SHINE

When should we expect Anton Lander to arrive as an NHL player? I like to give prospects five years after their draft day in order to allow for development timelines—we know prospects don’t develop in a straight line.

LANDER’S DEVELOPMENT BY YEAR

  • Age 18, draft +1: Role player in SEL, a very good pro league
  • Age 19, draft +2: Top 6 forward in SEL, a very good pro league
  • Age 20, draft +3: NHL depth forward, overwhelmed and ineffective
  • Age 21, draft +4: Role player in AHL, a very good pro league
  • Age 22, draft +5: Quality player in AHL, a very good pro league
  • NHL totals after 5 seasons: 94GP, 2-6-8

Lander showed growth in year two, scoring well and earning an Oiler contract. The club made a major error in year three, basically costing him an entire year of development, and it took him the next two seasons to recover. Lander is now on an NHL contract with a lot to prove, but he’ll arrive at training camp as a player who had some success in the AHL (led his team in scoring).

As luck would have it, another NHL team chose a Swedish teenager one spot before the Oilers. This team has a history of success in developing players, and a strong presence in Sweden. The Ottawa Senators are pretty damn good in procurement, and miles ahead of Edmonton in development.

JAKOB SILFVERBERG DEVELOPMENT BY YEAR

  • Age 18, draft +1: Role player in SEL, a very good pro league
  • Age 19, draft +2: Top 6 forward in SEL, a very good pro league
  • Age 20, draft +3: Impact forward in SEL, a very good pro league
  • Age 21, draft +4: Role player in NHL
  • Age 22, draft +5: Role player in NHL
  • NHL totals after 5 seasons: 100GP, 20-22-42

The disconnect comes in year three, age 20. Silfverberg finished second in SEL scoring that season, and was clearly ready to come to North America. Still, he played 34 AHL games (lockout) before beginning his NHL career.

DRAFT AND FOLLOW

We’ve been down this road many times, but it really does point out the value of not being in a hurry with these fellows. Even at the NHL level young Lander showed promise (penalty kill) at 20, but the Oilers keeping him in the NHL was a sham and a shame. From what we hear, Craig MacTavish has instituted some new rules for the organization, like the prospects play (in OKC) and the veteran minor leaguers fill the holes. Good plan.

EVIDENCE

If we were looking for evidence of a new, more mature organization, what would it look like? I think we have some anecdotal evidence of the Oilers more mature approach:

  • Darnell Nurse sent back to junior last fall.
  • Marco Roy staying in junior.
  • Most of the 2010-2011 draft cluster spent the season in OKC or ECHL.

THE FUTURE

Things we can look for this fall:

  • Sending Nurse back to junior
  • Sending Draisaitl back to junior
  • Ignoring strong training camp/pre-season performances from rookie pros. Send them to OKC.

TURNING PRO BY THE DOZEN

  • 2010 fall: Taylor Hall, Jordan Eberle, Magnus Paajarvi, Linus Omark, Teemu Hartikainen, Phil Cornet, Milan Kytnar, Jeff Petry, Chris VandeVelde (9)
  • 2011 fall: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Anton Lander, Cameron Abney, Olivier Roy, Brandon Davidson, Tyler Pitlick, Curtis Hamilton, Ryan Martindale, Mark Arcobello  (9)
  • 2012 fall: Nail Yakupov, Justin Schultz, Toni Rajala, Martin Marincin, Tyler Bunz, Kristians Pelss, Taylor Fedun (7)
  • 2013 fall: Oscar Klefbom, David Musil, Travis Ewanyk, Kale Kessy, Martin Gernat, Frans Tuohimaa (6)
  • 2014 fall: Dillon Simpson, Kellen Jones, Mitchell Moroz, Jujhar Khaira, Bogdan Yakimov (5)

Since 2010 fall, Edmonton has graduated:

  1. Taylor Hall
  2. Jordan Eberle
  3. Magnus Paajarvi
  4. Jeff Petry
  5. Ryan Nugent-Hopkins
  6. Anton Lander
  7. Nail Yakupov
  8. Justin Schultz
  9. Martin Marincin
  10. Oscar Klefbom

That’s a helluva list, but some patience with the lesser lights would have this team’s future shining brighter. Craig MacTavish has instituted the “AHL rule” and the “Pitlick-Hamilton rule” by my eye, and both are long overdue.

