Atlantic Crossing

The Edmonton Oilers ran their preseason record to 6-1-0 Sunday afternoon, winning over a strong group of Calgary Flames after a laggardly start. Based on performances, I’d say Kailer Yamamoto made the team, Evan Bouchard too. The rest? Too soon to know.

THE ATHLETIC!

The Athletic Edmonton is going to bring it all season long. Proud to be part of a lineup that is ready to cover the coming year. Outstanding coverage from a large group, including Daniel Nugent-Bowman and Jonathan Willis, Lowetide, Minnia Feng and Pat McLean. If you haven’t subscribed yet, now’s your chance. Special offer is here, less than $4 a month!

  • New Lowetide: Oilers waive Aberg, release Jerabek and stand at 25.
  • New Lowetide: Oilers prospects Berglund, Maksimov off to fine starts
  • Lowetide: Is this the year an Edmonton Oilers player wins the Calder Trophy?
  • Daniel Nugent-Bowman: Evan Bouchard enlists former figure skater to help improve a weakness in his game.
  • Jonathan Willis: Mikko Koskinen temporarily triumphs over Al Montoya, but the real battle for the backup role has just started
  • Eric Duhatschek: Milan Lucic has made changes to try and get his swagger, and scoring touch, back.
  • Jonathan Willis: What does the preseason performance of Jesse Puljujarvi and Kailer Yamamoto mean for the Oilers?
  • Lowetide: Impressive Cooper Marody preseason could lead to NHL recall.
  • Lowetide: Oilers farm system beginning to resemble the real thing
  • New Lowetide: RE 18-19: Cam Talbot is key to Oilers success in 2018-19
  • Lowetide: RE 18-19: A case for the defence.
  • Lowetide: RE 18-19: Ryan Strome and the Oilers long journey to competent third and fourth lines
  • Lowetide: RE 18-19: Leon Draisaitl and the pursuit of a second outscoring line in ’18-19
  • Lowetide: RE 18-19: Can the McDavid line lead the 2018-19 Oilers to the playoffs?

DEFENSE, LAST NIGHT

  • Jerabek-Bouchard went 6-8 in 7:19, 3-6 shots and 1-0 goals. Klefbom-Bouchard went 5-1 in 5:49, 3-1 shots and no goals. I thought Bouchard played a strong game, he marked his man defensively very well, and moved the puck expertly too. Had one moment where McDavid came around the net and drove in for a great shot when 97 sent him the puck. He’s learning on the job, will it be enough? I suspect he gets at least nine games. Jerabek had a better game, and spent four minutes on the 4-on-5 PK without a goal going into the net. Is it enough? We’ll find out.
  • Klefbom-Larsson went 2-6 in 4:10, 0-3 in shots, no goals. Larsson struggled before he left, one wonders if he was comfortable. Klefbom-Bouchard (stats above) was a surprisingly successful tandem considering Bouchard’s lack of experience. Klefbom-Benning went 2-3 in 4:37, 2-1 shots. I liked Klefbom’s game, didn’t get to see Larsson much.
  • Nurse-Benning went 4-15 in 11:31, 3-10 in shots and 0-2 in goals. Part of the problem was time spent with Draisaitl (more later) but both men lost their marks and were exposed at times during the game. I’m still onboard with the pairing but they need to tighten up (and not lose the high forward). Nurse also went 3-9 with Jerabek.
  • Cam Talbot stopped 40 of 43, .930. He was splendid, stone cold in the third period off (I believe) Dube.
  • NaturalStarTrick and NHL.com.

FORWARDS, LAST NIGHT

  • Nuge-McDavid-Rieder went 7-9 in 11:16, 5-4 shots and 0-1 goals. Most of 97’s offense came on the power play but he did have a HDSC at 5-on-5. Nuge has been quiet offensively for a few games, wonder if Todd McLellan is thinking of pulling a switch the game before opening night. The line didn’t play much, notice the totals of each trio.
  • Chiasson-Brodziak-Kassian went 5-8 in 8:10, 1-6 shots and no goals. I liked this group on the forecheck, wonder if Chiasson would be able to make more plays on his natural side. These three spent over seven minutes (combined totals) on the penalty kill.
  • Caggiula-Khaira-Aberg were 5-14 in 8:54, 4-8 in shots and 1-0 in goals (Yamamoto onboard, Aberg had shuffled up). Despite the possession numbers, I thought Caggiula and Khaira had their best games. The goal involving McDavid helped but for me they seemed to be involved in more plays and pushing into the offensive zone. Aberg was, to my eye, not a major factor.
  • Lucic-Draisaitl-Yamamoto were 6-16 in 12:03, 3-8 shots 0-1 goals (Lucic) and 3-10, 1-4 shots and no goals (Yamamoto). Leon had zero 5-on-5 points and just two individual high danger scoring chances in over 50 minutes of preseason.

REMAINING QUESTIONS

I have several, beginning with the No. 2 line. I understand the idea of being patient with Leon Draisaitl this fall, but the organization also has a responsibility to give him the best chance to succeed. I’d be very tempted to move Jesse Puljujarvi up, or grab Josh Leivo today, via trade, and run Rieder-Draisaitl-Leivo on the second line.

I’m also wondering about the defense, including Adam Larsson, the Nurse-Benning pair and what Russell-Bouchard might do against Taylor Hall in the opener.

The Oilers got plenty of good answers this fall, including a rocking goalie performance from Cam Talbot, a No. 1 line that scorched all comers, and three unproven right wingers focused on proving themselves early and often.

Good arrows. Still questions. This is the life of a building team. I am still convinced the team made the right call in keeping No. 10 overall, Oscar and the Nuge.

PROJECTED OPENING NIGHT ROSTER

  • Ryan Nugent-Hopkins—Connor McDavid—Ty Rattie
  • Milan Lucic—Leon Draisaitl—Kailer Yamamoto
  • Jujhar Khaira—Ryan Strome—Jesse Puljujarvi
  • Tobias Rieder—Kyle Brodziak—Zack Kassian
  • Drake Caggiula—Alex Chiasson
  • Oscar Klefbom—Adam Larsson
  • Darnell Nurse—Matt Benning
  • Kris Russell—Evan Bouchard
  • Jason Garrison
  • Cam Talbot (Mikko Koskinen)

written by

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

262 Responses to "Atlantic Crossing"

« Older Comments
  1. jtblack says:

    hunter1909: A couple of thoughts:

    – Leon is concerned about playing in front of his home town fans. He’d be a fool not to be. If this in any way impacts his preseason performance then so be it.

