TAKE YOUR PROTEIN PILLS AND PUT YOUR HELMET ON

by Lowetide

Every summer, weary Oilers fans are met by a blast from the sun, signaling the annual trek to find water in enough supply to be called a lake, and the realization that hope springs eternal when it comes to the local hockey team’s transactions. Allow me to take you back through the past, darkly:

  • June 30, 2009: Word tonight from multiple sources: Dany Heatley is an Edmonton Oiler. Senators get three NHL players in return: Andrew Cogliano, a very good young player; Dustin Penner, an inconsistent winger who does bring some things; Ladislav Smid, a young defender who has been developing at the NHL level. A lot of young talent heading the other way. Source
  • July 2, 2011: Did Cam Barker ever–at any time–play tough minutes in the NHL? No. He didn’t in Minnesota and in Chicago they always had a better option. Whatever Barker’s value–real or imagined, it doesn’t appear in the secondary disciplines (that I can find). Source
  • June 20, 2014: Edmonton acquires a window of opportunity to acquire Nikita Nikitin. Source
  • June 26, 2015: In terms of value, Peter Chiarelli gave up too much. Reinhart—if everything works out—projects as a second-pairing guy and the price paid was dear, too dear. Oilers fans will grind themselves into a fine white powder on this issue, I choose not to do it. Source
  • June 29, 2016: The Edmonton Oilers have traded Taylor Hall to the New Jersey Devils. It is a terrible trade. Defenseman Adam Larsson is the returning piece in the deal, and addresses the need for help at RHD for the organization. Source

I have zero interest in going back in time (except to acknowledge that fantastic photo by Rob Ferguson, all rights reserved) and if Peter Chiarelli brings Stanley to this town most of us will bask in the glow and allow history to fade (I think).

That said, Peter Chiarelli can do himself (and the Oilers) an enormous favor by making the kind of trade that will catapult this team into the highest reaches of NHL teams. What would it look like? A 2018 second-round pick for Alex Petrovic might do it, or maybe a one-year contract for Kevin Shattenkirk.

We’ve established the needs (second pair RHD, short term but effective replacement for Andrej Sekera, cap compliance, a forward who moves the needle and 3C would be best in terms of position) now it’s left to PC to find the deals.

  • Three for one? I don’t see it. If the Oilers want a major piece (Ryan O’Reilly, Matt Duchene, Drew Doughty) it’s going to mean a major piece going out. You might get a two-for-one in the case of Doughty, but that’s high rent both ways.
  • Prospect for immediate help? This I can see happening, in a Caleb Jones for Jason Demers kind of way. Edmonton doesn’t have that kind of cap room, but if the $77 million outer markers are true, then maybe this happens.
  • Buy Low? I’ve looked at some of the overrated (based on cap investment) players who might be available for very little, and it’s not a promising bunch. You could buy low on Cody Eakin (who we have talked about before), Matt Calvert, Brandon Pirri, Joonas Donskoi, Zemgus Girgensons, but are you sure you want to? One player who might be worth asking after is Adam Lowry, he of the 1.12/60 5×5 scoring this past season.
  • One for one? The most likely scenario.
  • Picks for Player? Could work, especially with LV in the picture. Florida’s protected list should be very interesting to Edmonton.

PC needs to grab a $6 million talent and pay 60 cents on the dollar in asset cost, and baby that’s a difficult thing to do. Idea being acquiring a player who can drive a line or anchor a pairing while also giving up something other than McDavid, Leon, Nuge, Oscar, Larsson or Talbot. That’s the task.

IDEAL SUMMER

I think it’s go time for the Oilers, so an aggressive stance is the correct one. It isn’t time to blow your brains out, and the big contracts are going to get signed (Leon’s cap number impacting this year). I would like to see:

  • Vegas selects Griffin Reinhart in expansion draft.
  • Golden Knights also select Mark Pysyk from Florida, and trade him to the Oilers in exchange for (one of) Anton Slepyshev, Caleb Jones or Ethan Bear.
  • Oilers sign Brian Campbell in free agency.
  • Oilers sign Spencer Foo to an entry-level deal.