Even more important? Tickets back to junior for all who are eligible.

EVERY. DAMN. ONE.

written by

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

43 Responses to "SHINE"

  1. cdean says:

    I hope they an stik to that rule if there is one what they need to do is find players that an help now

  2. J-Bo says:

    So out of Barkov, Monahan, Jones, & McKinnon, who should have went back to junior last year? This isn’t a reference to the mistakes made with Lander but your final statement seems to indicate that you think even these 4 should have been in junior or at least not the NHL.

  3. Dicky94 says:

    The one player I’m afraid they will rush is Nurse. He had a strong camp last year and he is going to push even harder this year. Hopefully Mac T can find a couple top four d men this summer so Nurse has to go back to Junior. Even send Klefbom back to the ahl for a season.

  4. Henry says:

    J-Bo,

    Monahan didnt have anything left to learn in junior particularly on his team. He would have been best off in the ahl getting stronger without getting burned as often. Not that he had a bad year.

    Jones and Mackinnon are exceptional. Like Hall. Didnt see Barkov as much as i would have liked.

    In the Oiler’s defence, they handled Eberle well.

  5. RexLibris says:

    J-Bo:
    So out of Barkov, Monahan, Jones, & McKinnon, who should have went back to junior last year? This isn’t a reference to the mistakes made with Lander but your final statement seems to indicate that you think even these 4 should have been in junior or at least not the NHL.

    Monahan ought to have gone back. I’ve argued as much on Flames’ forums and the fans there waste no time telling me how wrong I am because he scored well in his rookie year. I mostly keep y mouth shut but am reminded of Gagner and numerous other Oilers’ experiences. I think Barkov ought to have gone back as well, in my opinion. And possibly Jones but he was able to come in and play with Weber and Josi, so one could argue that helped his development by being surrounded by professional veterans.

    McKinnon could have, but his season was so beyond the pale that I think the right call was made.

  6. Lowetide says:

    It’s hard to keep No. 1 overall in junior, but the Lightning did right by Drouin sending him back. NY Islanders sent Bryan Trottier back.

  7. Hammers says:

    There are always exceptions to the rule like McKinnon last year but the smart move is to send them back . The other side would be a very good team of veterans or at least a group as in “D” & Jones in Nashville . . The only Oiler in this core group who should have made the jump is Hall . RNH ,YAK ,Magnus , Lander , Nurse etc all needed to go back to junior or to the AHL . I hope at some time in the future the NHL is smart enough to say Every team can send 1 junior to the AHL as there are some that need a greater challenge than a return to Junior . Nurse would benefit more from the Barons than going back .

  8. Bar_Qu says:

    If only from a cap management standpoint teams should always send their juniors back. And good teams will always do this as there is no rush to fill holes. But bad teams always need to “sell” their young guys because they are bad teams and have to make a turd look shiny.

    Hall, Mackinnon, Stamkos, they can do it, but would the Oilers have really been so much worse off if Hall was just entering his 6M a season contract this year? (ie had done two more years in junior) he was ready, the Oilers weren’t.

    And the problem is, when we argue the reasonableness of top players coming in right away, it clouds the issue, which is that 95-99% of young men need three to five years before they arrive in the NHL. Goalies apparently need ten, but goalies don’t count when talking drafting and development.

  9. Lloyd B. says:

    That’s a helluva list, It is and thats why I think trading the 3rd for immediate help is foolish unless the return knocks your socks off. Keep the pipeline full of top talent in various stages of development. McTavish has also said something to the effect …. the last thing we need is another 18 year old in our lineup. Katz in his letter to the masses also said something like..the days of short term gain for long term pain are over. So the arrows are pointing to a better development path.

    As painful as it is, another year or two of this and the sun will shine. Gives MacT the time to fill in the 6, 7s and 9s while we wait. Also structures the team correctly under a cap structure.

  10. Zangetsu says:

    If we can’t move into the second or third round, do we trade our later picks for more like last year?

  11. Goilers says:

    Hindsight is 20/20

    I’ve had this exact discussion with fellow Oilers fans over the last 6 months. Looking back, it is clear that the Organization would have benefitted more by sending both Nuge and Yak back to Junior (see Eberle). I know critics will point to the number and the NHLE that these players had, but it’s clear they weren’t ready. Maybe they were ready skill wise, but certainly there are issues regarding strength and maturity. Imagine what a long playoff run for Red Deer or Sarnia would have done for these guys development. Yak has 6 OHL Playoff games on his resume, Nuge has 13 WHL Playoff games. The ultimate goal is to win the Stanley Cup, proven playoff players at the Junior level are essential. It sure would be nice to have Nuge still on his EL right now. We can’t make the same mistake going forward, let’s allow whoever we draft this year, Nurse and the other top draft picks marinate for a bit. The results will be mouth watering.

  12. G Money says:

    Goilers: Looking back, it is clear that the Organization would have benefitted more by sending both Nuge and Yak back to Junior

    Quite possibly.

    It’s also quite likely that the org would have benefited just as much if they’d kept an experienced NHL coach around and not spun through two rookie coaches during Nuge’s 2/3 years and Yak’s 1/2 years.

    Then again, if they’d done that, they might not have Yak around at all, so who knows.

  13. Goilers says:

    Then again, if they’d done that, they might not have Yak around at all, so who knows.

    He might be a goner anyways!

  14. Big Dan says:

    I agree with letting the kids marinate. The Oilers have more options now to be competitive without them than they did a few years ago.

    2nd line center- keep Gagner if you have to, or replace him with Jokinen and/or Grabovski
    = Perron and Yakupov will thank you.

    3rd line winger- Winnik and/or Kulemin
    = Gordon and Hendricks will thank you.

    4th line center- Goc and/or Boyle/Pouliot/Moore
    = Lander and Arcobello will thank you.

    Engelland to replace Gazdic

    Trade for Boychuk, Coburn, and/or Oduya
    = Petry and Schultz will thank you.

    Sign Nikitin and/or Fayne
    = Ference, Marincin, and Klefbom will thank you.

    Greene to replace Fraser

  15. book¡je says:

    Lander? Let’s not get ahead of ourselves, I’m still waiting for Marc-Antoine Pouliot to crack the lineup.

  16. wheatnoil says:

    LT, I’m not as convinced as you are that MacT has learned this lesson.

    Yes, he sent Nurse back. However, if MacT was truly following a patient development path, Yakimov would be spending his Draft+2 and maybe Draft+3 year in the KHL… at least until he’s an impact player in that league. Now, the KHL today is a step above the SEL then, so perhaps “impact player” is asking a bit much, but at least a top 6 player. That allows him to develop at home a little longer, which is the benefit of picking European players in the draft. As it is, Yakimov didn’t even spend the whole year in the KHL, based on his TOI and the fact that he was sent down during the year, it would imply he had a good campaign, but was still a fringe KHL player.

    I imagine they send Yakimov to the AHL and hopefully for at least a couple seasons, but the problem is that they’ve already started the clock on his entry level deal. Now they have to make a decision on him in 3 years time. One more year in the KHL and that means decision-day moves back another year. Even without considering the contract, it has an effect on when Yakimov becomes waiver eligible too.

    The Oilers need a centre like Yakimov, and perhaps that and the fear of the lure of the KHL enticed them to bring him over now, but I am concerned they’re not managing this asset in the best way. The other concern is the longer they keep him in the AHL playing for peanuts, the more enticing jumping back to Europe would be for him, much like Hartikainen and Rajala did. If you let them develop longer in the Europe, making them more NHL ready while they make a bit more money, then bring them over and not have to keep them in the AHL for longer than a year… I wonder if that isn’t a better way to handle prospects drafted from Europe.

  17. commonfan14 says:

    Bar_Qu: but would the Oilers have really been so much worse off if Hall was just entering his 6M a season contract this year? (ie had done two more years in junior)

    But if Hall had done two more years in Junior, he’d probably be entering an $8 million contract next year. There’s always trade-offs.

    As for this general topic, is it a coincidence that the Oilers are going to draft either Ekblad or Draze (i.e. the two guys universally identified as the “most NHL ready” in this draft class)?

    I’ll believe there’s a new philosophy when I see it.

  18. Lowetide says:

    wheatnoil:
    LT, I’m not as convinced as you are that MacT has learned this lesson.

    Yes, he sent Nurse back. However, if MacT was truly following a patient development path, Yakimov would be spending his Draft+2 and maybe Draft+3 year in the KHL… at least until he’s an impact player in that league. Now, the KHL today is a step above the SEL then, so perhaps “impact player” is asking a bit much, but at least a top 6 player. That allows him to develop at home a little longer, which is the benefit of picking European players in the draft. As it is, Yakimov didn’t even spend the whole year in the KHL, based on his TOI and the fact that he was sent down during the year, it would imply he had a good campaign, but was still a fringe KHL player.

    I imagine they send Yakimov to the AHL and hopefully for at least a couple seasons, but the problem is that they’ve already started the clock on his entry level deal. Now they have to make a decision on him in 3 years time. One more year in the KHL and that means decision-day moves back another year. Even without considering the contract, it has an effect on when Yakimov becomes waiver eligible too.

    Russians are tricky. Yakimov could walk this season because he wasn’t under contract, but things can get complicated in regard to coming over and contracts. He’s 20, did well in the KHL, and I don’t think the AHL (which is where he’s heading, surely) is a giant step from the Russian league.

    Hard to see the same type of concern as Lander UNLESS they put him on the big team and he doesn’t piss a drop AND then the keep him all year anyway.

  19. murray says:

    wheatnoil,

    The problem with young players and the KHL is that they don’t play them. Yes yakimov’s elc begins 1 year sooner but how much is the increased ice time he will get in the AHL this season worth?

  20. Ca$h-Money! says:

    Lowetide: Russians are tricky. Yakimov could walk this season because he wasn’t under contract, but things can get complicated in regard to coming over and contracts. He’s 20, did well in the KHL, and I don’t think the AHL (which is where he’s heading, surely) is a giant step from the Russian league.

    Hard to see the same type of concern as Lander UNLESS they put him on the big team and he doesn’t piss a drop AND then the keep him all year anyway.

    Have to agree with Lowetide here. Worrying about the move of Yakimov to the AHL in his draft +2 season is nitpicking.

  21. wheatnoil says:

    Lowetide: Russians are tricky. Yakimov could walk this season because he wasn’t under contract, but things can get complicated in regard to coming over and contracts.

    True… I hadn’t considered that. If he gets offered a 2 or 3 year contract by a KHL team, then that kind of forces the Oilers hand to bring him over now, or abide by whatever ‘out clause’ is in the contract. It does get complicated. Slepyshev has another year left on his KHL contract, I believe, so the Oilers may make a decision on him next year.

    murray:
    wheatnoil,

    The problem with young players and the KHL is that they don’t play them.Yes yakimov’s elc begins 1 year sooner but how much is the increased ice time he will get in the AHL this season worth?

    Another good point. After I made that post and thought about it some more, I thought, “didn’t Yakupov also get fewer minutes than I would’ve expected in the KHL during the lockout and someone had mentioned that the KHL tends to underplay their younger players.”

    So perhaps my concerns with Yakimov can be put aside for the summer. We’ll see how long they let him ‘ripen’ in the AHL, though.

  22. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    I don’t remember any concern or debate about Roy leaving junior this Fall… was there?

  23. gd says:

    When it comes to forwards, I believe there are guys who going back to Junior actually caused them to stagnate. I’m thinking of guys like Strome/Connolly and I’m sure there are guys from the past that we could track their draft+1 & 2 years and see different results for similar players and treatments. I think Centres should be held back more often, similarly to D, but I sense the key is for an org to have an effective plan for a guy, properly communicate and monitor the plan.

    One question I have is if the Oilers draft LD, can he play in Europe rather the WHL?

  24. Andy P says:

    G Money: Quite possibly.

    It’s also quite likely that the org would have benefited just as much if they’d kept an experienced NHL coach around and not spun through two rookie coaches during Nuge’s 2/3 years and Yak’s 1/2 years.

    Then again, if they’d done that, they might not have Yak around at all, so who knows.

    If they had let Renney or Krueger choose their own staff off the get-go we would surely not be where we are now.

  25. spoiler says:

    LT said:

    We’ve been down this road many times, but it really does point out the value of not being in a hurry with these fellows

    Yes, a sample size of one points out a lot.

    Some players are helped by being held back, some are hurt. You never know which player is going to react which way. The important thing is to change when things aren’t working out, which was the Oilers’ error with Lander… the error wasn’t in putting him at the NHL level, but in not changing gears when he struggled (and you have to allow time for confidence to build too, it’s not a 5 game thing).

    And then to say it cost him a year of development and it took Lander 2 years to recover… lol, well I’d like to know what we’re basing this theory on. This is mere narrative-building, like the pundits do on TV. Maybe if we had an alternate universe handy where we can test theories like this, we can say something intelligent, but we don’t and can’t.

  26. wheatnoil says:

    Romulus Apotheosis:
    I don’t remember any concern or debate about Roy leaving junior this Fall… was there?

    Well he’s going back for an over-age season, I believe, instead of turning pro, which implies a certain amount of patience.

    Edit: wait, this is his overage season right? I might be wrong on that.

  27. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    wheatnoil: Well he’s going back for an over-age season, I believe, instead of turning pro, which implies a certain amount of patience.

    I meant this past Fall (2013-14). Isn’t that what LT meant above?

  28. spoiler says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: I meant this past Fall (2013-14). Isn’t that what LT meant above?

    That’s the way I read it too, and I can’t think of any talk that he would have played NHL hockey this past season.

  29. Lowetide says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: I meant this past Fall (2013-14). Isn’t that what LT meant above?

    I meant this season. Roy can sign a pro contract right now iirc. Oilers appear willing to have him play his overage season in the QMJHL.

  30. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    J-Bo:
    So out of Barkov, Monahan, Jones, & McKinnon, who should have went back to junior last year? This isn’t a reference to the mistakes made with Lander but your final statement seems to indicate that you think even these 4 should have been in junior or at least not the NHL.

    Barkov could have gone back. But not to junior. He was playing Finnish pro.

    Without a CHL contract, he could have played in the AHL without trouble too.

    Monahan definitely should have gone back. Calgary didn’t need him and other than having an unsustainable sh%, he didn’t have an exceptional year (which is what you’d expect from a rook on a bad team).

    Jones and McKinnon looked ready to me.

  31. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Lowetide: I meant this season. Roy can sign a pro contract right now iirc. Oilers appear willing to have him play his overage season in the QMJHL.

    Ok. that makes more sense.

    Given his trade and his excitement about it, plus his guaranteed shot at playing in the Mem Cup… you have think he’ll stay in jr.

  32. haters says:

    Heard a rumor that JVR is available ? Are we interested ? What would the cost be ? Also I think the oilers didn’t gaff that much on lander, he is a mediocre player who from what I read back before he made the trip over projected as 3rd 4th line center tops, not really sure what anyone expected of him past that.

  33. justDOit says:

    Please don’t trade Marincin, MacT. Sure, use him as an example of the Oilers’ development system, and then maybe offer Gernat or similar, but unless CFP v2 is coming back in return, Marincin goes nowhere. Mkay?

  34. Cameron says:

    RexLibris,

    The Monahan situation was a little more complicated than just ‘send him down/let him stay’, since he was clearly way too good to be returned to junior (and would have been on a crap team if he were), but wasn’t eligible for the AHL. Factor in; that he was absolutely killing it in training camp and the first 20 games, and that he already has size and strength to play against men, and it was all but impossible for the Flames not to keep him on the big roster.

    Last but not least, it’s a it tough to swallow the idea he should have been in juniors when he had a 20 goal rookie campaign (at age 18) – that would have been even more successful if he hadn’t been injured half way through the year.

    I get it that many people approach prospect development with an ideological framework of ‘send them back down no matter what’, but in Monahan’s case I’d say that facts on the ground triumph ideology.

  35. spoiler says:

    Update on contract discussions between Grabovski and the Capitals.

  36. Racki says:

    If I were GM, I wouldn’t consider Lander part of the plan. Do what you can to try and get the best you can from him, but I mean this year, don’t think of him as being in the NHL line up. If he somehow surprises and earns his way into the lineup, great, but the AHL is not the NHL. I don’t really care too much how well you do there… if you can’t play well here, you go back. I’m not sure Lander will ever be a regular NHLer, but that said, I’m not considering him a throw away or giving up on him early. Just saying, let him continue to do well in the AHL and give him some looks up here until he proves he’s ready to stay (if it happens). But MacT needs to ensure he isn’t even just pencilling Lander in as a bottom six guy this year, IMHO.

  37. Andy P says:

    Cameron:
    RexLibris,

    The Monahan situation was a little more complicated than just ‘send him down/let him stay’, since he was clearly way too good to be returned to junior (and would have been on a crap team if he were), but wasn’t eligible for the AHL. Factor in; that he was absolutely killing it in training camp and the first 20 games, and that he already has size and strength to play against men, and it was all but impossible for the Flames not to keep him on the big roster.

    Last but not least, it’s a it tough to swallow the idea he should have been in juniors when he had a 20 goal rookie campaign (at age 18) – that would have been even more successful if he hadn’t been injured half way through the year.

    I get it that many people approach prospect development with an ideological framework of ‘send them back down no matter what’, but in Monahan’s case I’d say that facts on the ground triumph ideology.

    How much of Monahan being injured would have been due to him having a boy’s body in a man’s game? Same goes for every young player injured in their early years, such as Hall and Nuge and Yak?

  38. gd says:

    Re: Lander,
    I don’t think he’ll ever be a difference maker, but there are not a lot of guys who are point a game scorers in the AHL before 23, so I got to think there’s a player there somehow. He is younger then Anders Lee and Eric Haula. If there is a guy who deserves the chance to learn two way hockey from Ramsey it is him. All I know is if we saw his age and AHL stat line on another team, we would be discussing targeting him.

  39. spoiler says:

    Andy P: How much of Monahan being injured would have been due to him having a boy’s body in a man’s game?

    Like none?

  40. Big Dan says:

    gd,

    Lander may not score a lot, but he is a player that has the ability to alternate between all four lines (I have faith in Craig Ramsay).

    I watch all these guys like Dwight King, Kyle Clifford, and Trevor Lewis in LA. Their stats are abysmal (15-20 points) yet they are useful because they are smart and physical.

    I could definitely see Lander becoming like them next year. I definitely DO think he is part of the plans.

  41. Andy P says:

    spoiler: Like none?

    Are you the only person on this blog who is unaware of the increased risk of injury to moving young people into the NHL before they get “hair on their @$$” as LT has said?