    – many who post here are already approaching the halfway mark toward the asylum; worrying about this line or that line and none of us are even the coach who makes the decisions. This is really a part of the other point. Leon is keeping his powder dry for Cologne, which is going to be the biggest moment in German hockey history.

    Oilers struggle 10-20 games in and I’ll be selling pre-dipped in pitch torches, with a free light off of the bonfire.

    I have Edm on the outside looking in come playoff time.

    You can spin the narrative any which way; If Leon lays down a 3 pt game on opening night, you can say “I told you so”. If Leon has 4 pts after 9 games, then it will be a different narrative.

    I do agree preseason is difficult to gauge; but Connor seems to be rolling with 70% effort???

  2. VOR says:

    Georgexs: Your recaps are thorough. Corsi gives you something to talk about, I get it.

    If a line was outplayed on corsi but broke even or won on goals, is that a problem? Would you shake up that line just because of bad corsi? We know that getting outplayed on corsi doesn’t suggest bad things are just around the corner on goals.

    The thing I don’t know yet is when and why you stick with a line and when and why you switch things up. All we’re used to seeing is what this HC does. In 16-17, with a lot of proven scoring in the forward ranks and a winning record, he kept things relatively stable. In the other years, not so much. I don’t yet know how other coaches react to similar situations.

    The lack of correlations that I’ve been highlighting are possibly more than just randomness; I feel they have to be a function of the adjustments that coaches and GMs are making throughout a season. they try to smooth out big differences. This will take me longer to understand, however.

    In the meantime, I think talking about corsi without first providing the context of goals is… problematic.

    We do not know, nor do you, that being outplayed in Corsi doesn’t portend bad goal results.

    You didn’t look at individual or line Corsi as a short and long term predictor of individual or line performance as measured by GF. Not to mention you didn’t look at score effects. Nor did you look at game outcomes or clustering effects (the idea that their are threshold values beyond which score adjusted,venue adjusted, record adjusted Corsi, is extremely predictive).

    We also don’t know what the distribution of Corsi, Corsi events, or relative Corsi events in a game looks like and the same can be said of GF. Nor is their any a priori reason to assume the relationship between CF and GF would be linear. So while you’ve done an elegant and interesting job of showing that team CF and team GF aren’t linearly correlated you are miles from proving they aren’t related and nowhere near proving their isn’t information content in Corsi.

    Also missing from your analysis is any analytical work on how we, the readers of this blog think about Corsi and what we information or pleasure we might derive from Lowetide’s use of Corsi.

  3. pts2pndr says:

    Lowetide: Waivers isn’t necessary but if Chiasson isn’t on the roster the world won’t end. I see Leivo as being (possibly) the player McLellan hoped Drake Caggiula would be offensively. If he’s on the roster, and Yamamoto or Rattie struggle, you can plug him in. Edmonton badly needs skill on the wings, they don’t need two Kassians.

    Tnx that was my thinking as well. I did have some concern re Yamamoto being sent down and I am of the belief he has earned a spot on the roster.

  4. Jaxon says:

    OriginalPouzar: So we carry three goalies or are we waiving Sparks for the AHL?

    Do you have more faith in Spark’s future or Koskinen’s? I’m saying you let Koskinen go. Go back to 2007, and look at all the AHL goalies who performed as well as Sparks. Many of them turned into NHL starters or at least 1B goalies. He’s only 25 and one of the best North American goalies outside the NHL. If you want the next Vasilevsky or Murray, then you should be actively pursuing a player like Sparks.

  5. Jaxon says:

    Jaxon: Do you have more faith in Spark’s future or Koskinen’s? I’m saying you let Koskinen go. Go back to 2007, and look at all the AHL goalies who performed as well as Sparks. Many of them turned into NHL starters or at least 1B goalies. He’s only 25 and one of the best North American goalies outside the NHL. If you want the next Vasilevsky or Murray, then you should be actively pursuing a player like Sparks.

    Wait… when did Koskinen get a f’ing NMC?!?!

  6. Richard S.S. says:

    The first 10 games usually determine whether or not a Team makes the playoffs. The next 20 games makes a good Team better, makes a bad Team worse or give a mushy middle Team their last chance.

  7. Richard S.S. says:

    jtblack,

    It’s practice!

  8. BornInAGretzkyJersey says:

    Richard S.S.:
    The first 10 games usually determine whether or not a Team makes the playoffs.

    Source?

    General wisdom, as coined by Bob McKenzie, is that if you’re not in the top-8 by American Thanksgiving, you’re not making the playoffs.

  9. Georgexs says:

    VOR: We do not know, nor do you, that being outplayed in Corsi doesn’t portend bad goal results.

    You didn’t look at individual or line Corsi as a short and long term predictor of individual or line performance as measured by GF. Not to mention you didn’t look at score effects. Nor did you look at game outcomes or clustering effects (the idea that their are threshold values beyond which score adjusted,venue adjusted, record adjusted Corsi, is extremely predictive).

    We also don’t know what the distribution of Corsi, Corsi events, or relative Corsi events in a game looks like and the same can be said of GF. Nor is their any a priori reason to assume the relationship between CF and GF would be linear. So while you’ve done an elegant and interesting job of showing that team CF and team GF aren’t linearly correlated you are miles from proving they aren’t related and nowhere near proving their isn’t information content in Corsi.

    Also missing from your analysis is any analytical work on how we, the readers of this blog think about Corsi and what we information or pleasure we might derive from Lowetide’s use of Corsi.

    You’re of course welcome to do whatever analysis springs to your mind. You may have a preference for the things you mention. I don’t.

    When you say, however, “You didn’t look at individual or line Corsi as a short and long term predictor of individual or line performance as measured by GF.” it does make me wonder… did you actually read what I wrote?

  10. OriginalPouzar says:

    Richard S.S.:
    OriginalPouzar,

    If you don’t sign Chiasson, he’s a Free Agent unless you are absolutely sure he will go to Bakersfield.If you need a Winger two or three games in, he might not be recallable to sign.Then you are calling up someone who might barely be acceptable.
    If you do sign Chiasson, you can send Yamamoto back to Bakersfield.If you need a Winger two or three games in, call Yamamoto back.Now you have someone who can really do the job.That’s 13 forwards with a stud available when needed.

    I’m aware of the scenarios and options. I just don’t think that Chiasson has done enough to earn a contract and that there will be more substantial options on the waiver wire over the next day.

  11. Lowetide says:

    McFarland has two points tonight, might end up helping the Condors this season.

  12. OriginalPouzar says:

    Jaxon: Do you have more faith in Spark’s future or Koskinen’s? I’m saying you let Koskinen go. Go back to 2007, and look at all the AHL goalies who performed as well as Sparks. Many of them turned into NHL starters or at least 1B goalies. He’s only 25 and one of the best North American goalies outside the NHL. If you want the next Vasilevsky or Murray, then you should be actively pursuing a player like Sparks.

    We both know that there is essentially a zero percent chance of the Oilers replacing Koskinen in the next 48 hours via a waiver claim.

    I was against the Koskinen signing from day one giving the swarth of goalies that were going to be available – from established high end NHL back-ups (with starter qualities) like Halak to young and up and coming goalies like Sparks.

    With that said, the Koskinen deal is done and he’s not going anywhere in the next 48 hours and, given that, I’d rather discuss actual lineup up decisions that are still up in the aware.

    I think that may have come off douchy but that was not my intent and I apologize if it did.

  13. OriginalPouzar says:

    Lowetide:
    McFarland has two points tonight, might end up helping the Condors this season.

    He scored last night as well.

    Its a Lander and Rattie like preseason heater…..

  14. Jaxon says:

    OriginalPouzar: We both know that there is essentially a zero percent chance of the Oilers replacing Koskinen in the next 48 hours via a waiver claim.

    I was against the Koskinen signing from day one giving the swarth of goalies that were going to be available – from established high end NHL back-ups (with starter qualities) like Halak to young and up and coming goalies like Sparks.

    With that said, the Koskinen deal is done and he’s not going anywhere in the next 48 hours and, given that, I’d rather discuss actual lineup up decisions that are still up in the aware.

    I think that may have come off douchy but that was not my intent and I apologize if it did.

    Not at all… I hadn’t really thought through the logistics of claiming anyone on waivers at this late stage, especially a goalie. Seeing as everyone will expose their final players at the same time right before rosters are due to be finalized, there won’t be many, if any, waiver claims from here on in. Oilers are at 23 once Seekers goes on LTIR and they sign Garrison (probably), then they will be at 13F,8D,2G. If they choose Chiasson, then they will be at 14F,7D,2G. That is with Bear and Yamamoto still in the NHL. If one of them gets sent down then they could sign both Chiasson and Garrison.

    That said, if Sparks or Holl or Di Giuseppe were exposed, I would seriously think about not signing Garrison or Chiasson and sending Bear and/or Yamamoto down as needed to make room, and yes possibly carry 3 goalies if they have a chance to grab a young possible future starter like Sparks.

  15. Georgexs says:

    LT,

    When you provide a recap, you’re saying, in part, corsi for this group or pair was bad/good and that tells us something about what happened in this game.

    One of the limitations I have in my observations about corsi comes from the fact that I still haven’t parsed the game event files off of nhl.com. So I haven’t been able to say whether corsi matters inside a game, i.e., does winning/losing corsi in a game correlate to winning/losing on goals. For now, I can only look at the effects and influences of corsi on goals over a series of games.

    But just now I discovered I had game data off of corsica for the 2016-17 season. I downloaded it way back in 2017 and promptly forgot about it.

    I pulled it up and looked at the results for forwards. There were 44202 entries. (Correction: there were 44202 entries total, forwards plus defensemen.)

    I did a simple crosstab with two dimensions:

    – whether a forward was negative, even, or positive on corsi in a game

    – and whether a forward was negative, even, or positive on goals in the same game

    Here are the results for forwards at 5v5 in the 2016-17 season:

    Rows are Corsi Differential (-, 0, +) and columns are Goal Differential (-, 0, +). Entries in the table are a count of player records that match the criteria.

    – : 4054, 6963, 2903

    0: 475, 1024, 499

    +: 2865, 6651, 3954

    This shows that if a forward lost the corsi battle in a game, he is more likely to have lost rather than won the the goal battle as well (4054 – vs. 2903 +). If he instead won the corsi battle in a game, he is more likely to have won rather than lost the goal battle as well (2865 – vs. 3954 +). And, if he broke even on corsi, it’s basically a coin flip on whether he won or lost the goal battle (475 – vs. 499 +). It also shows that there’s a pretty good chance of coming out even on goals regardless of how a forward does on corsi.

    But, all in all, corsi does appear to give us information about goals at the game level. Your stubbornness in sticking with corsi for the recaps is warranted. I don’t have the 17-18 data, but I don’t see why it would be much different from 16-17.

    So we have this result for the relationship between corsi and goals at the game level, and we have the results I’ve already listed for the relationships between corsi and goals aggregated over a number of games.

    One tells me that corsi helps us understand what happened in a game. The other tells me that corsi doesn’t help us predict what’s going to happen in future games.

    You’re doing descriptive work in your recaps so you care more about the first point than the second point.

    I still think that adding goal results to your recaps would fill in important details to the picture, and further our mutual interest in better understanding what happened in a game.

    Cheers.

  16. Craig Zonit says:

    Lowetide,

    Wilde,

    Thanks guys, didn’t realize it was still preseason.

  17. JimmyV1965 says:

    OriginalPouzar: Sure, I’m open to these types of changes, however, I’m being realistic with what the coach is going to do.

    We essentially know that Lucic is going to start the season as 2LW.We can bitch and disagree about this but he’s been there all camp and, subject to a crazy last minute switch like last year (Drai up to 1RW), Lucic will be 2LW so I’m trying to work the lines around that know deployment.

    Totally agree OP. I’ve become increasingly pessimistic about Lucic’s ability to play hockey. He’s not good on the rush and while you think he should be good at the cycle game, he’s absolutely awful. If he has the puck along the wall for more than 2 seconds, you can almost guarantee he will lose possession. His inability to protect the puck is shocking. He simply doesn’t have the stick work skills to keep the puck away from players much smaller than him.

    Having said all that, he will get a long look on the second line. He’s a long time vet with a big contract, who currently sits near the top of the pecking order. These guys get tonnes of rope from virtually all NHL coaches. Tmac isn’t alone in this.

    And for the sake of the team, let’s cross our fingers and hope he gets a good, long look on the second line. Because that means we are winning. Tmac is much more likely to quickly push Lucic down to the fourth line if we are losing. If we are winning, he will give him more leash. In the end, he will be moved regardless. It just may take awhile.

  18. pts2pndr says:

    Jaxon: Do you have more faith in Spark’s future or Koskinen’s? I’m saying you let Koskinen go. Go back to 2007, and look at all the AHL goalies who performed as well as Sparks. Many of them turned into NHL starters or at least 1B goalies. He’s only 25 and one of the best North American goalies outside the NHL. If you want the next Vasilevsky or Murray, then you should be actively pursuing a player like Sparks.

    Some of us are still a little gun shy from the Eakins hire and a numer of Marlies that rotated through the oil like bad chili not lasting long and smelling bad on the way out! Bringing in players from the Leaf organization even given there apparent improvement of late still seems somewhat risky!

  19. unca miltie says:

    LT. please leave Corsi in your game reports. It may or may not have an impact on goals, but I find it interesting to know for each line.

  20. VOR says:

    Georgexs: You’re of course welcome to do whatever analysis springs to your mind. You may have a preference for the things you mention. I don’t.

    When you say, however, “You didn’t look at individual or line Corsi as a short and long term predictor of individual or line performance as measured by GF.” it does make me wonder… did you actually read what I wrote?

    I did read it all. I see after this post you actually did some of the follow up research I suggested. And it turns out that it enriched your understanding and ours.

    It is a shame you are so dismissive of my other points.

    I leave you with this: in research on humans and for that matter throughout the natural world the smart money bet is that a relationship between two variables is non-linear.

  21. JimmyV1965 says:

    Wilde:
    Essentially, the pro-scouting dept. makes both good and bad bets (in terms of skill players) and the coaching staff flushes the scorers and keeps the checkers.

    This is an ongoing issue that will plague the teams’ scoring depth indefinitely until addressed.

    Can you give examples of this please. Seems like the coaching staff has accepted guys like Rattie and Maroon. They have given Kassian seemingly endless rope.

  22. VOR says:

    Hudson,

    At least Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Tampa Bay have NHL focused scouts.

  23. VOR says:

    unca miltie:
    LT. please leave Corsi in your game reports. It may or may not have an impact on goals, but I find it interesting to know for each line.

    I agree completely.

  24. JimmyV1965 says:

    VOR: I think it is simple.

    If you watch Aberg play he demonstrates real skill. That skill dose not always result in a noticeable performance difference versus other players but that could well be down to lack of opportunity or bad luck.

    The thing we know about skill in hockey is that the more skill on your team the better.

    We can sum it up as get skill guys, keep skill guys.

    Makes ya wonder why Nashville dumped him. And they still employ Zac Rinaldo.

  25. Georgexs says:

    VOR: I did read it all. I see after this post you actually did some of the follow up research I suggested. And it turns out that it enriched your understanding and ours.

    It is a shame you are so dismissive of my other points.

    I leave you with this: in research on humans and for that matter throughout the natural world the smart money bet is that a relationship between two variables is non-linear.

    Tbh VOR, I had no idea what you suggested. Looking at it again, I still don’t see the connection. But if you think you deserve credit, great.

    I still don’t know how you can square “I did read it all.” with “You didn’t look at individual or line Corsi as a short and long term predictor of individual or line performance as measured by GF.”

    But I’m used to being confused by the things you say.

    Like, for example, “I leave you with this: in research on humans and for that matter throughout the natural world the smart money bet is that a relationship between two variables is non-linear.”

    You seem convinced my comprehension starts and ends with linear models. Maybe I do need some help here.

    It’s very easy to pull corsi and goal data these days, isn’t it? And you’ve said you’ve built models all your life. Why don’t you show me what this non-linear relationship between CF% and GF% looks like?

  26. Bank Shot says:

    I’m not sure why people think Aberg has a bunch of offence to offer at the NHL level.

    He scored at about the same rate in the swedish elite league at age 19 that Magnus Paajarvi did at 18.

    Then he came over to the AHL and scored at 0.5 ppg at age 20.

    A guy like Tobias Reider smoked Aberg in the AHL at 20, and he’s no scoring sensation in the NHL.

    Plus he offers other things.

    What the hell does Aberg offer if he isn’t scoring?

  27. Abbeef says:

    Bank Shot:
    I’m not sure why people think Aberg has a bunch of offence to offer at the NHL level.

    He scored at about the same rate in the swedish elite league at age 19 that Magnus Paajarvi did at 18.

    Then he came over to the AHL and scored at 0.5 ppg at age 20.

    A guy like Tobias Reider smoked Aberg in the AHL at 20, and he’s no scoring sensation in the NHL.

    Plus he offers other things.

    What the hell does Aberg offer if he isn’t scoring?

    That’s a more succinct way of saying what I have been trying to say!

  28. godot10 says:

    Jaxon:
    I’d be in the horn with Leaf’s management about a trade for Garret Sparks and Justin Holl. Both may get exposed on waivers. Holl would be a great 4RD, starting with 2/3 of the games until Bouchard goes back to junior on December 8th, then taking over 3RD and allowing Bear to remain in the AHL and come up for injury. Holl could prove to be a perfect fit with his incredible speed and first pass ability. And Sparks is one of the best goalies to ever come out of the AHL. His last two seasons have been great. He’s only 25, so he would fill a big gap in their goalie prospect pool. Sparks AHL numbers put him in elite company.

    Koskinen has a NMC. The Oilers will have to carry 3 goaltenders if they claim one off waivers. Koskinen may have agreed to consider Bakersfield for short stints, but I doubt he would agree to spend big chunks of the season there.

  29. OriginalPouzar says:

    As per Stauffer:

    Oilers in Cologne:
    RNH-McDavid-Rattie
    Lucic-Draisaitl-Yamamoto/Rieder
    Khaira-Strome-Puljujarvi
    Caggiula-Brodziak-Kassian/Chiasson
    Klefbom-Bouchard/Larsson
    Nurse-Benning
    Garrison-Bear

  30. OriginalPouzar says:

    What those D pairings mean to me, if I’m interpreting correctly is that the healthy opening night deployment will be:

    Klef/Larsson
    Nurse/Benning
    Russell/Bear

    Bouchard and Garrison as extras.

    Bouchard is keeping Larsson’s spot warm with his back issue and Garrison is keeping Russell’s spot warm.

    With Russell not even skating and haven’t being seen in a while now I honk his injury may be a bit serious which will earn Garrison a contract.

  31. jp says:

    Georgexs,

    So would you replace CF% with something? Or just embrace the void?

    FWIW I like it as a game descriptor.

  32. jp says:

    OriginalPouzar:
    Ryan McLeod with an assist in a 4-1 win. 17/30 in the faceoff.

    Safin held off the sheet again in a 4-2 win – couple of shots on net. A slow start to his Moosehead career.

    That’s a LOT of faceoffs, no?

  33. Yeti says:

    OriginalPouzar: With Russell not even skating and haven’t being seen in a while now I honk his injury may be a bit serious which will earn Garrison a contract.

    Unless they had a waiver claim in mind, I imagine they’d have to give him a contract now. Even if Russell is 100% we need the depth he provides.

  34. OriginalPouzar says:

    Koskinen starts on Wed against Cologne.

    My only issue with that is a full week for Talbot between starts and we know he doesn’t do well after long breaks.

    Also:

    Edmonton Oilers

    Verified account

    @EdmontonOilers
    25m25 minutes ago
    More
    Coach McLellan says Kris Russell & Adam Larsson will not play the #Oilers final pre-season tuneup vs. Cologne on Wednesday with the goal of having them back for Saturday vs. New Jersey.

  35. OriginalPouzar says:

    OriginalPouzar:
    As per Stauffer:

    Oilers in Cologne:
    RNH-McDavid-Rattie
    Lucic-Draisaitl-Yamamoto/Rieder
    Khaira-Strome-Puljujarvi
    Caggiula-Brodziak-Kassian/Chiasson
    Klefbom-Bouchard/Larsson
    Nurse-Benning
    Garrison-Bear

    What the forward lines mean to me is that, potentially, Yamamoto sees the pressbox for game 1 with Rieder as 2RW and Caggulia and Kassian as the 4th line wingers.

    Based on camp performane, I would think that Kassian is the odd-man out – Drake and Rieder as the fourth line wingers (great fourth line) and Yamamoto as 2RW but I doubt that happens.

  36. OriginalPouzar says:

    Bank Shot:
    I’m not sure why people think Aberg has a bunch of offence to offer at the NHL level.

    He scored at about the same rate in the swedish elite league at age 19 that Magnus Paajarvi did at 18.

    Then he came over to the AHL and scored at 0.5 ppg at age 20.

    A guy like Tobias Reider smoked Aberg in the AHL at 20, and he’s no scoring sensation in the NHL.

    Plus he offers other things.

    What the hell does Aberg offer if he isn’t scoring?

    I liked Aberg and, based on a small heater last year, it looked like he may have more to give.

    He is starting to get Slepyshev-like status in here – could have been a great top 6 player but the coach never gave him a chance – something about sideburns or stubborn or Russian or something, whereas, in reality, the player simply never actually earned a greater opportunity than he got. Yup, he was on the outside looking in at camp but he never showed well enough to force himself in to a better opportunity – this, to me, started with waiting until essentially the latest possible time to even head to Edmonton from Europe – perhaps coming to Edmonton a few days early to skate with the leadership team (McDavid, Nurse, etc.) would have been a good idea…..

  37. OriginalPouzar says:

    jp: That’s a LOT of faceoffs, no?

    Sure is – per the boxscore, the next highest player took 10.

  38. London Jon says:

    OriginalPouzar:
    Koskinen starts on Wed against Cologne.

    My only issue with that is a full week for Talbot between starts and we know he doesn’t do well after long breaks.

    Also:

    Edmonton Oilers

    Verified account

    @EdmontonOilers25m25 minutes ago
    More
    Coach McLellan says Kris Russell & Adam Larsson will not play the #Oilers final pre-season tuneup vs. Cologne on Wednesday with the goal of having them back for Saturday vs. New Jersey.

    I agree, not ideal. You’d want Talbot starting the season two or three days after a game like the Calgary one.

    Problem is the bigger ice is surprisingly materially different for a goalie. I played a season as a goalie on Euro ice and you wouldn’t want to go to it and then go back to NA ice straight away. Your angles and facing up and positioning are everything now and it throws you way off.

    Fingers crossed koski plays well, gets his confidence up and then has a 10-12 game run of training and watching NHL games before he gets a start.

    Surprised we are going full A* lineup in Cologne…

  39. Wilde says:

    Bank Shot:
    What the hell does Aberg offer if he isn’t scoring?

    Here lies one of the things that are often said, and really, really grind my gears.

    The idea that, if a player who scores isn’t big, doesn’t hit, etc, isn’t doing anything if they aren’t scoring.

    It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of how goals occur.

    Goals don’t just happen.

    You don’t just hop onto the ice with a certain amount of goal-scoring skill, skate around, and randomly score sometimes, doing nothing at any other time.

    No hockey player scores on 100% of their chances – so what’s a player who scores doing, when they’re not scoring?

    Generating chances. Getting the puck to the offensive zone. Putting themselves in a position to make a scoring play. Beating checks.

    For every goal you score in the NHL, you have to do so, so much work.

    You can’t produce points without doing everything that’s necessary to get turn the play into a scoring one.

    No player, in the modern game, who produces points does so by purely getting carried by teammates and being in the right place at the right time. They’d be a massive drag on those teammates.

    Every player who scores does work when they’re not scoring.

  40. jp says:

    OriginalPouzar: Sure is – per the boxscore, the next highest player took 10.

    Wow. Grooming an all situations C I guess.

  41. Wilde says:

    OriginalPouzar: He is starting to get Slepyshev-like status in here – could have been a great top 6 player but the coach never gave him a chance – something about sideburns or stubborn or Russian or something, whereas, in reality, the player simply never actually earned a greater opportunity than he got. Yup, he was on the outside looking in at camp but he never showed well enough to force himself in to a better opportunity – this, to me, started with waiting until essentially the latest possible time to even head to Edmonton from Europe – perhaps coming to Edmonton a few days early to skate with the leadership team (McDavid, Nurse, etc.) would have been a good idea…..

    It’s barely about Aberg.

    Everyone pointing out how nominal the player’s contribution is, misses the point.

    It’s just another documented instance of a trend.

    They flush players based on things other than merit, just at the margins, and each time you bring up an individual case, someone can argue the impact individually isn’t that notable, and they’d be right.

    But then, after time, we end up looking at a team that’s been entirely turned over since 2015 at said margins, and are performing barely better than then as a group – how much better than the Hall-off version of Oilers past, will the McDavid-off Oilers of now be, in GF%?

    As of 2017-18, about 4%, from 37.5%-38.0%, to 41.5%.

  42. Wilde says:

    Aberg had bad stick details.

    Auvitu had chaos in the DZ.

    Pouliot had a nominally negative penalty differential season.

    Slepyshev didn’t outscore players with top-six opportunities while on the 4th line.

    Oesterle and Davidson didn’t get to go on a PDO heater with Sekera.

    Maroon was too similar to Lucic.

    None of these guys make a difference on their own.

    Bring up any of these guys individually, and people will ask if you’re really complaining about that guy being gone.

    Problem is, altogether, they’re cheaper and better than guys currently on the roster (Caggiula, Kassian, Russell) who will contribute to the negative GF% when 97 is off the ice unless Talbot stands on his head. They’ll also force tough decisions to keep the good players in the org, financially.

  43. Abbeef says:

    Wilde: Here lies one of the things that are often said, and really, really grind my gears.

    The idea that, if a player who scores isn’t big, doesn’t hit, etc, isn’t doing anything if they aren’t scoring.

    It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of how goals occur.

    Goals don’t just happen.

    You don’t just hop onto the ice with a certain amount of goal-scoring skill, skate around, and randomly score sometimes, doing nothing at any other time.

    No hockey player scores on 100% of their chances – so what’s a player who scores doing, when they’re not scoring?

    Generating chances. Getting the puck to the offensive zone. Putting themselves in a position to make a scoring play. Beating checks.

    For every goal you score in the NHL, you have to do so, so much work.

    You can’t produce points without doing everything that’s necessary to get turn the play into a scoring one.

    No player, in the modern game, who produces points does so by purely getting carried by teammates and being in the right place at the right time. They’d be a massive drag on those teammates.

    Every player who scores does work when they’re not scoring.

    I don’t believe this is misunderstood, at least not by me. Offensive players should produce offence, if they aren’t they should be generating chances/shots for themselves or others. If they aren’t doing either of these they should be working their tails off to generate turnovers. Aberg did none of these things in preseason save a couple one off chances over all of his games. I don’t believe it’s an understanding issue but an issue of those comparing what Aberg actually did and those thinking about the idea of what Aberg could be. Unfortunately based on what I have seen I don’t think Aberg has the drive to become what people believe he could become. I’d love it if he went down to the A and proved me wrong.

  44. deardylan says:

    Wilde: WILDE

    Wilde wrote: Offensive players should produce offence, if they aren’t they should be generating chances/shots for themselves or others. If they aren’t doing either of these they should be working their tails off to generate turnovers.

    Wilde, what is the best statistical indicator that combines what you mentioned?

    1. converting shots into goals for themselves or others
    1. generating chances/shots for themselves or others
    2. working their tails off to generate turnovers.

  45. Wilde says:

    Abbeef: I don’t believe this is misunderstood, at least not by me.Offensive players should produce offence, if they aren’t they should be generating chances/shots for themselves or others.If they aren’t doing either of these they should be working their tails off to generate turnovers.Aberg did none of these things in preseason save a couple one off chances over all of his games.I don’t believe it’s an understanding issue but an issue of those comparing what Aberg actually did and those thinking about the idea of what Aberg could be.Unfortunately based on what I have seen I don’t think Aberg has the drive to become what people believe he could become.I’d love it if he went down to the A and proved me wrong.

    Yes, he did do those things, both in the preseason and in the much larger, much more legitimate sample of play in the regular season last year – to a more significant degree than the amount of competition necessary to slot himself high enough in the lineup so as to not be the odd man out.

    I’m not projecting Aberg. I’m saying he’s better and has been better, in real games, as is and as was, than wingers currently on the roster.

    In the regular season last spring, and this fall.

    This isn’t looking at him and thinking what he could be. It’s just what happened. This is the crux of my argument.

    The reason he is gone is because he doesn’t fit their idea of a role player, it’s because they want certain players and lines to play one way and certain players and lines to play another.

    It’s an alchemical attempt at building a hockey team, it’s an execution on an idea that your players should fit your blueprint and not that you should draw your blueprint by looking at your players.

    Keep the most skill on the roster as possible. That’s my argument. Keeping Aberg on the roster is doing that.

    I’m tired of watching the puck on the stick of players who can’t threaten the other team when they have it. Every time the team has the puck, it should be threatening to the opposition. Checks must be threatened at all times.

  46. frjohnk says:

    LT,

    I like that you use corsi, for some it may not mean much, but for others, it seems like a game within a game and it gives us a description of what was happening when said player/s were on the ice.

    Looking at your recaps from above on your defensive pairings.

    “Jerabek-Bouchard went 6-8 in 7:19, 3-6 shots and 1-0 goals. Klefbom-Bouchard went 5-1 in 5:49, 3-1 shots and no goals.”

    It has corsi, shots, goals, TOI. Looks pretty good to me.

  47. Wilde says:

    deardylan: Wilde wrote: Offensive players should produce offence, if they aren’t they should be generating chances/shots for themselves or others. If they aren’t doing either of these they should be working their tails off to generate turnovers.

    Wilde, what is the best statistical indicator that combines what you mentioned?

    1. converting shots into goals for themselves or others
    1. generating chances/shots for themselves or others
    2. working their tails off to generate turnovers.

    those aren’t my words, they’re abbeef’s

  48. OriginalPouzar says:

    London Jon: I agree, not ideal. You’d want Talbot starting the season two or three days after a game like the Calgary one.

    Problem is the bigger ice is surprisingly materially different for a goalie. I played a season as a goalie on Euro ice and you wouldn’t want to go to it and then go back to NA ice straight away. Your angles and facing up and positioning are everything now and it throws you way off.

    Fingers crossed koski plays well, gets his confidence up and then has a 10-12 game run of training and watching NHL games before he gets a start.

    Surprised we are going full A* lineup in Cologne…

    Ya, I was thinking about the pros and cons of starting Talbot – too much rest vs. a game on a bigger ice surface. Probably best not to mess with the angles, etc. (although he will be practicing on that ice).

    I’m not surprised about the full lineup (subject to injuries) – they normally dress their full lineup for the last preseason game to start with and, if they rested any players, they’d have the full week between games which isn’t idea.

    None of this is idea – although the Devils have to go through the same thing (and I assume their game in Bern is on Olympic ice as well – just an assumption though).

  49. OriginalPouzar says:

    Lets not forget here that Aberg is still part of the Oilers organization. We’ll find out in a few hours if he cleared waivers and, if he does, I assume he will report to Bakersfield and there is little doubt he will be called up to play at some point (assuming he doesn’t mail it in in Cali).

    Maybe the right way to look at this is to focus on depth – a legit NHL call-up option in the minor leagues.

  50. jp says:

    Wilde:
    Aberg had bad stick details.

    Auvitu had chaos in the DZ.

    Pouliot had a nominally negative penalty differential season.

    Slepyshev didn’t outscore players with top-six opportunities while on the 4th line.

    Oesterle and Davidson didn’t get to go on a PDO heater with Sekera.

    Maroon was too similar to Lucic.

    None of these guys make a difference on their own.

    Bring up any of these guys individually, and people will ask if you’re really complaining about that guy being gone.

    Problem is, altogether, they’re cheaper and better than guys currently on the roster (Caggiula, Kassian, Russell) who will contribute to the negative GF% when 97 is off the ice unless Talbot stands on his head. They’ll also force tough decisions to keep the good players in the org, financially.

    I want to agree with you, but I’m not sure I actually do.

    They’ve sent away guys like Aberg, Pouliot, Slepyshev, Oesterle, Auvitu (you can add Purcell, Yakupov, Schultz, Pitlick, Cammalleri and maybe Jerabek to that group too I think).

    But Chiarelli has also sent out Korpikoski, Pakarinen, Hendricks, Gryba, Lander, Gazdic, Nikitin, Reinhart, Ference, Letestu.

    Has there really been a systematic talent drain around the edges when we’re looking at a bottom 6 of Strome, Brodziak, Khaira, Caggiula, Kassian, one of JP/Yamamoto and Chiasson, and bottom of the roster D Russell, Bouchard, Bear, Garrison?

    These aren’t world beaters for sure, but I feel like you’d need to cherry pick from the departed players to create a better lineup. And it’s near impossible I think to argue that as a group there’s not more talent in the current group than in most earlier versions.

    Maroon leaving hurts for sure, but I do have a hard time believing the Oilers wouldn’t have signed him for 1.5X as much as he took from St. Louis. The real talent drain was sending Hall and Eberle out for Larsson and Strome (and the related Lucic add).

    Even after looking into it I’m not convinced that there’s been an overall talent drain from the edges of the roster, since Chiarelli arrived.

  51. Wilde says:

    OriginalPouzar:
    Lets not forget here that Aberg is still part of the Oilers organization.We’ll find out in a few hours if he cleared waivers and, if he does, I assume he will report to Bakersfield and there is little doubt he will be called up to play at some point (assuming he doesn’t mail it in in Cali).

    Maybe the right way to look at this is to focus on depth – a legit NHL call-up option in the minor leagues.

    He’ll likely be the most substantial forward offensively if he arrives there, at least for the beginning of the season. It’d be a huge boon for that team.

  52. Abbeef says:

    Wilde: Yes, he did do those things, both in the preseason and in the much larger, much more legitimate sample of play in the regular season last year – to a more significant degree than the amount of competition necessary to slot himself high enough in the lineup so as to not be the odd man out.

    I’m not projecting Aberg. I’m saying he’s better and has been better, in real games, as is and as was, than wingers currently on the roster.

    In the regular season last spring, and this fall.

    This isn’t looking at him and thinking what he could be. It’s just what happened. This is the crux of my argument.

    The reason he is gone is because he doesn’t fit their idea of a role player, it’s because they want certain players and lines to play one way and certain players and lines to play another.

    It’s an alchemical attempt at building a hockey team, it’s an execution on an idea that your players should fit your blueprint and not that you should draw your blueprint by looking at your players.

    Keep the most skill on the roster as possible. That’s my argument. Keeping Aberg on the roster is doing that.

    I’m tired of watching the puck on the stick of players who can’t threaten the other team when they have it. Every time the team has the puck, it should be threatening to the opposition. Checks must be threatened at all times.

    Fair enough, I guess that’s where we disagree. I would argue he didn’t do those things through preseason or his limited NHL career. I would suspect the coaching staff agrees with me which would be the reason for reassignment not the thought that he can’t be a role player.

  53. Abbeef says:

    Abbeef,

    Where could we find HD scoring chances for vs HDSCA for players? Or is there a better stat for looking at offense being generated (not including points).

  54. frjohnk says:

    jp: Even after looking into it I’m not convinced that there’s been an overall talent drain from the edges of the roster, since Chiarelli arrived.

    I agree with you
    but this is interesting
    https://twitter.com/dellowhockey/status/1046743403764097024
    In an ESPN poll with 50 NHL players, one player
    “Added a Western Conference player, Take Connor away and Edmonton is the worst team in the league”

  55. frjohnk says:

    Abbeef:
    Abbeef,

    Where could we find HD scoring chances for vs HDSCA for players?

    natural stat trick

  56. Wilde says:

    jp: But Chiarelli has also sent out Korpikoski, Pakarinen, Hendricks, Gryba, Lander, Gazdic, Nikitin, Reinhart, Ference, Letestu.

    To be clear, I am not speaking solely to Chiarelli’s acquisitions, or even really about Chiarelli at all.

    I’m talking about what the coaching staff does with assets in.

    Of each of the players in the first list, and each of the players in the second list, the players in the latter received much more ice time and opportunity from the coaching staff.

    Of all of the players you mentioned, who was kept on for longer? Who received more ice-time?

    Ryan Strome is actually the perfect asset to examine, in terms of usage and their verbal. His handling has all of the behavioural issues I’m speaking to, attached to it:

    He’s ‘brought in to fill the net’ – gets barely any time on skill lines to do so, does indeed produce at the requisite level, but is demoted on the basis of lack of production in spite of the actual, factual production.

    This is a key part of the process. They give a small amount of time to the player in a role, and the player scores maybe a couple points, then is demoted ostensibly on merit.

    Then, they can point to the counted stats (He only scored one goal with McDavid!) and supporters of the coaching staff do this repeatedly.

    Except, that one goal came in time proportionate to represent an acceptable – above that of the competition – rate of scoring.

    Then, the player is demoted, and, here’s the second behaviour: he has to ‘change his game’ to contribute in other areas.

    But what is more likely to net a positive contribution? The player bringing the game that they already play, but against a lower level of competition, or forcing the player to play a different game simply because they’re playing lower in the lineup?

    Then, the player is flushed if they can’t complete the role change that is only necessary because of said-so. And again the counting stats are pointed to when they are. (Slepyshev scored 10 goals over his two seasons, he doesn’t matter!)

    And then suddenly, nobody carries the puck unless they’re an ordained player (imagine if a non-Nurse defenceman chased their own dump-in), nobody attempts actual check-beating maneuvers, nobody scores unless an ordained player is on the ice, because scoring talent is eliminated half by personnel decisions, and half by playstyle decisions.

    Any criticism of the team as constructed that focuses solely on Chiarelli is an incomplete one, because of this vision, and these decision-making behaviours by the coaching staff.

  57. Abbeef says:

    frjohnk,

    Thanks I’ll check it out after work.

  58. pts2pndr says:

    OriginalPouzar: I liked Aberg and, based on a small heater last year, it looked like he may have more to give.

    He is starting to get Slepyshev-like status in here – could have been a great top 6 player but the coach never gave him a chance – something about sideburns or stubborn or Russian or something, whereas, in reality, the player simply never actually earned a greater opportunity than he got.Yup, he was on the outside looking in at camp but he never showed well enough to force himself in to a better opportunity – this, to me, started with waiting until essentially the latest possible time to even head to Edmonton from Europe – perhaps coming to Edmonton a few days early to skate with the leadership team (McDavid, Nurse, etc.) would have been a good idea…..

    Chicken or egg? European hockey players have family too could be a reason!

  59. pts2pndr says:

    Wilde: To be clear, I am not speaking solely to Chiarelli’s acquisitions, or even really about Chiarelli at all.

    I’m talking about what the coaching staff does with assets in.

    Of each of the players in the first list, and each of the players in the second list, the players in the latter received much more ice time and opportunity from the coaching staff.

    Of all of the players you mentioned, who was kept on for longer? Who received more ice-time?

    Ryan Strome is actually the perfect asset to examine, in terms of usage and their verbal. His handling has all of the behavioural issues I’m speaking to, attached to it:

    He’s ‘brought in to fill the net’ – gets barely any time on skill lines to do so, does indeed produce at the requisite level, but is demoted on the basis of lack of production in spite of the actual, factual production.

    This is a key part of the process. They give a small amount of time to the player in a role, and the player scores maybe a couple points, then is demoted ostensibly on merit.

    Then, they can point to the counted stats (He only scored one goal with McDavid!) and supporters of the coaching staff do this repeatedly.

    Except, that one goal came in time proportionate to represent an acceptable – above that of the competition – rate of scoring.

    Then, the player is demoted, and, here’s the second behaviour: he has to ‘change his game’ to contribute in other areas.

    But what is more likely to net a positive contribution? The player bringing the game that they already play, but against a lower level of competition, or forcing the player to play a different game simply because they’re playing lower in the lineup?

    Then, the player is flushed if they can’t complete the role change that is only necessary because of said-so. And again the counting stats are pointed to when they are. (Slepyshev scored 10 goals over his two seasons, he doesn’t matter!)

    And then suddenly, nobody carries the puck unless they’re an ordained player (imagine if a non-Nurse defenceman chased their own dump-in), nobody attempts actual check-beating maneuvers, nobody scores unless an ordained player is on the ice, because scoring talent is eliminated half by personnel decisions, and half by playstyle decisions.

    Any criticism of the team as constructed that focuses solely on Chiarelli is an incomplete one, because of this vision, and these decision-making behaviours by the coaching staff.

    I am in full agreement! There are a large number of plaer deployments that are mind boggling! There was a similar problem I believe in SanJose.

  60. giddy says:

    Hi Hunter. Please put me down for 93 points on the season and 12 goals for Yakupov. Thank you.

  61. jp says:

    Wilde: To be clear, I am not speaking solely to Chiarelli’s acquisitions, or even really about Chiarelli at all.

    I’m talking about what the coaching staff does with assets in.

    Of each of the players in the first list, and each of the players in the second list, the players in the latter received much more ice time and opportunity from the coaching staff.

    Of all of the players you mentioned, who was kept on for longer? Who received more ice-time?

    Ryan Strome is actually the perfect asset to examine, in terms of usage and their verbal. His handling has all of the behavioural issues I’m speaking to, attached to it:

    He’s ‘brought in to fill the net’ – gets barely any time on skill lines to do so, does indeed produce at the requisite level, but is demoted on the basis of lack of production in spite of the actual, factual production.

    This is a key part of the process. They give a small amount of time to the player in a role, and the player scores maybe a couple points, then is demoted ostensibly on merit.

    Then, they can point to the counted stats (He only scored one goal with McDavid!) and supporters of the coaching staff do this repeatedly.

    Except, that one goal came in time proportionate to represent an acceptable – above that of the competition – rate of scoring.

    Then, the player is demoted, and, here’s the second behaviour: he has to ‘change his game’ to contribute in other areas.

    But what is more likely to net a positive contribution? The player bringing the game that they already play, but against a lower level of competition, or forcing the player to play a different game simply because they’re playing lower in the lineup?

    Then, the player is flushed if they can’t complete the role change that is only necessary because of said-so. And again the counting stats are pointed to when they are. (Slepyshev scored 10 goals over his two seasons, he doesn’t matter!)

    And then suddenly, nobody carries the puck unless they’re an ordained player (imagine if a non-Nurse defenceman chased their own dump-in), nobody attempts actual check-beating maneuvers, nobody scores unless an ordained player is on the ice, because scoring talent is eliminated half by personnel decisions, and half by playstyle decisions.

    Any criticism of the team as constructed that focuses solely on Chiarelli is an incomplete one, because of this vision, and these decision-making behaviours by the coaching staff.

    That’s more difficult to disagree with, and I agree in large part.

  62. Bank Shot says:

    Wilde:
    Every player who scores does work when they’re not scoring.

    But some players do more work than others.

    Aberg to me looks like a guy that saves his effort for the offensive zone, and isn’t inclined to put in the hard work in the tough areas of the ice.

    Aberg sure took lots of shots on net though. Kind of similar to Puljujarvi. Postive corsi, no results. Take what the other teams give them and waffle a shot on net from long range rather than go to the hard areas of the ice. Better corsi than other players because the coaches don’t trust them in situations where they are likely to be under sustained pressure.

    I guess we will see if he contributes in Anaheim. They are a team that has perennial success. If he doesn’t succeed there, it’s hard to make an argument that the Oilers overlooked a talent.

    Nashville isn’t a team know for bleeding talent either btw.

« Older Comments

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!
© Copyright - Lowetide.ca