Projected Roster

  • Maroon-McDavid-Eberle
  • Lucic-Draisaitl-Puljujarvi
  • Pouliot-RNH-Foo
  • Caggiula-Letestu-Kassian
  • Khaira, Pitlick
  • Klefbom-Larsson
  • Campbell-Pysyk
  • Nurse-Benning
  • Oesterle
  • Talbot (Brossoit)
  • Sekera-LTIR

I think you can get them under a $77 million cap and run that group until the deadline. Lack of experience on RW is a concern, but Kassian can move up, Caggiula can move over and Leon is at the ready. I like this defense, especially when Sekera comes back. Thoughts?

KEY DATES THIS MONTH

  • June 15: The first day the Oilers can tell us they are buying out Benoit Pouliot.
  • June 17: Oilers submit their expansion protected list.
  • June 21: We find out if LV took Letestu, Khaira, Reinhart or Brossoit. I say Reinhart.
  • June 23: Oilers draft Robert Thomas No. 22 overall.
  • June 24: Oilers pick five forwards, a defenseman and a goalie in later rounds of entry draft.
  • June 29: Oilers acquire Mark Pysyk from Vegas Golden Knights.
  • July 1: Oilers sign Brian Campbell.
  • July 10: Oilers sign Spencer Foo.

How many of these things actually happen? I’ll bet two (Pouliot, Reinhart).

LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

Friiiday! A fun, crazy morning with the normal circus. 10am, TSN1260. Scheduled to appear:

  • Steve Lansky, BigMouthSports. Steve predicting Pekka Rinne’s dive a week ago, and we are here.
  • Frank Seravalli, TSN. SCF’s look to be winding down and the wild ride trade summer is just around the corner.
  • Matt Iwanyk, TSN1260. Who will the Oilers lose in the expansion draft? Plus, with Edmonton getting the Grey Cup (announcement today) should the season start mid-June?
  • Paul Almeida, SSE. Oilers summer.

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

147 comments
0

You may also like

0 0 vote
Article Rating
147 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
godot10

Truth: Johansen played this year with Forsberg and Arvidsson

Forsberg 82312758
Arvidsson 80 313061

Hall played with Zajac and Palmieri.

Zajac 80 143145
Palmieri 80 26 27 53

I highly doubt the difference in Johansen’s linemates scoring 22 more goals than Hall’s is attributable to Johansen being the better player. There is an argument to be made, but it’s unfair to say that without considering who Hall played with vs who Johansen did.Not to mention the D corps playing in Nashville.

Now compare the defensemen behind Johanssen and Hall this season.

godot10

John Chambers:
Re: Russell

Why not give him a 5-year deal for like $11M.

3-3-2-1.5-1.5

AAV is only $2.2M, and if he can’t deliver after 4 years his buyout is only $700K / yr.

But there is salary cap recapture that significantly impacts the cap.

godot10

Ducey: If they signed Russell for 3 yrs, could they not trade him after 2?

Cough…Andrew Ference…cough. Small defensemen don’t age particularly well. Russell has already been missing time with a seeming chronic something in his upper legs.

Philosophil

Scungilli Slushy,

Very late to this thread- To clarify the analogy- Larsson is a Tundra, not a Tacoma. Significant difference.
jordan oesterle or Joey Laleggia is a Tacoma like D player (acknowledging that JL is now a forward).

CrazyCoach

stevezie: It’s one of those heuristics that probably works better than it should, fooling people into thinking it is true. You can make the claim Canada’s 10th best C is better than its 2nd best rw and probably be right (I did not look this up). BUT THIS IS NOT BECAUSE WINGS DON’T MATTER!
It’s just that good players matter more than pretty good players (and so on).
If your best forward is a wing, he will matter more than your C. Forsberg is an excellent example.
Those two cents were not that quick. Ah well.

Good points,

LT beat me to it, but the versatility of Centres holds a little weight. as well.

Hockey Canada seems to use this philosophy as the majority of their teams will have an overabundance of centres. That and the philosophy of taking the most talented players.

I have a feeling they learned a hard lesson in taking Rob Zamner for the 98 Olympics.

who

Cassandra: So now we are evaluating players on who “covers the most ice?”What if skating around a lot doesn’t correlate with goals?In any case, Klefbom covers more ice than Larsson, is he intrinsically more valuable then?(I think so!)