  42. Deadman Waiting says:

    Very nice post. You almost convinced me. Actually, you did convince me there for a moment. But then I squinted a little harder and came most of the way back to my original position.

    The argument is fundamentally circular: that a bad team can become a good team simply by behaving the same way as the good team behaves, as a team that is good already. Dress like the boss, be the boss. What could be more obvious?

    Only I don’t believe that. In most walks of life, success is not a bus that shows up at a bus stop with a little bus shelter and a reliable bus schedule published months in advance.

    What emulating success buys you is a model for how to stay successful once you earn your first taste, so that you aren’t remembered years later as the one-shot wonder. To achieve that first taste, however, there’s precious little formula. This is true for individuals and it’s true for organizations.

    Of course, one reads stories all the time of people (or corporations) for whom success did arrive in a miraculously straight line. We all know the type, those rare, gifted individuals who eat Chance for breakfast, and from an early age.

    The rest of us are left scrabbling to ascend to the ranks of champagne and caviar, many of us having not yet experienced either (though some catch table scraps from daddy’s silver spoon, or are actually given a spoon of their very own—or even, in the extreme case, receive a relentless ant column of silver spoons to supplement or replace the many precious spoons neglected, abused, lost, or forgotten).

    I have never poured over capgeek, so I don’t know how the asterisks are arrayed in the heavens, but it appears to me that $16m is tied up in Smyth, Horc, and Hemmer; another $10m is tied up in Whitney, Barker, and Khabibulin; $3m in Souray and Nilsson (for the valued contribution of not showing up at all); plus nearly another $8m for Hall and Hopkins, with potentially another $5m in bonuses (though I can’t immediately discern if these are eligible bonuses or bonuses actually obtained, which might be moot for budgetary purposes in any case).

    That’s $40m tied up in three aging vets with something left in the tank (aggregately overpaid), three badly faltering players of yesteryear/neverwhere, and two insanely promising greenhorns (whose successful straight-line development was substantially abetted by the protective Rolex-encumbered wingspan of a certain Comrade Horcy harpyja, himself a late bloomer of faltering fizz).

    The GM has $24m bucks burning a hole in his pocket to procure another fifteen guys, many of whom will need to fill in LARGE holes around the edges of the $40m you’ve already expended.

    Okay, don’t panic, let’s step back, calm down, and dress like the boss. What would Detroit do they found themselves faced with this precise predicament?

    My guess: Tender their resignations immediately, so as not to besmirch their posterity.

    Any others?

    Yes, I know, if we had been more like Detroit since the days of the EIG—as the Friendly Giant used to say: look back, look waaay back—we would never have arrived at hell’s Frobisher Bay GO Transit station in the first place—because, of course, the EIG is the fertile tundra from which to nurture a sustainable paradise of lather, rinse, reload … and repeat.

    That covers ineffective (file under: budgetary bungle).

    As for Lander’s meander, I’ll pass the mic to the Stanford yoga chick, PhD.

    How to make stress your friend

    Stress. It makes your heart pound, your breathing quicken and your forehead sweat. But while stress has been made into a public health enemy, new research suggests that stress may only be bad for you if you believe that to be the case.

    That covers overwhelmed.

    ———

    One upon a time, long ago, I wrote a hyperbolic post about Nugent’s tremendous edge control and the next day I observed Lowetide becoming uncharacteristically cranky when the unwashed showed up and drank the Kool-Aid without noticing the artificially carbonated spring water of planet Xenu from which it was brewed.

    Now I certainly wouldn’t want to amp up the unwashed unnecessarily, so in my hyperbolic exercise from yesterday afternoon concerning the same player, I pulled out the carbonation stops all the way to the hiss in prissstine.

    Jebus, if the unwashed bought into it this time, I wash my hands, having done everything humanly possible to subvert my hyperbole short of double-underlining “nose hair trimmer” (which in my own estimation almost single-handedly rendered the rest of my post irrelevant).

    Not that I go back to check myself, which is a major character flaw, as I well know.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca