that he was too high in the order. How often were we able to see a Smyth-Belanger-Jones fourth line for example?

    Jones doesn’t have a good enough defensive game to play in the bottom six. The problem with Jones is Jones.

    LMHF put it best earlier in the thread:

    Then he started cheating in both directions…at the wrong times…every time.

  29. TheseColoursDontRun says:

    Way off topic but the Oilers have been named the most inefficient team in hockey. Second only to the Cubs for worst in N.A. pro sports.

    http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-04-24/smartest-spenders-in-sports-2014

  30. LMHF#1 says:

    WeirsBeard:

    The problem with Jones was never really Jones, but rather that he was too high in the order. How often were we able to see a Smyth-Belanger-Jones fourth line for example?

    Yikes. You do remember how Belanger played don’t you? The man who wouldn’t take a wrist shot?

  31. Caramel Obvious says:

    icecastles,

    If you agree that there is such a thing as puckluck then I don’t see why you wouldn’t think it would apply to Omark. He scored in every single league in the world. He didn’t score in the NHL. Why do you think that is? I think it was because he was unlucky. This is not implausible. It is even likely

    Now I don’t think Omark is anything other than a 40 point player or so. What’s wrong with that. The problem is that there is this mentality that players have to fit predefined, and made up, roles. How many times did you hear that Omark wasn’t playing because he didn’t fit into the top six. That’s prett bad reasoning since there is no such thing as a top six forward.

  32. icecastles says:

    Caramel Obvious: If you agree that there is such a thing as puckluck then I don’t see why you wouldn’t think it would apply to Omark.

    You said it is EXCLUSIVELY puck luck that determined why he is out of the league entirely. This is an insanely over the top claim. Just because I agree it exists, in no way implies that I have to agree it was the sole determinant in his NHL career ending.

    Caramel Obvious: He scored in every single league in the world. He didn’t score in the NHL. Why do you think that is?

    Because the NHL is the hardest league in the world, with considerably less time and space to make plays than lower-tier north american leagues or the bigger European ice. That doesn’t favour danglers like Omark. He’s not the first guy who has been unable to translate his game, and he won’t be the last.

    Caramel Obvious: Now I don’t think Omark is anything other than a 40 point player or so. What’s wrong with that.

    First, there is no universe in which Omark gets 40 points in in the NHL, unless we’re talking career totals. Second, if he gets 40 points and gives up 100 due to inattentive defensive play, there’s not really a net benefit. See Gagner, Sam.

    Caramel Obvious: there is no such thing as a top six forward.

    I’ll pass that on to Sidney Crosby and Steven Stamkos.

  33. Lois Lowe says:

    MacT ruined Robbie Schremp.
    Eyeglow/60
    THUNDEROUS BODYCHECKS!!
    Horcov is overpaid!
    Barbara Anne Scott sucks the hind banana.
    The Oilers should have signed Curtis Glencross.
    Morrison, Conklin, or Markannen?

  34. Ducey says:

    LMHF#1:
    This season should have answered the question of who you keep on an NHL roster: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000412011.html
    The excuse given afterwards was “it’s not Omark versus Jones because, ya see, Jones is a peg that fits”.
    He never did.
    Then the discussion shifts to culture. Remember why Omark was shunned? I’m sure someone can also supplement with the analytics stuff but as you know that isn’t my thing.
    Omark was sent down because he “didn’t fit” and he tried innovative things to score in shootouts. Ryan Jones “did fit”. That’s BS.

    a) As you may have noticed, the reason the Oilers have sucked the last few years is goals against. They have had a plethora of skilled offensive players who can’t stop a beacball on defence. Adding a guy who doesn’t score enough, doesn’t add toughness and also can’t play defense doesn’t really seem to be the way to fix the goals against problem. Jones at least had some attributes (some toughness, some size, decent hands, some PK experience) that would allow you to think he could morph into a bottom 6 shutdown guy. With Omark that was never going to happen.

    b) I would love you to make out a case for Omark for a bottom 6 player (unless you think he should have played ahead of Hall, Hemsky, Eberle, Perron, Yak). Please explain how he would do well playing tough minutes on the 3rd line where he would be expected to play shutodown with poor zone starts. Maybe you think he play on the 4th line with a toughie. Please explain how effective he would be playing 6 minutes a night because he can’t PK and isn’t good enough to PP.

    c) him being sent down because of a spin o rama is completely baseless. You have no evidence of this – at all.. Did other teams pass on him because he tried to innovate? Why did Buffalo then trade for him and then cut him? He had already done the spin o rama.

    d) Omark is a one trick pony (offense) and that trick isn’t good enough to keep him in the circus. If he was willing to learn some other skills maybe he would still be in the NHL. He wasn’t or can’t. Its on Omark, not the NHL or the OIlers.

  35. WeirsBeard says:

    LMHF#1: Yikes. You do remember how Belanger played don’t you? The man who wouldn’t take a wrist shot?

    Oh he was terrible, and there’s a reason he is retired. My point was that Jones should have always been on the fourth line with other nonfacepunchers. I don’t think we would see him as a problem there.

  36. TheOtherJohn says:

    I realize that it is a Thursday and its 6 months sincer the Oilers were eliminated from the playoffs but OMARK?. Really. Thats the hill to die on today: he is n NHL player/he isn’t an NHL player.

    FFS I have no difficluty skewering Oiler management/pro scouts/amateur scouts/player development but the Omark debate is completely irrelevant. Nobody wanted him. Fact that the Oilers resigned Jones for a ridiculous $1.5m is more of an indictment of MacT than how he deal with Omark

    In terms of advancing the discussion here today could we discuss whether Taylor Hall laces up his left skate first or is it the right? Discuss……………..

  37. G Money says:

    TheseColoursDontRun: Second only to the Cubs for worst in N.A. pro sports.

    WE’RE NOT LAST! WE’RE NOT LAST! WE’RE NOT LAST!

    C’mon everyone, say it with me!

  38. LMHF#1 says:

    Ducey: a) As you may have noticed, the reason the Oilers have sucked the last few years is goals against. They have had a plethora of skilled offensive players who can’t stop a beacball on defence. Adding a guy who doesn’t score enough, doesn’t add toughness and also can’t play defense doesn’t really seem to be the way to fix the goals against problem. Jones at least had some attributes (some toughness, some size, decent hands, some PK experience) that would allow you to think he could morph into a bottom 6 shutdown guy. With Omark that was never going to happen.

    b)I would love you to make out a case for Omark for a bottom 6 player (unless you think he should have played ahead of Hall, Hemsky, Eberle, Perron, Yak).Please explain how he would do well playing tough minutes on the 3rd line where he would be expected to play shutodown with poor zone starts. Maybe you think he play on the 4th line with a toughie.Please explain how effective he would be playing 6 minutes a night because he can’t PK and isn’t good enough to PP.

    c) him being sent down because of a spin o rama is completely baseless. You have no evidence of this – at all.. Did other teams pass on him because he tried to innovate? Why did Buffalo then trade for him and then cut him? He had already done the spin o rama.

    d) Omark is a one trick pony (offense) and that trick isn’t good enough to keep him in the circus. If he was willing to learn some other skills maybe he would still be in the NHL. He wasn’t or can’t. Its on Omark, not the NHL or the OIlers.

    A) I went on several times about how Omark had the assets to be a strong defensive player given a coach who knew how to use them and was willing to do so.

    B) I don’t believe in the “third line tough minutes” approach. Again, I’ve said this several times. I advocate for specialists low in the order. He’d have been a perfect candidate.

    C) Explain how you prove the psyche of a coach. I’m speculating based on my read of the situation. So what?

    D) I disagree wholeheartedly except for the fact that there is blame on every party.

    An NHL where Jacques gets 150ish games to prove he can play (including a stint on the top effing line) but Omark gets less than 100 is a stupid Stupid STUPID NHL.

  39. LMHF#1 says:

    TheOtherJohn:
    Irealize that it is a Thursday and its 6 months sincer the Oilers were eliminated from the playoffs but OMARK?. Really. Thats the hill to die on today: he is n NHL player/he isn’t an NHL player.

    It isn’t the player, it is the principle.

  40. spoiler says:

    He kinda reminded me of Lumley.

  41. icecastles says:

    TheOtherJohn: In terms of advancing the discussion here today could we discuss whether Taylor Hall laces up his left skate first or is it the right? Discuss…………….

    I heard that when Hemsky was here, he was always the last one to lace his skates.

    And Penner was too lazy to even use the top eyelet on his skates.

  42. Ducey says:

    LMHF#1: A) I went on several times about how Omark had the assets to be a strong defensive player given a coach who knew how to use them and was willing to do so.B) I don’t believe in the “third line tough minutes” approach. Again, I’ve said this several times. I advocate for specialists low in the order. He’d have been a perfect candidate.C) Explain how you prove the psyche of a coach. I’m speculating based on my read of the situation. So what?D) I disagree wholeheartedly except for the fact that there is blame on every party.An NHL where Jacques gets 150ish games to prove he can play (including a stint on the top effing line) but Omark gets less than 100 is a stupid Stupid STUPID NHL.

    It would seem to me that you have a bias against the Oilers/ NHL that they don’t give little guys a chance. That has scewed your vision so badly that you have clung to Omark to make your point. That is a hill you will die on, my friend.

    Omark is 27 and by my count has played for 8 differnet coaches. I don’t know when these attributes of being a “great defensive player” are going to come out. Again it must be all 8 of those coaches faults. Poor Linus.

    If you think Omark (who is small, not physical, doesn’t play well without the puck, seems to have little interest in checking) could be a “great defensive player” then you don’t know one when you see one.

    If you are speculating on the psyche of the coach as the basis of your argument as to why Omark should have stayed in the NHL, well then you don’t have an argument.

    JFJ has nothing to do with Omark. Because JFJ sucked and was given a chance, that means Omark should be given another 70 games to really prove he sucks too?

  43. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Woodguy: Jones is a two-way player. No he isn’t, he’s never been that player. Not ever. Jones had some offensive flair, but not enough to play on a team’s top 6F, and because of that he was cast in a secondary role. Because he LOOKS like a hard-working guy who can drive in on the forecheck, backcheck like a demon and force the play, win battles and make life along the wall no fun at all, people think he is one. But he hasn’t been that player for the Oilers, not one time.
    And that’s the truth.
    Ruth.

    we need to apply these lines of thought more broadly. It is such an important insight.

    The refrain I hear often when watching a game at my brother in laws place or at a live game or a bar is:

    “Do something!”

    A guy like Jones always “looks” like he’s doing something. That tricks a lot of fans into the bad equation “do something” = “effectiveness”

    One of the biggest reasons the underlying numbers help is to force a second look at players.

    ———–

    Hahaha… Omark again. I love him so much, if only for giving Oiler fans outsized fits of torment.

    icecastles: So we’re going with the saw-him-good assessment on Omark then, are we? What’s your case that Omark is significantly better than Jones? Go through Omark’s corsi numbers at BTN. There’s not one positive number in one category from one season he played.
    Not.
    A single.
    One.

    this is a weird thing to be so strident about, considering just yesterday I pointed to how he actually led the team the one year he got a long NHL look

    http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?ds=30&f1=2010_s&f2=5v5&f5=EDM&f7=50-&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67

  44. Woodguy says:

    Lois Lowe:
    MacT ruined Robbie Schremp.
    Eyeglow/60
    THUNDEROUS BODYCHECKS!!
    Horcov is overpaid!
    Barbara Anne Scott sucks the hind banana.
    The Oilers should have signed Curtis Glencross.
    Morrison, Conklin, or Markannen?

    <3

  45. Ducey says:

    TheOtherJohn: In terms of advancing the discussion here today could we discuss whether Taylor Hall laces up his left skate first or is it the right? Discuss……………..

    Tying Hall’s skates is now Bucky’s job. He does a really nice job. Just like Taylor’s dad used to.

    He also tells tall tales of the early days of the franchise.

    Thats why they can’t let Bucky go.*

    *This may fall in the same category as the speculation that Omark was wrecked by the Oilers after his spin-o-rama.

  46. Woodguy says:

    One day I hope to cheer for a hockey team where Omark vs. Jones doesn’t become a debate because the roster and system are good and deep enough that those two players wouldn’t ever be on the roster.

  47. Lois Lowe says:

    Ducey: Omark is 27 and by my count has played for 8 differnet coaches.I don’t know when these attributes of being a “great defensive player” are going to come out.Again it must be all 8 of those coaches faults.Poor Linus.

    If you think Omark (who is small, not physical, doesn’t play well without the puck, seems to have little interest in checking) could be a “great defensive player” then you don’t know one when you see one.

    Not to mention he spent time in OKC. Now that there is a narrative floating around that Todd Nelson is a coaching guru, you would figure that little Linus would have learned his defensive chops down there. Why did Todd Nelson, aka Scotty Bowman Redux, not get through to him?

  48. Woodguy says:

    Fucking Tambellini.

    *spits*

  49. Lois Lowe says:

    What do the fans of good teams talk about? I have never had the luxury of cheering for one.

    Growing up in Alberta in the 80′s and early 90′s I was a Devils fan, right around the time they got good I started following the plucky, small market Oilers.

  50. misfit says:

    dwillms:
    misfit,

    I was just looking at their roster yesterday as well. Would the Ducks be ready to give up on Etem or Smith-Pelly? Is either one worth rolling the dice on to turn them into a potential top-6 option?

    I have no idea. I was just thinking about teams that may have room to move a RW if they had needs elsewhere that we could fill.

    Free agency doesn’t seem to be a great option for us (though bottom 6′ers are maybe less of an issue), and we don’t have much in-house. I believe Pitlick is probably at the top of the list, and I, for one, am not thrilled with the idea of him having full-time NHL employment next year.

    Down the road, I could see both Chase and Houck as options at RW, but I’d rather see them continue their development in junior/minors for at least a few more years. That timeline could work great if we were able to sign a Moss or Stempniak in the offseason.

  51. icecastles says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: The refrain I hear often when watching a game at my brother in laws place or at a live game or a bar is:
    “Do something!”
    A guy like Jones always “looks” like he’s doing something. That tricks a lot of fans into the bad equation “do something” = “effectiveness”

    It reminds me of the brilliant Stephen Leacock line:

    “Lord Ronald said nothing; he flung himself from the room, flung himself upon his horse and rode madly off in all directions.”

    That speaks to our Oilers in so many ways.

    Romulus Apotheosis: this is a weird thing to be so strident about, considering just yesterday I pointed to how he actually led the team the one year he got a long NHL look

    I am sure you mean it’s a weird thing to be strident about given those statistics. But it comes across as saying it’s a weird thing to be strident about because you said so. You take great pride in pointing out not just facts, but that it was you who uncovered said facts. We already know you’re smart, Rom. You don’t need to rub everyone’s noses in it quite as often as you do. Not looking to debate the point, just a humble request for less chest-thumping in the “told-you-so” posts.

  52. icecastles says:

    Woodguy: One day I hope to cheer for a hockey team where Omark vs. Jones doesn’t become a debate because the roster and system are good and deep enough that those two players wouldn’t ever be on the roster.

    Amen to that.

  53. LMHF#1 says:

    Ducey: It would seem to me that you have a bias against the Oilers/ NHL that they don’t give little guys a chance.That has scewed your vision so badly that you have clung to Omark to make your point.That is a hill you will die on, my friend.

    Omark is 27 and by my count has played for 8 differnet coaches.I don’t know when these attributes of being a “great defensive player” are going to come out.Again it must be all 8 of those coaches faults.Poor Linus.

    If you think Omark (who is small, not physical, doesn’t play well without the puck, seems to have little interest in checking) could be a “great defensive player” then you don’t know one when you see one.

    If you are speculating on the psyche of the coach as the basis of your argument as to why Omark should have stayed in the NHL, well then you don’t have an argument.

    JFJ has nothing to do with Omark.Because JFJ sucked and was given a chance, that means Omark should be given another 70 games to really prove he sucks too?

    This is just getting funny…

    I really don’t care about the size of a player. I care about their effectiveness.

    I didn’t use the word great. Quote properly if you’re going to quote.

    I said strong. I stand by that assessment of the player and others with a game like him. That it didn’t happen doesn’t mean it couldn’t have happened. He had assets (strong on the puck and in corners, smart and willing to work hard, good passer) that can be developed into a strong player in the defensive zone. Instead you get the “doesn’t fit in the top six” BS which discounts the potential for development through coaching.

    I don’t particularly care whether you think I have an argument. I stated my observations, speculation and conclusion. Never set out to present an analytic case. I also pointed to a reason he was sent down, NOT a reason he should have stayed. The two are different. People can take it or leave it.

    Try this on for size: Grant me that in an alternate universe Omark was indeed sent down solely because of that SO attempt we all remember that failed. Other than the coach flat out saying “I sent him down because he was irresponsible with a scoring chance” or something to that effect, how else could you figure this out other than through observation, thought and reaching a conclusion? is it somehow not true because it was not said? Am I saying this is indisputable? No.

    The example Jacques provides has everything to do with every instance of players (big or small) being turned into pegs based on antiquated notions of role rather than being analyzed on a positive impact v. negative impact basis.

  54. LMHF#1 says:

    Woodguy:
    One day I hope to cheer for a hockey team where Omark vs. Jones doesn’t become a debate because the roster and system are good and deep enough that those two players wouldn’t ever be on the roster.

    This.

  55. icecastles says:

    Who was it that said debates in academia are the most fierce precisely because there is so little at stake? There’s got to be a lesson in that with today’s debate.

    Referring of course, to the fury that’s been stirred up over this skate-lacing debate.
    (I heard that Omark didn’t even lace his skates: he used velcro)

  56. russ99 says:

    Has this devolved into yet another Omark thread? Jeez.

    Both sides of the argument are way too deeply entrenched to convince anyone otherwise, and it doesn’t matter anyway. While I hope he lights it up in the SEL or KHL, he’s no longer an Oiler, case closed.

    Back to Jones – seems like MacT bringing him back was a really bad move considering how many good 2-way wingers were available in FA last year.

    He hit on the bigger moves like the Gordon signing, the late season goalie moves and the Perron trade, but his mid to low level moves were pretty suspect.

  57. icecastles says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: this is a weird thing to be so strident about, considering just yesterday I pointed to how he actually led the team the one year he got a long NHL look

    A couple other things that occured to me in regard to this data:

    1) I went off his raw numbers, which are indeed bad. You’re right in that he was the best on the team that year (across a decent number of games too, so you’re not only correct due to a ‘small sample size thing: those numbers can largely be trusted), but best on the worst team doesn’t mean he was necessarily good. Especially given his qualcomp and zone starts (easiest on the team among forwards). And his CorsiRel was 11th among forwards who had played 30 or more games. Hardly glowing.

    2) Part of my objection to Omark that you didn’t quote (I may have made it in a different post) was his inability to finish (in rebuttal to Captain Obvious’s post about puck luck being the sole determinant of Omark’s fate). Even when he was sending the play in the right direction as he appeared to be doing that season, he managed five goals in 51 games.

    Five.

    For a player with a more or less one dimensional game (unless you’re arguing that he’s decent defensively, which I believe you’re not though I could be wrong), that’s nowhere near good enough. Chances and zone time are important because they increase a player’s likelihood of scoring goals. If they don’t score and they’re still being scored on, then those factors become significantly less relevant.

    The corsi you cite from 2010/11 is indeed a sign that there was potentially an NHL-caliber player there, but he never seemed to emerge with the chances he was given, and there wasn’t enough else in his game to warrant (in the eyes of his coaches, at least) more chances.

    This is probably a better point than just asking you to stop picking on people when you’re right and they’re wrong. So suck it, you… you… smart person, you.

  58. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    icecastles: I am sure you mean it’s a weird thing to be strident about given those statistics. But it comes across as saying it’s a weird thing to be strident about because you said so. You take great pride in pointing out not just facts, but that it was you who uncovered said facts. We already know you’re smart, Rom. You don’t need to rub everyone’s noses in it quite as often as you do. Not looking to debate the point, just a humble request for less chest-thumping in the “told-you-so” posts.

    haha

    sorry. that does read as dickishness as you quote it. I was hoping my preface made something clear.

    Romulus Apotheosis: Hahaha… Omark again. I love him so much, if only for giving Oiler fans outsized fits of torment.

    I was trying to take responsibility in a funny way for bringing Omark back into our lives yesterday (not for being smart or whatever). I figured today’s Omark chat was some kind of hangover and wanted to acknowledge “my bad!” not trying to get credit or anything.

    but, it certainly does read that way… seriously sorry to give that impression…

  59. icecastles says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: but, it certainly does read that way… seriously sorry to give that impression…

    You’re direct, you don’t pull your punches, and you never say something you’re not willing to think through or back up… I have ENORMOUS respect for that. I’m just sensitive because our team is fucking terrible and I actually feel some sort of Catholic guilt even watching the playoffs and getting so excited by the quality of play.

    Also, I had a nightmare last night that I moved back to Winnipeg.

  60. spoiler says:

    icecastles: Also, I had a nightmare last night that I moved back to Winnipeg.

    I once had to change a flat in a -20 fucking-October blizzard at evening rush hour on Pembina at B. Grandin and Univ Cres. That nightmare still re-occurs as some sort of Dante-ian anti-Inferno punishment.

    *shivers uncontrollably*

    But it hasn’t scarred me or anything…

    *weeps*

  61. speeds says:

    Intersting to hear via Bob Stauffer that MacT and Lowe are in Finland (presumably at U-18′s), Nylander is having a big tourney, has been rising up the charts.

    He might be making a very good case for himself in front of MacTavish and Lowe.

  62. Glock9 says:

    Andy P:
    I think it’s fitting that his dog is a red setter. If ever there was a dog type that characterized Jonesy, that’s the one, and I mean that as a compliment. Happy, carefree, energetic, more than willing to do everything asked of him, not a greyhound but will run, not a pit bull but will fight if he has to, just a great person to have on a team.

    Well put. Not a great hockey player, never was but very likeable and put in effort. Good luck Jonesy.

  63. Derek says:

    I’m fairly indifferent to Linus Omark and Ryan Jones, neither of them make chocolate.

  64. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    icecastles: You’re direct, you don’t pull your punches, and you never say something you’re not willing to think through or back up… I have ENORMOUS respect for that. I’m just sensitive because our team is fucking terrible and I actually feel some sort of Catholic guilt even watching the playoffs and getting so excited by the quality of play.

    Also, I had a nightmare last night that I moved back to Winnipeg.

    You’re far too generous.

    ——-
    On Omark… I won’t belabor it but I thought and still think there’s a player in there somewhere. But, he’s enough of a tweener to not expend a ton of energy on.

    That’s why it’s so interesting that he excites so much conversation (I say this as one who gleefully participates, not some holier than thou abstainer).

    At any rate, my point yesterday that Bruce picked up on but didn’t get much interest wasn’t really about Omark, but about how situational luck works.

    A good team that has a hole in their top 9 for a skilled forward, but is tight against the cap… by virtue of their situation is going to see the world differently than a bad team that has cap space and isn’t lacking for warm bodies, or doesn’t care to fill holes to compete for anything.

    In one situation a Zuc or a Brunner or an Omark looks like a cheap way to fill a hole and take a long flyer on a guy. In the other situation, there is very little incentive to take on a project and not look for more proven options

    but, that’s enough about Omark.

  65. spoiler says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: On Omark… I won’t belabor it but I thought and still think there’s a player in there somewhere. But, he’s enough of a tweener to not expend a ton of energy on.
    That’s why it’s so interesting that he excites so much conversation (I say this as one who gleefully participates, not some holier than thou abstainer).
    At any rate, my point yesterday that Bruce picked up on but didn’t get much interest wasn’t really about Omark, but about how situational luck works.
    A good team that has a hole in their top 9 for a skilled forward, but is tight against the cap… by virtue of their situation is going to see the world differently than a bad team that has cap space and isn’t lacking for warm bodies, or doesn’t care to fill holes to compete for anything.
    In one situation a Zuc or a Brunner or an Omark looks like a cheap way to fill a hole and take a long flyer on a guy. In the other situation, there is very little incentive to take on a project and not look for more proven options
    but, that’s enough about Omark.

    I’m scared of what happens when you do belabour a point.
    :-D

  66. icecastles says:

    spoiler,

    Are you a fellow U of M grad, Spoiler? Do I know you? Shawn, is that you?

    Derek: I’m fairly indifferent to Linus Omark and Ryan Jones, neither of them make chocolate.

    I have to reignite that blog.

    Romulus Apotheosis: You’re far too generous.

    All my lovers tell me this. but like Ryan Jones, they keep coming back.

  67. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    spoiler: I’m scared of what happens when you do belabour a point.

    ugh. it’s the worst. ask any prof I’ve ever written a paper for. I never did figure out parsimony.

  68. G Money says:

    *** SHAMELESS SELF-PROMOTION WARNING ***

    Just published another FanPost over at C&B: http://www.coppernblue.com/2014/4/24/5650132/draft-success-ohl-vs-whl

    This particular post stems directly from a discussion (OHL vs WHL) on this very blog a few days ago, and I even quote a few of you lot. So you should read it entirely out of self-interest! :-)

  69. icecastles says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: parsimony

    Brevity is shorter. :D

  70. spoiler says:

    icecastles: Are you a fellow U of M grad, Spoiler? Do I know you? Shawn, is that you?

    Nope, U of A grad. I co-ran a development program at the U of M back in the early 90s for the Alumni Association/Development office. Wasn’t a student, but I probably held the record in campus parking tickets. Used to live in that hospital-green coloured apartment building on Pembina next to a Garbonzo’s and across the street from a bar… Strawberries, I think it was called.

  71. spoiler says:

    icecastles: Brevity is shorter.

    Well, in his defense, his avatar isn’t Romulus Tacitus.

  72. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    spoiler: Well, in his defense, his avatar isn’t Romulus Tacitus.

    I like where this is going.

  73. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    have a listen to Stauffer talking to Reinhart and Bennett today if you missed it:

    https://soundcloud.com/630ched/oilers-now-apr-24-4th-half-hour?in=630ched/sets/oilers-now-1

  74. icecastles says:

    spoiler: Nope, U of A grad. I co-ran a development program at the U of M back in the early 90s for the Alumni Association/Development office. Wasn’t a student, but I probably held the record in campus parking tickets.Used to live in that hospital-green coloured apartment building on Pembina next to a Garbonzo’s and across the street from a bar… Strawberries, I think it was called.

    I did some psych, economics and criminology courses at U of A. For it’s shitty rep, I actually enjoyed U of A.

    I know the green apartment building… I thought about getting a place there at one point because it had such a great name, though I recall it being named something else, which I completely forget.

    spoiler: Well, in his defense, his avatar isn’t Romulus Tacitus.

    Razor blades for breakfast, man! Awesome.

  75. Lois Lowe says:

    As someone who never attended the U of A I can say with some certainty that it doesn’t have a shitty rep among the people I know. I’ve attended three post secondary institutions in my life, two have been excellent for the field I was in, the other notsomuch but it’s not a strength of that particular school.

  76. Lowetide says:

    G Money:
    *** SHAMELESS SELF-PROMOTION WARNING ***

    Just published another FanPost over at C&B: http://www.coppernblue.com/2014/4/24/5650132/draft-success-ohl-vs-whl

    This particular post stems directly from a discussion (OHL vs WHL) on this very blog a few days ago, and I even quote a few of you lot.So you should read it entirely out of self-interest! :-)

    VERY good read, thanks for posting this!

  77. icecastles says:

    Lois Lowe:
    As someone who never attended the U of A I can say with some certainty that it doesn’t have a shitty rep among the people I know. I’ve attended three post secondary institutions in my life, two have been excellent for the field I was in, the other notsomuch but it’s not a strength of the school.

    I wrote in a hurry and wasn’t clear. Not so much the academic rep (though that’s not really glowing outside a handful of faculties) as the experience of attending. The overcrowding is indeed a major problem and their attempted expansion was a disgrace of the worst sort, but I found its reputation as a commuter campus and an ugly university was, while containing some truth, quite overblown.

    It was a pleasant enough campus and one of the more friendly and relaxed atmospheres I’ve found. given it’s close integration with the Whyte Avenue neighbourhood, the campus border is somewhat more permeable than many schools in Canada, and it doesn’t empty and die quite so quickly in the evenings as I feared would be the case.

    U of M while an infinitely more attractive campus, was by far the worst I’ve seen for suffering from being a commuter campus. next to no off-campus housing within walking distance, no nearby shops or restaurants, and completely isolated from the city on a peninsula on a highway. Brutal student experience and the 25 year plan to mitigate it is decidedly unambitious.

  78. delooper says:

    G Money:
    *** SHAMELESS SELF-PROMOTION WARNING ***

    Just published another FanPost over at C&B: http://www.coppernblue.com/2014/4/24/5650132/draft-success-ohl-vs-whl

    This particular post stems directly from a discussion (OHL vs WHL) on this very blog a few days ago, and I even quote a few of you lot.So you should read it entirely out of self-interest!

    Like any academic, the first thing I did is read over your post to see if I was cited.

  79. Lois Lowe says:

    York is the worst campus in the history of ever. I can’t comment on McGill’s, but U of T St. George is amazing. UBC is gorgeous but very much a commuter campus since there is nothing around it. Calgary’s is ugly, but close to lots of houses, not close to downtown though.

    I’ve not set foot on a campus in Saskatchewan or Manitoba, so can’t comment.

  80. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    G Money:
    *** SHAMELESS SELF-PROMOTION WARNING ***

    Just published another FanPost over at C&B: http://www.coppernblue.com/2014/4/24/5650132/draft-success-ohl-vs-whl

    This particular post stems directly from a discussion (OHL vs WHL) on this very blog a few days ago, and I even quote a few of you lot.So you should read it entirely out of self-interest!

    ha! look at that. I got you re-tweeted by the man himself:

    Rob Vollman retweeted you
    12m: A very interesting post by GMoney: Draft Success: OHL vs WHL http://sbn.to/1pukTT2 via @CopperandBlue related:
    @robvollmanNHL @behindthenet

    good job G!

  81. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    speaking of twitter. this came up just now:

    ISS Hockey ‏@ISShockey 11m
    You can ask your questions to @ISShockey. Our scouts @SCocker11, @DeeBesty and @OlliJLahdesmaki will reply.
    #U18askISS

    Romulus’ Apotheosis ‏@RomulusNotNuma 9m
    @ISShockey how much weight do you give to birth date and league of origin? @SCocker11 @DeeBesty @OlliJLahdesmaki

    Steven Cocker ‏@SCocker11 5m
    @RomulusNotNuma limited… this is why tournaments like the #U18Worlds are so important for coverage. DOB and league aren’t deciding factors

    Romulus’ Apotheosis ‏@RomulusNotNuma 5m
    @SCocker11 thx. interesting. a lot of novice draft watchers take great concern re: young and old spectrum of draft years.
    no weight at all?

    Steven Cocker ‏@SCocker11 3m
    @RomulusNotNuma personally if a player can think the game then those shouldn’t be factors. Many other “signs” that would come before DOB

  82. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Lois Lowe: York is the worst campus in the history of ever.

    it really is the pits.

    which is too bad, because Black Creek is right next door to the campus and is quite lovely. I have no idea how that landscape inspired such a dystopic vision of Communist styled infrastructure.

  83. icecastles says:

    Now then. Can we please abandon this friendly tone of camaraderie and get back to our usual business of spewing vitriol and hate over which was the slightly less marginal NHLer?

    How about a 1st line of Hardichuck-Hartikanen-Hendricks, a 2nd line of Jones-Joensuu-Jaques , a 3rd line of Belanger-Brown-Brule and a 4th line of Macintyre-Moreau-oMark.

    If we can’t win, we can at least be catchy.

  84. delooper says:

    Lois Lowe: of

    If you want to see ugly campuses, North America isn’t the best place to go looking. Paris Nord (Paris 13) is one of the uglier ones. Some of the floors are falling apart. The university has arranged a bus ride for the 200m walk from the subway to the campus, because people were getting mugged too regularly on the short walk in.

  85. icecastles says:

    delooper: The university has arranged a bus ride for the 200m walk from the subway to the campus, because people were getting mugged to regularly on the short walk in.

    Some people have no sense of adventure.

  86. Lois Lowe says:

    Nothing really compares to the Ivy League campuses to be honest. My brother went to Dartmouth and it is stunning, actually, the whole town of Hanover seems like a movie set.

  87. icecastles says:

    Lois Lowe:

    I’ll see your ivy league and raise you a Hogwarts.

  88. delooper says:

    Lois Lowe:
    Nothing really compares to the Ivy League campuses to be honest. My brother went to Dartmouth and it is stunning, actually, the whole town of Hanover seems like a movie set.

    A bunch of the non-ivy super-expensive schools are nice, too. The University of Miami has marble fountains all over campus. Tulane has the whole rich southern look down. U.Virginia was originally designed by Jefferson in a neo-classical standard way. But it’s quite cute. Northwestern University looks like it’s made out of rock.

    Getting back to Europe, the University of Nice is quite amazing. The mathematics building is a thin cylinder, with offices on the outside and a big natural-light amphitheatre at the bottom-centre.

  89. Bruce McCurdy says:

    LMHF#1: This season should have answered the question of who you keep on an NHL roster: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000412011.html

    OK, now I get it. Clearly you keep the guy with 5 goals and -16 over the guy with 18 goals and -5.

  90. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Ryan Jones:

    2010-12: 160 GP, 35-23-58

    ** eye injury **

    2012-14: 79 GP, 4-9-13

    His scoring just fell off a cliff after that injury. It used to be the one thing that made him stand out against all the other bottom sixers — “at least he can score a little bit”. Scored in college, the AHL and the NHL. Since that injury, in the last two years he’s been the same 2-goal scorer as the likes of Fraser, Gazdic, Smithson, Brown, Belanger etc.

    Certainly it’s time for him to move on — he knows it, MacT knows it, the fans know it. Was likely time last summer, but so it is. He seems like a good-hearted guy who tried hard to connect with the fans. I wish him success, but given that eye thing I don’t really expect to see him latch on to an NHL job.

  91. prairieschooner says:

    I believe that there are a number of people on here suffering from an as yet undiagnosed condition.
    We have seen this condition present a number of times in previous years the worst outbreak was during the Robbie Schremp era or non era.
    Another major outbreak appears to be sweeping through Oiler fans again just now with Linus Omark
    It is believed that these outbreaks coincide with the long gaps between the end of the regular season and the start of training camp.
    The condition manifest itself with fans posting on various sites about the inflated abilities of players who were unsuccessful as NHL players. Not unlike travellers lost in the desert the fans fantasize about things that are not really there.
    The remedy for this condition is untried because it is believed that a play off run by the Oilers would shorten the time between the end of the season and training camp thereby reducing the opportunity for this delusional thinking to take hold.

  92. Ca$h-Money! says:

    Serious, honest question for O’Mark supporters:

    If he got another 20 games, even with limited linemates, on 1 or 2 teams next year, and still produced decent Corsi numbers but weak boxcars, would that be enough to get you off the wagon? I’m honestly curious.

    I just want to know at what point, if ever, boxcars trump stats. I mean I’m a stats first guy myself, but I recognize that at a certain point failure to launch is failure to launch. I just don’t feel he’s 1 opportunity away from proving himself and carving out a 200 game NHL career.

    Also…. Jones seems nice (it’s his thread after all).

  93. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Ca$h-Money!,

    well, I think boxcars matter too.

    In every other league under the sun he’s scored. In the one year he got a real NHL shot, he scored pretty well for a rookie.

    That’s not a track record that = guaranteed success if the situation’s right. But neither is it a track record that says = meh, bust.

  94. Doc Savage says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Ryan Jones:

    2010-12: 160 GP, 35-23-58

    ** eye injury **

    2012-14: 79 GP, 4-9-13

    His scoring just fell off a cliff after that injury. It used to be the one thing that made him stand out against all the other bottom sixers — “at least he can score a little bit”. Scored in college, the AHL and the NHL. Since that injury, in the last two years he’s been the same 2-goal scorer as the likes of Fraser, Gazdic, Smithson, Brown, Belanger etc.

    Certainly it’s time for him to move on — he knows it, MacT knows it, the fans know it. Was likely time last summer, but so it is. He seems like a good-hearted guy who tried hard to connect with the fans. I wish him success, but given that eye thing I don’t really expect to see him latch on to an NHL job.

    Awesome point, expressed as simple and as clear as possible.

    There is no way to do a proper analysis of Ryan Jones without talking about the impact of that eye injury. It would be like talking about Ryan Whitney and not taking into account his foot injuries – you just can’t do it. Like you imply above, too bad MacT had to experience another year of Ryan Jones post-eye injury at $1.5 million. Man, with that skillset, it’s hard to believe that Ryan Jones has actually earned $7.4 million dollars over his career, most of it from the Oilers. That’s insane.

  95. One-Timer says:

    Lois Lowe:
    York is the worst campus in the history of ever. I can’t comment on McGill’s, but U of T St. George is amazing. UBC is gorgeous but very much a commuter campus since there is nothing around it. Calgary’s is ugly, but close to lots of houses, not close to downtown though.

    I’ve not set foot on a campus in Saskatchewan or Manitoba, so can’t comment.

    McGill’s impressive main entrance is about two blocks from St. Catherine’s Street, so no integration problem there. Some of the architecture is pretty utilitarian, but there’s lots of granite and the setting on the flank of Mount Royal is hard to beat. Enjoyed my time there immensely.

  96. FastOil says:

    prairieschooner:
    I believe that there are a number of people on here suffering from an as yet undiagnosed condition.
    We have seen this condition present a number of times in previous years the worst outbreak was during the Robbie Schremp era or non era.
    Another major outbreak appears to be sweeping through Oiler fans again just now with Linus Omark
    It is believed that these outbreaks coincidewith the long gaps between theend of the regular season and the start of training camp.
    The condition manifest itself with fans posting on various sites about the inflated abilities of players who were unsuccessful as NHL players. Not unlike travellers lost in the desert the fans fantasize about things that are not really there.
    The remedy for this condition is untried because it is believed that a play off run by the Oilers would shorten the time between the end of the season and training camp thereby reducing the opportunity for this delusionalthinking to take hold.

    The real deal is Gazdic. He’s tough, he can skate for a big guy, and with the on-the-job training the Oilers are giving him I would expect his next season to be similar to Lucic’s second year. Or maybe Penner’s.

    It isn’t easy to earn your way to the NHL, so maybe bringing a guy in and teaching him exactly what to do isn’t a bad idea. Bringing in Laraque to be the bottom six corner coach (Smytty does the top 6 and butt deflections of course) and to help the Oilers better engage political activism would probably be a good idea as well.

  97. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Doc Savage: Awesome point, expressed as simple and as clear as possible.

    There is no way to do a proper analysis of Ryan Jones without talking about the impact of that eye injury.It would be like talking about Ryan Whitney and not taking into account his foot injuries – you just can’t do it.Like you imply above, too bad MacT had to experience another year of Ryan Jones post-eye injury at $1.5 million.Man, with that skillset, it’s hard to believe that Ryan Jones has actually earned $7.4 million dollars over his career, most of it from the Oilers.That’s insane.

    Friggin’ eye injuries are the worst. Saw the same thing happen to Brett Callighen and Ethan Moreau, just to name a couple of other Oilers wingers with marginal offensive talent. After they came back they said they were fine but the puck seemed to go through their stick a lot more often. Same with Jones, who scored a lot of his goals simply by getting his stick on the puck in/around the blue paint. A lot easier to accomplish with proper depth perception etc.

  98. Ryan says:

    Bruce McCurdy:
    Ryan Jones:

    2010-12: 160 GP, 35-23-58

    ** eye injury **

    2012-14: 79 GP, 4-9-13

    His scoring just fell off a cliff after that injury. It used to be the one thing that made him stand out against all the other bottom sixers — “at least he can score a little bit”. Scored in college, the AHL and the NHL. Since that injury, in the last two years he’s been the same 2-goal scorer as the likes of Fraser, Gazdic, Smithson, Brown, Belanger etc.

    Certainly it’s time for him to move on — he knows it, MacT knows it, the fans know it. Was likely time last summer, but so it is. He seems like a good-hearted guy who tried hard to connect with the fans. I wish him success, but given that eye thing I don’t really expect to see him latch on to an NHL job.

    I had problems visiting this site this afternoon. Of all the posts to crash this site, Ryan Jones? Really?

  99. Ryan says:

    Woodguy:
    One day I hope to cheer for a hockey team where Omark vs. Jones doesn’t become a debate because the roster and system are good and deep enough that those two players wouldn’t ever be on the roster.

    lmao.

    I didn’t think we’d see Woodguy in the sail on Tubthumber thread. :)

    Great point, though.

  100. Chris Hext---formerly EasyOil--- says:

    On the topic of nice university campuses: University of Bath in the UK has a gorgeous campus, plenty of greenery, a lake with an amphitheatre looking on to it for summer concerts, a small shopping precinct, a couple of bars, a large golf course directly behind it, and unrivalled sporting facilities (Olympic athletes & national sports teams often train there). Some of the old ugly 60s breeze-block buildings are still there, but are gradually being updated. It’s on the edge of the city, and on top of a massive hill, but there are regular buses so commuting isn’t really an issue. The views from the edge of the campus over the city are stunning.

    I’m biased, having lived right next door to the uni my entire life (well, apart from my own uni years and now that I’m in Australia).

    Oxford has some beautiful campuses too, from what I’ve seen.

  101. Philosophil says:

    we’ve missed the simple and obvious here – there was only room for one Ryan on this team – Jones and Smyth had to go. I blame it on Kevin Quinn and Jack Michaels. Damn PBP men.

    Sorry. had to be said. i feel shame.

  102. Ryan says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Friggin’ eye injuries are the worst. Saw the same thing happen to Brett Callighen and Ethan Moreau, just to name a couple of other Oilers wingers with marginal offensive talent. After they came back they said they were fine but the puck seemed to go through their stick a lot more often. Same with Jones, who scored a lot of his goals simply by getting his stick on the puck in/around the blue paint. A lot easier to accomplish with proper depth perception etc.

    The counterpoint to your argument is that the production drop off post eye injury was there for all to see…. plain as day, I might add. Yet, Mact still gave him $1.5m x 1 year. Should we be concerned that our GM signed him to that contract?

  103. Bruce McCurdy says:

    Ryan: I had problems visiting this site this afternoon.Of all the posts to crash this site, Ryan Jones?Really?

    I blame O’Mark.

  104. theres oil in virginia says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Friggin’ eye injuries are the worst. Saw the same thing happen to Brett Callighen and Ethan Moreau, just to name a couple of other Oilers wingers with marginal offensive talent. After they came back they said they were fine but the puck seemed to go through their stick a lot more often. Same with Jones, who scored a lot of his goals simply by getting his stick on the puck in/around the blue paint. A lot easier to accomplish with proper depth perception etc.

    This year, the most frustrating part (for me) about watching Jones was that he couldn’t make the simple plays. For example, he would be skating along with the puck and !zip! he’d lose control of it for no good reason. It didn’t occur to me before now, but your statement fits my observations of those moments this year like a glove.

  105. theres oil in virginia says:

    Ryan: The counterpoint to your argument is that the production drop off post eye injury was there for all to see…. plain as day, I might add.Yet, Mact still gave him $1.5m x 1 year.Should we be concerned that our GM signed him to that contract?

    The hope was that he could recover. Did that contract hurt the team? I think it’s worth asking why he didn’t look for other options that were out there, though. Same with the lack of C depth. He said he was happy with the guys he had to fill the void. I always thought that might just be a bluff to conceal that he couldn’t get the guys he wanted, but I don’t know how to tell. Not that there was a plethora of options available, but there were some. Hopefully, we don’t see a repeat this off-season.

  106. One-Timer says:

    tcho:
    It is interesting, however, when Oilers cast offs/problems (Colin Fraser, Mike Brown, Corey Potter) end up being used productively (albeit in minor roles) by other teams. I wonder if this will be the case with Jones.

    I mentioned this the other day about Brown. Low TOI compares to team-mates (a bit over 8 min/game), but he’s not strictly facepunching. He’s being used to play hockey. In the playoffs. For the San Jose Sharks.

    I’m not saying the Oilers lost a gem here. But better teams see what they need in a guy like this and use him effectively. How many players have been churned through the Oil’s bottom 6 this past season? There’s just no system.

  107. delooper says:

    One-Timer: I mentioned this the other day about Brown.Low TOI compares to team-mates (a bit over 8 min/game), but he’s not strictly facepunching.He’s being used to play hockey.In the playoffs.For the San Jose Sharks.

    I’m not saying the Oilers lost a gem here.But better teams see what they need in a guy like this and use him effectively.How many players have been churned through the Oil’s bottom 6 this past season?There’s just no system.

    It’s not all that bad. Very strong teams can use middling players effectively, whereas on weak teams, a middling player would be a major liability. That’s the problem with being a weak team, there’s not enough quality out there to cover for the mistakes of a few middling players.

    The Oilers of the 80′s had plenty of middling players. Semenko didn’t appear that way because there was so much talent and desire on his lines, the Oilers could have played a man down most games and still won.

  108. LMHF#1 says:

    Bruce McCurdy: OK, now I get it. Clearly you keep the guy with 5 goals and -16 over the guy with 18 goals and -5.

    I’m talking PPG and you know it.

    I’m also assuming you watched those games. Assuming you were writing post gamers – same as I was. We both know who the better player was that season.

  109. Bruce McCurdy says:

    LMHF#1: I’m talking PPG and you know it.

    I’m also assuming you watched those games. Assuming you were writing post gamers – same as I was. We both know who the better player was that season.

    Sure I know what you meant, I’m just yanking your chain and calling you out on a blanket statement presenting stats with no other comment than “this proves my point” by very quickly and easily finding important stats that ran counter to your argument. I find that kind of aggravating, so I tend to become a little aggravating myself in countering it. Please take in the spirit intended. No harm, no foul, but the stats alone did not make your case, so You needed to make it.

    At the Cult of Hockey we gave Omark an average grade of 5.3 that season and Jones of 5.1, so *slight* edge Omark but hardly a TKO by our judgement, for whatever that is worth. Jones scored some useful goals, whereas Omark had a nice stretch in the second half when every other skilled forward north of latitude 51 went down with injury, illness, or some other act of Gord. Wasn’t that the season Jones himself stepped on Gagner’s hand?

    Anyway, those guys both had a more featured role than folks expected, and not coincidentally the team had a bad year. They’re both gone now, let’s just wish them well with their future endeavours and move onwards and upwards.

  110. Ivan says:

    G Money,

    GM, great post! Geekish, but informative!

  111. LMHF#1 says:

    Bruce McCurdy: Sure I know what you meant, I’m just yanking your chain and calling you out on a blanket statement presenting stats with no other comment than “this proves my point” by very quickly and easily finding important stats that ran counter to your argument. I find that kind of aggravating, so I tend to become a little aggravating myself in countering it. Please take in the spirit intended. No harm, no foul, but the stats alone did not make your case, so You needed to make it.

    Not really suggesting that should convince the group with hindsight – saying it should have convinced coaches and management at the time. Evidently it didn’t.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca