Grow Some Funk of Your Own

One of the things I’ve kept track of over the years is the size and quality of the Connor McDavid cluster. I’m not sure how much appeal this idea holds but for me it’s a key element for the eventual Stanley run. The organization needs McDavid-Leon and then a large group of support players and value deals. Here’s another key: Evan Bouchard might be the final first-round pick that can be included in the 97 cluster. How is that group 18-22 doing?

THE ATHLETIC!

The Athletic Edmonton features a fabulous cluster of stories (some linked below, some on the site). Great perspective from a ridiculous group of writers and analysts. Proud to be part of the group. Outstanding offer is here.

THE MCDAVID CLUSTER

Bouchard is technically part of a new cluster but he was an older draft pick in 2018, so I’ve placed him here. One of the legacy gifts left by PC is a large number of kids who couldn’t grow with the group. I’ll name Nail Yakupov, Griffin Reinhart, Anton Slepyshev and Puljujarvi is a strong candidate to miss the boat. One of the things I do every year is count the contribution of each cluster (McDavid, Prime, Veteran) by year to see who is growing.

  • 2015-16: 411 games, 63-125-136 .331 points-per-game; .153 goals-per-game
  • 2016-17: 409 games, 80-170-250 .611 points, .196 goals
  • 2017-18: 334 games, 85-146-231 .692 points, .254 goals (!!)
  • 2018-19: 200 games, 70-94-164 .820 points, .350 goals (!!)

Based on current progress, the McDavid cluster should account for 298 games and 104 goals. That’s enormous production from a very small percentage of the roster (measured by total games). This is championship calibre based on production-per-game.

The worry is that there are just two main contributors and both of them are already getting paid. You need Yanni Gourde and then another Yanni Gourde (Brayden Point) coming up behind. Edmonton badly needs names like Evan Bouchard, Tyler Benson, Ryan McLeod, Caleb Jones and Ethan Bear to work out. Plus a goalie.

THE PRIME CLUSTER

This is the second most important category, led by Nuge, and three feature defensemen. Oilers need a couple of 20-goal wingers to flush out the group. Here’s the history:

  • 2015-16: 485 games, 68-96-164 .338 points and .140 goals
  • 2016-17: 515 games, 72-123-195 .379 points and .140 goals
  • 2017-18: 717 games, 101-133-234 .325 points and .141 goals
  • 2018-19: 497 games, 48-125-173 .348 points and .097 goals

Extrapolated over 82 games, the totals are 741 games and 72 goals. What’s missing? Well you can see it in the 2015-16 “prime” group that included Taylor Hall and Jordan Eberle. The failed auditions since 2012 and the poor returns on trades are really evident here. There’s no winger in his prime to push the river. Important for the Oilers to have a few more pieces by the time the McDavid cluster becomes the prime cluster.

It’s also important to note the falloff from last season. The prime cluster will be 30 goals behind the 2017-18 group. That’s substantial.

THE VETERAN CLUSTER

This is the group of players who have been paid very well since 2015 and have not delivered enough to warrant continued employment. Here are the numbers:

  • 2015-16: 667 games, 68-122-190 .285 points and .102 goals
  • 2016-17: 640 games, 91-117-208 .325 points and .142 goals
  • 2017-18: 515 games, 43-105-148 .287 points and .083 goals
  • 2018-19: 349 games, 38-37-75 .215 points and .109 goals

Projected to 520 games and 57 goals, not enough to warrant the money. If the Oilers could magically erase the entire cluster, life would be a dream for the new general manager.

THE SUMMER

Ideally the McDavid cluster takes on a greater role in 2019-20. McDavid and Draisaitl are the heart of the order, but if one or two of JP, KY, Tyler Benson, Evan Bouchard, Ethan Bear or Caleb Jones emerge as useful regulars, that would represent real progress. It is not guaranteed—Peter Chiarelli bet on Puljujarvi three times and lost his job in part because of it—but there’s real talent in the McDavid cluster.

The “prime” group has Nuge and three defensemen (Klefbom, Larsson and Nurse), I keep looking around for a Nikolaj Ehlers who could jumpstart a second scoring line.

The veteran group is the hole where the money goes and Edmonton isn’t getting value. I hope you enjoyed this look at the three clusters of this Oilers team, for me it has value. You have expressed in the past that this isn’t beneficial, so consider this a personal indulgence.

LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

At 10 this morning, TSN1260. This is going to be a huge week for the Oilers and Eskimos and we have you covered. Scheduled to appear:

  • Derek Taylor, #CFLDetails on TSN. Free agency gone wild tomorrow in the CFL. Quarterbacks, rush ends, wideouts, holy smokes it’s big.
  • Eric Stephens, The Athletic Anaheim. We’ll chat about Randy Carlyle out with the Ducks, Bob Murray interim and Dallas Eakins waiting.
  • Jason Gregor, TSN1260. St. Louis is giving the Oilers the Blues, is it all over? Plus Eskimos and free agency.

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

written by

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

293 Responses to "Grow Some Funk of Your Own"

« Older Comments
  1. Dr. Taboggan says:

    Just read Sunilagni’s latest article at coppernblue. The graphs at the end showing CMD’s rolling FF% is just depressing. I was pretty excited about the Hitch hiring but things have really bottomed out since he took over. I know Klef has been injured but yikes.

  2. OriginalPouzar says:

    YKOil,

    I am absolutely fine with retained salary transactions to dispose of players because that has zero negative effect past the initial contract expiry – no added cap hit beyond expiry and not asset disposal tax.

    I am not on board with retaining salary/cap and adding an asset in order to dispose. With Manning and Spooner, one or the other should be good enough to divest of the contract and I choose retention so there is no more bleed of assets.

    Of course, I’d rather give Spooner an actual chance to succeed in the organization by playing in the top 6 – I don’t see the coach making the decision to put the player in a position to succeed.

    The former GM is vilified for a deal that the coach has not given a chance to succeed! I put the Strome/Spooner matter as much on Hitchcock as on Chiarelli – actually maybe moreso as Spooner has a career history of doing exactly what this organization needs – top 6 scoring rates as a complimentary player on a scoring line.

  3. pts2pndr says:

    Ben: Problem with Huberdeau and Ehlers is that they’d both be traded to make cap space (the thought being that Huberdeau goes to make room for one/both of the CBJ guys).

    But I’d do something like JP, 1st, Lagesson, Russell for Huberdeau in a heartbeat.

    Lagesson is a left shot Larsson and we don’t know what we have in JP but at twenty he could very easily turn out to be equal to Huberdeau. That doesn’t even cover with the fact that when you trade Russel you have no second pairing right D. As much as Russel struggles at the position he is the best that we currently have. In your scenario you not only bleed talent to acquire but blow a hole in another part of the team. And to this you would add a first round pick ? Why don’t you throw in Connor to make the deal fair!

  4. anjinsan says:

    Side,

    Katz keeps the OBC close to wrap himself in the flag, to associate with greatness, to make his actions unassailable.

  5. OriginalPouzar says:

    GordieHoweHatTrick: Agree. Is a complementary player for top 6, but didn’t have a lot of love here for that. I have also previously suggested he should be given a good go with McD…
    So you are saying, bring him back now? Or as I was suggesting – keep him down a bit longer to let him appreciate the opportunity of being in the NHL so he comes prepared and motivated for next year?

    I’d be fine with bringing him back at any time – he is a legit proven NHL player.

    I’m all about the Condors but the organization could have a hole filled internally if they give it a chance and its important, in my opinion, to give it the chance.

    The issue is the $1,050,000 in cap he adds when brought up (minus the cap hit of the player going down for him – likely Malone). Add that to what would need to be cleared for the Sekera activation (currently apx $1.2M).

  6. OriginalPouzar says:

    Ryan:
    OriginalPouzar,

    IIRC Hitch tried Nuge and Spooner early on. That line got its teeth kicked in really badly.

    That’s what I said, Spooner got a couple games with Nuge when he first got here and then was banished to the bottom 6 (generally the 4th line).

    It was 56 minutes total.

    As an aside, his whopping 25 minutes with McDavid are sparkling…..

  7. OriginalPouzar says:

    Side: Do you suggest we don’t discuss topics that we don’t have any certainty about?

    That would eliminate a lotttt of discussion on this blog.

    Nope – I’m suggesting that I was disapointed that the 150 comments were primarily related to the topic.

    Of course, many are called idiots and otherwise personally “attacked” if they don’t agree that the OBC is controlling from behind the scenes – given it is still 100% unproven to anyone that posts on this board……

  8. Bank Shot says:

    OriginalPouzar:
    Of course, many are called idiots and otherwise personally “attacked” if they don’t agree that the OBC is controlling from behind the scenes – given it is still 100% unproven to anyone that posts on this board……

    I would say that Cassandra who is on the other side of that debate casts more aspersions than any three other posters combined.

  9. Bos8 says:

    Condors don’t seem to be the team to be on a twelve game winning streak. Benson and Marody have dominated from game one on smarts and edge work. Oh, and excellent passing. Currie is a product of the two and Gambardella has outmoted Yama – heavy forecheck, faster and better shot. Potentially Lagesson has the highest ceiling. He’s been playing cover for Jones and Bear, allowing them to roam. This is not conducive to their D in their own zone.

    Sekera has released Lagesson by doing his own job properly, allowing Lagesson to shine. It’s a couple of games and I would like to see them together for a couple of or three more games but I would bring the two of them up together. Lagesson as is, is an improvement on the Oilers bottom four D. In the words of Belichek, “He’s doing his job” and getting no acknowledgement. Trading for Petrovic and Manning with Lagesson on the farm is just wrong.

  10. Bank Shot says:

    Buddy:
    Serious question for those of you who watch Bakersfield a lot and have a sense of the overall level of the AHL.

    If you took the Oilers, removed the actual contributing players (let’s say McDavid, Drai, Nuge; Klef, Larsson, Nurse), replaced them with players of the same level as the rest of the roster (e.g. Strome,Caggiula, Wideman, whoever), and then dropped the whole team into the AHL, how would they do?

    The rest of the OIlers would destroy the AHL.

    Most NHL 4th liners were point per game players in the AHL.

    It’s a huge jump.

    Just look at guys this season like Spooner and Puljujarvi. They show next to nothing at the NHL level, but are both elite scorers in the AHL.

    A guy like Kris Russell would be Pronger down there.

  11. Glovjuice says:

    Lowetide: I will call GoDaddy on the gateway, but have no been able to find a workaround for not logging in. You have to log in

    Frickin log in people – it’s a free blog – stop the frickin whining; fuck.

  12. Side says:

    OriginalPouzar: Nope – I’m suggesting that I was disapointed that the 150 comments were primarily related to the topic.

    Of course, many are called idiots and otherwise personally “attacked” if they don’t agree that the OBC is controlling from behind the scenes – given it is still 100% unproven to anyone that posts on this board……

    Personal attacks and people calling eachother idiots?

    I must have missed those posts.

    Guess we should drop trade rumour discussions since those are rarely 100% proven?

  13. Side says:

    Glovjuice: Frickin log in people – it’s a free blog – stop the frickin whining; fuck.

    I do log in. Sometimes I have to log in again in the same day. Our host has to log in every day.

    Sometimes people visit the blog and don’t realize they have to log in to view today’s article and may leave the site, creating a situation where our hosts daily efforts can’t be appreciated fully.

    It’s not unreasonable to ask for a site that doesn’t require constant logging in or weird inconsistencies without any kind of disclaimer.

    Having this fixed is beneficial for the reader and the host.

  14. Dustylegnd says:

    commonfan29:
    Speaking of the McDavid-Drai cluster, here’s an idea I don’t like at all but fear might be true.

    If there’s one lesson from the last nine years of Oiler hockey, it’s that it doesn’t matter how good your best players are when your worst players are terrible.

    It’s entirely possible that concentrating on making your worst player as good as possible is a better approach than ensuring your best player is as elite as possible.

    That the current top-end salary trend was started by the Oilers should be enough to give everyone pause, and yet we’ve instead seen it embraced as the wise way of the future by hockey men and media alike.

    I wonder just how far out of the box the OIlers would have to look to find a new GM willing to re-consider that collective wisdom. Since I love watching McD and Drai play so much, I guess I’m okay with the fact that the Oil would never think of going that route.

    I am going to say the Blackhawks started the over pay your stars model with the Kane and Toews contracts….we can’t blame everything on Chia…although I would love to

    This link below from very late in yesterday’s thread says the opposite of what you are suggesting is true….it is a really thought provoking read

    https://lastwordonhockey.com/2018/05/30/draft-pick-value-charts/

    Hockey is not a weakest link sport (soccer is) Hockey is a strongest link sport….success driven by exceptionally good players

    https://hockey-graphs.com/2017/03/14/strong-and-weak-links-talent-distribution-within-teams/

    I suppose the problem with the Oilers is their lineup is Binary..players are either amazingly good or horrifically bad….the bottom 8 forwards……at least 4 of the D and both Tenders have been shit

  15. Ben says:

    pts2pndr: Lagesson is a left shot Larsson and we don’t know what we have in JP but at twenty he could very easily turn out to be equal to Huberdeau. That doesn’t even cover with the fact that when you trade Russel you have no second pairing right D. As much as Russel struggles at the position he is the best that we currently have. In your scenario you not only bleed talent to acquire but blow a hole in another part of the team. And to this you would add a first round pick ?Why don’t you throw in Connor to make the deal fair!

    Dude. Come on.

    “JP could turn out to be equal to Huberdeau.” Yeah. Sure. Mayyyyybe.

    The 1st could *also* be as good as Huberdeau. Mayyyyybe.

    Lagesson *could *be as good as Pronger. Mayyyyybe.

    Won’t even bother commenting on your “Russell is a 2RD” thing.

    But Huberdeau, right now, *is* a stud driver who puts up almost a point per game on an excellent contract for years to come.

  16. Scungilli Slushy says:

    I’m having trepidation with so much McCrimmon media talk. He may be a good junior evaluator but someone commented here (sorry don’t recall whom) that his role in LV was the west and that was the weakest part of what they did.

    The Oilers aren’t lacking in the junior side now , they are drafting skill and doing well enough.
    They are weak on the pro side and in negotiations, and Kelly doesn’t have anything to make me think he’s the right guy for this team right now.

    Getting Engelland to not be bad is more on Gallant saving KMs butt than uncovering a hidden gem in an old banger.

    The Oilers need someone to take them to cutting edge. In every department. The farm and drafting are functional now, everything nhl side needs a revolution.

    Burgers seems to want a manager for the business from his dance on the carpet, which GM implies, but I see that position’s prime role as deal maker. Deals are the critical aspect to the nhl club. Trades have to be sane, contracts have to be correct for what they are buying.

    Burgers mentioned talent evaluation, but of who? There is too much for one person to have a handle on directly with players amateur and pro. So making good support hires is second in importance. Overseeing good people is not hard.

    If he meant evaluating his support people sure, that’s not what I think he meant.

    OP mentioned that we’re going on about this stuff, but it is the most important thing that will happen for the team’s fortunes for the next four years at least. Could be a rough summer, or the best since forever ago.

    Bob’s going to do it, I sure hope he learned his lesson and had his eyes open, and ears catching the locker room chatter. I suppose he did catch Hockey Canada up to those passing them.

  17. OriginalPouzar says:

    Side: Personal attacks and people calling eachother idiots?

    I must have missed those posts.

    Guess we should drop trade rumour discussions since those are rarely 100% proven?

    Again, I never said not to discuss unproven hypothesis – I am simply stating that there are many on here disparaging others for having an opposite viewpoint/opinion – on an unproven matters.

    I displayed my displeasure that the primary topic of discussion has been, yet again, the constant talk about the OBC, not because its unproven but b/c I personally don’t care to discuss it and think its a wildly overblown verbal.

  18. Pescador says:

    Glovjuice: Frickin log in people – it’s a free blog – stop the frickin whining; fuck.

    Believe it or not, some of us actually hit the donate button out of appreciation for Lowetide & his tireless commitment to the best Oiler fan blog on the net.
    But ya there are a lot of asshole freeloaders who take advantage of the opportunity to have a free place to bitch & moan.

  19. deardylan says:

    If I dont see the germs or OBC, it doesnt exist, does it? 😉

  20. Pescador says:

    Lowetide: I will call GoDaddy on the gateway, but have no been able to find a workaround for not logging in. You have to log in

    I can’t believe I need to log in
    just so I can complain about how your site inconveniences me.
    Go Fife & Deckle yourself buddy

  21. Side says:

    OriginalPouzar: Again, I never said not to discuss unproven hypothesis – I am simply stating that there are many on here disparaging others for having an opposite viewpoint/opinion – on an unproven matters.

    I displayed my displeasure that the primary topic of discussion has been, yet again, the constant talk about the OBC, not because its unproven but b/c I personally don’t care to discuss it and think its a wildly overblown verbal.

    That’s fair.

    I don’t quite see how it’s overblown, personally. Over 13 years of the Oilers dwelling in the basement and a generational talent is being squandered by the org. and some fans seem indifferent or complacent with those running the show. It’s bizarre.

  22. Scungilli Slushy says:

    Ben: Dude. Come on.

    “JP could turn out to be equal to Huberdeau.” Yeah. Sure. Mayyyyybe.

    The 1st could *also* be as good as Huberdeau. Mayyyyybe.

    Lagesson *could *be as good as Pronger. Mayyyyybe.

    Won’t even bother commenting on your “Russell is a 2RD” thing.

    But Huberdeau, right now, *is* a stud driver who puts up almost a point per game on an excellent contract for years to come.

    Huburdeau in year 7 is .75 PPG. He’s – 23 this year almost 1 PPG for the first time. He’s 27 next season. He has an 8 team NTC kicking in. 5.9M cap hit for 4 after this season.

    I’m not seeing it. Ehlers would be a better bet because of his age and same cap. Or Stone because he has a 2 way game at the same age basically. But Ehlers is the least risky choice because you are buying the heart of prime instead of the end and he’s as good. And rumoured to be available.

  23. deardylan says:

    I need more VORtex with my ORIGINAL SLUSHY SIDEs. Bring on the SHEPtastic lobster PESCADOR with a POUZERpinch of KINGERseasalt

  24. Side says:

    Pescador: Believe it or not, some of us actually hit the donate button out of appreciation for Lowetide & his tireless commitment to the best Oiler fan blog on the net.
    But ya there are a lot of asshole freeloaders who take advantage of the opportunity to have a free place to bitch & moan.

    If you are completely new to the blog or are referred to an article and the article is not there

    And there are no comments in the articles because you can’t see them.

    How do you know you need to log in to read the latest article? Or to read the comments?

    Not sure why people are so riled up about this. It benefits LT to not have these hiccups or oddities in place. lol

  25. Bag of Pucks says:

    OriginalPouzar: Again, I never said not to discuss unproven hypothesis – I am simply stating that there are many on here disparaging others for having an opposite viewpoint/opinion – on an unproven matters.

    I displayed my displeasure that the primary topic of discussion has been, yet again, the constant talk about the OBC, not because its unproven but b/c I personally don’t care to discuss it and think its a wildly overblown verbal.

    You’re a guy that will post 10 straight posts without anyone replying, which is essentially talking to yourself and then you criticize a topic that a number of posters actually want to dialogue on. Personally I don’t care to read about or discuss your personal workout regimen, but oddly enough I haven’t felt the need to comment on my ‘displeasure’ with that wildly overblown topic until today.

  26. deardylan says:

    I cant believe i loggedin to read this mind bending triple negative. Does three negatives create a glitch in the matrixtide?

    “never said not to discuss unproven hypothesis”

    Matrix needle just bounced

  27. Glovjuice says:

    Cassandra:
    Have you notice that those who are quickest to blame the supposed red wine crew for this travesty are the same ones that defended Chiarelli the hardest and longest?

    The fact is that there is surprisingly little evidence that the OBC does anything, for better or for worse.To wit:

    First, all of the reporting, whether it is employed by the Oilers (Stauffer), local guy (Rishaug), or National and respected (Friedman) insist that Chiarelli had full autonomy.

    Second, each of the general managers over this time, Tambelli and his do nothing style, MacT’s abbreviated term, and then Chiarelli each had very distinctive styles, making different kinds of moves. There is not a common, dominant, thread between them besides it not working out.

    Third, there is past precedent in Boston for almost all of Chiarelli’s flagship moves.

    While not as headling grabbing as the other disastrous moves, what Chiarelli did this year reached a new level of strange and incompetent.In short succession the Spooner, Manning, Petrovic, and Koskinen might be unprecedented.Each of them awful and so without justification that it beggars the mind.

    Under these circumstances my question is why didn’t anyone stop these things from happening.MY conclusion, terrifying as it may be, is not that the OBC have too much power, but that they had too little.

    Before this year Chiarelli was already on the short list for worst general managers of all time.But what he did this season deserves a whole new category. The problem isn’t that they interfered with Chiarelli too much, but that they didn’t know how terrible he was at his job and hence didn’t interfere enough.That’s the story.

    Downright terrifying. Haven’t thought of this angle but it makes sense. It’s the end of planet of the Apes or invasion of the body snatchers level terrifying. Yikes.

  28. Dustylegnd says:

    Just finished reading the analysis on the impact of strong link vs weak link on hockey success

    https://hockey-graphs.com/2017/03/14/strong-and-weak-links-talent-distribution-within-teams/

    Having strong links on the ice for as much time as possible seems to be a good predictor of success in the NHL

    Weak Link players are not devastating if you can limit their ice time to a reasonable level

    The teams at the top of the Standings like Tampa, Toronto and Boston East and Winnipeg, Nashville, Calgary and San Jose West have an inordinate number of strong link players on their teams thus allowing them to have maximum impact on the game outcome

    Hockey teams are not damaged by their weak link players like Soccer teams are…..but if you have 2.5 forward lines occupied by weak links and 2 D pairings that are weak links…..you have a hockey problem

    One line or 1.5 line teams can not sustain success in the NHL….it is the teams with multiple strong links that can dominate time on ice that will prevail through time….teams that lack true true Elite Strong link players will almost always fall short of the ultimate goal

    based on the above assumptions I look for the following teams to be left standing

    East
    1) Tampa
    2)Toronto/Boston

    West
    1) Winnipeg
    2) Calgary/San Jose

    Lesser chance

    1) Nashville/Washington

    Teams like Nashville are driven by strong link D men but lack a true Super Elite strong link up front

    Teams like Edmonton and Colorado lack enough strong link players to have anything but weak links on the ice for well over half the game…..the good teams limit their truly weak link players to less than 10 percent of the game

    3 lines deep with 4 legit NHL D men and 1 true dominant forward will take you a long long way in this league

  29. YKOil says:

    Dustylegnd:
    3 lines deep with 4 legit NHL D men and 1 true dominant forward will take you a long long way in this league

    I remain convinced that adding a RHD that is solid defensively and can get the puck out of the zone (a passing D is preferred) is our true #1 need on this team.

  30. ArmchairGM says:

    pts2pndr: Lagesson is a left shot Larsson and we don’t know what we have in JP but at twenty he could very easily turn out to be equal to Huberdeau. That doesn’t even cover with the fact that when you trade Russel you have no second pairing right D. As much as Russel struggles at the position he is the best that we currently have. In your scenario you not only bleed talent to acquire but blow a hole in another part of the team. And to this you would add a first round pick ?Why don’t you throw in Connor to make the deal fair!

    Let’s be real here: Lagesson is an AHLer, Huberdeau is probably 5x Puljujarvi at this point, and Russell is an expensive 3LD on most any team. You’re right that it isn’t a fair deal, but you’re wrong that it’s unfair in the Oilers favour.

  31. Dustylegnd says:

    YKOil: I remain convinced that adding a RHD that is solid defensively and can get the puck out of the zone (a passing D is preferred) is our true #1 need on this team.

    yes we need an Elite talent on D for sure….we have no Elite D men on this team…….Kleff would be #5 on Nashville for instance……we need a 2 second line wingers and 2 third line wingers as well….we also need 2 1st line wingers…..other than that we are in awesome shape

    or top scoring winger has 27 points and he is having an out of body experience
    our next leading scoring winger has 16 points

    Calgarys top winger has 75 points
    Calgarys #2 winger has 57 points
    Calgarys #3 winger has 21 points

    Calgary’s top D man 54 points
    Edmonton’s top D man 28 points

    Calgary has Elite talent at Center on the wings and on D…

    We have Elite talent at Center

    The new GM has a tremendous job in front of him

  32. Professor Q says:

    Jordan:
    Serious Question:

    Dellow for GM?

    Could it happen?

    Asking for a friend…

    The Sashi Brown Era would begin.

  33. Professor Q says:

    OriginalPouzar:
    We may see Sekera activated for Friday’s game against Carolina if the league doesn’t agree to the 2 game extension.

    Of course, the team could send Reggie to the Bake on a real conditioning stint (not the current assigned which is to determine “fitness to play”) but, for that, they would need to officially activate him and clear the cap space and, while he’s in Bakersfield, he takes up one of the 23 spots on the NHL roster.

    Either way, if the league doesn’t approve the two game extension, we are likely to see some transactions prior to Friday:

    ——————————-

    Jason Gregor

    Verified account

    @JasonGregor10m10 minutes ago
    More
    Sekera will play his 3rd AHL game on Wednesday. Then league will listen to Oilers appeal for two more games. League is very rigid on this. They don’t want teams “hiding” players. Need to see clear reasons why vet would need two more games.

    I’m not too sure that they’re “rigid” per se. It’s just that the Robidas and Horton ordeals were sketchy and deserved scrutiny at the time, and didn’t even have a direct scenario to Sekera, who is actually trying to get back to health.

    Technically, in the CBA, it does say that the Commissioner won’t deny the extension maliciously or without just cause, and will be as lenient as possible. Sort of taking a more compassionate and lenient route as opposed to gavels slamming. I guess whether they follow that or not is up to debate, but it is in there.

  34. Kinger_Oil.redux says:

    Dustylegnd:

    3 lines deep with 4 legit NHL D men and 1 true dominant forward will take you a long long way in this league

    So:

    Klef-Larsson
    Nurse-Sek (I know, I know, next year he will back, won’t he?

    x-CmD-x
    x-Drai-x
    x-RNH-x

    Solve for 6 x’s:

    Pool – not showing it yet
    Kalier – not showing it yet
    Lucic – Been better since Christmas, there’s that
    Reider – woulda shoulda coulda: maybe next year?
    Rattie – not feeling it
    Kassian – never understood why he wasn’t top-9 deployment
    Jar – shown some ability, maybe more games with Nuge
    Chiasson – not ideal, but sqint enough for cheap

    – Most ot the above players are best slotted as wingers for a 3rd line (at best)

    – Next year, maybe Benson also is in mix for 3rd line

    – So Dusty: what about 3 good top-4 D, plus one who hasn’t been healthy, plus a generational player, another awesome player (who doesn’t play C much), and Nuge, and a lot of competition for 3rd line wingers: does that take us a long way in this leauge?

  35. Dustylegnd says:

    Kinger_Oil.redux,

    Everybody healthy, goaler that can give us .910 or better…..we still need a dominant winger or 2……just not enough Elite talent up front and we have 0 elite talent on the back end…..so no….we don’t make it past the 2nd round because we can’t keep the true strong links on the ice for enough minutes

  36. OriginalPouzar says:

    Bag of Pucks: You’re a guy that will post 10 straight posts without anyone replying, which is essentially talking to yourself and then you criticize a topic that a number of posters actually want to dialogue on. Personally I don’t care to read about or discuss your personal workout regimen, but oddly enough I haven’t felt the need to comment on my ‘displeasure’ with that wildly overblown topic until today.

    FYI – 3 people have reached out to me from this blog regarding exercise and nutrition advise – I guess they can add some value

    FYI

    Yup, I’ll make a bunch of posts in a row – in response to items in the initial blog entry and various comments thereto. No, there will not be 10 posts in a row that have anything to do with me personally, those are one-offs here or there – sorry if they inconvenience you, I’m quite certain they never take up 90% of the conversation and day after day after day.

    FYI – 3 people from this community have reached out to me for nutrition and/or fitness advise – I guess the posts do add value for some

    FYI 2 – You just voiced your displeasure so that card is now played.

    Anyways, enjoy the rest of your evening.

  37. OriginalPouzar says:

    JD Dudek with his 5th goal of the year to pull BC to within one in the third.

  38. Wilde says:

    Cassandra/CB has done some trolling in his day.

    On this post he’s done absolutely none and if you can’t easily find something to engage with in what’s been said, that’s on you.

  39. smellyglove says:

    I know many here don’t like Travis Yost, but here he is throwing some shade at Oilers/OBC:

    https://www.tsn.ca/the-oilers-are-squandering-mcdavid-s-excellence-1.1255904

    “It’s bad enough that the Edmonton Oilers wasted all three seasons of ’s entry-level contract. Save for one playoff series win in the 2016-17 season, the Oilers have nothing to show for the luxury of three years with the world’s best hockey player on a middling $925,000 average annual value contract.”

    “There is going to be a lot of soul-searching for this organization post-Peter Chiarelli. I think the organization wants to point to the general manager and head coach – both of whom have been removed from their duties – as the reason for this futility, but they can’t possibly shoulder all of the blame.

    It would certainly appear that there is something more afoul within the organization, and now the club no longer has the luxury of skirting their mistakes due to a lack of salary “

  40. smellyglove says:

    Pescador: kin whining; fuck.

    Lowetide probably spends what, 1-5 hours per day here, writing articles, moderating, reading comments, and interacting with his tribe. Mostly only the hardcores know about the website’s problems, others… occasional visitors and new people are coming here seeing only day-old articles. Why not make the most of LT’s efforts by ensuring the widest possible readership.

    LT is losing traffic, comments, and probably donations and influence because he is only capturing a portion of the potential traffic and engagement that otherwise would be.

    Folks like yourself and others criticizing people like me for trying to help LT are overlooking these facts.

    LT’s FM transmitter is glitching down to AM, and occasionally to two tin cans tied together by wire, levels. We’re trying to help him.

  41. ArmchairGM says:

    Scungilli Slushy: Huburdeau in year 7 is .75 PPG. He’s – 23 this year almost 1 PPG for the first time. He’s 27 next season. He has an 8 team NTC kicking in. 5.9M cap hit for 4 after this season.

    I’m not seeing it. Ehlers would be a better bet because of his age and same cap. Or Stone because he has a 2 way game at the same age basically. But Ehlers is the least risky choice because you are buying the heart of prime instead of the end and he’s as good. And rumoured to be available.

    Huberdeau is a couple of months younger than Nugent-Hopkins, his salary is a hair less and his career ppg – both in junior and in NHL – is slightly better. This year they are neck-and-neck with 52 points: Huberdeau in 54 games and Nugent-Hopkins in 55. It basically like getting another Nugent-Hopkins, but a winger who doesn’t PK. Pretty much exactly what this team needs.

  42. Tibor says:

    smellyglove,

    I’m not a fan of Yost at all. It is really easy to pile on the Oilers right now, and rightfully so, but if the Leafs don’t win a playoff round this year is the same article going to be written about how the Leafs wasted all three seasons of Austin Matthew’s entry level deal?

    The Tampa Bay Lightning missed the playoffs 5 of the first 6 years of Stamkos’ career. Sometimes these things take time to sort out. It looks bad but I still believe a competent GM can get us out of this mess.

  43. OriginalPouzar says:

    I still don’t believe that the Spooner trade should be lumped in with trades such as the Manning deal as far as “head-scratching” goes.

    Clearly the trade hasn’t worked out as now (although some of us believe the coach never gave it a chance), however, I believe the rational behind the trade at the time was (is) justifiable.

    This was (is) a team with a major need for secondary scoring in the top 6 and, frankly, Spooner has produced at higher rates through his career than Strome has – the trade was made in the name of offence which makes the coach’s refusal to play Spooner on a scoring line all the more baffling.

    Of course, Strome’s best offensive season was as a winger on the Island on a scoring line and he never really got that chance in Edmonton either – that one is on the previous coach. At least the previous coach was able to find a defined role for Strome and helped him succeed in that role (eventually) – the same cannot be said for the current coach and Spooner.

  44. OriginalPouzar says:

    YKOil: I remain convinced that adding a RHD that is solid defensively and can get the puck out of the zone (a passing D is preferred) is our true #1 need on this team.

    I’ve been saying that for two years now and I think it remains true. At the same time, given organizational depth, I’m not so sure that such a player should be the main external acquisition target.

    While there are no guarantees for any of our d-man prospects to become legit top 4 players (although I think we can all be comfortable in saying Bouchard is more likely than not in a few years), we have a plethora of defence prospects, many close to NHL ready and many coming shortly thereafter.

    On the other hand, we have a smaller array of legit forward prospects (Benson and Marody the only one’s on the cusp and neither likely to be top 6 players, maybe though). McLeod has even arrows and Maksimov is likely a few years away if he ever makes it. Safin just needs to play.

  45. Side says:

    Wilde:
    Cassandra/CB has done some trolling in his day.

    On this post he’s done absolutely none and if you can’t easily find something to engage with in what’s been said, that’s on you.

    You may want to review your definition of trolling:

    “This is either nonsense or sloppy thinking.”

    “The urge to blame the OBC in this town is pathological.”

    ” This is all very disconnected from reality.”

    ” It is conspiracy theory stuff that makes it difficult to suss out the real problems behind the oddities.”

    “And yet even this isn’t true. They are not a constant through those years. ”

    “And yet in this very thread there are multiple people who agree with me. As always, there are two camps. There are those that think and those that call people trolls. Those that think won’t always agree but people in your camp are always going to be wrong because they don’t stop long enough to understand what is being said.”

    This one is particularly good given his admission that he will troll anything Chiarelli related for as long as Chiarelli lives.

    “Whatever. I have a long and established record of being right on these issues. Everything I said has proven true and yet you somehow still seem unable to acknowledge it.”

    “But let us note that every single person with knowledge of the Oilers has said publicly that Chiarelli had autonomy for his decisions. That should be the starting point, not this sad attempt to shift the blame from people who were unwilling to see what was right in front of their faces for so long.”

    Every single person with knowledge of the Oilers has said this publicly? Chiarelli has full autonomy? Interesting considering Bob Nicholson said not too long ago that Chiarelli didn’t make the Koskinen decision on his own. Unless Chiarelli went to others within the org. (like people in the OBC) for advice, which, I don’t know helps Cassandra’s argument.

    Cassandra definitely has some interesting points, but lets not pretend he is not trolling or arguing in good faith, here.

    I have no clue why people go out of their way to defend him when he says stuff like the above threaded in almost all of his posts.

  46. JimmyV1965 says:

    OriginalPouzar: GordieHoweHatTrick

    Ryan: I’m not pinning this on Kevin Lowe, but the Oilers, in general, don’t have much time for the modern NHL defenseman. I’m not sure where this comes from, but their tastes have been slow to evolve with the times. Defend with grit… transition the puck optional defenseman have been the prevailingpreference.

    +1000. I don’t think I’ve ever skipped over so many comments. The blame game gets really really really boring.

  47. godot10 says:

    smellyglove:
    I know many here don’t like Travis Yost, but here he is throwing some shade at Oilers/OBC:

    https://www.tsn.ca/the-oilers-are-squandering-mcdavid-s-excellence-1.1255904

    “It’s bad enough that the Edmonton Oilers wasted all three seasons of ’s entry-level contract. Save for one playoff series win in the 2016-17 season, the Oilers have nothing to show for the luxury of three years with the world’s best hockey player on a middling $925,000 average annual value contract.”

    “There is going to be a lot of soul-searching for this organization post-Peter Chiarelli. I think the organization wants to point to the general manager and head coach – both of whom have been removed from their duties – as the reason for this futility, but they can’t possibly shoulder all of the blame.

    It would certainly appear that there is something more afoul within the organization, and now the club no longer has the luxury of skirting their mistakes due to a lack of salary ”

    Has not McDavid made all of his bonuses, particularly in years 2 and 3. He is nearly a $4 million dollar cap hit in two of those years.

    It would help if Yost would get his facts right.

  48. Bag of Pucks says:

    OriginalPouzar: Yup, I’ll make a bunch of posts in a row – in response to items in the initial blog entry and various comments thereto. No, there will not be 10 posts in a row that have anything to do with me personally, those are one-offs here or there – sorry if they inconvenience you, I’m quite certain they never take up 90% of the conversation and day after day after day.

    FYI – 3 people from this community have reached out to me for nutrition and/or fitness advise – I guess the posts do add value for some

    FYI 2 – You just voiced your displeasure so that card is now played.

    Anyways, enjoy the rest of your evening.

    The larger point is that everyone posts things that are not of interest to the community as a whole, and you are free to ignore what doesn’t interest you and free to interact with what does. That’s a more diplomatic approach than grousing about a topic that doesn’t interest you and marginalizing those who do partake, especially when it’s a topic you freely admit is a frequent (ie popular) topic of choice for many posters here.

  49. Bag of Pucks says:

    Side,

    +100

  50. Wilde says:

    Anyone catch that bit by Hitchcok about “the analytics that were slapped on my desk this morning”?

  51. OriginalPouzar says:

    smellyglove:
    I know many here don’t like Travis Yost, but here he is throwing some shade at Oilers/OBC:

    https://www.tsn.ca/the-oilers-are-squandering-mcdavid-s-excellence-1.1255904

    “It’s bad enough that the Edmonton Oilers wasted all three seasons of ’s entry-level contract. Save for one playoff series win in the 2016-17 season, the Oilers have nothing to show for the luxury of three years with the world’s best hockey player on a middling $925,000 average annual value contract.”

    “There is going to be a lot of soul-searching for this organization post-Peter Chiarelli. I think the organization wants to point to the general manager and head coach – both of whom have been removed from their duties – as the reason for this futility, but they can’t possibly shoulder all of the blame.

    It would certainly appear that there is something more afoul within the organization, and now the club no longer has the luxury of skirting their mistakes due to a lack of salary ”

    Not the point of the post but I think Yost’s dishonesty should be pointed out – he knows full well that McDavid’s true cap hit during his ELC seasons approached $4M with him vesting his performance bonuses.

  52. OriginalPouzar says:

    I think I’ll continue to express my opinion just as you are to express your opinion about my “10 posts in a row”.

    P.S. As per your own advice, feel free to skip right over my posts, each and every time.

  53. OriginalPouzar says:

    Wilde:
    Anyone catch that bit by Hitchcok about “the analytics that were slapped on my desk this morning”?

    He has talked numerous times about the analytics they review after practice every day.

    I did not find he said that in any sort of negative way but feel he quite embarrasses the information and knowledge.

  54. Glovjuice says:

    Bag of Pucks: You’re a guy that will post 10 straight posts without anyone replying, which is essentially talking to yourself and then you criticize a topic that a number of posters actually want to dialogue on. Personally I don’t care to read about or discuss your personal workout regimen, but oddly enough I haven’t felt the need to comment on my ‘displeasure’ with that wildly overblown topic until today.

    Get a room you big studs.

  55. OmJo says:

    Side: Every single person with knowledge of the Oilers has said this publicly? Chiarelli has full autonomy? Interesting considering Bob Nicholson said not too long ago that Chiarelli didn’t make the Koskinen decision on his own. Unless Chiarelli went to others within the org. (like people in the OBC) for advice, which, I don’t know helps Cassandra’s argument.

    Which is also funny because Bob Nicholson literally said this after firing Chiarelli…

    “Peter Chiarelli was the president and GM of this hockey team. We gave him the authority to make those decisions.”

    He also said he wanted to bring in Chiarelli and give him full autonomy.

    That obviously changed as his tenure here went on and The Committee got involved in decisions. Even then, Chiarelli was the one responsible for putting those decisions into action.

  56. Bag of Pucks says:

    OriginalPouzar:
    I think I’ll continue to express my opinion just as you are to express your opinion about my “10 posts in a row”.

    P.S. As per your own advice, feel free to skip right over my posts, each and every time.

    https://youtu.be/EuJzSTNDUGI

  57. Glovjuice says:

    OriginalPouzar: Yup, I’ll make a bunch of posts in a row – in response to items in the initial blog entry and various comments thereto. No, there will not be 10 posts in a row that have anything to do with me personally, those are one-offs here or there – sorry if they inconvenience you, I’m quite certain they never take up 90% of the conversation and day after day after day.

    FYI – 3 people from this community have reached out to me for nutrition and/or fitness advise – I guess the posts do add value for some

    FYI 2 – You just voiced your displeasure so that card is now played.

    Anyways, enjoy the rest of your evening.

    I just pine for more Indian Ocean (Ocean is the most beautiful word of the English language, by the way) OP abs pics.

  58. OriginalPouzar says:

    John Marino with 2 assists tonight in the Beanpot final. A goal and four assists over his last 5 games.

  59. Glovjuice says:

    smellyglove: Lowetide probably spends what, 1-5 hours per day here, writing articles, moderating, reading comments, and interacting with his tribe. Mostly only the hardcores know about the website’s problems, others… occasional visitors and new people are coming here seeing only day-old articles. Why not make the most of LT’s efforts by ensuring the widest possible readership.

    LT is losing traffic, comments, and probably donations and influence because he is only capturing a portion of the potential traffic and engagement that otherwise would be.

    Folks like yourself and others criticizing people like me for trying to help LT are overlooking these facts.

    LT’s FM transmitter is glitching down to AM, and occasionally to two tin cans tied together by wire, levels. We’re trying to help him.

    Yes, yes, you are.

  60. Lowetide says:

    smellyglove:

    LT is losing traffic, comments, and probably donations and influence because he is only capturing a portion of the potential traffic and engagement that otherwise would be.

    The VERY weird thing about glitches like we’ve been experiencing is that visits go WAY up. I think it might be a case of people repeatedly trying to get on. Anyway, I appreciate input and most of it is offered as yours is, so keep it coming. I’m fully aware that almost everyone visiting here has a great knowledge than me about these things and appreciate the patience.

  61. Glovjuice says:

    Bag of Pucks: The larger point is that everyone posts things that are not of interest to the community as a whole, and you arefree to ignore what doesn’t interest you and free to interact with what does. That’s a more diplomatic approach than grousing about a topic that doesn’t interest you and marginalizing those who do partake, especially when it’s a topic you freely admit is a frequent (ie popular) topic of choice for many posters here.

    Yes, empathy is lacked by so many. It really is the weakest human link if I had to pick one.

  62. OmJo says:

    Lowetide: The VERY weird thing about glitches like we’ve been experiencing is that visits go WAY up. I think it might be a case of people repeatedly trying to get on.

    A-ha! So this is all part of the plan, isn’t it!

  63. Glovjuice says:

    OriginalPouzar: Not the point of the post but I think Yost’s dishonesty should be pointed out – he knows full well that McDavid’s true cap hit during his ELC seasons approached $4M with him vesting his performance bonuses.

    Agree, Yost is an utter joke. Stunned he would even consider the 925,000 K thing in his post. He should be eternally embarrassed to be paid for this level of work .

  64. Wilde says:

    Side: You may want to review your definition of trolling:

    I’ll be happy to, but let’s get something straight here first:

    I would (and I will) argue from the position that he /got/ trolled on today’s post.

    None of what you’ve quoted here was present in his first post, and none of what you’ve quoted was in response to someone else attacking the material of his first post. Here it is for reference:

    Cassandra:
    Have you notice that those who are quickest to blame the supposed red wine crew for this travesty are the same ones that defended Chiarelli the hardest and longest?

    The fact is that there is surprisingly little evidence that the OBC does anything, for better or for worse.To wit:

    First, all of the reporting, whether it is employed by the Oilers (Stauffer), local guy (Rishaug), or National and respected (Friedman) insist that Chiarelli had full autonomy.

    Second, each of the general managers over this time, Tambelli and his do nothing style, MacT’s abbreviated term, and then Chiarelli each had very distinctive styles, making different kinds of moves. There is not a common, dominant, thread between them besides it not working out.

    Third, there is past precedent in Boston for almost all of Chiarelli’s flagship moves.

    While not as headling grabbing as the other disastrous moves, what Chiarelli did this year reached a new level of strange and incompetent.In short succession the Spooner, Manning, Petrovic, and Koskinen might be unprecedented.Each of them awful and so without justification that it beggars the mind.

    Under these circumstances my question is why didn’t anyone stop these things from happening.MY conclusion, terrifying as it may be, is not that the OBC have too much power, but that they had too little.

    Before this year Chiarelli was already on the short list for worst general managers of all time.But what he did this season deserves a whole new category. The problem isn’t that they interfered with Chiarelli too much, but that they didn’t know how terrible he was at his job and hence didn’t interfere enough.That’s the story.

    For example, in BoP’s first reply, the thrust of his response was, and I will quote as well as encourage anyone to go back and read the full post to be sure I’m not misrepresenting:

    “The OBC is the common denominator in this 13 years of suck.”

    “The OBC doesn’t get a free pass on this failure of an organization”

    (There’s also a bit about Nicholson’s statement on the Koskinen negotiation that I’ll get to later, because you also made it and I want to get two birds stoned at once)

    Okay, so, there’s an immediately obvious problem here.

    Cassandra was saying that since the failures of Chiarelli are distinct from the failures from past directly (and overtly) OBC-operational eras; similar to his Boston regime’s moves; and all reporting (including national) has asserted that Chiarelli had autonomy during the periods the team was dismantled, then it’s actually easier to argue that the OBC had much less power than Chiarelli than vice versa.

    BoP is rebutting by simply stating that the OBC existed in the org before, during and after Chiarelli. Stating this fact and that they still exist (and as does their influence) and shouldn’t get a free pass for the failures they’ve been here /does not refute anything that Cassandra has stated at all./

    Cassandra is arguing details of the power dynamics between a group of people.

    BoP is arguing who existed in that group of people.

    So, moving on.

    ““This is either nonsense or sloppy thinking.

    The urge to blame the OBC in this town is pathological.”

    These two were a response to someone who had a claim that basically contradicted itself and also said:

    “To contend that the OBC has “nothing to do” with the Chiarelli fiasco is to focus on a donut’s hole and not the entire donut.”

    Now, admittedly I think most people would find Cassandra’s reply one of less manners than the other person’s, but I think the difference between them was manners and not by a wide enough gap to be considered trolling. Much worse has been said and (correctly) not been called trolling on this site.

    ” This is all very disconnected from reality.”

    This was part of the first BoP exchange, which again warranted a shorter rebuttal than I explained (but wanted to flesh out why it was dismiss-able, though for different reasons as well) and again, you, I, and many others have said much worse. It’s not trolling to respond dismissively to something that dismissed your original point without refuting it.

    ” It is conspiracy theory stuff that makes it difficult to suss out the real problems behind the oddities.”

    This is literally true. It is a conspiracy theory. It’s a theory about members of the organisation conspiring to undermine or wrongheadedly influence the organisation in a way that’s out of sync with what their actual jobs are.

    It was described as a coup d’état, man. C’mon. This isn’t an inflammatory, useless statement. It’s not trolling. If it’s trolling just because of the username behind it, then fine, we’re done here because there’s no common ground between us. I don’t think that anybody’s input should be automatically held as trolling when there’s something worth discussing in it.

    Conveniently, I’ve just scrolled right to your first reply:

    “You’re right, thanks to the last 3-4 years of Bob and Chiarelli, it’s safe to say that they are to blame for the last 13 years of failure in the Oilers org.

    Suggesting otherwise is just total conspiracy theory.”

    This, THIS is just substance-less.

    Part of Cassandra’s main point was that distinct actors over the 13 years had their own distinct patterns of failure.

    If he says that Tambellini had his own distinct patterns, then he’s saying Tambellini bears the responsibility for their outcomes.

    Which is contradictory to what you’re sarcastically trying to say he said.

    He’s blaming Chiarelli and Bob’s 3-4 years on them, and the previous years on the ones who came before. This is so clear and your reply is so baseless that you’re miles closer to trolling that his first post was.

    Side: “But let us note that every single person with knowledge of the Oilers has said publicly that Chiarelli had autonomy for his decisions. That should be the starting point, not this sad attempt to shift the blame from people who were unwilling to see what was right in front of their faces for so long.”

    Every single person with knowledge of the Oilers has said this publicly? Chiarelli has full autonomy? Interesting considering Bob Nicholson said not too long ago that Chiarelli didn’t make the Koskinen decision on his own. Unless Chiarelli went to others within the org. (like people in the OBC) for advice, which, I don’t know helps Cassandra’s argument.

    Not making a decision on your own is not the same as not being the one making the decision.

    Having autonomy to make your decisions and having counsel for your decisions are not mutually exclusive.

    Does MacT get a pass for his bad moves because he had a bad staff (and he most certainly did)?

    If you’re the decision-maker, the decisions are yours.

    Which is why people instead argue that not only did the OBC have input, they had actual /power/ over him.

    And that’s where we get into the weeds, and which shouldn’t be the default position because it requires speculation outside the ground truth and facts told by multiple trusted sources, again some national.

    All that, by the way? That’s not trolling. The only actual refutation that you’re giving here is a wording based one, where Cassandra said:

    “every single person with knowledge of the Oilers has said publicly that Chiarelli had autonomy for his decisions”

    When he should have said:

    “every single person with knowledge of the Oilers that has said anything publicly has said that Chiarelli had autonomy for his decisions”

    If he wanted to be 100% semantically airtight.

    But a person reading with constructive intentions would take these to mean the same, common sense thing. Because surely someone saying the first thing wouldn’t literally mean “everyone in the organisation in any capacity at any point in time during the Chiarelli era has said the exact same thing verbatim”.

    It’s obvious what’s meant, unless you want to put words in someone’s mouth, like this:

    Side: I truly do not know how you can think the OBC are not a problem, or don’t deserve to be blamed in the slightest. The sample size of failure linked to the OBC is much larger than the Nicholson/Chiarelli era at the Oilers.

    If you were Darryl Katz, would you have kept the OBC employed from 2007-2019?

    If so, why?

    Any other functional organization would and should have canned them.

    Where was “the OBC are not a problem, or don’t deserve blame in the slightest” said?

    Where was the inverse of “The sample size of failure linked to the OBC is much larger than the Nicholson/Chiarelli era at the Oilers.” argued?

    How does the question “If you were Darryl Katz, would you have kept the OBC employed from 2007-2019? If so, why?” logically follow from the discussion you were having?

    You don’t have to choose a team, dude. Arguing that Chiarelli was responsible for the decisions he made as GM is not a fervent argument that the OBC are blameless, or that failure didn’t occur under their regime.

    Again, slapping the shit out of a fake version of the other guy’s argument and then calling them a troll for making it is a lot closer to trolling than anything that was in the original argument or any response that was made to the shit-beating.

  65. Wilde says:

    OriginalPouzar:

    He has talked numerous times about the analytics they review after practice every day.

    I did not find he said that in any sort of negative way but feel he quite embarrasses the information and knowledge.

    I was trying to figure out whether or not he was saying that he was impressed by their analytics on their road games; embarrassed about the analytics at home; or embarrassed about the probably canyon between.

    I can’t really tell if he misspoke or didn’t.

  66. Lowetide says:

    OmJo: A-ha! So this is all part of the plan, isn’t it!

    Dammit! I’ve said too much!

  67. OmJo says:

    Wilde,

    I’m only 1/3 through this post but I think you forgot to add *mic drop*

  68. GordieHoweHatTrick says:

    Flight of the conchords
    Flight of the condors
    Nice

  69. GordieHoweHatTrick says:

    OriginalPouzar: I’d be fine with bringing him back at any time – he is a legit proven NHL player.

    I’m all about the Condors but the organization could have a hole filled internally if they give it a chance and its important, in my opinion, to give it the chance.

    The issue is the $1,050,000 in cap he adds when brought up (minus the cap hit of the player going down for him – likely Malone). Add that to what would need to be cleared for the Sekera activation (currently apx $1.2M).

    So you are implying something like this:
    Spooner-McD-Draisaitl
    JJ – Nuge- JP
    6’others

    Klef Lars Nurse Rej
    2 others

    2 goalies 1 of which is MK

    How do you do it with the cap?

    I value your opinion

  70. Glovjuice says:

    Wilde: I’ll be happy to, but let’s get something straight here first:

    I would (and I will) argue from the position that he /got/ trolled on today’s post.

    None of what you’ve quoted here was present in his first post, and none of what you’ve quoted was in response to someone else attacking the material of his first post. Here it is for reference:

    “Have you notice that those who are quickest to blame the supposed red wine crew for this travesty are the same ones that defended Chiarelli the hardest and longest?

    The fact is that there is surprisingly little evidence that the OBC does anything, for better or for worse. To wit:

    First, all of the reporting, whether it is employed by the Oilers (Stauffer), local guy (Rishaug), or National and respected (Friedman) insist that Chiarelli had full autonomy.

    Second, each of the general managers over this time, Tambelli and his do nothing style, MacT’s abbreviated term, and then Chiarelli each had very distinctive styles, making different kinds of moves. There is not a common, dominant, thread between them besides it not working out.

    Third, there is past precedent in Boston for almost all of Chiarelli’s flagship moves.

    While not as headling grabbing as the other disastrous moves, what Chiarelli did this year reached a new level of strange and incompetent. In short succession the Spooner, Manning, Petrovic, and Koskinen might be unprecedented. Each of them awful and so without justification that it beggars the mind.

    Under these circumstances my question is why didn’t anyone stop these things from happening. MY conclusion, terrifying as it may be, is not that the OBC have too much power, but that they had too little.

    Before this year Chiarelli was already on the short list for worst general managers of all time. But what he did this season deserves a whole new category. The problem isn’t that they interfered with Chiarelli too much, but that they didn’t know how terrible he was at his job and hence didn’t interfere enough. That’s the story.”

    For example, in BoP’s first reply, the thrust of his response was, and I will quote as well as encourage anyone to go back and read the full post to be sure I’m not misrepresenting:

    “The OBC is the common denominator in this 13 years of suck.”

    “The OBC doesn’t get a free pass on this failure of an organization”

    Okay, so, there’s an immediately obvious problem here.

    Cassandra was saying that since the failures of Chiarelli are distinct from the failures from past directly (and overtly) OBC-operational eras; similar to his Boston regime’s moves; and all reporting (including national) has asserted that Chiarelli had autonomy during the periods the team was dismantled, then it’s actually easier to argue that the OBC had much less power than Chiarelli than vice versa.

    BoP is rebutting by simply stating that the OBC existed in the org before, during and after Chiarelli. Stating this fact and that they still exist (and as does their influence) and shouldn’t get a free pass for the failures they’ve been here /does not refute anything that Cassandra has stated at all./

    Cassandra is arguing details of the power dynamics between a group of people.

    BoP is arguing who existed in that group of people.

    So, moving on.

    ““This is either nonsense or sloppy thinking.

    The urge to blame the OBC in this town is pathological.”

    These two were a response to someone who had a claim that basically contradicted itself and also said:

    “To contend that the OBC has “nothing to do” with the Chiarelli fiasco is to focus on a donut’s hole and not the entire donut.”

    Now, admittedly I think most people would find Cassandra’s reply one of less manners than the other person’s, but I think the difference between them was manners and not by a wide enough gap to be considered trolling. Much worse has been said and (correctly) not been called trolling on this site.

    ” This is all very disconnected from reality.”

    This was part of the first BoP exchange, which again warranted a shorter rebuttal than I explained (but wanted to flesh out why it was dismiss-able, though for different reasons as well) and again, you, I, and many others have said much worse. It’s not trolling to respond dismissively to something that dismissed your original point without refuting it.

    ” It is conspiracy theory stuff that makes it difficult to suss out the real problems behind the oddities.”

    This is literally true. It is a conspiracy theory. It’s a theory about members of the organisation conspiring to undermine or wrongheadedly influence the organisation in a way that’s out of sync with what their actual jobs are.

    It was described as a coup d’état, man. C’mon. This isn’t an inflammatory, useless statement. It’s not trolling. If it’s trolling just because of the username behind it, then fine, we’re done here because there’s no common ground between us. I don’t think that anybody’s input should be automatically held as trolling when there’s something worth discussing in it.

    Conveniently, I’ve just scrolled right to your first reply:

    “You’re right, thanks to the last 3-4 years of Bob and Chiarelli, it’s safe to say that they are to blame for the last 13 years of failure in the Oilers org.

    Suggesting otherwise is just total conspiracy theory.”

    This, THIS is just substance-less.

    Part of Cassandra’s main point was that distinct actors over the 13 years had their own distinct patterns of failure.

    If he says that Tambellini had his own distinct patterns, then he’s saying Tambellini bears the responsibility for their outcomes.

    Which is contradictory to what you’re sarcastically trying to say he said.

    He’s blaming Chiarelli and Bob’s 3-4 years on them, and the previous years on the ones who came before. This is so clear and your reply is so baseless that you’re miles closer to trolling that his first post was.

    Not making a decision on your own is not the same as not being the one making the decision.

    Having autonomy to make your decisions and having counsel for your decisions are not mutually exclusive.

    Does MacT get a pass for his bad moves because he had a bad staff (and he most certainly did)?

    If you’re the decision-maker, the decisions are yours.

    Which is why people instead argue that not only did the OBC have input, they had actual /power/ over him.

    And that’s where we get into the weeds, and which shouldn’t be the default position because it requires speculation outside the ground truth and facts told by multiple trusted sources, again some national.

    All that, by the way? That’s not trolling. The only actual refutation that you’re giving here is a wording based one, where Cassandra said:

    “every single person with knowledge of the Oilers has said publicly that Chiarelli had autonomy for his decisions”

    When he should have said:

    “every single person with knowledge of the Oilers that has said anything publicly has said that Chiarelli had autonomy for his decisions”

    If he wanted to be 100% semantically airtight.

    But a person reading with constructive intentions would take these to mean the same, common sense thing. Because surely someone saying the first thing wouldn’t literally mean “everyone in the organisation in any capacity at any point in time during the Chiarelli era has said the exact same thing verbatim”.

    It’s obvious what’s meant, unless you want to put words in someone’s mouth, like this:

    Where was “the OBC are not a problem, or don’t deserve blame in the slightest” said?

    Where was the inverse of “The sample size of failure linked to the OBC is much larger than the Nicholson/Chiarelli era at the Oilers.” argued?

    How does the question “If you were Darryl Katz, would you have kept the OBC employed from 2007-2019? If so, why?” logically follow from the discussion you were having?

    You don’t have to choose a team, dude. Arguing that Chiarelli was responsible for the decisions he made as GM is not a fervent argument that the OBC are blameless, or that failure didn’t occur under their regime.

    Again, slapping the shit out of a fake version of the other guy’s argument and then calling them a troll for making it is a lot closer to trolling than anything that was in the original argument or any response that was made to the shit-beating.

    Wow, what effort.

    Anyway: trivia time

    Name the 150 point scorers?

    First to 100 assists

    30 g 300 pim men

    76 goal scorers

    EST Stones song aside from their monster hits: mine is the glorious Loving Cup off of the mighty exile masterpiece.

    g’night. Going to get sexed.

  71. GordieHoweHatTrick says:

    Sharks feasting on Orcas tonight

  72. northerndancer says:

    Wilde: I was trying to figure out whether or not he was saying that he was impressed by their analytics on their road games; embarrassed about the analytics at home; or embarrassed about the probably canyon between.

    I can’t really tell if he misspoke or didn’t.

    I believe Hitch mentioned the ‘analytics’ twice and not one keen reported bothered to stray from what seemed like their pre-determined story line to ask the obvious question and get the Hitch teaching moment. “What analytics did you use to inform you of what?” Sad state of ‘journalism.’ IMO

  73. Dee Dee says:

    Been trying to find an online link to the old OilDrops episode that showed Kevin Lowe negotiating one of the players contract extensions and Steve Tambellini sitting out in the Lobby asking them how it went after they came out of Lowes office.

    Doesn’t seem to matter at the moment whether they were the puppet masters or just doing nothing and ignoring the sinking ship but everything else in the Organization has been replaced several times except for them.

  74. v4ance says:

    Wilde,

    Thanks Wilde! Great response.

    Earlier in the thread, someone tried to undercut Rishaug’s reporting as simply being an Oilers source putting out info to try to shed a sympathetic light on the organization and the OBC. As an experienced journalist and the daily beat reporter for TSN, I’m sure RIshaug had two or more sources to back up his tweet.

    I’d even bet Chiarelli would have been one of his sources, seeing as Rishaug would have talked with him on a daily or weekly basis over the course of 3 years of following the team.

    ***

    frjohnk: dellowhockey
    ‏Verified account @dellowhockey
    Jan 23
    I’m writing about the Oilers and the future and this doesn’t really fit but blaming the presence of Oiler old boys for their struggles kind of seems incorrect to me.

    Dellow was with the Oilers for over a year of Chia and McClellan.I believe Dellow and the Oilers parted ways in July of 16. A few weeks after the Hall trade.He would have insight on what was going on behind the scenes that few would have access to.Dellows credibility would take a major hit if he was lying here.

    Chia was the one pulling the trigger, and from what I can gather, McClellan was a big provider of the ammunition ( who he wanted out, type of player he wanted in)

    OBC had input for sure.After those picks in 2015 were turned down by Boston ( for Hamilton) and Florida ( Gudbranson) Reinhart was targeted.Interesting that VOR has mentioned that MacT wanted to use those picks to draft after the failed Hamilton trade.

    SO with Padre’s retweet of Dellow defending the OBC and Ryan Rishaug saying Chiarelli was responsible for his own failures, I’d like to join the club of OBC apologists. It seems more logical than the unproven theories put forward by BoP, hunter, Dustrock,etc.

  75. digger50 says:

    It’s not that Spooner did not succeed on a top line, it’s like he didn’t even try. His effort level got him yanked in a hurry. I think he was poster boy for “If you don’t believe, get out of the room.”

    Now these things don’t usually happen without a trigger but something surely changed, I just wish I knew what.

  76. JimmyV1965 says:

    pts2pndr: Lagesson is a left shot Larsson and we don’t know what we have in JP but at twenty he could very easily turn out to be equal to Huberdeau. That doesn’t even cover with the fact that when you trade Russel you have no second pairing right D. As much as Russel struggles at the position he is the best that we currently have. In your scenario you not only bleed talent to acquire but blow a hole in another part of the team. And to this you would add a first round pick ?Why don’t you throw in Connor to make the deal fair!

    I’d be fascinated to know what you think is a fair deal for Huberdeau. You’re not getting top six forward for pennies.

  77. JimmyV1965 says:

    JP has 37 pts in 53 games in the AHL. Benson has 38 pts in 46 games. Benson is a couple months younger.

  78. Bag of Pucks says:

    v4ance:
    Wilde,

    Thanks Wilde! Great response.

    Earlier in the thread, someone tried to undercut Rishaug’s reporting as simply being an Oilers source putting out info to try to shed a sympathetic light on the organization and the OBC.As an experienced journalist and the daily beat reporter for TSN, I’m sure RIshaug had two or more sources to back up his tweet.

    I’d even bet Chiarelli would have been one of his sources, seeing as Rishaug would have talked with him on a daily or weekly basis over the course of 3 years of following the team.

    ***

    SO with Padre’s retweet of Dellow defending the OBC and Ryan Rishaug saying Chiarelli was responsible for his own failures, I’d like to join the club of OBC apologists.It seems more logical than the unproven theories put forward by BoP, hunter, Dustrock,etc.

    What this argument really boils down to is either you’re the kind of person who believes everything the media tells you or you’re more of a skeptic who tries to look past the spin at the actual actions of the principles involved.

    The issue with an unfailing belief in the media is one of access. They can only report what they’re told/fed. In Canada, there’s not much going on in the way of investigative reporting with sports ‘journalists.’ Rishaug looking for two sources? Please. He’s a talking head not Woodward or Bernstein.

    The good news is the Oilers aren’t particularly good at spin. They contradict themselves a lot and their actions from pressuring injured players to firing people over Skype to calling some of their fans Tier 2 reveal more about their true motivations than any conspiracy theory speculation.

  79. JimmyV1965 says:

    Scungilli Slushy: Huburdeau in year 7 is .75 PPG. He’s – 23 this year almost 1 PPG for the first time. He’s 27 next season. He has an 8 team NTC kicking in. 5.9M cap hit for 4 after this season.

    I’m not seeing it. Ehlers would be a better bet because of his age and same cap. Or Stone because he has a 2 way game at the same age basically. But Ehlers is the least risky choice because you are buying the heart of prime instead of the end and he’s as good. And rumoured to be available.

    Just a couple quibbles with your post. I largely agree with everything you’ve said here, but Huberdeau will be 26 for the entire season next year and his -23 is largely a reflection of his high volume playing time on a team with weak goaltending. Barkov is -19 this year and no one would call him a defensive liability. My biggest concern with Huberdeau is that he’s more of a playmaker than goal scorer. I would rather have Ehlers though for the reasons you mentioned.

  80. Wilde says:

    Glovjuice: Wow, what effort.

    It’s less about effort and more about me being unable to not argue with people over nothing

    Well, not nothing because I’d rather posters like Cassandra not be called trolls and driven out b/c I think that’s unhealthy for the discussion but definitely not warranting a billion words

    northerndancer:

    I believe Hitch mentioned the ‘analytics’ twice and not one keen reported bothered to stray from what seemed like their pre-determined story line to ask the obvious question and get the Hitch teaching moment. “What analytics did you use to inform you of what?” Sad state of ‘journalism.’ IMO

    My life for a press pass to Ken Hitchcock avails

  81. RonnieB says:

    JimmyV1965: Just a couple quibbles with your post. I largely agree with everything you’ve said here, but Huberdeau will be 26 for the entire season next year and his -23 is largely a reflection of his high volume playing time on a team with weak goaltending. Barkov is -19 this year and no one would call him a defensive liability. My biggest concern with Huberdeau is that he’s more of a playmaker than goal scorer. I would rather have Ehlers though for the reasons you mentioned.

    i want to see how Ehlers performs in this year’s playoffs before getting too keen on him.
    Last year he had zero goals in 15 playoff games. Remember how Eberle was blasted for his 0 for 13?

  82. Wilde says:

    Anyone else notice the cooling down of most of the first round ranked guys in the 2019 draft?

    Starting to think my projection of there being a surplus of high-end forwards (by production) might not come true

  83. Side says:

    Wilde: but I think the difference between them was manners and not by a wide enough gap to be considered trolling

    Believing that the OBC is also part of Chiarelli’s decisions doesn’t add up to being a pathological conspiracy theorist.

    Cassandra’s manners are to dismiss any argument as his as crazy, confused, or conspiracy related from a position of “always being right” about these things. I don’t recall anyone else in this thread implying Cassandra may have a mental disease, is a conspiracy theorist, and dismissed him from a position of authority, do you? This is rampant in most of his posts.

    Sorry, where was the coup d’etat implied in this thread? I may have missed it – from what I could see it was implying that the OBC sucks and they give shitty advice and should also be removed from the organization. I don’t recall anyone in this thread saying that the OBC went out of their way to feed Chiarelli bad advice to sabotage the organization from within.

    “Part of Cassandra’s main point was that distinct actors over the 13 years had their own distinct patterns of failure.”

    Yes, and my point was that the distinct actors were fired and moved within the organization. Chiarelli as the distinct actor was fired and NOT moved within the organization, meaning his poor decisions left with him. The other distinct actors have been reshuffled and are providing advice to new GMs on how to run the organization.

    My comment about “if you were Katz” is pretty straightforward. It’s a hypothetical situation to lay out that if we were all owners of the organization, we would not have one of our failed GM’s being the “2nd hand man” to our new GM. Cassandra mentions the Reinhart deal and the fact that MacT wouldn’t have done it. Okay, but MacT made a bunch of other poor decisions in how to handle the Oilers D, so why is he still around?

    Sorry – but you are not fully autonomous if a “committee” is involved in decision making processes. OP is right in this thread in that none of us know definitively what goes on in the org and who is making what decisions. Chiarelli is definitely responsible for all of his decisions, but these “committee” meetings and leaning on MacT for counsel muddies things. But, as you can see in Cassandra’s posts, he places it all on PC and doesn’t see why people want the OBC to be removed from the organization.

    “But a person reading with constructive intentions would take these to mean the same, common sense thing. Because surely someone saying the first thing wouldn’t literally mean “everyone in the organisation in any capacity at any point in time during the Chiarelli era has said the exact same thing verbatim”.”

    This is trolling 101. You tell people you are an authority on the matter, that you are always right on the particular topic, and then you make weird sweeping statement that is NOT correct. It’s what baits people, it’s trolling.

    “Well, not nothing because I’d rather posters like Cassandra not be called trolls and driven out b/c I think that’s unhealthy for the discussion but definitely not warranting a billion words”

    You know what’s unhealthy for discussion and forums? Posters who say stuff like this:

    “It’s the dreaded 1 for 3 deal without the 3
    I hate being right. I’ve disliked Chiarelli since the beginning and he’s only gotten worse.
    I make this vow. I will poison this board with hatred for Chiarelli for as long as he lives. I don’t care if the Oilers make the playoffs. It they do, they would have made it anyway. It they don’t, it is his fault.
    I don’t even care if they win the Stanley Cup. If they do, it is in spite of this move.
    Anyone who defends Chiarelli from here until the end of time will be trolled mercilessly. Begone traitors. Your attitude has aided and abetted the ruination.”

    So, you read Cassandra/CB’s post saying he’s going to troll anyone about Chiarelli for as long as he lives. Keep this comment in mind when you read his posts about Chiarelli, because he really is sticking to his word. It’s difficult to have a discussion with Cassandra about Chiarelli, not because he is “always right” about Chiarelli, but because he’s never arguing from a position of good faith.

    Hence why he has never clarified/apologized/walked back this trolling comment of his.

    He is an admitted troll who trolls regularly (hence the warnings he gets from LT asking him not to troll and why Cassandra has been absent lately).

    Again, not sure why people go out of their way to defend a self-proclaimed, unapologetic troll. But, you do you, I suppose.

  84. YKOil says:

    Would take Ehlers or Huberdeau, unsure how to get them here given Cap work that needs to be done.

    The reason I keep on saying RHD is because we really only have Larsson. Petrovic, Benning Russell off-hand and Sekera off-hand just aren’t getting it done and so any losses in depth of LHD doubly impact the team because the RHD can’t carry their pairings and depend on the LHD to do the transition work.

    I think we should be sellers but I think we should buy on Jensen (Detroit) and try to get him extended. Can’t be any worse than Benning/Petrovic and could be better than Russell/Sekera off-hand. Also, probably cheaper.

  85. OriginalPouzar says:

    GordieHoweHatTrick: So you are implying something like this:
    Spooner-McD-Draisaitl
    JJ – Nuge- JP
    6’others

    Klef Lars Nurse Rej
    2 others

    2 goalies 1 of which is MK

    How do you do it with the cap?

    I value your opinion

    Sending down Malone and bringing up Spooner adds about $600K (just under) to the cap and takes us apx $1.8M over the cap with Sekera’s activation (and a 24 man roster).

    Without a trade, it could be as simple as waiving and re-assigning both Manning and Petrovic – that gets us cap compliant right there with a 22 man roster (7D, 13F, 2G).

  86. OriginalPouzar says:

    JimmyV1965:
    JP has 37 pts in 53 games in the AHL. Benson has 38 pts in 46 games.Benson is a couple months younger.

    One major component that is not being given any credence in these comparisons is that Benson was assigned to Bakersfield prior to the regular season and just left there to play night after night, get comfortable, develop chemistry, get in to a routine etc.

    Puljujarvi, every time he’s been assigned, its been mid-season and he’s been yo-yoes – some time here, some time there, etc. Same thing with Yamamoto.

    Give Jesse and Kailer some significant time at the AHL level – time to settle in and simply play nightly and I would posit their numbers would be every good as Benson’s.

  87. Wilde says:

    Tiny thing to get out of the way first:

    Side: Sorry, where was the coup d’etat implied in this thread? I may have missed it – from what I could see it was implying that the OBC sucks and they give shitty advice and should also be removed from the organization. I don’t recall anyone in this thread saying that the OBC went out of their way to feed Chiarelli bad advice to sabotage the organization from within.

    I never implied it was implied in this thread

    Side:
    Believing that the OBC is also part of Chiarelli’s decisions doesn’t add up to being a pathological conspiracy theorist.

    The accusation is not that people ‘believe that the OBC is also part of Chiarelli’s decisions”. Again, nobody believes that members of the organisation that had job titles like assistant GM straight up weren’t a part of the decisions. No one says that. You’re still just walking past this statement:

    Wilde: Not making a decision on your own is not the same as not being the one making the decision.

    Having autonomy to make your decisions and having counsel for your decisions are not mutually exclusive.

    Which is why people instead argue that not only did the OBC have input, they had actual /power/ over him.

    The argument is never about the belief or non-belief that the OBC had influence.

    The argument is always about the belief or non-belief that the influence was so great as to remove some or all of the responsibility as the final decision maker from Peter Chiarelli.

    If we go back to surface level on this again, I’m going to skip it.

    Side:
    Cassandra’s manners are to dismiss any argument as his as crazy, confused, or conspiracy related from a position of “always being right” about these things. I don’t recall anyone else in this thread implying Cassandra may have a mental disease, is a conspiracy theorist, and dismissed him from a position of authority, do you? This is rampant in most of his posts.

    First off, I’ve argued with Cassandra and none of this happened to me. None. Ever. And none of this was present in the first post. What does that imply?

    To get to the rest of the specifics, though:

    1) What part was implying a mental disease? Was it the “Cassandra Delusion” part? The insults in both directions were about thought process and thinking, and so the standard has to be applied both ways.

    Which is to say nobody said another person had a mental disease, or each party involved did.

    I prefer to think that nobody did. It didn’t go nearly that far and I think you know this.

    2) It /is/ a conspiracy theory! Even if you’re correct, it’s still a conspiracy theory. That’s what the words mean. Conspiracy theories are not always false or fantastical.

    3) As for the ‘dismissal from a position of authority’, I don’t know how that applies here but I’m guessing that you’re saying that he thinks he’s an authority and so he’s dismissing you because of that? I think you misrepresented things (as I have shown in my last post…) and then after that the discussion went nowhere because there was no actual engagement.

    And, also, none of that which was ‘rampant in all of his posts’ was unprovoked here. There was a dissenting opinion and the source got trolled and then called one. This is how places like this die, or at the very least become much more boring. Which is really the main reason I’m defending these takes.

    Side:
    Yes, and my point was that the distinct actors were fired and moved within the organization. Chiarelli as the distinct actor was fired and NOT moved within the organization, meaning his poor decisions left with him. The other distinct actors have been reshuffled and are providing advice to new GMs on how to run the organization.

    This point isn’t relevant to the assertions, though. Here’s what I considered the nucleus:

    ———————————————————————————–

    “Have you notice that those who are quickest to blame the supposed red wine crew for this travesty are the same ones that defended Chiarelli the hardest and longest?

    The fact is that there is surprisingly little evidence that the OBC does anything, for better or for worse.”

    [evidence provided]

    “My conclusion, terrifying as it may be, is not that the OBC have too much power, but that they had too little.

    “The problem isn’t that they interfered with Chiarelli too much, but that they didn’t know how terrible he was at his job and hence didn’t interfere enough. That’s the story.”

    ———————————————————————————–

    So, how does your point combat (or preclude in any way) anything that’s been said above?

    Side:
    My comment about “if you were Katz” is pretty straightforward. It’s a hypothetical situation to lay out that if we were all owners of the organization, we would not have one of our failed GM’s being the “2nd hand man” to our new GM. Cassandra mentions the Reinhart deal and the fact that MacT wouldn’t have done it. Okay, but MacT made a bunch of other poor decisions in how to handle the Oilers D, so why is he still around?

    Of course it’s straightforward. It’s also category ‘irrelevant thought experiment’. Anyone reading can read this, and then the Cassandra quotes, and then tell me how the hypothetical situation of what one would do if they were running the organisation has to do with an analysis of whether or not Chiarelli had autonomy.

    It seems to just be rehashing “they were therefore they had influence, if not why would they be there?” thing which again, doesn’t exonerate the final decision-maker of their final decision.

    If I was Katz I would have paid Julien Brisebois 50 million dollars. Who cares? Why does an insult (deserved or not) of Chiarelli’s record always invite this reaction to shit on the OBC? That’s getting ahead of yourself, because first you have to refute the ‘first, second, third’ part.

    Side: Sorry – but you are not fully autonomous if a “committee” is involved in decision making processes. OP is right in this thread in that none of us know definitively what goes on in the org and who is making what decisions. Chiarelli is definitely responsible for all of his decisions, but these “committee” meetings and leaning on MacT for counsel muddies things

    The fact that none of us knows definitively is an argument to evaluate the GM the way we normally do it, the way we normally evaluate GMs. Choosing who to delegate to, who to trust with what; these are all part of the job.

    And so is using the smell test and having a good one. Imagine if all of the legwork up until only the final signature is required: would the Reinhart, Lucic and Larsson acquisitions pass?

    You have to get past this AND debunking the common threads and tendencies from his Boston days and many other hurdles in order to shift a material amount of the blame onto the OBC, and you’re skipping that/

    As is, this is just whataboutism.

    Side:
    This is trolling 101. You tell people you are an authority on the matter, that you are always right on the particular topic, and then you make weird sweeping statement that is NOT correct. It’s what baits people, it’s trolling.

    I’m guessing you’re referring to the following post:

    Cassandra: Whatever. I have a long and established record of being right on these issues. Everything I said has proven true and yet you somehow still seem unable to acknowledge it. Which of us is cursed?

    Which, it’s pretty funny that you’re equating “I have a long and established record of being right on these issues” to be “I am always right on this particular topic”.

    (Also Hall for Larsson, Lucic for a 7th round pick; many things he was legit correct on)

    But the kicker is that it was in response to this:

    “You get called a troll because you have a long documented history of trolling on this site, for which you’ve been called on many many times.
    In failing to acknowledge that, perhaps it’s you who is struggling with objective reality?
    The Cassandra delusion. It’s real and it’s spectacular.”

    So, is this okay? If what Cassandra said is such, is this not dismissing his argument as “crazy, confused”; “baiting” someone, “dismissing” them?

    Again (again again), you’ve got these things in the wrong order.

    EVERYTHING you’re condemning someone for doing wasn’t done by them until after it was done /to/ them.

    Just because he said he would troll people over Chiarelli doesn’t mean that’s what he came in here and did. There was ample actual discussion points contained in the first post that was made on the subject.

    You and others chose not to engage them, but still chose to antagonise. What would you call that? Again, I don’t think either should be called trolling but if one is, then they both are.

    Side: He is an admitted troll who trolls regularly

    Lol. How many Cassandra posts have there been in the last year?

    Side: Again, not sure why people go out of their way to defend a self-proclaimed, unapologetic troll. But, you do you, I suppose.

    Oh, I will. I don’t care if they call themselves a troll, I care whether or not they /do/ troll.

    Just like I don’t care if someone denies that they’re trolling, if they are, in fact, trolling.

    And if someone with a dissenting opinion gets doggie piled, I am absolutely going to uh, voice my displeasure with that. There was new information (Friedman, Rishaug) on a controversial topic with a ton of depth and historical significance to the Oilers. Jacking off about whose username posted what does absolutely nothing. The original post was not a troll.

    It’s much easier to interact/argue with Cassandra (and anyone else on the internet with a /reputation/) than people make it seem. I’d add that to the internet bible if I could.

  88. GordieHoweHatTrick says:

    OriginalPouzar: Sending down Malone and bringing up Spooner adds about $600K (just under) to the cap and takes us apx $1.8M over the cap with Sekera’s activation (and a 24 man roster).

    Without a trade, it could be as simple as waiving and re-assigning both Manning and Petrovic – that gets us cap compliant right there with a 22 man roster (7D, 13F, 2G).

    Good. Thanks.
    If the Oil are thinking about what to do with the impending cap crunch (due to Sek, regardless of Spooner), I imagine (?@!) they are actively looking for trade partners to move Manning and Petro, cause it would be nice to get a bag of pucks (no offense BoP!) or something for them instead of them getting picked off waivers for nothing. I imagine any other teams interested in these guys, are just waiting for that. Manning’s contract is a deterrent so I would hope he gets waivered before Petrovic and they find something in a trade for Petro.

  89. Chief Inspector says:

    JimmyV1965:
    JP has 37 pts in 53 games in the AHL. Benson has 38 pts in 46 games.Benson is a couple months younger.

    JP did most of this wo years ago when he was 18 with much lower quality linemates. And Benson is the older player.

  90. ArmchairGM says:

    Lowetide: almost everyone visiting here has a great knowledge than me about these things and appreciate the patience.

    Not me. I’m just an idea rat.

  91. OriginalPouzar says:

    GordieHoweHatTrick: Good. Thanks.
    If the Oil are thinking about what to do with the impending cap crunch (due to Sek, regardless of Spooner), I imagine (?@!)they are actively looking for trade partners to move Manning and Petro, cause it would be nice to get a bag of pucks (no offense BoP!) or something for them instead of them getting picked off waivers for nothing. I imagine any other teams interested in these guys, are just waiting for that. Manning’s contract is a deterrent so I would hope he gets waivered before Petrovic and they find something in a trade for Petro.

    The Oilers should have plenty of NHL d-men for next year (with Sekera back) and, when healthy, with current roster construction, Manning isn’t even on the NHL depth chart. Given the cap commitment for next year, that is a contract that should be moved if at all possible without taking back a bad contract with term or using an asset to get rid of it. If a team is willing to take it – it needs to go.

    With that said, the organization and the current coach clearly likes Manning over Petrovic.

  92. Lowetide says:

    For The Athletic: Oilers’ potential roster upheaval might set a record for summer activity

    https://theathletic.com/812613/2019/02/12/lowetide-oilers-potential-roster-upheaval-might-set-a-record-for-summer-activity/

  93. BONE207 says:

    Bank Shot:

    A guy like Kris Russell would be Pronger down there.

    Starfishies get more love in the Ahl

« Older Comments

Leave a Reply

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