|
Post by Dr. Telly-Belly on Dec 12, 2019 16:49:16 GMT -7
Lose some games because we don't have enough good players. We've been pretty good at it lately.
|
|
|
Post by neufab94 on Dec 12, 2019 16:55:48 GMT -7
Wow, quite the collection of thoughts so far:
re: McDavid and Draisaitl - regarding them "not being able to each carry a line:" I have stated repeatedly that numerous attempts at making them do so have not worked because they have a natural chemistry like many other pairs in the NHL. When you have a pair that continually gets results the smart thing is to keep it going. They end up spending more time in the offensive zone and until recently had a better +/- as a result of being able to control the play. Racking up points is not a bad way to defend. I completely reject the idea that they should each carry their own line as long as the Oilers have the wingers that they have AND because they make a great pair.
re: trade Larsson - I agree with the original post. Larsson has been a good soldier and is a reliable defender. To a large degree he is the PC poster child and would likely do well in a quieter market. He is a good player and should gain a good return. Movable parts I would include Larsson, JP, Manning, Russel to get back a good winger, another 2 way defenceman and a prospect. In one move would be fun to see, but more likely through a couple of moves. I have no intention to disrespect these players and consider this purely from the business side of hockey to obtain first of all, an improved roster, second, acknowledging that to do so a good player will be leaving, third, this should bring some cap relief, and finally, this could be a way to solve the JP situation.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Telly-Belly on Dec 12, 2019 17:13:33 GMT -7
Wow, quite the collection of thoughts so far: re: McDavid and Draisaitl - regarding them "not being able to each carry a line:" I have stated repeatedly that numerous attempts at making them do so have not worked because they have a natural chemistry like many other pairs in the NHL. When you have a pair that continually gets results the smart thing is to keep it going. They end up spending more time in the offensive zone and until recently had a better +/- as a result of being able to control the play. Racking up points is not a bad way to defend. I completely reject the idea that they should each carry their own line as long as the Oilers have the wingers that they have AND because they make a great pair. re: trade Larsson - I agree with the original post. Larsson has been a good soldier and is a reliable defender. To a large degree he is the PC poster child and would likely do well in a quieter market. He is a good player and should gain a good return. Movable parts I would include Larsson, JP, Manning, Russel to get back a good winger, another 2 way defenceman and a prospect. In one move would be fun to see, but more likely through a couple of moves. I have no intention to disrespect these players and consider this purely from the business side of hockey to obtain first of all, an improved roster, second, acknowledging that to do so a good player will be leaving, third, this should bring some cap relief, and finally, this could be a way to solve the JP situation.
|
|
|
Post by mrtea on Dec 12, 2019 17:15:17 GMT -7
Lose some games because we don't have enough good players. I like Tippet but I find he doesn't play 4 lines enough, but maybe it's all the penalties we've been taking.Penalties disrupt the flow because the PKers are getting more ice time.I think trying to keep 4 lines rolling is what we should be doing as much as possible. It keeps our team in the game and rested. Once you're down chasing the game it's not easy getting back ahead. We need to adopt a team mentality instead of a 1 or 2 line mentality. Then the team has to work for it too.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Telly-Belly on Dec 12, 2019 17:23:02 GMT -7
Lose some games because we don't have enough good players. I like Tippet but I find he doesn't play 4 lines enough, but maybe it's all the penalties we've been taking.Penalties disrupt the flow because the PKers are getting more ice time.I think trying to keep 4 lines rolling is what we should be doing as much as possible. It keeps our team in the game and rested. Once you're down chasing the game it's not easy getting back ahead. We need to adopt a team mentality instead of a 1 or 2 line mentality. Then the team has to work for it too. Could be but he may also not have confidence in some players.
|
|
|
Post by neufab94 on Dec 12, 2019 19:09:05 GMT -7
Wow, quite the collection of thoughts so far: re: McDavid and Draisaitl - regarding them "not being able to each carry a line:" I have stated repeatedly that numerous attempts at making them do so have not worked because they have a natural chemistry like many other pairs in the NHL. When you have a pair that continually gets results the smart thing is to keep it going. They end up spending more time in the offensive zone and until recently had a better +/- as a result of being able to control the play. Racking up points is not a bad way to defend. I completely reject the idea that they should each carry their own line as long as the Oilers have the wingers that they have AND because they make a great pair. re: trade Larsson - I agree with the original post. Larsson has been a good soldier and is a reliable defender. To a large degree he is the PC poster child and would likely do well in a quieter market. He is a good player and should gain a good return. Movable parts I would include Larsson, JP, Manning, Russel to get back a good winger, another 2 way defenceman and a prospect. In one move would be fun to see, but more likely through a couple of moves. I have no intention to disrespect these players and consider this purely from the business side of hockey to obtain first of all, an improved roster, second, acknowledging that to do so a good player will be leaving, third, this should bring some cap relief, and finally, this could be a way to solve the JP situation. View Attachment After hearing the play by play that splitting up McDavid and Draisaitl has created a "workmen ethic" on the lines instead of playing off the rush as a good thing I say it is NOT a good thing. Having 3 lines grind it out while 1 executes on the rush I believe creates a more dynamic front and forces the opposition to switch up their plan of attack and has a higher percentage of making the other team make a mistake.
|
|
|
Post by drtaf on Dec 13, 2019 1:33:44 GMT -7
My original question regarding whether McD or Drai were true centres was more aimed at defining what constitutes a "true centre"? I believe Bergeron defines the position and in the dynamic duos defence they are capable and able to achieve what I consider the 3 main objectives a good centre needs to do which are 1. Win face offs, 2 be the first forward back covering the middle while the D attempt to keep other team to outside and 3. Carry the puck up the ice and "Quarterback the offence (They just don't consistently achieve all 3 at the same time whereas Bergeron and a few others do). There are a lot more facets to being a centre and I welcome input into what others think are the most important. I mentioned Crosby and Malkin as the obvious comparison and again I believe it took 8-10 years before these 2 became elite centres (remember I'm not talking about being elite forwards, because they are all elite top end forwards with mad skills and we are very lucky to have 2 at the same time. Time is still on McD and Drai's side to hone their centre skills and some may have missed that I was actually advocating for the time being they be kept together because they are better together than apart (synergy). I also recall that Drai dominated centring his own line the year we made the playoffs and against elite centres like Jumbo Joe and Getslaf so maybe he just needs the "Challenge" of the playoffs? I believe this may have been instrumental in Crosby and Malkins centre development as well. Let's hope they both get "challenged" real soon. Finally, I think it's ok for fans to show passion about their teams' wins and losses and yes some players prefer not to play in a hockey hotbed. I call those players hypocrits who want their cake and eat it. They want their millions and then slip into anonymity, yet without the passionate fan bases of the hockey hotbeds, their wallets wouldn't be nearly as fat? If you ask me, all the best players in history loved playing in the couldron of the hockey hotbeds, those that prefer to play in the "floridas or carolinas" of the NHL are likely to get rich, but unlikely to be remembered 50 years from now.
|
|
|
Post by rapiershot on Dec 13, 2019 12:25:45 GMT -7
If we acknowledge the Edmonton mantra, then everyone not named McD or Drai is in the trade picture. Question is, what returns they can bring. Over the past 2 seasons, Larsson hasn't produced the level of play that teams are looking for in 1-4 Dmen. As a 5-6 Dman, the return won't be a 3C or top-6 forward.
Where teams may be interested, is in our D-prospects....that's where the GM will see some action. Combined with future draft picks, could be very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by drtaf on Dec 13, 2019 12:55:01 GMT -7
If we acknowledge the Edmonton mantra, then everyone not named McD or Drai is in the trade picture. Question is, what returns they can bring. Over the past 2 seasons, Larsson hasn't produced the level of play that teams are looking for in 1-4 Dmen. As a 5-6 Dman, the return won't be a 3C or top-6 forward. Where teams may be interested, is in our D-prospects....that's where the GM will see some action. Combined with future draft picks, could be very interesting. This is a tough one because I'm sure a lot of people are going to rage against given up any of our D-prospects for help now, but what if KH is getting feedback (indirect or otherwise) from McD, that he's not prepared to wait another 2-3 years before this team really starts to compete with the big boys, because realistically if we hold course now that's where we're projected? Personally, I'd rather wait the 2-3 years and have 5-6 years of success really competing for a cup, than mortgage future talent now for 2-3 yrs of playoffs without a realistic shot at a cup, but that's just how I see those 2 scenarios panning out. I'm not saying McD would do this or is selfish, but there's no doubt he's burning to be in the playoffs in order to compare himself with the greats in the only arena that matters. You see it on his face every interview he makes and millennials are not known for their patience.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Telly-Belly on Dec 13, 2019 14:28:59 GMT -7
If we acknowledge the Edmonton mantra, then everyone not named McD or Drai is in the trade picture. Question is, what returns they can bring. Over the past 2 seasons, Larsson hasn't produced the level of play that teams are looking for in 1-4 Dmen. As a 5-6 Dman, the return won't be a 3C or top-6 forward. Where teams may be interested, is in our D-prospects....that's where the GM will see some action. Combined with future draft picks, could be very interesting. This is a tough one because I'm sure a lot of people are going to rage against given up any of our D-prospects for help now, but what if KH is getting feedback (indirect or otherwise) from McD, that he's not prepared to wait another 2-3 years before this team really starts to compete with the big boys, because realistically if we hold course now that's where we're projected? Personally, I'd rather wait the 2-3 years and have 5-6 years of success really competing for a cup, than mortgage future talent now for 2-3 yrs of playoffs without a realistic shot at a cup, but that's just how I see those 2 scenarios panning out. I'm not saying McD would do this or is selfish, but there's no doubt he's burning to be in the playoffs in order to compare himself with the greats in the only arena that matters. You see it on his face every interview he makes and millennials are not known for their patience. Not trying to argue but how is it "mortgaging the future talent" if one prospect and a roster player or two are packaged? After all, we have more than one excellent prospects on defense including Bear, Jones, Bouchard, Broberg, Lagesson, Persson, Samorukov. Out of 7 (I realize that Bear, Jones and Persson are getting major opportunities) prospects, certainly we could part with 1 of them if it would improve the team.
|
|
|
Post by mrtea on Dec 13, 2019 15:13:43 GMT -7
If we acknowledge the Edmonton mantra, then everyone not named McD or Drai is in the trade picture. Question is, what returns they can bring. Over the past 2 seasons, Larsson hasn't produced the level of play that teams are looking for in 1-4 Dmen. As a 5-6 Dman, the return won't be a 3C or top-6 forward. Where teams may be interested, is in our D-prospects....that's where the GM will see some action. Combined with future draft picks, could be very interesting. Larsson still has a very good reputation across the league, he does have value. Many GM's will remember how some of our ex players have done better on other teams and take this into consideration. Others like Yakupov have not done so well but trading is a gamble. Also trades can take different forms of assets. The Oilers problem is we need to get back cap value that is the same or only slightly more expensive because we have very little room.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Telly-Belly on Dec 13, 2019 15:25:58 GMT -7
If we acknowledge the Edmonton mantra, then everyone not named McD or Drai is in the trade picture. Question is, what returns they can bring. Over the past 2 seasons, Larsson hasn't produced the level of play that teams are looking for in 1-4 Dmen. As a 5-6 Dman, the return won't be a 3C or top-6 forward. Where teams may be interested, is in our D-prospects....that's where the GM will see some action. Combined with future draft picks, could be very interesting. Larsson still has a very good reputation across the league, he does have value. Many GM's will remember how some of our ex players have done better on other teams and take this into consideration. Others like Yakupov have not done so well but trading is a gamble. Also trades can take different forms of assets. The Oilers problem is we need to get back cap value that is the same or only slightly more expensive because we have very little room. Does that make us a "seller" this season?
|
|
|
Post by mrtea on Dec 13, 2019 15:32:59 GMT -7
Larsson still has a very good reputation across the league, he does have value. Many GM's will remember how some of our ex players have done better on other teams and take this into consideration. Others like Yakupov have not done so well but trading is a gamble. Also trades can take different forms of assets. The Oilers problem is we need to get back cap value that is the same or only slightly more expensive because we have very little room. Does that make us a "seller" this season? All we can afford is what we can trade at similar dollar amounts, so I would say no. One good trade could make a big deal to us but it wouldn't make us buyers. Also we are not in as good of a position flexibility wise as we will be this off season and the following seasons.
|
|
|
Post by mrtea on Dec 13, 2019 15:39:06 GMT -7
Larsson still has a very good reputation across the league, he does have value. Many GM's will remember how some of our ex players have done better on other teams and take this into consideration. Others like Yakupov have not done so well but trading is a gamble. Also trades can take different forms of assets. The Oilers problem is we need to get back cap value that is the same or only slightly more expensive because we have very little room. Does that make us a "seller" this season? Sorry Telly I answered if we would be buyers. Yes I think we will be sellers, but not open house. I think Holland will try to trade players he doesn't see in our future. This year is very much an evaluation year, it has vast possibilities. A lot depends on if we overachieve like at the start or underachieve like we are doing now.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Telly-Belly on Dec 13, 2019 15:44:30 GMT -7
Does that make us a "seller" this season? Sorry Telly I answered if we would be buyers. Yes I think we will be sellers, but not open house. I think Holland will try to trade players he doesn't see in our future. This year is very much an evaluation year, it has vast possibilities. A lot depends on if we overachieve like at the start or underachieve like we are doing now. Kind of agree. Of course, with a strong start, we were tempted to think that we would be buyers but alas, we know for sure, this very much another evaluation year.
|
|
|
Post by drtaf on Dec 13, 2019 18:02:27 GMT -7
I’m not against giving up a mid level d-prospect but the advantage of having elite D-prospects is that they provide good $ value and in a cap era and being a cap strapped team, moving a vet for a prospect means we automatically lose the $ trade, which is fine if it works out great for us and the vet fulfills his promise. If not then it just handcuffs us for another year or 3. It’s a risky move and I’m not sure we are positioned for doing the risky moves just yet but it also might move the needle faster and keep our dynamic duo happy if we make the playoffs
|
|
|
Post by blackhawk216 on Dec 13, 2019 20:54:09 GMT -7
If we acknowledge the Edmonton mantra, then everyone not named McD or Drai is in the trade picture. Question is, what returns they can bring. Over the past 2 seasons, Larsson hasn't produced the level of play that teams are looking for in 1-4 Dmen. As a 5-6 Dman, the return won't be a 3C or top-6 forward. Where teams may be interested, is in our D-prospects....that's where the GM will see some action. Combined with future draft picks, could be very interesting. Not really, as if we are shipping out D-prospects and/or draft picks that gives us virtually zero cap relief. There has to be some "expensive pieces" going out in any trade we do for us to be able to absorb the salary coming back. So we are probably looking at one or more of Nurse, Klefbom, Larsson, Russell, Benning or Manning or maybe Neal, Chiasson or RNH to bring anything of value back that we can afford, and even then we may have to let one/two players of our future go. To a large extent, unless KH is prepared to move some veterans out, his hands are tied at the moment. To mention Nurse as possible trade bait may seem a bit silly at the moment, but if he is going to cost us around 7m then that needs some serious thought, especially with the likes of Bouchard, Lagesson and Broberg plus the Russian kid in the system.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall Bruce Mathers III on Dec 13, 2019 21:06:30 GMT -7
If we acknowledge the Edmonton mantra, then everyone not named McD or Drai is in the trade picture. Question is, what returns they can bring. Over the past 2 seasons, Larsson hasn't produced the level of play that teams are looking for in 1-4 Dmen. As a 5-6 Dman, the return won't be a 3C or top-6 forward. Where teams may be interested, is in our D-prospects....that's where the GM will see some action. Combined with future draft picks, could be very interesting. Not really, as if we are shipping out D-prospects and/or draft picks that gives us virtually zero cap relief. There has to be some "expensive pieces" going out in any trade we do for us to be able to absorb the salary coming back. So we are probably looking at one or more of Nurse, Klefbom, Larsson, Russell, Benning or Manning or maybe Neal, Chiasson or RNH to bring anything of value back that we can afford, and even then we may have to let one/two players of our future go. To a large extent, unless KH is prepared to move some veterans out, his hands are tied at the moment. To mention Nurse as possible trade bait may seem a bit silly at the moment, but if he is going to cost us around 7m then that needs some serious thought, especially with the likes of Bouchard, Lagesson and Broberg plus the Russian kid in the system. Over the next 3 years, two of Nurse/Klefbom/Russell should be traded and one of Larsson/Benning. At that time Broberg and Jones will fill the last two LD spots, and Bouchard will fill the last RD spot. Personally, I'd like to keep one of the Swedes, for Broberg's sake. It'll be easier for him if he has someone who speaks his language and can help him transition better.
|
|
|
Post by mrtea on Dec 13, 2019 22:10:07 GMT -7
Not really, as if we are shipping out D-prospects and/or draft picks that gives us virtually zero cap relief. There has to be some "expensive pieces" going out in any trade we do for us to be able to absorb the salary coming back. So we are probably looking at one or more of Nurse, Klefbom, Larsson, Russell, Benning or Manning or maybe Neal, Chiasson or RNH to bring anything of value back that we can afford, and even then we may have to let one/two players of our future go. To a large extent, unless KH is prepared to move some veterans out, his hands are tied at the moment. To mention Nurse as possible trade bait may seem a bit silly at the moment, but if he is going to cost us around 7m then that needs some serious thought, especially with the likes of Bouchard, Lagesson and Broberg plus the Russian kid in the system. Over the next 3 years, two of Nurse/Klefbom/Russell should be traded and one of Larsson/Benning. At that time Broberg and Jones will fill the last two LD spots, and Bouchard will fill the last RD spot. Personally, I'd like to keep one of the Swedes, for Broberg's sake. It'll be easier for him if he has someone who speaks his language and can help him transition better. On defense my only keepers are Nurse, Bear, Bouchard and Broberg. I think if we only trade one roster player and maybe one prospect we could handle that pretty easily. Depending on what combination of defensemen we might be able to get by trading two roster D and restocking from the farm team. A lot depends where we are in the standings at the time of any trade to see if we're buyers or sellers. right now we are buyers if we could find a good winger in our price ballpark.
|
|
|
Post by oilyfan on Dec 14, 2019 14:06:58 GMT -7
Well, the way I see it we need a lot. Bronco - Sheahan is a 4th line center. I like Drai and McD together with Kassian. We need a complimentary winger for RNH / Neal, and a legitimate 3rd line center (LMAO Telly, Wheeler?? he's a winger and he's a top line forward - no way no how the Jets trade him for Larsson, that wouldn't even start a conversation NMC or not + he making 8.25 million a season for next four after this). But I think all are right, we need a winger or two still, and we need a legit 3rd line center. I'm thinking a guy like Kadri (not him specifically), someone who has a mean streak, can score 20 goals, and is a solid Pker, face off winner, and could even play in OT (3 on 3). RNH is not a legit third line center in your opinion? Our first center SHOULD be McDavid. second SHOULD be Draisaitl. RNH third and then we need a fourth... pick from Granlun Sheahan Haas and Gagner. I think it's the lack of winger talent that forces us to use our centers on the wing. Nope, RNH isn't. He's second line center. You don't pay 3rd line centers 6M a year. Drai fits with McDavid, and though a couple years ago when Drai signed that contract we wanted a legit #2 or 1A centerman for that, bottom line is he's magic with McD, and Kassian is, so far, the best complimentary winger those two have had. If we could find good winger to compliment RNH/Neal, then we have two legit Lines. In today's NHL, that's all you need. The bottom two lines can be energy/specialty lines. Get a legit #3 center, someone with grit and speed and can score a bit, another winger to compliment him, and I think we're set. Now, about that goaltending........................................
|
|