But even if this were a good metric, it still wouldn’t make centers intrinsically more valuable.What do we mean by “cover more ice?”With or without the puck?Do centers always do more of this?McDavid is a transporter, but centers aren’t always.Are transporting centers intrinsically more valuable than those that don’t?

Cmon. I shouldn’t have to explain this to you but here goes. Centers basically mirror the puck in their own end which means they have to move all over the defensive zone. I know cause I is one.
Wingers basically cover the point and rarely get below the hash marks. Also when their team gains possession centers generally have to skate further to join the rush.
Don’t think I can make this any simpler for you.

Bank Shot

Cassandra:
Bank Shot,

It is hard to suss out individual contributions from team stats.For offensive contributions, I would suggest points.Defensive contributions are more difficult.My small suggestion was that we should not assume the center contributes more by default.

Well if we want to get granular, centers do contribute more by default. If you had two wingers that were identical in every way except one of them could win more faceoffs, you would take the one that wins faceoffs.

That doesn’t mean that faceoffs are significant contributor to wins, but all else being equal its better to start with the puck, rather than have to chase it.

So the question isn’t really are centers more valuable, its how much more valuable are centers?

As you mentioned in another post, Draisaitl shifted to wing. He did so seamlessly. Most centers don’t have any problem switching to wing. Over the years we have seen the Oilers try time and time again to convert wingers to center. It hasn’t worked.

The difficulty level is higher. Centers have more responsibility in the defensive end of the rink. Whether this actually translates into meaning that centers are more valuable on the ice surface is open to debate. I think it means they are more important to on ice success. You disagree, or are at least playing devil’s advocate.

So centers can play wing, there are twice as many wingers on a team as centers (more scarcity), and centers win faceoffs.

Therefore centers are more valuable. If a winger is clearly better than a center, you take the winger no question.

If its a tossup in ability, whats one good reason for taking a winger over a center?

russ99

Cassandra: Tracking is not going to be the golden chalice some here think it is.

In any case all of the metrics you seem to like track very closely with shots.There is no such thing as a player who is good at limiting the quality of shots who is not also good at limiting the number of shots.

For instance, it is quite true that Kris Russell is good at blocking shots and hence Corsi is going to underrate him.However, once you control for this by using Fenwick or Shots, using some kind of scoring chance metric doesn’t add a lot of information.

Another classic mistake is to judge defenders on against measures alone, as if these weren’t happening in a larger environment.For all players, the environment is going to determined the results to a very large degree and hence the best that can be done is to measure their value relative to the environment, and the best measure of the environment is the opposing measure.Which is to say to presuppose that defenders don’t really “drive” scoring chances for and hence I can ignore it in evaluating their defense, and hence their individual contribution, is to ignore the environment within which they play.

This is Ricki’s continual mistake, and why he consistently overrates the Mark Fistric’s of the world.

Good points.

I’m all for balance, but since shot for metrics are all the rage and there less focus on defense, which does help get you that cup, I’m a trumpeting the D metric horn a little loudly.

A team of all puck movers with little defensive aptitude may make the shot for metrics look nice, and add a few goals for, but also wear down the goalie.

There should be a mix of players with complementary skill sets in the D pairings, so both offense and defense are served. I’m certainly not advocating for 2-1 games, but we see how hard it is to score in the playoffs, and sometimes the clutch goals we scored to beat the Sharks and take the Ducks to the brink aren’t there.

This is my concern with the offseason. Were losing Sekera for a large portion of the season, and it may take him up to a year to her back to his previous level. Losing Sekera and Russell and adding players with little effect on defensive coverage make us a worse team next year at the expense of a few more goals, when we’re already scoring a a decent clip.

When you have a cup window, the idea is to get better every year, not to get worse.

Cassandra

who: Center are worth more than wingers because they have more defensive responsibility and have to cover more ice. Got nothing to do with who’s driving who. If they put up similar numbers you always take the center because he has shown the ability to play a more complete game.
For instance, if Taylor Hall had been a center,with his skill set, he would be a more valuable player.

So now we are evaluating players on who “covers the most ice?” What if skating around a lot doesn’t correlate with goals? In any case, Klefbom covers more ice than Larsson, is he intrinsically more valuable then? (I think so!)

But even if this were a good metric, it still wouldn’t make centers intrinsically more valuable. What do we mean by “cover more ice?” With or without the puck? Do centers always do more of this? McDavid is a transporter, but centers aren’t always. Are transporting centers intrinsically more valuable than those that don’t?

who

Doug McLachlan: I can’t for the life of me understand what he would deal Eberle for that makes sense.

Trade him to the Islanders for Hamonic – after the Vegas draft, of course – sure but is that really on offer?

None of the verbal from Chia suggests to me that he wants to get rid of Eberle’s 20-25 goals, though he may want to get rid of the contract.Even then, it’s only for two more years.

If there is an Eberle for Hamonic trade I bet it happens before expansion draft. Islanders would be much more motivated before and if the Oilers trade Eberle and go 4-4-1 they won’t lose an irreplaceable forward.

jtblack

jtblack:
LT. Maybe a question for another dat for Oilers Fandom.

What would the Oil have to accomolish in the next 10 yrs to be considered a success.I would be interested to know the “average”.

Your stuff is awesome on the draft!Thanks!!

Doug McLachlan

dustrock:
Dreger saying it looks like almost certain that Eberle will be traded.

Which means, obviously, he won’t.

I can’t for the life of me understand what he would deal Eberle for that makes sense.

Trade him to the Islanders for Hamonic – after the Vegas draft, of course – sure but is that really on offer?

None of the verbal from Chia suggests to me that he wants to get rid of Eberle’s 20-25 goals, though he may want to get rid of the contract. Even then, it’s only for two more years.

rickithebear

LT, Doug Mac:
1. Mact Tradded for Picks and Selected 2011 KHL draft 1st overall pick Anton slepyshev 88th 2013
2. MacT drafted Draisatl instead of Bennett 2014
3. MacT traded Perron for Pit #16 pick
4. Sather stated a trade for Talbot to the oilers was arranged March 2015
5. The 2015 draft lottery was won April 18, 2015
6. On april 24, 2015 Craig Mctavish was Relieved of his Duties; but retained in the org.
7. Peter Chiarelli was hired as New GM.
8. PC followed mact’s scout list and drafted Connar Mcdavid
9. PC traded the pit #16 and Edm 2nd for Griffin Reinhart.
10. Since MacT was still with the org. and mact had commited to the assets for the Talbot trade by sending petry to MTL. Sather offered the same deal to PC.
11. PC traded (2nd comp) Top 60 HD; EVGA Dman Marincin to TOR for 4th rd Pick
12. PC used the 4th rd pick to trade for Gryba.
13. MacT and Bucky Signed Benning and Caggulia to Contracts Per PC interview.

Barcs

stevezie,

I think that you’re being completely fair.

McDavid changes everything.

who

Cassandra:
All this talk about how centers are more important to wingers, but do we know this to be true?

How do we know Johansen is more important than Forsberg?Why can’t it be that Forsberg is driving Johansen and not the other way around?

This story about the relative value of centers has quickly become quite dogmatic.We don’t know it is true that centers drive shots and and goals.It occurs to me that there are multiple alternative hypothesis that are more likely. For instance, the best player on a line is most responsible for the share of shots and goals.

Center are worth more than wingers because they have more defensive responsibility and have to cover more ice. Got nothing to do with who’s driving who. If they put up similar numbers you always take the center because he has shown the ability to play a more complete game.
For instance, if Taylor Hall had been a center, with his skill set, he would be a more valuable player.

stevezie

Barcs,

I’ll call one cup a C-. I think McDavid is such a tremendous opportunity that winning one is enough to keep you from being run out of town, but I think it is fair to expect more. perhaps I am being unfair.

In the shorter term, I think it is fair to agree Chia did not design this team to win a cup right away (this year) or to be pretty good for a long tie and see what happens (Sharks/Predators method, which for most teams is a good one).

Rightly or wrongly, this team is designed to peak next year.

Pennant at a minimum. I’m not trying to be mean, I think they can do it.

stevezie

jtblack: What would the Oil have to accomolish in the next 10 yrs to be considered a success.

Great question. THE question.

Normally I would say a cup. It is so hard to win a championship in this league that winning just one is enough to satisfy, even if you coulda/shoulda won more.

However, I think McDavid changes things. So I’m putting the bare minimum at 2. Don’t get me wrong, I think with good management and luck (we’d need both) we could win four or five of the next ten. But if we win two, that’s still a helluva thing. Well done, everyone.

Anything less than two cups is a failure.

I’m also willing to give half marks for a pennant. So if the Oil play for three cups and win one, that’s okay with me too.

Maybe I’m defining “success” too generously, but considering how many people were doing victory dances over reaching the second round I think I’m okay.

Very curious what the group thinks on this one.

thebiggestmanintheworld

Love it or hate it, one thing is clear cut….

That was BOLD.

Barcs

jtblack,

I agree. But to reply to your second comment, I would be happy with them being cup contenders for years, even if they only won one. As long as they win one.

I would, however, be disappointed** if they won a cup and then became a team that fights to make the playoffs and then if they make it get bounced after a round or two. Kind of like Boston of the last few years.

**I would obviously be ecstatic about winning even one cup. But the question is in the context of overall level of competition over the next 10 years.

stevezie

CrazyCoach,
Cassandra,

My quick, on sort-of related, two cents:

It drives me crazy when (even some smart) people make the blatantly ridiculous claim that “wingers don’t matter.”

I think the thing that fools them into thinking something this obscene is, as CrazyCoach says, the center typically has the biggest opportunity to impact the game and so the best players are usually centers. When people make a quick list of the best forwards they notice most of them are centers (because the best players become centers), and conclude that wingers don’t matter that much.

It’s one of those heuristics that probably works better than it should, fooling people into thinking it is true. You can make the claim Canada’s 10th best C is better than its 2nd best rw and probably be right (I did not look this up). BUT THIS IS NOT BECAUSE WINGS DON’T MATTER!

It’s just that good players matter more than pretty good players (and so on).

If your best forward is a wing, he will matter more than your C. Forsberg is an excellent example.

Those two cents were not that quick. Ah well.

dustrock

Dreger saying it looks like almost certain that Eberle will be traded.

Which means, obviously, he won’t.

stevezie

Lowetide: He did this in Boston, too. I was SHOCKED with the price he paid for Kaberle at the 2011 deadline, and honestly didn’t think he was vital to the SC victory. But they won. I think that’s going to be the conversation around these parts. Frustration with deals until they win.

Fair enough, but he still got fired and more than earned it.

I honestly have a hard time assessing Chia’s career. He won a cup, the ultimate goal. But boy o boy has he made some terrible trades and signed some poor contracts. Many more than a good GM should have to his name.

Assessing his transaction record, I would say he is a mediocre at best GM. Assessing his record he looks like a good one.

I know a lot of luck is involved in winning, but I’m not sure luck covers Chia’s record. He helped make a pretty good Ottawa team too, for whatever that’s worth.

The best answer I’ve been able to come to is Joe Carter. A lot of home runs and RBIs, a few championships and a helluva highlight reel, but boy do advanced stats tear his career to shreds.

But I don’t know that much about baseball.

jtblack

LT. Maybe a question for another dat for Oilers Fandom.

What would the Oil have to accomolish in the next 10 yrs to be considered a success. I would be interested to know the “average”.

Your stuff is awesome on the draft! Thanks!!

jtblack

Barcs,

I think the minimum standard is competing for the next decade ad a True Cup Contender AND winning at least 1 Cup. Anything short of that is unacceptable.

And I am Pro PC. Love the work to date (even with the misses). But I will not make excuses if this team does not get to the finish line. LT SAID IT, Win and all is OK. Its that simple

Cassandra

russ99: Don’t get me started.

But I’ve moved on from that battle.

There are a lot better defensive metrics, but harder to find than the “shots for” metrics: HDSCA%, DGAA%,Zone Entries + own zone faceoffs vs. Zone exits, etc.

I like Woodmoney, but it makes assumptions about competition level, and doesn’t really quantify individual aptitude for defense and reducing the quality of scoring chances against, it’s more a QualComp number for defenders.

I think the difficulty derives from defense being more a team concept and it’s not easily distillable into one metric.

When the trackers arrive, the days of really being able to quantify defense will be upon us.

Tracking is not going to be the golden chalice some here think it is.

In any case all of the metrics you seem to like track very closely with shots. There is no such thing as a player who is good at limiting the quality of shots who is not also good at limiting the number of shots.

For instance, it is quite true that Kris Russell is good at blocking shots and hence Corsi is going to underrate him. However, once you control for this by using Fenwick or Shots, using some kind of scoring chance metric doesn’t add a lot of information.

Another classic mistake is to judge defenders on against measures alone, as if these weren’t happening in a larger environment. For all players, the environment is going to determined the results to a very large degree and hence the best that can be done is to measure their value relative to the environment, and the best measure of the environment is the opposing measure. Which is to say to presuppose that defenders don’t really “drive” scoring chances for and hence I can ignore it in evaluating their defense, and hence their individual contribution, is to ignore the environment within which they play.

This is Ricki’s continual mistake, and why he consistently overrates the Mark Fistric’s of the world.

Cassandra

Bank Shot,

It is hard to suss out individual contributions from team stats. For offensive contributions, I would suggest points. Defensive contributions are more difficult. My small suggestion was that we should not assume the center contributes more by default.

Cassandra

CrazyCoach,

I agree with your post in its entirety. Two points in particular I would like to draw out.

While it is certainly true that in general a center is assigned more defensive responsibility, a) as you point out the actual defensive responsibilities at any given time shift accord to circumstances (F1, F2, F3, etc), and b) even if they didn’t that the center has more responsibilities in general does not mean that any particular center is driving play, or any particular winger is not.

Finally, if centers inherently had more value than wingers, why would you ever play Draisatl on the wing? If it were true, you would always play your best forwards at center, but no teams do this, because wingers can drive play too, just in a different way.

To put it another way, a huge factor in limiting shots is exiting the zones in control of the puck and, typically, this is the job of the wingers. How do we know that job of defensive support is always more important than controlled zone exit? I would suggest that we do not know this.

The task is to assess value, and you can’t do this if you determine in advance that one kind of contribution is more valuable a priori.

Scungilli Slushy

Ducey: Johansen is a more valuable player than Hall.

Johansen last year: 82 14 47 61 .743 p/g
Hall: 72 20 33 53 .736 p/g

So a healthier, tougher player who puts up the same points per game (their points per 60 5 x 5 are the same) and is a #1 C. That beats a finesse LW all day long.

Remember that Johansens contract squabbles were part of the consideration for CLB as well.

And Larssen was more established at the time of their trades. Jones was in his third season and still in the valley of doubt. Larsson had completed 5 and was well established.

I think Johansen is more valuable now, but when he was traded he wasn’t well regarded. I read plenty about defensive issues, motivation issues, and of course he was hard for the Jackets to handle, seen as a selfish player. Jones was and is one of the premium young RHD. Not developed but well regarded and very valuable.

Hall was considered widely as a play driving chance generating player, who also scored those points on a historically bad team with barely any NHL defensmen. Larsson was considered to be underachieving for his draft pedigree and thought to have little offense and likely not even a legit first pairing D, especially around here, but elsewhere around the league. He didn’t establish the level of play he has until on the Oilers.

Johansen is a right shot centre and that helps, my point is that the Jackets got what was considered a better player with far more upside for their guy.

Despite the fact that the Hall trade was on the day considered poor value, again by many around the league and in media and here, the deal was done because Chiarelli had no leverage and despite trying for months was getting the same type of offers from all of the interested GM’s, and felt he had to pull the trigger.

He isn’t in that position now and I hope he does better moving forward.

How it has panned out isn’t the point of the statement that the trade wasn’t good value when it was made. With hindsight I would do the trade again, but Chiarelli didn’t have hindsight and was balls out on that one and Larsson covered the bet, luckily I think for him.

CrazyCoach

Cassandra: This story about the relative value of centers has quickly become quite dogmatic. We don’t know it is true that centers drive shots and and goals. It occurs to me that there are multiple alternative hypothesis that are more likely. For instance, the best player on a line is most responsible for the share of shots and goals.

I think part of it, is that centres are often asked to do more heaving lifting than wingers, in terms of faceoffs, and coverage in the defensive zone. A winger traditionally covers the points, but a centre is supposed to cover not only the slot area, but has to help out in the corners and behind the net as well. I know that in order to play centre, you have to have great skating skills and the ability to read and react plays all over the ice. I know at the youth level, you sometimes hide/protect a poor skater on the wings and give them less responsibility.

However, as I have explained in here before, we now refer to players as F1, F2, and F3 for both forechecking systems and defensive zone entires. And whether through subconscious training or just plain dumb luck, centres often are F1 on the backcheck. Not always, but I’m willing to bet money the majority of time, centres are the first back (now, that would be a study to conduct).

I do agree though, that some analytical work would certainly look at the relative value of wingers to centres.

I think I did provide an interesting hypothesis in that centres require more responsibility therefore they are valued more than wingers.

Just a few thoughts to muddy the waters further.

Barcs

LT,

From your projected lineup above, I would personally prefer Justin Williams on a one or two year deal than Foo. It provides a bit more maturity and playoff experience at the cost of a bit more money.

If Foo delivers equivalent offense to what Caggiula brought this year, I would like to see a stronger option.

No idea if that would fit under the cap, though.

Barcs

Doug McLachlan:
Barcs,

I would look to the Maroon, Kassian and Caggulia trades/signings as a hopeful sign that he gets he can’t overpay for the complimentary pieces.

Now where did I put those rose-tinted glasses of mine.

For sure. That’s why I’m not entirely down on Chiarelli. He’s miles better than anything we’ve had for years now. He’s a mixed bag for me, some great deals, and some that I thought were very poor.

The Maroon deal template was more of what I was hoping to see at this year’s deadline.

Ducey

Doug McLachlan:
Barcs,

I would look to the Maroon, Kassian and Caggulia trades/signings as a hopeful sign that he gets he can’t overpay for the complimentary pieces.

Now where did I put those rose-tinted glasses of mine.

You are wearing them! 🙂

Doug McLachlan

Barcs,

I would look to the Maroon, Kassian and Caggulia trades/signings as a hopeful sign that he gets he can’t overpay for the complimentary pieces.

Now where did I put those rose-tinted glasses of mine.

Doug McLachlan

LT, should the Oilers have any interest in adding Paul MacLean to McLellan’s coaching staff.

I believe the two worked together under Babcock winning the 07-08 Cup together in Detroit, yes?

He had been a Boudreau hire and I was surprised he stuck around with Carlyle but I seem to think he had some legit success in Ottawa.

Barcs

Lowetide: He did this in Boston, too. I was SHOCKED with the price he paid for Kaberle at the 2011 deadline, and honestly didn’t think he was vital to the SC victory. But they won. I think that’s going to be the conversation around these parts. Frustration with deals until they win.

Exactly. He has a history of both that and with overpaying his depth forwards unnecessarily. I hope that he has learned from these, but what is that saying you have?
Sooner or later you develop a past.

I think it’s the little things like this that make the difference between a team that contends for 4-5 years vs a team that contends for 8-10.

McSorley33

Shattenkirk has been pretty clear for a long time now where he wants to play……

Please people.

Ducey

mumbai max:
eberle pouliot benning picks/prospects for doughty and brown.

2 years of Doughty for 5 years of Brown – who is 32, has 5 x $5.85 left and has 27, 27, 28, and 36 points the last 4 years.

That contract means getting Doughty in that deal should not cost you much of anything.

There has to be a better way of disposing of Pouliot.

So, no thanks.

Doughty will be available as early as this deadline (and almost certainly next summer), I would think, once it becomes clear the Kings are going to have to dismantle things.

Doug McLachlan

Chia and the Oilers have lucked into the best player on the planet in Connor McDavid, how do you build around him?

I think, because of what they also have in Leon, that the Pittsburgh model is a perfect template on how you build your team.

Top 2 Centers in McDavid and Dria (Crosby and Malkin). Check.

Top end, if not elite, goaltending in Talbot (Fleury and now Murray). Check.

While Pittsburgh has a top end, if not elite, d-man in the currently injured Letang – something Edmonton is still searching for – I would argue that the Oiler d-corps as a whole looks very favourable even with the holes that need to be filled for the hoped for Russell departure and the Sekera injury.

Where the model breaks down is in the support roles and on the wings.

Kessel is superior to either Eberle or Lucic and while I love Nuge, his cap hit is going to be a luxury we won’t be able to afford once Mr. McDavid’s 2nd contract kicks in.

The challenge will be continuing to add on low-cost complimentary pieces on the wings (like Maroon and Kassian and Cagullia) to allow McDavid and Dria to weave their magic each post-season.

Chia’s history in Boston suggests that he may be prone to overpay for legacy/loyalty contracts. If he’s learned his lesson then the Pittsburgh model can really set the Oil up for years of runs if not Cups.

Professor Q

stush18: I could honestly see hall signed big with Toronto on his next contract.

If there is a position they are weak at, it’s defence and and left wing.

I was talking about Shattenkirk.

Bag of Pucks

digger50:
Bag of Pucks,

Like the Oilers?

I would guess the possibility of that ended when he elbowed Kassian and then turtled.

That’s the equivalent of the ex-wife getting pregnant with the new guy.

mumbai max

eberle pouliot benning picks/prospects for doughty and brown.

JARRI'S REVENGE

TO10801,

Might be a tad expensive for 7D ($1.4M) but agree that it depends on what else they do.

Great story, great value (if played higher in the order), great guy and from one of his last interviews, it seemed like he really wanted to be here (“I love those guys” [reference to Oiler team mates]).

Barcs

One thing that worries me about Chiarelli is his willingness to lose value in his deals.

I suppose it depends on your idea of what makes a good GM, but for me the best at the job are essentially great asset managers. They gain as much value, or lose as little as possible, in every deal or signing they make.

So regardless of your view on how the deals worked out, I think PC lost value with each of the Hall-Larsson, Reinhart, and Davidson deals.

I understand that he was in a tough negotiating position with the Hall trade (not that I think that justifies it), but it’s the latter two deals that concern me more in this.

This connects to PC buying “deadline rentals” in the future. Given how much of a crapshoot the NHL playoffs are, I would prefer that he not sell the future for rentals, and instead just make “hockey trades”.

This way, the Oilers can continue to have young talent coming up, keeping them in contention for longer, as well as preserving assets.

I believe it was Ken Holland in Detroit who stated that he was done with deadline rentals because it ultimately was not worth mortgaging the future for one playoff run.

So yeah, asset management. And it’s a concern with Chiarelli, for me.

Bank Shot

Cassandra:
Bank Shot,

Really, we don’t count shots against?That sounds to me like a pretty good measure of team defense.And once you have a measure of team defense you can start attributing it to players starting by seeing how the team does when that player is on the ice.

Now hockey is dynamic, so what you are actually measuring is the scoring environment when the player is on the ice (i.e. if a team or line plays slowly they’ll allow fewer shots but that won’t mean they are good at defense in an absolute sense, but it will mean they require fewer goals for to win, which is the only thing that matters).

In any case, Taylor Hall has consistently played in relatively low shot environment compared to other players in his situation, which is compelling evidence that he is doing something to create that environment, regardless of what position he is playing which is more or less irrelevant.

Shots against is a good team proxy. It’s very tough to break it down to an individual level because players that play an offensive role are going to be afforded better opportunities by the coach to take advantage of that offense with more o-zone starts, or mismatches against inferior opponents, or will be out at the end of the PP, and never at the end of a PK. Lots of little things that add up over time.

It’s going to amplify their shots for and decrease their shots against compared to say a Patrice Bergeron type.

Even taking that into account, Taylor Hall has performed worse than his primary center more often than not in his career when looking at SA/60. He has led his team a couple of times in Sf/60 but never in SA/60. I’d say there is some evidence there that he is better offensively than defensively.

Getting away from Hall though, I’d like you to answer my question about a center and a winger having identical shots for and against numbers.

If both the shots for and against are equal for a center and a winger which position would you choose?

Do you think they are completely equal in that situation?

What about for a defenseman and a winger? Shots for/against completely equal. D-man scored 10 points.

I think it’s pretty fair to say that in the last situation that the defenceman didn’t contribute as much to the shots for as the winger did, but probably contributed a whole lot more to the shots against due to the nature of the position.

You don’t think that a centre has a greater opportunity to make an impact in all areas of the ice than a winger?

Why do you believe this to be true? What evidence do you have that overrides common sense?

I would think it would need to be compelling for me to be convinced.

Barcs

Cassandra,

+1