CREATIVE THINKING

I’ve been trying to write this for a few months now, but nothing rhymes.  It isn’t an especially difficult subject, but the nuts and bolts are difficult. I’m going to have another lash this morning.

ELLIOTTE FRIEDMAN, A YEAR AGO

  • Creative thinking:  4. I do think Steve Tambellini was allowed to make his own decisions, but by the end, Kevin Lowe (and MacTavish) clearly didn’t believe in them. The most interesting thing about Monday’s media conference was how different Lowe and MacTavish sounded. Lowe talked about past accomplishments, MacTavish looked towards the future — saying repeatedly how much the game has changed. There was criticism for going “same old, same old” in Edmonton, but MacTavish came across very differently. This could be a very interesting dynamic.

A year into the process, there’s a lot of negativity toward MacT’s first season. We’ll take a longer look during the RE series, but I wanted to discuss creative thinking, evaluation and action specifically.

STEVE TAMBELLINI’S BIG MOVE

In the summer of 2011, Steve Tambellini had two 1st overall picks in his back pocket and a lot of holes on the NHL team. The biggest need was probably (this is no surprise) defense, where the team had this depth chart:

  1. Ladislav Smid
  2. Tom Gilbert
  3. Ryan Whitney
  4. Theo Peckham (looked at that moment like a guy on the way to establishing himself as an NHL D)
  5. Jeff Petry (had played 35 games in 2010-11 and looked good)
  6. Taylor Chorney (was still trying to get it right)

They added:

  • Cam Barker, who had recently been bought out by Minnesota. We looked at him right away and found him wanting in every area.
  • Andy Sutton, who was a suitable addition for third pairing—and enforcer role—and perhaps insurance against Theo Peckham who wasn’t clearly established as that option.

I don’t think those moves are strong enough, and in my opinion they show a lack of creativity. Furthermore, I’d suggest that Steve Tambellini settled for a lesser option and lacked the aggressiveness required to adequately address a very specific and large area of need. I’m hopeful that the links show this isn’t hindsight, we saw this at the time, and the decision to hire Cam Barker had a direct impact on the team, coach Renney, Taylor Hall’s entry level success, and on it goes.

ference12

CRAIG MACTAVISH AND HIS BIG MOVE

This isn’t a direct comparison, Tambellini had been on the job for several years when he made the Barker move. However, Craig MacTavish took over in April, made some assessments, and went about the work of getting things done. I could choose any number of options, but have chosen Andrew Ference since it was an attempt to address the same issue a couple of years later. Here’s what I posted at the time:

  • D Andrew Ference, 4 years times 3.25M. An overpay where he’ll play, Ference is ideally suited as a veteran pairing for Schultz the younger. He was 4th among Bruins in EV TOI (17:06) and fourth in PK TOI (2:13) and will probably play similar minutes with the Oilers. I think we should probably prepare for Ladislav Smid or Nick Schultz heading out of town (Ottawa or Philly is my guess) before training camp. The current LH depth chart is Smid, Ference, N Schultz, Anton Belov, Oscar Klefbom–suspect we’ll see a flip before fall.

The first season by Ference in Edmonton was not a good one, and that’s a very bad sign. In a season where young Martin Marincin played brilliantly after callup, you could reasonably argue that Ference was the least effective regular defenseman on the team:

marincin corsiRelInteresting that MacT’s Russian long shot performed well in this discipline, but his big money solution had a poor year. What’s more, unlike the Cam Barker deal (a one-year deal), Ference is signed for another three years at $3.25 million. Now, they can buy him out, and I’d suggest they’re at least a year away from contemplating it, but the fact remains that the MacT solution (Ference) was not successful AND it has a $9 million dollar kicker.

SUMMARY

Steve Tambellini signed Cam Barker to a one-year, $2.25 million dollar deal and traded him away after 25 games. Craig MacTavish aimed higher, signing Andrew Ference to a four-year deal at $3.25 million per season.

Question for you: what signing was the poorer of the two? I would still argue the Barker acquisition, because it had  no hope of success. The addition of Ference, although an older player, was an attempt to bring in a proven player, a veteran, an actual NHL player, to solve the problem.

I prefer that 10 times out of 10, even if it didn’t work out. Do you agree?

LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

hurdle gifat 10, we hit the airwaves with the Lowdown. Scheduled to appear:

  • Bruce McCurdy, Cult of Hockey. Gagner, Draft, Oil Kings, Ference versus Barker.
  • Guy Flaming, Pipeline Show. Oil Kings, Brett Pollock, what’s happening with Mitchell Moroz?
  • Kirk Luedeke, Red Line Report. 2014 draft, and the long and rich history of the Bruins v. Habs.
  • Andrew Berkshire, Habs Eyes on the Prize. Montreal has been so smart this postseason, but with Doug Murray apparently back in the lineup, is Michel Therrien back to bringing the crazy?

10-1260 via text, @Lowetide_ on twitter. See you on the radio!

written by

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

84 Responses to "CREATIVE THINKING"

  1. Marcus Oilerius says:

    Moroz seems to be having two pretty bad rounds in the playoffs now.

    Anything to be concerned about?

  2. Lowetide says:

    Marcus Oilerius:
    Moroz seems to be having two pretty bad rounds in the playoffs now.

    Anything to be concerned about?

    I’ll ask Guy. I think it’s always dangerous to read too much into a small sample size, and there are injuries at this time of year that can impact performance. Still, it’s a question worth asking.

  3. oilabroad says:

    I didn’t mind the Barker signing, it seemed like a low risk flyer that could end up a home run. if it had been in addition to a better signing there would have been no issue… unfortunately that was plan A for Tambo… The Ference signing to me seemed like the one where you knew exactly what you were going to get and you would likely not be happy with what you have long before you finished paying for it.

  4. Cameron says:

    I would actually defend the Barker signing more than you did. It is perfectly reasonable to take a shot on a player who has bombed out elsewhere, especially when there are so many tools in the kids toolbox .

    However, while throwing low-risk darts at other teams failed projects is defendable, it can’t be the plan for how you rebuild your defense.

    It’s one thing to throw the occasional dart at the board blidnfolded, but if that’s your only strategy for winning you are in trouble.

  5. j says:

    I am fine with Ference as far as leadership and veteran savvy are concerned. This team needs an attitude adjustment as much as it needs a number one defender. Much like Horcoff, the issue is cost and term, but we can probably all agree that the player type is a good fit for the team. Sadly, in the cap era, every player is evaluated solely against his $ value. Are we seeing the end of ‘intangibles’? Too bad.

  6. LMHF#1 says:

    Marcus Oilerius:
    Moroz seems to be having two pretty bad rounds in the playoffs now.

    Anything to be concerned about?

    Don’t see any reason to worry given his pro ceiling isn’t particularly high. If he doesn’t make it, he’s easily replaceable.

  7. Halfwise says:

    I always marvel at that young lady’s vertical leap, as well as her other attributes.

    MacT’s attributes include a bias for action, taking a shot. The Ference signing was his biggest single roll of the dice but it was not his only roll of the dice on D. And all of those rolls of the dice have to be considered in context: the Oilers have a lot of D prospects in the pipeline, and a three to five year strategy for the prospects will conflict with a one to three year strategy for thing that paying fans want most, playoff games.

    What Tambo should be given credit for (warning, short list to follow) is establishing minor league infrastructure. But while he was doing that the big club was sinking, and whatever alarms were sounding were ignored on Kingsway. We were watching LA and ANA last night — it sure feels as if the Oilers are far from a team that can play at that level.

    There sure is lots of blame to go around with this team. And not much to cheer for.

    Maybe they should drop the Octane Lameness Squad (TM) and introduce women’s hurdles.

  8. Younger Oil says:

    If Ference is bought out, that would be the third captain in a row (excluding Ryan Smyth) that would be bought out/pushed out of the city. I know in each case that it is best for the team, but I can’t think of another team where that has happened. I know captains aren’t the sole source of leadership in the locker room, but they should be the main one, and it seems like the C is starting to lose meaning in this city.

    This team needs a leader. I know people keep saying it’s Hall, and while he certainly shows leadership production-wise, I think people are mostly in agreement that he isn’t “captain material” quite yet due to his body language on the ice and sometimes the bench. He’ll be the captain of the future, but still needs to earn the role. Somebody needs to emerge as a leader on and off the ice, and help bridge the gap between the young players and old players, as well as the players and the coach.

    Ultimately, it needs to be a group effort, but something just hasn’t been clicking for the past 8 years. It’s only a matter of time before the young players want out.

  9. LMHF#1 says:

    Barker’s signing would have better if he was brought in as a bottom pairing/PB guy on a team with depth. The Oilers squad that signed him was not deep.

    Ference’s sidning would have been better if he was brought in as a bottom pairing leader on a team with emerging young D. Last year’s Oilers team was not there yet.

    I’m not arguing against the moves. They were both defensible even if Barker wasn’t a good gamble. The thing is, these two moves were THE move in those summers. Not good at all.

    This whole “we can only do one thing at a time” issue that existed over the past number of years is rather embarrassing. The Curtis Glencross situation being the clearest example.

  10. LMHF#1 says:

    Younger Oil:
    This team needs a leader. I know people keep saying it’s Hall, and while he certainly shows leadership production-wise, I think people are mostly in agreement that he isn’t “captain material” quite yet due to his body language on the ice and sometimes the bench.

    There are people that recoil at such responsibility, and people that rise. I can’t see Hall recoiling – and I’m far from his biggest fan. He’d step up if you put that responsibility to him.

  11. borisnikov says:

    oilabroad:
    I didn’t mind the Barker signing, it seemed like a low risk flyer that could end up a home run.

    How do you figure? I seem to recall not only Lowetide questioning the signing, but every other Oiler blogger of note. It was well pointed out that everyone believed there was zero chance for a home run in his case. Could it have turned out better? I guess… But home run potential? I don’t think it ever existed except maybe in Tambo’s optimistic assesment.

    *Edit* In Zona’s intant analysis he had this to say “Sigh.”

  12. borisnikov says:

    That free agent frenzy was just about the most atrocious of attempts as there ever was at creating a good hockey team. Eager, Hordichuk, Barker, Belanger, Sutton and Souray went to Dallas. lolz.

    I wonder if MacT had a look at that off season as a guide of what not to do when acquiring players.

    *looks at last season’s early season acquisitions* *gulp*

  13. Hammers says:

    Tambo made bigger mistakes than Barker , hell the Canucks tried him a year later at less money with the same result . Still not sure on Ference as he was hired as a #4 but played above that level but with poor results and on a bad team .Ference was perfect for a Boston but is in over his head on the Oilers . I don’t like hearing how good players are in the community as it’s on the ice that counts . Basically Tambo & McT get the same mark from me a C- for these 2 added players . Trouble was Tambo gets an overall D- and I would give McT a B- for last year .

  14. leadfarmer says:

    The sad thing about the Ference signing is that this last year was going to probably be his most effective year. Those legs are going to fall off in the next couple years. Barker we could get rid of after one year for nothing. Ferrence will need a buy out in 2 years.

    MacT made a lot of noise about the 3rd and 4th line being a threat to score and replaced them with other players that are not able to score.

    Maybe the smartest man in the room shouldn’t be the last player to play without a helmet.

  15. PaperDesigner says:

    The problem is that both moves addressed the wrong end of the defense, they were both, even under the most optimistic of projections, bound to be no better than second pairing players, and more likely to be in your bottom pairing. The problem was, and is, who is at the top of the depth chart. MacTavish needs to address that issue, and do it now. Tambellini never did, and it eventually cost him the job. One has to think even MacTavish will run out of rope eventually.

  16. Andy P says:

    borisnikov:
    That free agent frenzy was just about the most atrocious of attempts as there ever was at creating a good hockey team. Eager, Hordichuk, Barker, Belanger, Sutton and Souray went to Dallas. lolz.

    I wonder if MacT had a look at that off season as a guide of what not to do when acquiring players.

    *looks at last season’s early season acquisitions* *gulp*

    BK:
    You do know that out of that group, only Souray and Barker went to the Dallas organization, and only Souray played on their NHL team, right?

  17. blainer says:

    Moves like Barker and Ference were made because in Barkers case no one will pay the money we did to get him. Same in Ference’s case. As with Free Agents.. players are going to the highest bidder. We lucked out big time on Clarkson and need to be very careful going forward as we will need the cap room in a couple of years. Ference needs to be on the bottom pairing playing the vetern role..anything higher than that will get us in trouble.

  18. mumbai max says:

    I like the subject of this thread, creativity, even if not the specific examples.

    It will take creativity to get the Oil out of the hole. Some examples:

    1. Free agent value signings. These exist, just not on July 1. Thinking Gilbert and Raymond. (I also think one non creative overpay in one of the areas of need 2C, 1/2D is defensible)

    2. Overage junior signings. Others are better at finding the gems. Euro overage anyone?

    3. College FA signings. We are ok at this, and in fact have good results since MacT arrived. Shultz, Oesterle

    4. Trades with teams needing to reach the cap floor. Can you say Gagner boys and girls?

    5. Trades with teams with cap problems. It seems possible that the cap is going to be more like 69 than the 71 capgeek is currently using. That has huge ramifications for teams like Toronto, Philly and Chicago. Good players are going to shake loose from this sub group of teams. Look at the Perron example. Or Scrivens.

    6. Trades with other bottom feeders. There is a lot of desperation at the bottom of the food chain. Exploit others in the same situation. I am looking at you Flyers, Islanders, Toronto and Carolina.
    Vancouver. Desperation? LOVE IT.

    7. Trades with teams in full rebuild. Well, one team anyway, Buffalo. A good defenceman will shake loose there, and perhaps someone like Stewart. Or perhaps Stewart himself!!

    8. Three way trades. Please lord, let us forget about Patrick O’Sullivan. Anyway, there are some great three way trades out there, waiting to be engineered by a creative mind able to think about more than one thing at the same time. Tambo, how we miss thee. NOT.

    9. Reclamation projects. NOT like Barker. Burrows? Other teams players who have had bad years with extenuating circumstances (like Gagner’s jaw) and are selling low.

    Potential trade chips without screwing things up:

    1. Gagner
    2. Klefbom/Marincin **** ONE ONLY and only for genuine 2C OR 1/2D!
    3. Musil, Gernat, Simpson, Fedun……pick any 2 from the DP pile
    4. Arco (I hate this but he may have value, LOOK at those AHL numbers)
    5. Lander, see above
    6. Pitlick, Horak, Russians, Khaira, Chase……pick as many as you want from the FP pile
    7. 2014 1st round pick
    8. 2015 1st round pick

    Some good chips there.

    He needs to be patient and creative, and slide around against the grain looking for deals in all these areas. The legendary LT 3 for 1 (for Weber/Subban) would be fine, but 4 or 5 lower key and creative and CLEVER deals would be preferable.

    Good luck MacT, we are all (mostly) with you and hoping for a great summer.

  19. borisnikov says:

    Andy P,

    I’m not sure what you mean. The first five were signed as free agents by Tambo and Souray was bought out over hurt ego and subsequently ended up in Dallas.

  20. borisnikov says:

    Hammers,

    The Canucks didn’t pencil him in for duty in the top 4 though.

  21. CurtisS says:

    Our rebuild has been slower due to drafting, so if Tambellini made the final call on drafting he really sucked.

    Since Stu took over in 08 to 2010 after the first round we only hit on Marincin, and IMO thats not good enough for a rebuilding team.

    I stopeed at 2010 cause 2011 and forward the jury is still out on.

  22. Mr DeBakey says:

    Moroz seems to be having two pretty bad rounds in the playoffs now.
    Anything to be concerned about?

    It hasn’t changed my opinion of him, so no, not concerned.

    An overpay where he’ll play, Ference is ideally suited as a veteran pairing for Schultz the younger

    Ference was brought in to be Jason Smith And Ethan Moreau. So, his contract is actually quite cheap.

  23. flyfish1168 says:

    I would put alot of the blame on our pro scouts. I must admit I like tihe Barker signing more due to the fact that it was only for one year. Fernece is going hinder our CAP space.

  24. John Chambers says:

    Was at the Anaheim LA game last night. Lots of pretty ladies in the crowd. Saw a Cogliano, a Stoll, and a Kelly Hrudey jersey in my section. These people were friendly and knew nothing of hockey. Jack and cokes were fourteen bucks and ultimately set me back more than the tickets.

    Kept trying to figure out which team Pancakes was playing for. ..

  25. jake70 says:

    Staois 2.7M cap hit x 4 years – Lowe in 2006
    Pisani 2.5M cap hit x 4 years – Lowe in 2006
    Roloson 3.67M cap hit x 3 years – Lowe in 2006 (at 36 yo)
    Penner offer sheet 4.25M cap hit x 5 years – Lowe in 2007(avoided the Vanek at 7M if unmatched)
    Souray – 5.4M cap it x 5 years – Lowe in 2007
    Moreau – 2M cap hit x 4 years – Lowe in 2007
    Gilbert – 4M cap hit x 6 years – Lowe in 2008
    Horcoff 5.5M cap hit x 6 years – Lowe (Katz?) in 2008
    Glencross – gone – Lowe in 2008

    Here Tambo, it’s all yours. Have fun. ;-)

  26. RexLibris says:

    Cameron,

    Tambellini’s bet on Barker wouldn’t have been so bad if it was to slot him in as a 6-7. Reclamation projects, especially on defensemen, can pay off every once in awhile.

    He bet on Barker to be a 1st or 2nd pairing solution.

    You recall my reaction to Feaster’s signing of Cervenka being that it was too big a bet on too unknown a commodity in a crucial position.

    This was partially due to my experience in seeing how Tambellini approached Barker.

    Both Tambellini and Feaster were betting the rent money on a longshot, and in both situations it backfired – the Barker bet worse than the Cervenka one, in my opinion.

    It isn’t that a team shouldn’t look at bringing these players in, but rather that every player needs to be objectively assessed and then placed in a position to succeed. To do otherwise is either negligence or incompetence.

  27. RexLibris says:

    John Chambers: Was at the Anaheim LA game last night. Lots of pretty ladies in the crowd. Saw a Cogliano, a Stoll, and a Kelly Hrudey jersey in my section. These people were friendly and knew nothing of hockey. Jack and cokes were fourteen bucks and ultimately set me back more than the tickets.Kept trying to figure out which team Pancakes was playing for. ..

    He was sitting in the stands with one of the pretty ladies. :)

  28. gcw_rocks says:

    The problem with the Barker signing was the failure to bring in someone capable of caring a heavier load above him. Barker was Tambelini’s Belov. Sutton was his Fraser and a much much better choice for that role.

    Tambelini never even tried to get a Ference. How do you rate doing nothing vs trying something that had the smell of failure on it from the get go? Especially, as you pointed out, they already had a younger version of the same player in Smid and a lesser version of the same player in Schultz Sr?

    Barker vs Belov – win for MacT
    Sutton vs Fraser – hands down win for Tambelini
    Do nothing vs do the wrong thing (Ference) – big fail for both. The flaws of both GMs are highlighted here. Tambelini was afraid to act or didn’t understand the need to act. MacT sees the problem but is twenty years out of date in identifying the solution. Plus he has a little Loweitis in giving too much term.

    Regardless, we should never set the bar for MacT at what Tambelini did. That is setting the bar way to low.

    Nobody solved there defensive problems through free agency last summer. Carolina came the closest with Hainsey, but they also got Sekera via trade. I would take Sekera and Hainsey over Ference and Belov any day.

    Another comparable might be Ottawa. Ottawa needed a top line winger as much as the Oilers needed a top pairing defender. Murray went and got Ryan. MacT went and got Ference. Who did a better job of filling a critical need?

  29. RexLibris says:

    jake70,

    The contracts weren’t even the worst of it. The drafting and developing was what really sunk this team.

    Tambellini gets a lot of criticism here, and rightly so, but he put together a nice farm system and some good practices in terms of prospect communication during his time.

    Marincin was drafted and Nelson hired during his tenure, so there is that.

    Now, he also traded Brodziak and a pick for depth picks, sooooo….

  30. oilabroad says:

    borisnikov: How do you figure? I seem to recall not only Lowetide questioning the signing, but every other Oiler blogger of note. It was well pointed out that everyone believed there was zero chance for a home run in his case. Could it have turned out better? I guess… But home run potential? I don’t think it ever existed except maybe in Tambo’s optimistic assesment.

    *Edit* In Zona’s intant analysis he had this to say “Sigh.”

    So I shouldn’t have an opinion unless its backed up by the blogging community??? I am not sure what you are saying. I have seen enough reclamation projects over the years that turned out well, that I didn’t see the downside on a one year deal when we were not up against the cap.

  31. Racki says:

    My review of MacT as general manager would be quite glowing. I’ll be the first to admit that in year 7 of him coaching (maybe earlier) I was calling for his head. But I always recognized him as a smart man. That Friedman quote says a lot too. MacT knows what the team wants. I believe he has a plan, but struggles a bit with execution due to it being difficult to acquire what he needs. With Tambellini, I’m not sure how the apologists stick up for this guy. There was no semblance of a plan.. No promise of anything other than the team spiraling to the basement year after year. I’m not sure (like others) that this was by his design either. His words didn’t really sound like a guy who wanted to tank each year. He seemed like a guy who was in over his head.

    With MacTavish we are seeing the same failed season so far, but I feel like I know where we stand with him. He wants to make this team a winner. He is shipping out the turds that Tambi brought in. In some cases, he’s brought in his own, but he clears them out when he can too. I think he knows what the team needs. That’s a giant step from Tambellini.

    The team is in good hands now, but it will take time to address all the needs (fix bottom six, new 2nd line C, big name D man). I think his checklist is on par with mine, and that’s good by me. He’ll do what is needed to get it. There will be some long shots (like Belov) along the way, but I think he sees the need for proved guys too (like Gordon).

  32. zatch says:

    I like the idea of hunting in Europe. There are 2 types of guys there, 20-21 YO who slipped off the draft board (think of these guys as extra draft picks) and 22-25 YO who may have upside. It’s likely harder to turn these guys into money than I think, as otherwise everyone would be doing it. But there is value to be had there.

    In general, I feel there’s an embarrassment of riches in Euopre, even in non-traditional places…Croatia and Lithuania have a couple interesting young guys, and I can only imagine where they’d be if they’d had Hockey Nation style support and training when they were younger. If I were a GM, I’d scout like hell in places like Britain, the Balkans, the Baltics, etc. then max out my 6th/7th round picks through downtrading or casting off fringe players to grab them.

    Actually, I just got an insane idea on how to swing this, although it’s expensive.

  33. Melman says:

    CurtisS,

    I said that too the other day. For this team to crawl out of the sewer they need some surprise wins from a pick outside the 1st round. You could devote a bit more time to these kids if the pro scouting came up with a win every once in a while, but pre-MacT it’s been atrocious . I still remember the Oil Change episode with Gare drooling over Hordichuk and Eager like they’d just punched a ticket to the SCF. And lest we forget the magical 3 way deal where they gave up Erik Cole not for Justin Williams but for POS – an epic stinker that should not be forgotten from Tambi’s bungle list.

  34. OilClog says:

    Screw Tambi it’s all Lowes fault with the Comrie debacle.. We could have Perry right now!!! Lordy

  35. Melman says:

    Racki,

    good post. The problem with having so much to clean up is that it will take time. MacT seems willing to accept some mistakes, and then ship them out when he realizes they aren’t part of the solution, to get this thing turned around as fast as he can. I think that’s a completely defensible position to take.

  36. RexLibris says:

    OilClog: Screw Tambi it’s all Lowes fault with the Comrie debacle.. We could have Perry right now!!! Lordy

    I blame Sather and the Messier trade. If Steven Rice turns into a player this whole franchise gets turned around!

  37. RexLibris says:

    Racki,

    I agree.

    This is more or less the position I have taken.

    Smart guy. Big mess. Learning on the job.

  38. CurtisS says:

    Melman,

    Exactly why do you think we keep having to turn over our bottom 6. We look every year because we cant draft and develop them.

    Is Brodziak the last one? Thats a long time.

  39. su_dhillon says:

    I like Mactavish, and while there are plenty of moves I didnt like, mosty at the bottom of the roster, I am still hopeful he can get this turned around. That being said setting the bar at Cam Barker and asking did MacT beat that is getting us nowhere. Tambellini was terrible at his job, being better than Tambellini cant be MacT’s goal, he has to compete with the Lombardi’s, Chiarelli’s, and Bowmans. In year 1 he wasn’t close but he also wasnt left with a lot of useful pieces to move around. We wait.

  40. Ca$h-Money! says:

    The problem with the Barker signing, above all else, is what it signified.

    He paid a guy, recently bought out (and who was run out of town by the team before that for being terrible) over $2 million.

    It was an indication of Tambellini’s extreme inability to recognize value and/or potential. Who were we bidding against? You can’t tell me there was another offer anywhere close to that kind of money! I’d bet there wasn’t another offer over $1 million for the guy (I would actually bet there wasn’t another offer). That, above all else, was the problem with the Barker signing.

  41. misfit says:

    I wasn’t a huge fan of either deal at the time, but Ference was a much better move. He is a much better defender, was a proven commodity in the NHL, and was added for what he could bring off the ice as much (or more) than his contributions on it. Being a local boy was a plus.

    Cam Barker was brought in because 7 years prior, he was drafted 3rd overall.

    Neither signing was a good one, but at least the Ference decision was made with some idea of what we were getting and was based on something reasonable.

  42. Zangetsu says:

    If I remember right, we said at the time that the barker move was a gamble that had a chance to pay off in a year that was a write off anyway. Somewhere along the line the verbal changed from we took a chance on barker to Barker was our guy and failed.

  43. Bag of Pucks says:

    If you’re looking to build a dominant table hockey team, Tambellini is your man.

    No one was better at finding defensemen that could only pivot on one leg.

  44. fuzzy muppet says:

    My mind keeps coming back to a specific scenario:

    If Ekblad falls to 3, does #3 OV and Sam Gagner to Philly for Couterier and #17(not positive that’s where they’re at but it’s around there) happen?

    Is that fair?

  45. Henry says:

    RexLibris:
    jake70,

    The contracts weren’t even the worst of it. The drafting and developing was what really sunk this team.

    Tambellini gets a lot of criticism here, and rightly so, but he put together a nice farm system and some good practices in terms of prospect communication during his time.

    Marincin was drafted and Nelson hired during his tenure, so there is that.

    Now, he also traded Brodziak and a pick for depth picks, sooooo….

    The pick Tambi traded has turned into their starting goaltender, Kuemper. The Oilers got Olivier Roy and Kyle Bigos. With the current run of luck, Roy will turn into the Flames starter and go to the hall of fame. Le sigh.

  46. Henry says:

    fuzzy muppet:
    My mind keeps coming back to a specific scenario:

    If Ekblad falls to 3, does #3 OV and Sam Gagner to Philly for Couterier and #17(not positive that’s where they’re at but it’s around there) happen?

    Is that fair?

    Don’t we hope that Eckblad will be a more valuable player than SeanC?

  47. flyfish1168 says:

    I still believe our pro scouts should get a bulk of the blame. JMHO they should know the weaknes and strentgh of each UFA and certain playrs that maybe useful to be targets for a trade. Watching one of the Oil Change episodes and listeing to them talk about Jered Smithson was to me an indication of their due dilegence done poorly.

  48. LMHF#1 says:

    Bag of Pucks:
    If you’re looking to build a dominant table hockey team, Tambellini is your man.

    No one was better at finding defensemen that could only pivot on one leg.

    Well played sir.

  49. russ99 says:

    I think Barker and Ference are totally different situations.

    Barker was still coasting on his first round pedigree, and more than one team took a shot on that idea of some potential and failed miserably. So there’s no reason Tambellini should have assumed he’d work here when he flunked out of Chicago and Minnesota already.

    Ference was targeted and brought in for leadership and experience (plus the cup ring) much more than he was brought in for his play on the ice, then he played way above his optimal level and played with vastly poorer quality players than he played with in Boston. His drop off was to be expected.

    IMO, MacT got what he wanted in Ference. Where he failed was not getting another experienced defenseman in here based solely on his play being better than other players on the roster. He worked around that with the Grebeshkov and Belov signings and the Larsen trade.

    Dealing Smid for peanuts made that look even worse.

  50. FastOil says:

    Cam Barker was the worse signing because there was no chance he covered the bet.

    However, to choose one as worse sort if excuses the other. How about no more bad signings at all?

  51. "Steve Smith" says:

    borisnikov:
    Andy P,

    I’m not sure what you mean. The first five were signed as free agents by Tambo and Souray was bought out over hurt ego and subsequently ended up in Dallas.

    People constantly forget this – constantly, to the point that I once had to correct Joanne Ireland on this point – but Sutton wasn’t a free-agent signing. He was what we got for Kurtis Foster, and it was a hell of a trade.

    As for Barker vs. Ference, Barker was obviously (at the time of the signing) going to be a waste of $2.25 million and a roster spot for one year, and then we’d be free of him. Ference was obviously (at the time of signing) going to occupy a big chunk of cap space for an extended period of time, with a no-trade and with contributions diminishing over time from a low starting point. Both signings were awful, but I think Ference’s was worse, just for its impact. And I say that as somebody who’s basically supportive of MacTavish’s work his first year on the job.

  52. Bag of Pucks says:

    LMHF#1: Well played sir.

    I think I have a carpal tunnel injury to this day from playing Wayne Gretzky’s All Star Table Hockey.

    Back in my college days, the Friday night tournaments were epic. Liberal dosages of beer and trash talk. Naturally, the point shot goal from the other side of the red line was affectionately dubbed ‘The Iafrate’ for obvious reasons.

  53. "Steve Smith" says:

    FastOil:
    Cam Barker was the worse signing because there was no chance he covered the bet.

    Are you suggesting that there was ever a chance that Andrew Ference would deliver an average of $3.25 million in value in each season from age 34 to 38?

    There was never any chance that either would cover the bet. At least with Barker we were free of the stupid mistake after one season, and we didn’t give him a no-trade clause.

  54. Bar_Qu says:

    I am hopeful the Ference signing will look better next year (“hey look! He’s saying it will be better next year!”) when the D and the F get better balance – assuming the moves MacT makes this summer bring some balance to the F at least. For sure, if there is a high level D, then Ference becomes a player who can play up or down the roster as needed. But Barker was never going to be that guy and was identified as such before he played a game.

    Ideally MacT would have signed Hainsey or Gilbert this off-season, and hopefully he watched their seasons with hindsight kicking him in the tail and he can try for something similar this summer. I never had the confidence Tambo would learn a lesson like that.

    If MacT is making the same rookie mistakes next year that he made this year, then I will be prepared to see him go. Tambo was ready to go after one season.

  55. Racki says:

    While I have no qualms with ripping on Tambellini whenever I can, Barker was once a top 3 pick. Yah he failed to reach expectations by a long shot, even before Tambi signed him but it was a very small gamble.

    With Tambi, I’m not a big supporter of some of the moves he made, but it’s more the moves he didn’t make that bothered me. Too much sitting around and hoping the problem would fix it internally. We don’t have time for that anymore. MacT is a man of action. Some might not like that, but I’d prefer to see him working away than waiting around to see if the answer to all our problems is in the system somewhere, just needing some more AHL time. Every bit they wait is every bit these young kids free years are wasted (not to mention the impact losing so much will have on them)

    The other problem is when you expect Foster or Barker to be the driving force of your blueline. But in fairness, MacT thought Ference would be that guy and seems wrong. But, as we’ve come to expect, he won’t force him to be that guy. You can bet he’s looking to move Ference down the depth charts and find a #1 pairing guy. Previous management would have said “well maybe we should wait and see if kelfbom / Marincin or Nurse can do it”? While we waste another year.

  56. mumbai max says:

    fuzzy muppet:
    My mind keeps coming back to a specific scenario:

    If Ekblad falls to 3, does #3 OV and Sam Gagner to Philly for Couterier and #17(not positive that’s where they’re at but it’s around there) happen?

    Is that fair?

    I think it is an overpay. You give up a guaranteed NHL player (Ekblad) plus an established 2C for a less established 2C and a draft pick with a 50% chance of becoming a player. Plus they have cap problems and this would not work.

    Maybe add a sweetener. We add Gernat/Musil/Fedun, They add Coburn. This would work for the cap.

  57. Racki says:

    I’d rather have Ekblad.

  58. FastOil says:

    “Steve Smith”: Are you suggesting that there was ever a chance that Andrew Ference would deliver an average of $3.25 million in value in each season from age 34 to 38?

    There was never any chance that either would cover the bet.At least with Barker we were free of the stupid mistake after one season, and we didn’t give him a no-trade clause.

    It’s all ugly, but at least Ference is an NHL calibre player. Barker never was. I guess it depends on what you look at, cap stupidity (and MacT toasted Olczyk) or total incompetence :)

  59. Racki says:

    FastOil: It’s all ugly, but at least Ference is an NHL calibre player. Barker never was. I guess it depends on what you look at, cap stupidity (and MacT toasted Olczyk) or total incompetence

    Re Ference, I’ll also say that it’s very common for D men to age like a fine wine. I don’t know what it is, but many get better with age. To expect ference to be that guy when he really hasn’t been, I guess that was a mistake. MacT isn’t without fault.. But what he’s demonstrated so far has been positive to me despite poor season results. Ference will be a great guy in the long run if they get him moved down the depth charts. I think as a bottom pairing we will be very happy with him. It was a mistake to think he is a top pairing, I think, but unlike barker and foster there IS a place on an NHL team for a guy like ference, even at his age.

  60. G Money says:

    FastOil: It’s all ugly, but at least Ference is an NHL calibre player. Barker never was. I guess it depends on what you look at, cap stupidity (and MacT toasted Olczyk) or total incompetence

    “Never” is an incorrect statement. Barker put up 40 pts in 68 games in his second NHL season. Don’t care who you are, that is an impressive point rate (0.59) for a defensemen. It’s higher than what Suter, OEL, Shattenkirk and several other notables put up this year.

    That’s what the people who kept signing Barker were hoping to get. It’s not the draft pedigree.

  61. G Money says:

    Bar_Qu: I am hopeful the Ference signing will look better next year (“hey look! He’s saying it will be better next year!”) when the D and the F get better balance

    I am as well.

    If you look at his time with Boston, he was an excellent 4D. He relied on his partner to know what he was doing, and that left Ference free to do what he did best – cover his (one) guy, battle hard, be chippy.

    Put him in that same situation and he’ll likely be fine.

    The wildcard with Ference is his age – whether his legs give out before balance arrives is the question.

    Can’t complain much about the contract – doesn’t matter who it is, they aren’t coming to Edmonton as a free agent without an overpay, in dollars or in term or both.

  62. Undisclosed_Personal_Reasons says:

    Both moves were equally uncreative (both signings).

    Both had a high probability of failure (playing above their roles).

    Neither, even if successful, would have addressed actual need (1st pairing D).

    And one we’re going to pay for until 2017.

    On this head-to-head comparison, I’ll take the Tambo failure.

    That said, i’ll take MacT over Tambo seven days a week on the basis of other transactions.

  63. Woodguy says:

    “Steve Smith”: People constantly forget this – constantly, to the point that I once had to correct Joanne Ireland on this point – but Sutton wasn’t a free-agent signing.He was what we got for Kurtis Foster, and it was a hell of a trade.

    As for Barker vs. Ference, Barker was obviously (at the time of the signing) going to be a waste of $2.25 million and a roster spot for one year, and then we’d be free of him.Ference was obviously (at the time of signing) going to occupy a big chunk of cap space for an extended period of time, with a no-trade and with contributions diminishing over time from a low starting point.Both signings were awful, but I think Ference’s was worse, just for its impact.And I say that as somebody who’s basically supportive of MacTavish’s work his first year on the job.

    Both points are true.

    Tambellini DID re-sign Sutton to one more year, but he was injured in the off-season and never played a game of it.

    Agreed that Ference was the worse move.

    Barker was a flier that only hurt for one year. Low percentage bet but with only one year of ramification.

    Ference was a 4/5 who *might* be ok on the 3rd pairing, but was a disaster as a 2/3.

    His age was the biggest concern.

    Physical forwards and Dmen fall off a cliff around 30-32 years old.

    Ference is already 35 and I doubt he has 3 more NHL quality years left.

    At 43CF% last year, that’s already “below replacement”

    Some of that 43% is Jultz, but Jultz’ 49% with Belov and 49.6% with Marincin suggest that Ference is the biggest problem there.

    Let me put it this way:

    The Edmonton Oiler GM signed a player who was well past NHL prime given his age.

    The Edmonton Oiler GM signed this player for 4 years and gave him more than what he probably would have got on the open market.

    The Edmonton Oiler GM gave a “past his prime” player more money and term than any other GM would have.

    The Edmonton Oiler GM sited the player’s leadership ability and Cup ring as reasons for the signing.

    The Edmonton Oiler GM praised this player and called him a key leader after his first year with the Oilers was an abject failure by any measure.

    Am I talking about MacT with Ference or Tambellini with Khabbi?

    Add to this the near miss with Clarkson and I am very wary of how MacT evaluates players.

    He wouldn’t be the first rookie GM to pay for past performance and ignore the cliff that most NHL players fall off of.

    I’m just sad because he seems smarter than that, but the evidence suggests otherwise.

  64. Rocknrolla says:

    Hi all,

    Can someone explain the subtle difference between the Corsi, Corsi rel, and Corsi QofC?

    I understand the terms on their own, but not sure about combined.

    Wouldn’t that ference number mean that overall less shots were directed at the other end( straight Corsi), but when you factor in he was playing the toughs,(Corsi QofC) his is 4th on the list?

    Thanks in advance for the lesson on this chart!

  65. Woodguy says:

    Rocknrolla:
    Hi all,

    Can someone explain the subtle difference between the Corsi, Corsi rel, and Corsi QofC?

    I understand the terms on their own, but not sure about combined.

    Wouldn’t that ference number mean that overall less shots were directed at the other end( straight Corsi), but when you factor in he was playing the toughs,(Corsi QofC)his is 4th on the list?

    Thanks in advance for the lesson on this chart!

    Here’s Gabe’s FAQ.

    http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2009/10/9/1078607/frequently-asked-questions-about

  66. "Steve Smith" says:

    Woodguy: Both points are true.

    Tambellini DID re-sign Sutton to one more year, but he was injured in the off-season and never played a game of it.

    As I recall, though, the re-up was for reasonable money (I may be mistaken on that). At the time we first acquired him, he was making considerably too much, which would have been a poor reflection on Tambellini if he’d signed him to that as a UFA. Instead, he traded a bad contract in Kurtis Foster for a somewhat better one (and a much better player) in Sutton.

    So it’s actually Foster’s contract that was a poor reflection on Tambellini, not Sutton’s. But at least there was some hope that Foster might rebound from his horrific injury when he was signed, so that signing wasn’t as inexcusable as either Barker or Ference.

  67. Marcus Oilerius says:

    I’ve been reading this thread carefully and been giving matters a lot of thought.

    As disappointed as I am in the Ference contract, it’s not a disaster. It doesn’t cripple the team, it won’t be around when we’re in contention (I don’t think anyone expects us to contend in 3 years, right?), and while Ference is further along the way down the hill than anyone would like, if we think of him as a better Strudwick (the good character veteran), it’s easier to stomach.

    Even the Smid deal really doesn’t look that bad once you see how he performed in Calgary. It cleared cap space and cleared out what seems to be a bottom-pairing defender off the roster. We have enough of those.

    Ultimately I don’t think we’d have this criticism if we had had a shred of success during the season. Is it the roster? Is it coaching? Is it both? We can fairly surmise it is the roster, and we can’t make a decision on Eakins until we give him a better roster. Whether he deserves another season is debatable, but with the Hall and MacTavish endorsement, I’m just going to stop wringing my hands about it and accept the facts on the ground.

    Above all, what gives me confidence in MacT is that he has the confidence to make moves and can see where we’re weak. I can disagree with him about Klefbom, Schultz and so on, but given the number of times I’ve been wrong about players, particularly when they’re drafted, I can accept that the Oilers do probably know more than I do.

    So for the summer at least, I’ll maintain a positive mindset about things. My own negativity is wearing me down.

  68. OilClog says:

    Only Oiler fans are crazy, sick, mental enough to still talk about Barker.

    What is winning?!?

    Damn you Steven Rice!

  69. FastOil says:

    G Money: “Never” is an incorrect statement.Barker put up 40 pts in 68 games in his second NHL season.Don’t care who you are, that is an impressive point rate (0.59) for a defensemen.It’s higher than what Suter, OEL, Shattenkirk and several other notables put up this year.

    That’s what the people who kept signing Barker were hoping to get.It’s not the draft pedigree.

    True. Doesn’t make it a good decision or him a legit player as the small sample size proved.

    The Oilers got him 4 years of bad later than his career year. I don’t think points tell the whole story. Lots of “talented” guys don’t make the NHL. Barker had 14 post Oiler NHL games.

  70. jayzz says:

    I am so sick of seeing bottom of the order run of the mill players wearing the C on this team, Ference takes selfish penalties and loses his temper far to often. Strip C give him half the year and see if Boston will take him back for a draft pick…

  71. "Steve Smith" says:

    jayzz: see if Boston will take him back for a draft pick…

    I’m pretty sure not – they’d already announced that they weren’t re-signing him before he went UFA. It’s almost as if that should have been some kind of warning…

  72. rickithebear says:

    While Corsi is the end all and Be all on this site.
    I will lok at a dman’s performance rather than a partial moment in time.

    we want Dmen who
    - protect the Box. (low % inside 20ft)
    -Influence the number of Pucks released getting to the net. (% of missed andblocked)
    -increase the distance that all pucks are relaesedm (keep to perimeter) high average distance
    - reduce the success rates versus average inside 20ft.
    - achieve a good EVGA/60 relative to the average for comp faced.

    Ference was
    25% inside 20f (elite and his best year)
    average shot from 37ft (elite and his 2nd best year)
    better than average for shot success ( worst year inside 20 ft Dubnyk)
    then he was injured!

    The man was a 2.37 EVGA Dman facing the other teams best.
    he was out leveraging the other teams players by more efficient center of gravity.

    What sticks out in most minds is the mid Jan. on when Ference tried to take on larger forwards
    with zero success playing with a tore Pectoral muscle.

    No shit sherlock!

    he was our best EVA dman. in the top 70 anfd historically a top 50 set-up dman.
    Better than J. Schultz and petry.
    he is what we want our other even puck moving Dmen. Schultz and Petry to be Defensively.

    The game is played mostly at Even.
    till Jan. he was our best 1st Comp dman and our best set-up Dman at Even all year.

    Boston’s GM knew he had 4 Dmen who could move the puck at even and defend the box.
    Bartkowski 18 EVA (25)
    Chara 17 EVA (32)
    Boychuck 15 EVA (47)
    Hamilton 14 EVA (55)

    I am happy we willbe able to roll.

    Marincin-Schultz
    Ference-Petry

    the only concern is a healthy Ference.

    If you guys were disappointed in this!

    Corsi!

    Jesus!

  73. rickithebear says:

    jayzz: I am so sick of seeing bottom of the order run of the mill players wearing the C on this team,

    Ference Jason Smithed it from Jan. on!
    Your quote is f……………embarrasing!

  74. DeadmanWaking says:

    The problem all through the Tambi era was time horizon. He was largely being judged by people who felt the team could compete sooner rather than later, if only the GM pulled the right strings. I doubted during Tambi’s early years if there really was much the GM could do to hurry the rebuild along. Certainly the GM can make palliative moves, and help the team achieve better outcomes in the standings than the core progression warrants. All you get in return for your efforts are worse draft picks and even more unreasonable expectations from the fan base. The fan base largely doesn’t want success. They want resolution. They want success or management heads rolling in the gutter, it hardly matters which. The underlying problem is that once the guillotine is well oiled, it’s hard to stop the cycle.

    The only argument in support of Tambi was that he was a grand master at keeping his powder dry. This is an unpopular strategy. That’s why so many people eat at McDonalds instead of grilling their own burgers from superior beef.

    If Tambi’s actual goal was to do nothing until the time was ripe, $2 million for Barker was not a bad way to play it. Even if it doesn’t look like a constructive move after sixty seconds of scrutiny, it gets jaws wagging. Those jaws were going to wag anyway. They might as well wag about Barker than some other prospect you mean to keep (aka the Petry type). Barker becomes a fairly cheap–and easily disposed–sacrificial anode. What proportion of the jawboning about Barker’s uselessness would have otherwise been directed at running Petry out of town? Yes, I’m guilty of a certain strain of cynicism.

    In this story, the reason Tambi keeps his job year after year is that there’s an internal narrative which everyone has bought into, that the dawn will rise on the big pounce, and all that dry powder is put to good use in a grand conflagration of wheeling and dealing.

    This is why, for me, the Belanger verbal represented rock bottom. He’s older than Moses, but what convinced me is that He Wants To Be Here for Three Years! He sees good things happening on the ice, and wants to be part of the gravy years.

    Uh, no. This was a man whose powder was going pear shaped, and he darn well knew this was his last contract where he would be paid to stick around.

    capgeek shows me that Belanger’s contract set us back $5.25 million over three years (ignoring what we recovered on the buyout). I’d far rather have Ference at twice the price. I’ve never gotten over Belanger’s facial expression during his locker-room interview after the Yakupov celly. That was a man who knows he signed a contract for more than he’s worth. He was a broken man, and not in a good way.

    Thornton is a broken, broken man.

    Not that Belanger was wrong about Yakupov, whose career so far has more Barker than bite, but with the polar opposite personality. If only his results equaled his mojo we’d be singing a different tune.

    Here’s a little thought experiment. Imagine we got Yakupov first, RNH second, and Hallsy third. Flip the bubble. We’d be gnashing far less about the dispersion in our window of opportunity. We landed the best horse when we had the least stable.

    George B. McClellan

    At the start of the Civil War, McClellan’s knowledge of what was called “big war science” and his railroad experience suggested he might excel at military logistics. This placed him in great demand as the Union mobilized.

    Although McClellan was meticulous in his planning and preparations, these characteristics may have hampered his ability to challenge aggressive opponents in a fast-moving battlefield environment. He chronically overestimated the strength of enemy units and was reluctant to apply principles of mass, frequently leaving large portions of his army unengaged at decisive points.

    The majority of modern authorities have assessed McClellan as a poor battlefield general. However, a small faction of historians maintain that he was a highly capable commander, whose reputation suffered unfairly at the hands of pro-Lincoln partisans who needed a scapegoat for the Union’s setbacks. His legacy therefore defies easy categorization. After the war, Ulysses S. Grant was asked to evaluate McClellan as a general. He replied, “McClellan is to me one of the mysteries of the war.”

    One thing McClellan didn’t do was march the Union to some overwhelming, early defeat, not that he didn’t want to.

    McClellan rejected the tenets of Scott’s Anaconda Plan, favoring instead an overwhelming grand battle, in the Napoleonic style. He proposed that his army should be expanded to 273,000 men and 600 guns and “crush the rebels in one campaign.” He favored a war that would impose little impact on civilian populations and require no emancipation of slaves.

    This particular Mr Dithers wore a coat of many colours.

    Before Tambi, we didn’t have a long list of emerging stars under the age of twenty-five.

    There are situations where “evaluating” is not the worst plan. What ultimately made McClellan a liability is that his methods were incompatible with Lincoln’s political hot seat, and there was great risk that a truce was reached after all that bloodshed which settled nothing.

    We know in retrospect that Tambi came late and slow into the hairpin turn and then meekly floated off into the retaining bales, without so much as spinning a double donut matting the pedal with the straight track in view.

    There’s an upside in not bending the frame when you’re still an engine rebuild away from being truly competitive. When the tires fall off the day the new fuel injector arrives, it becomes all too clear that you babied the car far too much.

    Then Eakins comes along and melts the tires on the first lap. Apparently, that’s wrong, too. Dumb rookie with a heavy foot.

    Everything Wrong With Days of Thunder In 8 Minutes Or Less

    Gets off to a pretty good start, then flags a little in the home stretch.

  75. rickithebear says:

    Corsi to measure the complex play and effect of a player.
    Anoys the F……….. out of Me.

    it is like the tools on here who want to trade Eberle for Simmonds cause of hits and Penalties.

    I am all about being man enough to go to the bleeding areas and delivering in them.
    That means goals not Corsi.

    Eberle has a slightly higher shot count per game inside the high chance area than Simmonds.
    Simmonds 209GM 72G 69A 40 EVG
    Eberel 206G 78G 100A 57EVG
    Eberle the 14th best evg score in that pewriod has the Stones to deliver!
    Simmond is the 3rd best PP scorer in the Game.

    I will keep the man with the Stones

  76. Henry says:

    rickithebear,

    Your post is interesting, thanks. Where do you get your data for shot distance?

  77. G Money says:

    FastOil: True. Doesn’t make it a good decision or him a legit player as the small sample size proved.

    The Oilers got him 4 years of bad later than his career year. I don’t think points tell the whole story. Lots of “talented” guys don’t make the NHL. Barker had 14 post Oiler NHL games.

    Not defending the signing – I hated it even before hindsight kicked in. Just pointing out that it is inaccurate to say that Barker was “never” an NHL player, or that he has only ever been signed because of his draft pedigree (both statements that have been made one or more times in this thread).

    Henry:
    rickithebear,

    Your post is interesting, thanks.Where do you get your data for shot distance?

    Somekindofninja.com … ricki’s posts are always interesting. Hard to read maybe, and a bit obsessed with somekindofninja, but interesting nonetheless!

  78. Rocknrolla says:

    Woodguy: Here’s Gabe’s FAQ.

    http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2009/10/9/1078607/frequently-asked-questions-about

    Thanks Woodguy, but I have seen that FAQ, and am familiar with the terms on their own. My question is when these terms are combined is that a different statistic?

    More specifically in regards to the chart above, can someone describe the following 3 terms:

    CorsiQofC

    CorsiRelQofC

    Corsi Rel (although I think I know this one is instead of straight corsi percentage it is in relation to other teammates in a +/- format)

    I am used to seeing them on their own as %ages, as in Corsi 52%, QofC as a +.50 or -.50

    Thanks all

  79. "Steve Smith" says:

    G Money: Somekindofninja.com … ricki’s posts are always interesting.Hard to read maybe, and a bit obsessed with somekindofninja, but interesting nonetheless!

    Also absolutely fixated on the notion that EVGA/60 is the best measure by which to evaluate defencemen (and EVGF/60 for forwards), notwithstanding the mountain of evidence that ONSV% and ONSH% are almost entirely outside of skaters’ control.

  80. "Steve Smith" says:

    Rocknrolla: Thanks Woodguy, but I have seen that FAQ, and am familiar with the terms on their own.My question is when these terms are combined is that a different statistic?

    More specifically in regards to the chart above, can someone describe the following 3 terms:

    CorsiQofC

    CorsiRelQofC

    Corsi Rel (although I think I know this one is instead of straight corsi percentage it is in relation to other teammates in a +/- format)

    You understand CorsiRel. The other two are completely different, because they’re quality of competition metrics, unlike Corsi and CorsiRel which are possession metrics. CorsiQoC and CorseRelQoC are measures of the quality of opponents faced by a given player, calculated by using those opponents’ Corsi and CorsiRel, respectively. This is as distinct from regular QoC, which uses opponents’ +/-.

  81. denny33 says:

    Woodguy,
    Am I talking about MacT with Ference or Tambellini with Khabbi?
    Add to this the near miss with Clarkson and I am very wary of how MacT evaluates players.
    He wouldn’t be the first rookie GM to pay for past performance and ignore the cliff that most NHL players fall off of.
    I’m just sad because he seems smarter than that, but the evidence suggests otherwise.
    ****************************************************************************************

    This last sentence is golden…..

    1) This was a BRUTAL signing. Many said this last summer – it turned out worse, imo.

    2) Asking a Stranger to walk into a dressing room and be Captain is Embarrassing – unless you are Mark Messier.

    3) Listening to Mac T speak makes me cringe sometimes.

    Just the fact we are trying to compare Mac T signing of a 35 year old to long term money vs Tambo’s signing of Barker for 1 year tells us all we need to know about Mac T….

    Yes, yes,….but Mac T is better than ST right, right? ( silence )

  82. "Steve Smith" says:

    denny33: Yes, yes,….but Mac T is better than ST right, right? ( silence )

    MacTavish is markedly better than Tambellini. Tambellini wouldn’t even have fiddled while Rome burned – he’d still be staring kind of vacantly at the fiddle when the flames reached him.

    In contrast, MacTavish has brought in Gordon, Scrivens, and Perron to address team needs. Arguably Fasth and Hendricks too. I’m not going to absolve him of Ference, Fraser, and Gazdic (though Fraser was acquired for very little, and Gazdic for still less), but, on balance, MacTavish has done a lot of good.

    Honest question: other than through the draft, did Tambellini bring in as many useful players during his entire tenure as MacTavish has in his first year on the job?

  83. Saul Goodman says:

    What must EDM add to get Logan couture, Eberle? Seems like a change in scenario that gives us better balance,

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca