Patience

How did it work out so badly? We tend to separate prospects into ‘success’ or ‘fail’ based on their NHL performance and ability to sustain a level of play that keeps them in the big league. Looking back, understanding injuries, coaching changes and a lack of a designated farm team for part of the decade, it seems incredible the Oilers didn’t get more from their drafted forwards 2000-09. How bad was it? Bad.

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 Athletic, check it out here.

THE KIDS FROM 2000-04

The Oilers received over a decade of hard work from Ales Hemsky, but the rest of this group was either traded too soon (Brodziak, Stoll), succumbed to injury (Pouliot, Jacques) or faded away. Many of these players either fit the style of coach Craig MacTavish or ground their skills in the minors to make themselves more responsible. Schremp was the outlier. Edmonton didn’t get much from these selections as a group. The farm team walkabout was certainly a major factor and trades impacted the team too, plus looking for a second opinion (Winchester) that worked out for the player in a new town (for a time). What can we learn from this? Patience, dammit!

THE KIDS FROM 2005 TO 2009

Eberle>Hemsky but the portion of the bell curve ahead for Ebs will bring him back to the pack. This group wasn’t impacted by the farm team chaos, but were fast tracked (Gagner, Lander) or flushed for no good damned reason (Omark). One bizarre note: Schremp’s even strength scoring per 60>Gagner. How bizarre.

THE KIDS FROM 2013 TO 2017

This is the current group, the last five years. Enormous advantage in having the top two names signed to long-term deals, and Yamamoto took a step forward this season. I’m encouraged that Holland reached out to Slepyshev and further encouraged by recent comments from Jesse Puljujarvi that could have him back in Edmonton. I don’t think it’s wise to get too high or low with this news, the Puljujarvi side has wanted a trade for some time and it seems unlikely they would abandon the goal at this point in the offseason. A month from now? August? More likely.

Fascinating turn, Samorukov the latest in a (now) long line of Russian prospects who would prefer to play at home than in Bakersfield. Samorukov was challenged by AHL opposition a year ago, so a return would have been the play here. The KHL is a good league too, so as long as he plays then Samorukov should not lose any development time with this transaction. I do wonder if this might be a signal about the AHL season but that’s a stretch, we just don’t know. Oilers need some AHL blue if there’s a 2020-21 season though, that’s a fact.

LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

I have a feeling it’s going to be a busy day for breaking news, our turn comes at 10, TSN1260. Steve Lansky from BigMouthSports and Inside the Truck podcast will talk about the NHL’s return and what the game will look like upon return. Matt Iwanyk from TSN1260 will talk Euro 2020, hockey players in the summer Olympics, and the critera for the NHL’s hub cities (which seems to be changing). 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

75 Responses to "Patience"

  1. Hitman77 says:

    We have a need for forwards with this upcoming draft. With the news that Samorukov is headed to the KHL, I wonder if this motivates Holland to take another d-man with his first. Would love to see our draft board.

  2. OriginalPouzar says:

    As far as development goes, i’m fine with Sammy in the KHL over the AHL.

    I wonder if this has something to do with the greater likelihood of the KHL season – its slatted to start in September, I believe and who knows when the AHL season will start – I don’t imagine it doesn’t generally line up with the NHL season which is likely for December.

    I just hope this isn’t a signal of Sammy’s enthusiasm for the organization – I doubt it is but you never know.

    The left side of the Bake D was looking good with Sammy, Lennstrom, Nimelainan – assuming Lagesson is in the NHL. It will be OK.

  3. so polar says:

    That’s rough on Samurokov and Russia. Figured he’d take a big step forward next year, which I suppose is no less likely (CSKA, I assume, has as many trainers as any NHL club). Hopefully he’s not too entranced.

  4. LadiesloveSmid says:

    Are there many/any examples of prospects leaving the AHL for the KHL and returning to be impact NHLers?

  5. OriginalPouzar says:

    Jack Michaels with a tweet about Jesse’s potential return after the second “never say never” statement.

    I don’t recall Jack ever tweeting about speculative player movement before.

  6. JimmyV1965 says:

    Hey OP. Just wanted to comment on the idea that trading the first round pick for a player somehow hurts us in th expansion draft. I don’t see the logic. We are losing a good player in the expansion draft. That’s just the reality. If we trade the first round pick, it doesn’t change the fact that we are losing a good player. We have simply increased the number of good players Seattle gets to choose from. Yes we lose a good player, but we have increased the pool of good players on the team. The only way it hurts is if you think the first round pick will someday be better than the player we lose in the expansion draft, which would be far from clear if we draft later in the first round.

    PS. I’m not thrilled with the way I explained this.

  7. N64 says:

    JimmyV1965:
    Hey OP. Just wanted to comment on the idea that trading the first round pick for a player somehow hurts us in th expansion draft. I don’t see the logic. We are losing a good player in the expansion draft. That’s just the reality. If we trade the first round pick, it doesn’t change the fact that we are losing a good player.We have simply increased the number of good players Seattle gets to choose from. Yes we lose a good player, but we have increased the pool of good players on the team. The only way it hurts is if you think the first round pick will someday be better than the player we lose in the expansion draft, which would be far from clear if we draft later in the first round.

    PS.I’m not thrilled with the way I explained this.

    It’s only about the drop off from the additional exposed player to the others. And yeah that’s impossible to evaluate without knowing which of Nurse and Klef and Larsson and Nuge are under contract by then.

    So from the outside hard to say if the drop off will be significant. Also the play of Jones and Lagesson will change things too. Probably best not to overthink this. The only likely thing is that exempt assets including picks should go up in trade value vs non-exempt assets.

  8. PennersPancakes says:

    LadiesloveSmid:
    Are there many/any examples of prospects leaving the AHL for the KHL and returning to be impact NHLers?

    Giordano had 2 seasons in the AHL, half a season in the NHL before doing a year in the KHL.

  9. pts2pndr says:

    JimmyV1965:
    Hey OP. Just wanted to comment on the idea that trading the first round pick for a player somehow hurts us in th expansion draft. I don’t see the logic. We are losing a good player in the expansion draft. That’s just the reality. If we trade the first round pick, it doesn’t change the fact that we are losing a good player.We have simply increased the number of good players Seattle gets to choose from. Yes we lose a good player, but we have increased the pool of good players on the team. The only way it hurts is if you think the first round pick will someday be better than the player we lose in the expansion draft, which would be far from clear if we draft later in the first round.

    PS.I’m not thrilled with the way I explained this.

    Op will jump all over this but I will beat him to it. You did not figure in the possible value of a lower cap hit entry level contract. These will become ever increasingly more valuable if the cap flattens and or deflates. There are pros and cons either way you proceed. What scares me is that are trade acquisitions have been less than stellar.

  10. PennersPancakes says:

    JimmyV1965:
    Hey OP. Just wanted to comment on the idea that trading the first round pick for a player somehow hurts us in th expansion draft. I don’t see the logic. We are losing a good player in the expansion draft. That’s just the reality. If we trade the first round pick, it doesn’t change the fact that we are losing a good player.We have simply increased the number of good players Seattle gets to choose from. Yes we lose a good player, but we have increased the pool of good players on the team. The only way it hurts is if you think the first round pick will someday be better than the player we lose in the expansion draft, which would be far from clear if we draft later in the first round.

    PS.I’m not thrilled with the way I explained this.

    Agreed. As long as you’re only exposing 5 good players and not 4 good players and 1 great player you’re safe. I’m not going to speak on IF trading a 1st is a good idea or not BUT I am surprised a couple teams didn’t go the route of stocking up on players.

    If you are only exposing 1 good player and the rest are junk it could make sense to offload the player for a draft exempt asset or to try to bribe the drafting team to avoid taking that player. If you’re already exposing 2 good players of equal value you’re screwed anyways. If you can find a different team trying to unload their one player for less than market value you should go for it as long as the cost of acquiring that single player is less than the cost of bribing the drafting team.

    Basically all the teams who made substantial trades with Vegas were on the lesser end of value.
    – Islanders give up a 1st and 2nd to get rid of 1 year of Grabovski.
    – Minnesota give up Tuch to protect Dumba and Sandella but also selected Haula
    – Columbus gave up Karlsson, a 1st, and a 2nd to take on 3 years of Clarkson
    – Ducks gave up Theodore to protect Manson and Vatanen
    – Jets swapped 1st round picks (11 spots) to take Thorburn
    – Pittsburgh gave a 2nd for MAF
    – Florida gave up Marchessault so Vegas would pick Smith. Cost them a 4th round pick
    – Tampa gave up Gusev, a 2nd, and a 4th to get out of the last year of Garrisons contract.

    Its difficult to view these without also looking back at the protected lists and hindsight is 2020 but teams paid Vegas to take good players. Its crazy to look at the assets Vegas walked away from at the draft, then crazier to see how they handled all those picks in trades and ended up against the cap.

  11. JimmyV1965 says:

    N64: It’s only about the drop off from the additional exposed player to the others. And yeah that’s impossible to evaluate without knowing which of Nurse and Klef and Larsson and Nuge are under contract by then.

    So from the outside hard to say if the drop off will be significant. Also the play of Jones and Lagesson will change things too. Probably best not to overthink this. The only likely thing is that exempt assets including picks should go up in trade value vs non-exempt assets.

    I was thinking about all those teams that got raped in trades by Vegas trying to protect certain players. I’m not sure of the exact details of each trade, but I’m sure some teams would have been better trading their first round pick for a good player and just letting Vegas take that player. I guess what I’m saying is the expansion draft shouldn’t alter your team building strategy, unless there is a specific reason why.

  12. LMHF#1 says:

    They screwed up that 05-09 group so very badly. An absolute boatload of talent and players with coachable, transferable skills but no Sather to get the best out of them. Utter shame.

    Specifically, I maintain that Linus Omark with the right Coach could not only have been the shootout star and PP contributor he is, but his ability to go into a corner or along the boards and win the puck battle was elite. The fact no one on the staff recognized that this could have been utilized as an elite defensive skill is just sad.

  13. JimmyV1965 says:

    PennersPancakes: Agreed. As long as you’re only exposing 5 good players and not 4 good players and 1 great player you’re safe. I’m not going to speak on IF trading a 1st is a good idea or not BUT I am surprised a couple teams didn’t go the route of stocking up on players.

    If you are only exposing 1 good player and the rest are junk it could make sense to offload the player for a draft exempt asset or to try to bribe the drafting team to avoid taking that player. If you’re already exposing 2 good players of equal value you’re screwed anyways. If you can find a different team trying to unload their one player for less than market value you should go for it as long as the cost of acquiring that single player is less than the cost of bribing the drafting team.

    Basically all the teams who made substantial trades with Vegas were on the lesser end of value.
    – Islanders give up a 1st and 2nd to get rid of 1 year of Grabovski.
    – Minnesota give up Tuch to protect Dumba and Sandella but also selected Haula
    – Columbus gave up Karlsson, a 1st, and a 2nd to take on 3 years of Clarkson
    – Ducks gave up Theodore to protect Manson and Vatanen
    – Jets swapped 1st round picks (11 spots) to take Thorburn
    – Pittsburgh gave a 2nd for MAF
    – Florida gave up Marchessault so Vegas would pick Smith. Cost them a 4th round pick
    – Tampa gave up Gusev, a 2nd, and a 4th to get out of the last year of Garrisons contract.

    Its difficult to view these without also looking back at the protected lists and hindsight is 2020 but teams paid Vegas to take good players. Its crazy to look at the assets Vegas walked away from at the draft, then crazier to see how they handled all those picks in trades and ended up against the cap.

    Thanks. You explained my thoughts much better than I did.

  14. JimmyV1965 says:

    pts2pndr: Op will jump all over this but I will beat him to it. You did not figure in the possible value of a lower cap hit entry level contract. These will become ever increasingly more valuable if the cap flattens and or deflates. There are pros and cons either way you proceed. What scares me is that are trade acquisitionshave been less than stellar.

    You’re right of course. But I think cap concerns are something GMs have to grapple with, regardless of the expansion draft.

  15. N64 says:

    JimmyV1965:I guess what I’m saying is the expansion draft shouldn’t alter your team building strategy, unless there is a specific reason why.

    Exactly my take. In most team building strategies it’s going to be a marginal difference. You’d have to know the specifics around Nurse, Klef, Larsson, Nuge etc. And even then if you think your move will add Jones to the exposure list you factor that into your asks anyways.

  16. JimmyV1965 says:

    N64: Exactly my take. In most team building strategies it’s going to be a marginal difference. You’d have to know the specifics around Nurse, Klef, Larsson, Nuge etc. And even then if you think your move will add Jones to the exposure list you factor that into your asks anyways.

    Agreed. They’re are so many unknowns it’s almost impossible to project a year out. I’ll be surprised, but not shocked, if we would prefer to protect Jones rather than Bear when the expansion draft takes place.

  17. OriginalPouzar says:

    DId JFJ succumb to injury or was he just an awful NHL player?

    I recall a play he made about 50 games in to his NHL career – he took a pass in the neutral zone, pivoted and made a solid dump – I remember saying to my buddy “that’s the best play JFJ has ever made in the NHL”.

  18. N64 says:

    JimmyV1965: Agreed. They’re are so many unknowns it’s almost impossible to project a year out. I’ll be surprised, but not shocked, if we would prefer to protect Jones rather than Bear when the expansion draft takes place.

    I’d be shocked if Bear was unprotected. If Jones makes the case he need equal protection someone older likely gets moved. But again if I trade away an exempt asset like a pick my ask goes way up compared to e.g. the Vegas era Oil who had less to expose.

  19. OriginalPouzar says:

    It still astonishes me that, out of that list of middling tweeners, Chris VandeVelde was one that was able to have an NHL career – 3 full seasons with the Flyers.

  20. OriginalPouzar says:

    Hitman77:
    We have a need for forwards with this upcoming draft.With the news that Samorukov is headed to the KHL, I wonder if this motivates Holland to take another d-man with his first.Would love to see our draft board.

    I don’t see what Sammy playing in the KHL as oppossed to the AHL would have any effect on this coming draft. Its not like the drafted player would fill his spot in Bakersfied and I don’t believe this move signals that Sammy isn’t a legit NHL prospect.

    This very well may be Sammy wanting to actually play hockey in 2020 – the AHL may not play hockey until 2021 (or late 2020).

  21. OriginalPouzar says:

    JimmyV1965:
    Hey OP. Just wanted to comment on the idea that trading the first round pick for a player somehow hurts us in th expansion draft. I don’t see the logic. We are losing a good player in the expansion draft. That’s just the reality. If we trade the first round pick, it doesn’t change the fact that we are losing a good player.We have simply increased the number of good players Seattle gets to choose from. Yes we lose a good player, but we have increased the pool of good players on the team. The only way it hurts is if you think the first round pick will someday be better than the player we lose in the expansion draft, which would be far from clear if we draft later in the first round.

    PS.I’m not thrilled with the way I explained this.

    Yes, we are losing a good player but here are the scenarios:

    1) the player we acquire is real good and we protect him and have to expose someone that would previously be on the protected list – that would/could be someone like Nuge/Yamamoto. Factor in the loss of a player like that over, say, AA or Benson, plus the 1st round pick in the acquisition cost

    2) if the player isn’t good enough to knock someone out of a protected spot then he’s exposed and either (a) taken by Seattle or (b) not taken by Seattle – in either case, that’s a bad trade for a 1st round pick, isnt’ it? We lose the player or he’s not taken for free.

    I’m not saying that there can be no trade of expansion draft exempt assets for non-exempt assets but future protected lists and the expansion draft must be factored in by management.

    Thankfully, we know management is indeed factoring in the draft as we’ve heard Holland mention it (I believe in and around the deadline).

  22. PennersPancakes says:

    OriginalPouzar,

    Dont go big game hunting before the expansion draft unless you have nothing to protect. If youre exposing the likes of AA and Kassian acquire as many similar players as you want.

  23. dustrock says:

    LMHF#1:
    They screwed up that 05-09 group so very badly. An absolute boatload of talent and players with coachable, transferable skills but no Sather to get the best out of them. Utter shame.

    Specifically, I maintain that Linus Omark with the right Coach could not only have been the shootout star and PP contributor he is, but his ability to go into a corner or along the boards and win the puck battle was elite. The fact no one on the staff recognized that this could have been utilized as an elite defensive skill is just sad.

    Absolutely agree. I’d even argue Schremp, for all his faults, probably could have had a career if he was handled differently.

  24. LMHF#1 says:

    dustrock: Absolutely agree.I’d even argue Schremp, for all his faults, probably could have had a career if he was handled differently.

    I was a student at the UofA when Schremp was drafted. The players would come in the pre-season to Clare Drake to get ready and I’d head there, do some work, eat lunch or run the track and watch the skates.

    One of Schremp’s first times out there that first year I watched him go an entire practice without missing a pass. Not. One. I’ve never seen any other player do that. He needed a coach and mentor, especially if you now read about some of the stuff he was clearly dealing with at the time. He didn’t have that and it’s a damn shame because that’s one of the most purely talented players I’ve seen.

  25. JimmyV1965 says:

    OriginalPouzar: Yes, we are losing a good player but here are the scenarios:

    1) the player we acquire is real good and we protect him and have to expose someone that would previously be on the protected list – that would/could be someone like Nuge/Yamamoto. Factor in the loss of a player like that over, say, AA or Benson, plus the 1st round pick in the acquisition cost

    2) if the player isn’t good enough to knock someone out of a protected spot then he’s exposed and either (a) taken by Seattle or (b) not taken by Seattle – in either case, that’s a bad trade for a 1st round pick, isnt’ it?We lose the player or he’s not taken for free.

    I’m not saying that there can be no trade of expansion draft exempt assets for non-exempt assets but future protected lists and the expansion draft must be factored in by management.

    Thankfully, we know management is indeed factoring in the draft as we’ve heard Holland mention it (I believe in and around the deadline).

    I the player we trade for is so good we have to expose Nuge or Yams, is that not a win for the team? We’ve actually improved the team so much we now have to expose a really good player. I really doubt we could trade for a player better than Nuge though.

    Exposing the player we trade for does not necessarily mean he’s a bad player; he’s just not as good as the players we protect. He could still be a better player than anyone we acquire with the 20 OV, who might not be a viable NHL option for three or more years. If Seattle takes that player instead of Jones, for instance, haven’t we simply traded the first round pick to keep Jones? I guess we might lose if the player isn’t as good as Jones and we lose him anyway, but that’s the type of risk you make in any trade.

  26. hunter1909 says:

    OriginalPouzar: DId JFJ succumb to injury or was he just an awful NHL player?

    Injury. He started out like gangbusters in Hamilton, was a crowd favourite but got injured and the rest never got written.

  27. hunter1909 says:

    LMHF#1: I was a student at the UofA when Schremp was drafted. The players would come in the pre-season to Clare Drake to get ready and I’d head there, do some work, eat lunch or run the track and watch the skates.

    One of Schremp’s first times out there that first year I watched him go an entire practice without missing a pass. Not. One. I’ve never seen any other player do that. He needed a coach and mentor, especially if you now read about some of the stuff he was clearly dealing with at the time. He didn’t have that and it’s a damn shame because that’s one of the most purely talented players I’ve seen.

    See: Lowe+MacT

  28. N64 says:

    OriginalPouzar: Yes, we are losing a good player but here are the scenarios:

    1) the player we acquire is real good and we protect him and have to expose someone that would previously be on the protected list – that would/could be someone like Nuge/Yamamoto. Factor in the loss of a player like that over, say, AA or Benson, plus the 1st round pick in the acquisition cost

    2) if the player isn’t good enough to knock someone out of a protected spot then he’s exposed and either (a) taken by Seattle or (b) not taken by Seattle – in either case, that’s a bad trade for a 1st round pick, isnt’ it?We lose the player or he’s not taken for free.

    I’m not saying that there can be no trade of expansion draft exempt assets for non-exempt assets but future protected lists and the expansion draft must be factored in by management.

    Thankfully, we know management is indeed factoring in the draft as we’ve heard Holland mention it (I believe in and around the deadline).

    After the Vegas debacle everyone is going to factor it on the cost side, but they’ll also factor in into the value they are asking for even if it does not impact them on the cost side. #paymeorkraken

  29. N64 says:

    JimmyV1965: I the player we trade for is so good we have to expose Nuge or Yams

    Neither will be exposed if on roster.

  30. JimmyV1965 says:

    N64: Neither will be exposed if on roster.

    Agreed. They’ll go 7-3 if either of those guys have to be exposed.

  31. dustrock says:

    LMHF#1,

    Yeah, he’s something like Zegras, I’d say.

    Funny of the things Steve Valiquette was really trumpeting in his Athletic interview, which was mostly about stats, he talks about how using a psychologist turned his career around.

    I think the focus for him was on using psychologists for goalies to deal with letting in weak goals, et cetera, but there’s so many players who could benefit.

  32. N64 says:

    JimmyV1965: Agreed. They’ll go 7-3 if either of those guys have to be exposed.

    Or 4-4. Sure you get 2 extra skaters with 7-3, but it still comes down first of all to which 8 skaters do you want to protect.

    If the first 8 includes 5 forwards odds are Kraken will take Oil’s 4th D, but yeah you get to protect two more F to make sure they do. 😉 #nogriff

  33. jp says:

    OriginalPouzar: DId JFJ succumb to injury or was he just an awful NHL player?

    hunter1909: Injury. He started out like gangbusters in Hamilton, was a crowd favourite but got injured and the rest never got written.

    When did he first injure his back? I can’t remember for sure.

    His first pro season (05-06) he played 65 AHL – 7 NHL games.
    06-07 he played 29 AHL – 37 NHL games (37-0-0-0 in the NHL).
    07-08 he played 38 AHL – 9 NHL games (running his career totals to 53-0-0-0). He missed significant games here so this may have been the major injury?
    08-09 he only played 8 AHL – 7 NHL games (finally scored a goal). Seemingly injured most of the season.
    Then he played 2 years mostly with the Oilers, producing little offense.

    IIRC he may have been 40+ games into his NHL career without a point BEFORE his major injury. I could also be mistaken though. Seemed a bit Lander-y in his inability to translate AHL offense to the NHL…

  34. dustrock says:

    https://theathletic.com/1865153/2020/06/12/there-is-racism-still-very-alive-and-well-the-indigenous-experience-in-hockey/

    Please read the entire article. Black Lives Matter protests have been in the news, and Edmonton got 10,000-15,000 people out to the Ledge for a protest, which is phenomenal.

    But I wonder how many people would turn up for an Indigenous Lives Matter protest.

  35. pts2pndr says:

    JimmyV1965: Agreed. They’re are so many unknowns it’s almost impossible to project a year out. I’ll be surprised, but not shocked, if we would prefer to protect Jones rather than Bear when the expansion draft takes place.

    No GM in their right mind would protect Jones over Bear. Not only are right D harder to find but the Oilers left side D is far deeper. If Jones has the value you think he has you move him for a equally young forward to fit in your top six and protect seven and three.

  36. JimmyV1965 says:

    dustrock:
    https://theathletic.com/1865153/2020/06/12/there-is-racism-still-very-alive-and-well-the-indigenous-experience-in-hockey/

    Please read the entire article.Black Lives Matter protests have been in the news, and Edmonton got 10,000-15,000 people out to the Ledge for a protest, which is phenomenal.

    But I wonder how many people would turn up for an Indigenous Lives Matter protest.

    I was surprised the Hockey Diversity Alliance didn’t include a single native person. I’m an old white guy so WTF do I know, but I would suggest no single cultural group has suffered more in Canada than natives.

  37. OriginalPouzar says:

    As we get in to mid-June, we are coming up on what normally would be some important dates.

    The deadline to extend qualifying offers to RFAs.

    The buyout window (generally starts 48 hours after the cup is given).

    My guess is that we will have some official clarity that all these dates are bumped to when the official off-season will be – after the post-season gets completed (or cancelled if need be).

    There has been some discussion if non-playoff teams can buy players out at this point and tender the QOs but I wouldn’t think they’d bifurcate that.

  38. Reja says:

    JimmyV1965: I was surprised the Hockey Diversity Alliance didn’t include a single native person. I’m an old white guy so WTF do I know, but I would suggest no single cultural group has suffered more in Canada than natives.

    Doesn’t fit the narrative.

  39. Someone says:

    LMHF#1: I was a student at the UofA when Schremp was drafted. The players would come in the pre-season to Clare Drake to get ready and I’d head there, do some work, eat lunch or run the track and watch the skates.

    One of Schremp’s first times out there that first year I watched him go an entire practice without missing a pass. Not. One. I’ve never seen any other player do that. He needed a coach and mentor, especially if you now read about some of the stuff he was clearly dealing with at the time. He didn’t have that and it’s a damn shame because that’s one of the most purely talented players I’ve seen.

    Thanks for posting this, I really never followed Schremp after his time with the Oil. Did a little digging after reading your post, and it makes a little more sense how things turned out.

  40. Reja says:

    Last year at this time I wanted a Jesse and Jones trade to Columbus for Josh Anderson and a 3rd rounder. Jones could team up with his brother and Jesse could land with the Finn GM, man what a over pay that is. I wonder what it would take to get Josh or even if he’s healthy his stock sure went down but I think he would be the perfect rifleman on Mcdavid’s line. Kass, Connor and Josh that’s a dream line for me.

  41. PennersPancakes says:

    Reja: Doesn’t fit the narrative.

    This group formed four days ago with seven people, give them a break. Hopefully they recognize the struggles other groups have faced, especially indigenous peoples in Canada, and have invitations for players of those backgrounds to join.

    This is independent of the league and as we can already see, cause some criticism and possible back lash. They can not force players to join but hopefully more do.

    “In creating our alliance, we are confident we can inspire a new generation of hockey players and fans,” it said in a statement. “We are hopeful that anyone who puts on skates or sits in the stands will do so without worrying about race, gender or socioeconomic background (and) will be able to express their culture, identity, values and personality without fear of retribution.”

    I don’t see anything in that mission statement other than a noble and honorable cause.

  42. JimmyV1965 says:

    pts2pndr: No GM in their right mind would protect Jones over Bear. Not only are right D harder to find but the Oilers left side D is far deeper. If Jones has the value you think he has you move him for a equally youngforward to fit in your top six and protect seven and three.

    You’re talking about today. It could change in a year from now. One year ago, most of us probably liked Jones more than Bear. A lot changes in a year. I’ll say it again. I’ll be surprised, but not shocked, if Bear regresses next year, Jones progresses, and their perceived values change.

  43. JimmyV1965 says:

    PennersPancakes: This group formed four days ago with seven people, give them a break. Hopefully they recognize the struggles other groups have faced, especially indigenous peoples in Canada, and have invitations for players of those backgrounds to join.

    This is independent of the league and as we can already see, cause some criticism and possible back lash. They can not force players to join but hopefully more do.

    “In creating our alliance, we are confident we can inspire a new generation of hockey players and fans,” it said in a statement. “We are hopeful that anyone who puts on skates or sits in the stands will do so without worrying about race, gender or socioeconomic background (and) will be able to express their culture, identity, values and personality without fear of retribution.”

    I don’t see anything in that mission statement other than a noble and honorable cause.

    I simply noted that I was surprised no natives were on the HDA. I didn’t intend to start a big debate and I certainly didn’t intend to criticize the HDA.

  44. Harpers Hair says:

    Minneapolis has voted unanimously to disband its police department.
    https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/06/12/us/minneapolis-city-council-resolution-police-reform/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

    This should be interesting.

  45. godot10 says:

    C’mom. Lets move on to more important questions, like whether JK Rowling is actually Voldemort because she asserts that women with two X chromosomes should have substantive equality to women with a Y chromosome.

  46. Lowetide says:

    Gents, I appreciate the perspectives but this hockey blog simply cannot tolerate political, racial, religious and other contentious arguments. No one is timed out, would have hoped for more respectful discourse from some, but suffice to say the deleted content is unwelcome for the rest of the day.

    Thanks.

  47. Decidedly Skeptical Fan says:

    Harpers Hair:
    Minneapolis has voted unanimously to disband its police department.
    https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/06/12/us/minneapolis-city-council-resolution-police-reform/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

    This should be interesting.

    Minneapolis was already on the road to being the next Detroit or Newark. They were lagging behind Baltimore in their pursuit but this action should bring them to the front of the line rather quickly. Interesting? Perhaps, when viewed from afar. Up close it will be something else entirely.

  48. LMHF#1 says:

    Someone: Thanks for posting this, I really never followed Schremp after his time with the Oil. Did a little digging after reading your post, and it makes a little more sense how things turned out.

    Yep.

    For those that haven’t read – go find his retirement post on Facebook. Reveals a lot. Very sad but glad he’s found his way to the other side of it.

    Check on your people. Even when you think they’re at their best.

  49. Reja says:

    Decidedly Skeptical Fan: Minneapolis was already on the road to being the next Detroit or Newark. They were lagging behind Baltimore in their pursuit but this action should bring them to the front of the line rather quickly. Interesting? Perhaps, when viewed from afar. Up close it will be something else entirely.

    Has the mob renamed the city yet?

  50. PennersPancakes says:

    JimmyV1965: I simply noted that I was surprised no natives were on the HDA. I didn’t intend to start a big debate and I certainly didn’t intend to criticize the HDA.

    Sorry Jimmy I know you werent, my comment was directed to the person who replied to yours talking about there being a narrative.

    I think your point is very valid and one I agree with too. I think adding voices such as Cheechoo or Nolan would help draw attention to it.

  51. defmn says:

    Lowetide:
    Gents, I appreciate the perspectives but this hockey blog simply cannot tolerate political, racial, religious and other contentious arguments. No one is timed out, would have hoped for more respectful discourse from some, but suffice to say the deleted content is unwelcome for the rest of the day.

    Thanks.

    My apologies if I was considered a part of that.

  52. jtblack says:

    JimmyV1965:
    Hey OP. Just wanted to comment on the idea that trading the first round pick for a player somehow hurts us in th expansion draft. I don’t see the logic. We are losing a good player in the expansion draft. That’s just the reality. If we trade the first round pick, it doesn’t change the fact that we are losing a good player.We have simply increased the number of good players Seattle gets to choose from. Yes we lose a good player, but we have increased the pool of good players on the team. The only way it hurts is if you think the first round pick will someday be better than the player we lose in the expansion draft, which would be far from clear if we draft later in the first round.

    PS.I’m not thrilled with the way I explained this.

    If you look back to the Vegas expansion draft, almost ALL Teams were too concerned with what they were losing … you lose your 8th or 9th best player. That’s it .. no need to worry. There are lots of players who can step up into those slots …

    Build the best team you can. Know that you will lose 1 player. move on. Don’t overthink it.

  53. OriginalPouzar says:

    so polar:
    That’s rough on Samurokov and Russia. Figured he’d take a big step forward next year, which I suppose is no less likely (CSKA, I assume, has as many trainers as any NHL club). Hopefully he’s not too entranced.

    Hudler off the top of my head left to Czech league after a few years in the AHL and then played as an NHL regular (prior to another hiatus, to Russia).

    Giordano was a tweener prior to his year in the KHL.

    Without hearing anything official, I don’t think this has anything to do with the an issue with his development, role in the Bake or the org but I presume its to guarantee he’ll be playing hockey from September to December as the AHL is unlikely to be playing in that period.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if Holland and the organization were actually in favor of this.

  54. OriginalPouzar says:

    N64: It’s only about the drop off from the additional exposed player to the others. And yeah that’s impossible to evaluate without knowing which of Nurse and Klef and Larsson and Nuge are under contract by then.

    So from the outside hard to say if the drop off will be significant. Also the play of Jones and Lagesson will change things too. Probably best not to overthink this. The only likely thing is that exempt assets including picks should go up in trade value vs non-exempt assets.

    Klefbom and Nurse will both be under contract – their current/new contracts run 3 and 2 more years, respectively.

    Yes, the ultimate would be to have Nuge wait until after the expansion draft to re-sign him but, practically, I think its more realistic that he’s re-signed prior to then.

    You are right, we can’t predict the protected and exposed lists with any sort of certainty – the draft is a full season away and, for all we know, Nurse is traded for example – we just don’t know.

    We can make predictions based on current organizational depth and contract status and, as of right now, its looking like a Jones will be exposed or, if he pops, a few of AA, Benson, Kassian, etc.

    If we add a protected player in there bumping another to exposed, that player is looking to be very material, like Yamamoto.

    If the player acquired is left unprotected, well, I hope we don’t give up the 1st round pick for a player that they are willing to expose a year later.

    ————-

    Correct, exempt assets should have more value which is really the point I was making – not that an exempt asset cannot be traded for non-exempt asset but it needs to be a heck of a deal.

  55. godot10 says:

    Reja: Has the mob renamed the city yet?

    They have in their homestead stake in Seattle. The Capital Hill Autonomous Zone,..or CHAZ. Paradise (its Seattle so maybe Nirvana) finally exists for those pro-antifa pro-BLM academic types. I wonder if many of them will choose to relocate to this “heaven-on-earth”.

  56. JimmyV1965 says:

    jtblack: If you look back to the Vegas expansion draft, almost ALL Teams were too concerned with what they were losing … you lose your 8th or 9th best player. That’s it .. no need to worry. There are lots of players who can step up into those slots …

    Build the best team you can. Know that you will lose 1 player. move on. Don’t overthink it.

    Agreed. Too many teams hurt themselves trying to convince Vegas to take player A, rather than player B. Unfortunately for Seattle, NHL GMs learned a painful lesson that won’t be repeated in the future.

  57. OriginalPouzar says:

    JimmyV1965: I was thinking about all those teams that got raped in trades by Vegas trying to protect certain players. I’m not sure of the exact details of each trade, but I’m sure some teams would have been better trading their first round pick for a good player and just letting Vegas take that player.I guess what I’m saying is the expansion draft shouldn’t alter your team building strategy, unless there is a specific reason why.

    On the contrary, in my opinion, in the time leading up to the expansion draft, team building absolutely needs to have the expansion draft and its implications in mind.

    The Oilers are set-up to lose a solid/good player (shit maybe even a really good player depending on how the likes of Jones, AA, Benson play this coming year) but, if they go one player further down the list, they are set up to lose a very very good player.

    We can’t say that will be the case with certainty, given movements through the year but I’m very confident GM’s are cognizant if expansion draft implications.

  58. OriginalPouzar says:

    JimmyV1965: I the player we trade for is so good we have to expose Nuge or Yams, is that not a win for the team? We’ve actually improved the team so much we now have to expose a really good player.I really doubt we could trade for a player better than Nuge though.

    Exposing the player we trade for does not necessarily mean he’s a bad player; he’s just not as good as the players we protect. He could still be a better player than anyone we acquire with the 20 OV, who might not be a viable NHL option for three or more years. If Seattle takes that player instead of Jones, for instance, haven’t we simply traded the first round pick to keep Jones? I guess we might lose if the player isn’t as good as Jones and we lose him anyway, but that’s the type of risk you make in any trade.

    If the player is better than Nuge or Yams then, yes, the trade is good in isolation but now you have to factor in losing Nuge or Yams – you’ve traded the 1st round pick and Yams for that player (and Benson or AA or whoever gets saved from getting picked) – dangerous game.

    If the player is exposed, in all likelihood that means it was a bad trade – Even is he’s a good player, you get him for a year and he’s gone – you’ve traded a good 1st round pick for a rental.

    Sure, you could say they’ve traded the 1st round pick to keep Jones, that’s a good point I’ll concede.

  59. JimmyV1965 says:

    OriginalPouzar: Klefbom and Nurse will both be under contract – their current/new contracts run 3 and 2 more years, respectively.

    Yes, the ultimate would be to have Nuge wait until after the expansion draft to re-sign him but, practically, I think its more realistic that he’s re-signed prior to then.

    You are right, we can’t predict the protected and exposed lists with any sort of certainty – the draft is a full season away and, for all we know, Nurse is traded for example – we just don’t know.

    We can make predictions based on current organizational depth and contract status and, as of right now, its looking like a Jones will be exposed or, if he pops, a few of AA, Benson, Kassian, etc.

    If we add a protected player in there bumping another to exposed, that player is looking to be very material, like Yamamoto.

    If the player acquired is left unprotected, well, I hope we don’t give up the 1st round pick for a player that they are willing to expose a year later.

    ————-

    Correct, exempt assets should have more value which is really the point I was making – not that an exempt asset cannot be traded for non-exempt asset but it needs to be a heck of a deal.

    ’ll just make one more comment about this and move on. If you expose the acquired player, it doesn’t necessarily imply you have wasted the first round pick. In essence, you have used the first round pick to provide cover for a player like Jones, and reduced the possibility of losing him in the expansion draft. That in itself has value. If the acquired player has even less value than the players you expose, you have simply made a bad trade. This has no relationship with he expansion draft. You have simply made a bad trade.

  60. OriginalPouzar says:

    hunter1909: Injury. He started out like gangbusters in Hamilton, was a crowd favourite but got injured and the rest never got written.

    I’m going to go with terrible terrible hockey player.

    Lots of players start out well in the AHL and aren’t NHL players as it turns out – JFJ was one of them and, although there is no way to ever know, I would suggest he wouldn’t have been an NHL player even if he was oft-injured – god he was terrible in the NHL as an Oiler, just awful.

  61. JimmyV1965 says:

    OriginalPouzar: If the player is better than Nuge or Yams then, yes, the trade is good in isolation but now you have to factor in losing Nuge or Yams – you’ve traded the 1st round pick and Yams for that player (and Benson or AA or whoever gets saved from getting picked) – dangerous game.

    If the player is exposed, in all likelihood that means it was a bad trade – Even is he’s a good player, you get him for a year and he’s gone – you’ve traded a good 1st round pick for a rental.

    Sure, you could say they’ve traded the 1st round pick to keep Jones, that’s a good point I’ll concede.

    I shouldn’t have acknowledged that we could potentially lose Nuge and Yama. There’s no way either of those players will be the eighth best forward on the team.

  62. jtblack says:

    OriginalPouzar,

    “On the contrary, in my opinion, in the time leading up to the expansion draft, team building absolutely needs to have the expansion draft and its implications in mind.”

    agreed, it has to be on the radar and is 1 factor to consider in regards to the roster …. but wasn’t Edmonton quite worried about who they were going to lose last time?

    Every team loses one decent player. I believe time and energy from mgmt. can be spent on many other items, with the expansion draft lingering in the background.

    If Seattle gets Kassian? so what. Gets AA , oh well. J.J. .. oh well … the 7-3 or 4-4 protected option gives team the ability to cover their best guys ..

  63. Dac189 says:

    I’m thinking they go 4-4

    McDavid, Drai, RNH, Yamamoto
    Possibly lose AA or Benson

    Klefbom, Nurse, Bear, Larsson.
    Possibly lose Jones or Benning.

    Considering that RNH and Larsson could wait until after to sign, I believe Edmonton is in a really good position to not lose much.

    Even if they sign early, at most we lose a mid level player.

    Unless they take Koskinen or Smith. Then we’re in trouble.

  64. OriginalPouzar says:

    Reja:
    Last year at this time I wanted a Jesse and Jones trade to Columbus for Josh Anderson and a3rd rounder. Jones could team up with his brother and Jesse could land with the Finn GM, man what a over pay that is. I wonder what it would take to get Josh or even if he’s healthy his stock sure went down but I think he would be the perfect rifleman on Mcdavid’s line. Kass, Connor and Josh that’s a dream line for me.

    I think I read that Anderson is unlikely to be back for the post-season, at least for the beginning of it.

  65. OriginalPouzar says:

    jtblack: If you look back to the Vegas expansion draft, almost ALL Teams were too concerned with what they were losing … you lose your 8th or 9th best player. That’s it .. no need to worry. There are lots of players who can step up into those slots …

    Build the best team you can. Know that you will lose 1 player. move on. Don’t overthink it.

    If you add player that needs to be protected then the value difference between the player likely to be taken and the player bumped off the protected list needs to be taken in to account in the acquisition.

    If that value gap is material, then, 100% it needs to be part of the GMs diligence.

    That could be the case in Edmonton – much depends on the development of various players over the next year.

  66. OriginalPouzar says:

    jtblack:
    OriginalPouzar,

    “On the contrary, in my opinion, in the time leading up to the expansion draft, team building absolutely needs to have the expansion draft and its implications in mind.”

    agreed, it has to be on the radar and is 1 factor to consider in regards to the roster …. but wasn’t Edmonton quite worried about who they were going to lose last time?

    Every team loses one decent player.I believe time and energy from mgmt. can be spent on many other items, with the expansion draft lingering in the background.

    If Seattle gets Kassian?so what. Gets AA , oh well. J.J… oh well … the 7-3 or 4-4 protected option gives team the ability to cover their best guys ..

    Agreed on Kassian, AA, etc. (well, unless AA spikes again) – the issue is adding a player to the protected list that pushes down a more material player.

  67. maudite says:

    pts2pndr: Op will jump all over this but I will beat him to it. You did not figure in the possible value of a lower cap hit entry level contract. These will become ever increasingly more valuable if the cap flattens and or deflates. There are pros and cons either way you proceed. What scares me is that are trade acquisitionshave been less than stellar.

    Yeah….just adds extra asterix to NPV of this potential asset. I don’t see anyway we aren’t protecting 4 defennders

    Klef
    Nurse
    bear
    jones

    4 forwards (likely)
    Mcdavid
    Drai
    RNH
    Yamato

    Key exposed:

    AA
    Benson
    Puj
    kassian

    Any addition paying that 1st is likely for a winger…which then means you are probably going 7/3 thereby exposing probably Jones….

    I’d rather have an A- level prospect in pipeline then add to problem. That opportunity cost is massive unless you are willing to make a really bold move regarding defence prior to draft. Which, if that is the case, would make more sense to parlay value of whichever defenseman you think is best cashed prior to expansion draft

  68. maudite says:

    To me:

    This also impact JJ Puj present trade value as well. He very well might not be worth more than a 2nd right now due to that fact that he adds to problem when it comes to protected list and is still logically unknown value with just potentially a higher ceiling.

  69. Dac189 says:

    maudite,

    JP getting bought for a 2nd then picked by Seattle.
    It would basically result in losing a 2nd round pick to the expansion which doesn’t sound too bad

  70. ArmchairGM says:

    JimmyV1965: You’re talking about today. It could change in a year from now. One year ago, most of us probably liked Jones more than Bear. A lot changes in a year. I’ll say it again. I’ll be surprised, but not shocked, if Bear regresses next year, Jones progresses, and their perceived values change.

    *Ahem*

    Not all of us thought Jones was better than Bear.

  71. Harpers Hair says:

    Sardar Khalsa (@SardarKhalsa1) Tweeted:
    Outlaw biker gangs heading to Seattle to mix it up with Antifa. This should be interesting.

  72. russ99 says:

    RNH will be a UFA, And with the cap cratering I doubt he signs this summer. So do we make a handshake agreement to make a quality offer after the expansion draft and protect another young forward?

    Also prospects pools of the OBC era were not well served by MacT’s throw them in sink or swim strategy.

  73. russ99 says:

    maudite,

    Also he’s a RFA so an acquiring team has to deal with his agent once they make a trade, IMO this has dropped his trade value more than anything, I suspect this story is more to reduce the hardline agent stance to facilitate a trade more than anything else.

  74. OriginalPouzar says:

    russ99:
    maudite,

    Also he’s a RFA so an acquiring team has to deal with his agent once they make a trade, IMO this has dropped his trade value more than anything, I suspect this story is more to reduce the hardline agent stance to facilitate a trade more than anything else.

    I would think that Holland would give permission to any acquiring team to speak with Jesse’s people and get surety that he’ll sign his QO (or something similar) and come to North America.

  75. Brad says:

    N64,

    This has gotten me thinking… Could we see a team protect 5-3 under the 8 skater protection limit?
    If you value your 5th forward over your 4th D, but your 4th D over your 6th forward, wouldn’t you protect 5 and 3 in the hopes of enticing Seattle to take your F over the D? If you go 7-3 (as conventional wisdom might suggest is better), Seattle is nearly certain to select your 4th D. Protecting 2 extra players has cause you to lose a more valuable player.
    Interesting scenario to consider, anyways. If you had cap space in this hypothetical scenario, you could probably make some decent draft pick gains through acquiring an overpaid F with a NMC that you’re “forced” to protect. Use the last protection slot on a prospect or just a career minor-leaguer.

Leave a Reply

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