The Oilers have a very good chance of selecting first overall, and will pick either 1 or 2.
Details are here.
A reasonable top 10 (as it stands now) might look like this:
- C Ryan Nugent-Hopkins
- D Adam Larsson
- L Gabriel Landeskog
- C Sean Couturier
- D Dougie Hamilton
- C Ryan Strome
- D Ryan Murphy
- L Jonathan Huberdeau
- L Sven Bartschi
- D Duncan Siemens
Lottery - Edmonton's SC Final!
ReplyDeleteI look forward to this special annual event for the Oilers.
ReplyDeleteLottery party at my house in Red Deer. I even have a certain 10/11 Edmonton Oiler that accepted an invitation, although I would rather not say which one. On a side note, if any of you plan to attend, PLEASE BRING VODKA. LOTS OF IT.
ReplyDeleteSure chaddarb,
ReplyDeleteI'll just load up the truck with liquor and drive around Red Deer until I get to your house. Its the invisible one on Bullcrap Drive, right?
Is it Khabibulin?
ReplyDelete"Yeah, I come to house Charddarb. But you pick me up. I sleep on your bed, you sleep outside. You be quiet and leave me alone then give drive me to airport. Okay, bye bye fuck off."
Can't wait to see v3.0 act uncomfortable in front of a camera and use bizzare voice inflections for the 16,385th time.
ReplyDeleteO/U on the number of times he asks himself a question?
Given he won't have a ton of air time to himelf I set the line at 2.5.
Landeskogg, Larsson or the Nuge...
ReplyDeleteCaptain, Staple on D or Sakic...
I'm torn...................
RNH as Sakic is a bizarre comp.
ReplyDeleteThink more Hemsky or Oates.
As per Tencer tweet Cam Ward not going to WC.
ReplyDeleteMaybe 40 will get a look at #2?
Smarmy, that "special annual event" gave me a good chuckle.
ReplyDeleteLet's all chant Larsson! I wonder if anyone wants a particular player badly enough to trade up within the top 5 though. I mean if the Oilers could get something good and still nab Larsson or Couturier that would be ideal.
Puzzles the hell out of me how Couturier has slid like he has, although I don't seem him dropping to 12th like Fowler did. Probably just a result of the other kids finishing strong.
Will be interested to see McKenzie's promised top 10 list at tsn.ca.
ReplyDeleteHere's a question: how much do Tambellini/Lowe care that the Nuge is a Western Canadian kid, while Larsson is a dirty foreigner and Couturier is a changeling from the dreaded south who lives in the east.
My bet is they they think the Nuge is more likely to want to live in Western Canada, will be happier here long term.
I'm not agreeing with that thinking, but I bet it's a factor.
Kris, I don't think Larsson concerns them too much, they've drafted MPS and Lander successively one go around, and have considered and used high 2nd round picks on guys like Marincin.
ReplyDeleteI think the only 'dirty' foreigners as far as the Oilers are concerned are from Mother Russia.
Verification Word: smakings
Let me answer your question with a question. What is the hardest position to fill on a hockey team?
ReplyDeleteAnswer: #1 Centre.
If you think about it, and look around the league, how many teams have a "true" #1 Centre? Not too many.
Good day.
ReplyDeleteAs per Bob Stauffer.
Stars fire Marc Crawford.
If you think about it, and look around the league, how many teams have a "true" #1 Centre? Not too many.
ReplyDeleteBy any reasonable definition of "true" #1 Centre, there is an average of one per team.
Crawford fired in DAL. God save us if CBC picks him up again.
ReplyDeleteIf you could only choose from these two, who do you prefer:
-Crawford
-Weekes
Also,
v3.0's year end presser tomorrow at 1pm. I set the line on self asked question at 8.5
I.E.:
"Were we happy with our results? Not at all, but we like the change in culture that the youth of the organization brought this year"
Uni,
ReplyDeleteGood point. But couldn't being more local be a sort of tie breaker?
If you could only choose from these two, who do you prefer:
ReplyDelete-Crawford
-Weekes
Is the answer Howie Meeker?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWoodguy: If you could only choose from these two, who do you prefer:
ReplyDelete-Crawford
-Weekes
Ugh!
I guess Crawford has a clue...
sometimes.
The correct answer is death.
ReplyDeleteOr not watching.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWith all the coach firings (OTT, FLA, MIN, DAL) and Lemaire retiring again, you have to figure Mac T and Hitchcock will be back coaching again next year.
ReplyDeleteCan't wait to see v3.0 act uncomfortable in front of a camera and use bizzare voice inflections for the 16,385th time.
WG, you and your obsession with Tambo (especially his interview skills) is really cracking me up. You have to get some therapy or something :-)
LT, someone threw this idea around earlier in the year, but what about a series of blog posts where posters are encouraged to make predictions for who the Oilers will pick in each round?
ReplyDeleteFor example, once draft standings are solidified, there could be a post for each draft pick the Oilers own. Could be something fun to do year over year. People could look back on their predictions a few years removed for "told you so" fodder.
Ducey,
ReplyDelete"Do I need some therapy to help me with my obsession? Of I probably do, but I think obsession is a strong word. I think that using the Detroit model of getting everyone's opinion here is probably stronger than therapy"
"Should I try the Chicago model? Not a bad idea, the Chicago model of going with a smaller team of decision makers to diagnose my neurosis and completely rebuild it might be the way to do."
"Do you have steak? Yes? I think I'll have the fish"
Now I remember - I had lasagne.
ReplyDeleteMy definition of a "True" #1 Centre is a player who can either score 50 goals, get 100 points or both. Centremen like that don't grow on trees, so in my opinion, if you have a golden opportunity to draft one, you do.
ReplyDeleteI was driving around after posting this morning thinking about 14 at C while making some sales calls.
ReplyDeleteThen someone on Stauffer's show suggested that 91 might make a good C given his size and skating ability.
Add to that his already developed defensive acumen and that might be the solution to 1C. In about 3-4 years.
My definition of a "True" #1 Centre is a player who can either score 50 goals, get 100 points or both.
ReplyDeleteBy your definition there are 0 #1C currently in the NHL.
By your definition there are 0 #1C currently in the NHL.
ReplyDeleteHardest position to fill, I tells ya. Well, except for the elusive "true" checking centre, who plays forty minutes a night without ever recording a minus.
Rob, no one in the NHL this season fits your criteria of a number 1 centre then.
ReplyDeleteIf we lower that bar to over 80 points then only 2 players match your criteria.
You seem to lean towards hyperbole quite a bit, which is fine, but maybe you should tone it down a bit so it isn't quite so obvious.
Damn I need to hit refresh more often, both WG and SS beat me to it.
ReplyDeleteAlso a true #1 defenceman should be able to score 70 points and play 30 minutes a night and be +30. Those don't grow on trees. We should draft Larsson.
Take Steven Stamkos as an Example. He has scored 50 goals, so that would make him a "True" #1 Centre. Another example would be Joe Thornton. He has cleared 100 points on more than one occasion. Like I previously stated, it is the hardest position to fill on a hockey team.
ReplyDeleteRob: Then we draft Couturier.
ReplyDelete89% Chance we get that.
I would be happy if we draft either Larsson or "The Nuge". There is an argument to be made either way. I personally, would draft Hopkins, but ultimately it comes down (if you forget about drafting for need) to who you think will be a better NHL player? Tough to assess now, but I guess that's why Tambellini, K-Lowe and MacGregor get the big bucks. We will see soon enough!
ReplyDeleteIf only Tambellini was smart enough to draft us a true number one goaler, who never lets in more than one goal a game.
ReplyDeleteBut I guess those don't grow on trees. Sigh.
RVD, don't forget Lecavalier, he's scored both 50 goals and 100 points in a season.
ReplyDeleteAlso by your logic then FPB is correct in his assertation that Couturier would be a better pick.
Personally I think the Oilers will draft Larsson, but they have to wait to see where they pick. Then the games begin.
ReplyDeleteThere's an 89% chance Couturier turns into a 50 goal or 100 point player?? Hot damn, we'd be stupid not to take him if we believed that!
ReplyDeleteOr just stupid.
Most of us are relying on what we read. It comes down to trusting Edmonton will make the right choice.
ReplyDeleteJon K: Check out my previous post.
ReplyDelete89% of the CHL 6''3 and 90+ 1st rounders had at least one season of 70+ points.
There's also a 100% chance of me trying that Baileys-Guinness combo Dennis recommends.
ReplyDeleteWait what were we talking about again?
89% of the CHL 6''3 and 90+ 1st rounders had at least one season of 70+ points.
ReplyDeleteAcknowledged, but
i. 70+ points is a hell of a lot different from 100+ points, and
ii. You're saying that of players of that size who scored at that rate and were selected at that point in the past, 89% of them turned out. That's not the same as establishing predictive power.
And he'll forever be known as "The Example."
ReplyDeleteBPA, baby, with marginal weighting on position - in fact, wouldn't that be more of a tiebreak, if all things equal?
I hope that geography isn't a variable at all. If they win, they will come...right?
The problem with Couturier is, as I (and many others) have stated repeatedly....Couturier CAN'T SKATE! Other than that, he has great skill. Besides, he wouldn't be able to keep up with the up-tempo kind of game we play. Hall and Eberle would be saying something like "Hurry UP!" to him more times than you can count.
ReplyDelete"Hurry UP!" to him more times than you can count.
ReplyDeleteMore times than you can count, maybe. I can count to maventy.
Steve, it's Rob.Van.Dam who's been stating that Ryan Nugent-Hopkins will be a perennial 50 goal or 100 point scorer and thus he should be taken 1st overall.
ReplyDeleteI believe that FPB was simply trying to contect that by RVD's criteria, Couturier would be the better bet, although throwing that 89% stat out there was neither here nor there.
I have a 89% chance of trying root beer with spiced rum.
WTF is contect? How in tarnation did swype think that was a word?
ReplyDeleteMaventy eh? I can only count to umpteen.
My ideal scenario
ReplyDelete1) Oilers draft Larsson, package LA's pick and move up to around 10th and somehow Coutourier falls (a la fowler last year) to 10th.
2) Oilers draft RNH, package LA's pick and move up to around 10th and pick Siemens.
Remember, Lowe said that Hall's goal was to win a Stanley Cup. So you see who wants to win a Stanley and you draft that guy. :-)
ReplyDeleteI believe that FPB was simply trying to contect that by RVD's criteria, Couturier would be the better bet, although throwing that 89% stat out there was neither here nor there.
ReplyDeleteFPB said "89% Chance we get that." In the context, I took "that" to mean "100+ points or 50+ goals". That said, I'm quite happy to chalk that up to self-aware hyperbole, which we could frankly use more of around here. As a percentage of total hyperbole, anyway.
"True" (and not "technical") #1 Centres - we may not be able to come up with a definition, but I think we can mostly agree on who we're talking about:
ReplyDeleteCrosby, Malkin (I know, I know, 2 from one team), Stamkos, H. Sedin, B. Richards, Datsyuk, Toews, Getzlaf, Backstrom, Thornton, Kopitar, E. Staal.
Maybe people want to add some more, but I think that list probably more or less represents the ilk RVD is talking about.
They're definitely hard to get, but so are perrenial Norrise candidates.
I wonder how many of those guys Nashville could trade Shea Weber for though... I'm very torn.
I am kind of hoping CLB finishes the lottery in the 4th spot with the Oilers 1st.
ReplyDeleteThen we could pitch Hemsky and the #1 for Ryan Johansen and the #4.
EDM gets rid of brittle boy and brings in the true #1 C along with Dougie Hamilton.
Howson gets Hemsky and the splash of the #1.
RobVD: The problem with Couturier is he can't skate?Seriously?He skated well enough to make Team Canada,he skated well enough to rack up a ton of points in the Q.
ReplyDeleteLiam Reddox can skate,so can Cogliano and JFJ.
Steve: I never talked about 100 points or 50 goals.
ReplyDeleteOnly that players who filled who enter that category (As Couturier did) have a sky high rate of success in the NHL.
Rob: Poor Robitaille can't skate. Too bad he's in the HOF.
Apologies, then - as I say, I interpreted the "that" in "89% chance we get that" to be referring to Rob's "true" #1 centre criterion.
ReplyDeleteReposting the research:
ReplyDeleteHere's the 6''3 players with 90+ points on draft year since 1980 with theyr NHL high next to them :
''Dave Andreychuck (99 Points)
Adam Creighton (70 Points)
Mario Lemieux (199 Points)
Mike Modano (93 Points)
Trevor Linden (80 Points)
Petr Nedved (99 Points)
Keith Primeau (73 Points)
Eric Lindros (115 Points)
Chris Gratton (62 Points)
Jason Allison (95 Points)
Jason Arnott (76 Points)
Chad Kilger (25 Points)
Joe Thornton (115 Points)
Vincent Lecavalier (108 Points)
Jason Spezza (117 Points)
Eric Staal (100 Points)
Counting Gratton and Kilger as busts, this makes for 2/17.
Considering the other's best season lowest is 70 points (Creighton)
Drafting a 6''3 with 90 + points out of the CHL is granting a success ratio of 89%''
Not a lot of busts.
SS: Well I don't believe theyre was ever a 6''3 kid with +90 points out of the 1st round.
I would really like to know how important "optics" and ability to play NOW are for Oilers management. Can Oiler fans support a pick that comes with another year of major junior or SEL play? If it's most NHL ready now there appears there may only be two legitimate candidates in Landeskog and Larsson. I have no problem with either but after listening to Hall's opinions on GL last night I have to say I likey.
ReplyDeleteIf GL's the way the Oilers are leaning it certainly makes the option to trade down from #1 to secure more assets a lot more viable. "Hello Columbus? Ottawa? NYI? Florida? You really see this Larsson/RNH kid as a cornerstone? Well now".
WG: 100% with you on MP as a solid centre candidate. Has he ever played the position? Can he win or be taught the art of faceoffs? Centre's a damn tough position vs wing with speed, play development recognition, and positioning being key. Definitely think he should get as much consideration as Hall or Eberle.
Off topic but I wonder what Chicago might be willing to relinquish to a team willing to take on Campbell's ridiculous contract and allow them some breathing room? Would Dave Bolland, injury warts and all, be worth it at $3.3 per? Patty Sharp?
fpb,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the research. I don't know if you had to pour through all the records yourself but it would be a chore.
However, your 90 pt criteria nicely avoids Jason Bonsignore, who had a mere 86 pts in his draft year (in only 58 games).
If I may discount the possibility that you are smarter than all the scouts, there must be a reason (aside from skating) for Couturier's drop - whether it be IQ or character or toughness or compete.
Cabbie, I think they identified Kane, Toews, Sharp, Duncan, Seabrook as their core.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sold on Bolland, but I'm intrigued by what they'd be willing to part with. As much as I'd like Frolik, I don't see Campbell's contact being worth even that.
Ducey: Yeah But it also avoids guys like Rick Nash. So it goes both ways.
ReplyDeleteThere's also reasons why guys like Alexeev, Gillies and etc pop up in the draft.
Doesn't mean it's a valid reason.
And 89% is pretty darn accurate.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWG: Bizarre Voice Inflections is simply awesome:) Your quip about the puppet asking himself questions gave me a nice laugh:)
ReplyDeleteDucey: the thing is, though, WG isn't wrong when he talks about.
SS: Yes, you're better off drafting or acquiring centres instead of trying to convert wingers. I just push the idea of 4 as a winger because he played there before.
Uni: remember, blend the baileys with ice and fill up a beer mug's worth of the results. Pour up the Guiness.
then alternate:)
Overall, this is the only real good day of the year for Oilers fans.
so at least we have that.
As per Mirtle's twitter, then NHL will have video on their site from hockey ops explaining video review decisions.
ReplyDeleteDennis, there have been several good days as Oilers fans:
ReplyDeleteGame 1 - Win vs. Calgary
Games 78 & 79 - Wins vs. Vancouver
Game 80 - loss to the flames, and they're eliminated anyways
I'm sure there were other good days in there too... Today is a gooder because we can't lose.
Draft day will also be a good one, even if it might cost us another actual NHLer.
I did some analysis over at C&B, and realized that the Khabbi signing has single handedly cost the Oilers about 20 points in the standings this season.
Yes. Without our MVP, we're outside the lottery.
This team isn't great, but at least there is some hope for the future. Would you rather be a Panters/Flames/Wild/Thrashers fan right now?
Things could be a hell of a lot worse.
While it's nice that it has benefitted us the last couple of years, the NHL lottery process is pretty ridiculous. There's no way finishing last should ensure you a top-2 pick.
ReplyDeleteTo prevent the kind of obvious tanking we saw this year (and last year when we didn't address the goalie situation), all non-playoff teams should probably each get a ping-pong ball and have the whole order drawn at random.
The NBA did that at first and eventually went away from it, but I think it makes a lot more sense.
I would also be a little disappointed if the first overall pick turned out to be a player equal to or lesser than:
ReplyDeleteCreighton, Gratton, Linden, Nedved, Allison, Kilger, and mabe even Primeau.
Some were excellent players, but this is the first overall pick. (Look at recent first overalls.)
But fpv has a point, even if he overstates it and in his odd fpv-style way. Couturier is a good prospect and his size and skill alone makes it likely he'll be a decent NHL regular. We can agree on that.
But Larsson and the Nuge have a lot going for them too. Larsson is a two way guy, so it's hard to use boxcar numbers (which is all we have) to evaluate him. And the whole idea behind drafting Nugent Hopkins first is that his talent -which is undeniable- isn't reflected in his boxcars. (You could say the same about Landeskog.)
It would be nice if we had better numbers like Corsi, quality of matchups, etc. on these guys. But without it, you have to go on things like speed and skating Those things really were in Hall's favor, and they made him the better prospect. (Even if Tyler turns out better than Taylor.)
So skating counts against Couturier. I also get the strong impression that scouts, rightly or wrongly, think there's an attitude problem or something. I mean, his drop has been big, really big.
I'm all for drafting a #1 centre, except there isn't one in this draft, so I'll take the 25 minute defenseman who can play in all situations.
ReplyDeleteTeam Larsson
Godot10: Yeah, why don't you back that up with something?
ReplyDeleteKris: If a guy doesn't maximize his talent in Junior he probably never will.
Scouts also had good impressions on guys who weren't that good. You'd also be dissapointed in Doug Wickenheiser and the gang under 6''3. The point of that is it's a higher success rate.
I probably will begin research with the 6''0 and less guys with over 90 points to make a comparable with RNH.
ReplyDeleteJordan,
ReplyDeleteHad a quick look at C&B and didn't see it.
Link?
Thanks.
fpv,
ReplyDeleteYou should search for all prospects that scored more than 106 points, have great skating, amazing skill, and are defensively aware. That's RNH's comp.
Then try searching for Larsson comps without underlying numbers, adjusting for different leagues and differetn eras.
We get your point, we just don't think it proves what you think it does.
Kris: Try and find me that guy who popped 106 points without looking like he had amazing skill.
ReplyDelete"Drafting a 6''3 with 90 + points out of the CHL is granting a success ratio of 89%"
ReplyDeleteThat seems to be true only if your definition of success for this pick is one season of 70 points or better. I realize that if you're too stringent on your initial criteria you'll lose sample size but shouldn't you be more stringent on the definition of success - like over 70/80 points in 4 seasons or something like that?
If I were to list the number 1 draft choices from 1980 forward, I'd see a similar (or better) success rate using your criteria. For forwards only Stefan, Daigle and Wickenheiser being busts out of 21 draft picks - 86% success knowing nothing about them except that they are forwards picked #1 overall.
What do they call those things that orbit the nucleus of an atom; you can measure their effect but you can't put a tangible thumb on them, and they seem to waver in and out of this physical dimension?
ReplyDeleteI was shit at physics, but were those things "true" #1 centers?
TG: Lawton wasn't a bust?
ReplyDeleteYeah. Well it's an approximation. This took a lot of time to get down.
Anyway i'm doing the same for 6''1 forwards and less with 90+ points so we'll see how they compare.
fpv,
ReplyDeleteThat is my point.
---
All you're showing is that Couturier is a good prospect, not that he's better than Nugent Hopkins.
I think we can all agree, the boxcar numbers alone make Couturier look like the best forward in the draft. (We need better numbers to evaluate defensemen like Larsson.)
Couturier also has size.
But it is not true that a team should always draft the biggest forward with the best boxcars.
1. There might be a better defenseman available. (Or, in the later rounds, a goalie.)
2. There might be a forward with comparable boxcars who has room to grow physically, who has better other intangibles. (See 4.)
3. The boxcar numbers of the big forward might be inflated by playing in a weaker league, playing with better linemates, playing more TOI, playing more on the PP, a run of lucky SH%'s a la Andrew Cogliano.
4. There might be intangibles showing the big, high boxcar forward is Schremp-like, or Esposito-esque, or there might be injuries, or problems with skating.
The reason to draft someone other than Couterier, if there is one, is not that he isn't an excellent pick, but some combination of 1-4.
Kris: Then you're relying entirely on things we can't measure.
ReplyDeleteUnless someone has a foolproof method of proving 1-4 have actual relevances or do exist, i'l go with actual numbers.
You know what? I think I mangled some physics 10.
ReplyDeleteI'm confusing things with that other thingamajig where you get that box with 100+ point "True" #1 Center written on it, but then when you open the box the players dies...gruesomely.
And there is a 6 toed cat in the box with him, too.
Haven't read any other posts yet, but Couturier has dropped out of the top 5 in many places. Huberdeau and Strome usually come in after the consensus top 3.
ReplyDelete0ne 70pt season, does not an NHL player make.
ReplyDeleteGrant: That's a bar for measurement. Not an indestructible foolproof way of saying someone is a godly N1 center.
ReplyDeleteSo far i've ran 1980 to 1987 and the bust rate was a 38% for 6''1 and under forwards with +90 Points. That's considerably more.
fpv,
ReplyDeleteAre you saying you would always draft the biggest forward with the best boxcars, regardless of context, like PP time, qual of linemates, qual of league, attitude problems, injuries, and skating?
If so, you're insane.
Kris: It seems regardless to be better bet. All those other smaller guys were taken with ''Context'' and still busted at a way higher level than the big guys. Almost 30% more.
ReplyDelete(Not biggest 6''3 90+ points minimum)
Unless there's some guy with mad crazy skills like Crosby who's burning the 100 points mark by 50 Points.
I'll remind you that Tyler had a signigicantly more goals than Taylor in their draft year, but that didn't mean the latter was the better pick. There were equal picks, and intangibles like athleticism gave Taylor, rightly I think, an edge.
ReplyDeleteFPB - Yup, I realized I forgot to include Lawton the minute I hit publish. 81% success then based only on forwards drafted first overall. 100% in the last ten years.
ReplyDeleteTo be clear, I don't disagree with your arguments about Couturier and appreciate the general point that he's a big kid that has put up a ton of points in junior - that's normally a recipe for success. It'd be nice to know what it is that has turned scouts off him.
I'd like to be on board with taking Larsson as well but drafting defencemen so high is pretty high risk. Only 2 in the last 15 years have gone first:
Eric Johnson ahead of Jordan Staal, Toews and Backstrom
Phillips ahead of Zyuzin, Dumont and Vochkov.
Three more second (including to Zyuzin):
Hedman behind Tavares ahead of Duchene
Doughty behind Stamkos ahead of Bogosian
Five more third:
Gudbrandson (behind Hall, Seguin)
Bogosian
Jack Johnson (behind Sid and Ryan)
Cam Barker (behind Ovechkin and Malkin)
Bouwmeester (behind Nash and Lehtonen)
Stuart (behind Lecavalier and Legwand)
I don't know what measure to use to establish whether these were good picks that high but in hindsight it's hard to argue any of these should have gone first overall (except for Phillips - that was an ugly top 4)
Maybe we grab this Swedish defenseman and trade up using some package of LA's pick, a 2nd and a player to grab this Couturier fella. Ecspecially if he falls into the 6-10 range.
ReplyDeletefpv,
ReplyDeleteWhat percentage of those busts were a.) from an older era of junior hockey, and b.) from stacked teams like Schremp's Knights, or c.) from weak leagues like the QMJHL of old.
---
If you really want to get into the numbers, you'll have to adjust for league and era. (This is doable, but time consumming.) You'll have to calculate only ES offense to eliminate Schemp-like PP inflated players. (Unfortunately, you don't have TOI so you can't eliminate that as a distortion, but c'est la vie.). You can adjust for quality of linemates by measuring the percentage of total team offense that each player contributes.
(These measures would've shown Schremp to suck.)
Until you've done that, at the very least, the "numbers" you're running are more noise than signal and they're not advancing the conversation.
I can't see Couturier falling out of the top 5. Seriously. WHAT AM I MISSING ABOUT HIM?
ReplyDeleteUni: Cabbie, I think they identified Kane, Toews, Sharp, Duncan, Seabrook as their core.
ReplyDeleteHear ya loud and clear and think Hossa has to be included in that grouping as well Uni. Don't think they have much choice with the coin he's pulling. Hawks are pretty strapped for at least 3-4 years I believe and if they flop first round this year vs Mary Kate and Ashley it might force their management to take a long hard look.
I love what Bolland brings to the table and the only ??'s there for me are the injuries. One of the best 3rd line C's in the league and very capable of taking on 2nd line duties with a team like the Oilers. Gritty, pest, shut down guy with very decent hands. Steve Ott with way more talent if you like. Frolik has the hands but I see him as the Pillsbury Doughboy.
You're the one who soured me on him, from that one game on SNW.
ReplyDeleteHaha. So you tell me?
Kris: They're the same for everyone.
ReplyDeleteIt's just to make clear that taller kids with the same points are much safer bets in general.
The problem is you're basically acting like all these measurable favor RNH, while you more or less can prove it, and you ask me to do so which is pretty unfair.
As for the Q' being shit, you'd have to prove me that it would also need a dumb down.
BTW: 5/15 busts were from the Q. Other split between OHL and WHL.
*When I say they're the same for everyone, i'm just saying odds both smaller and taller guys got aproximatively the same share of the pie.
ReplyDeleteThis conversation has died.
ReplyDeleteThis conversation has died.
ReplyDeleteYou're watching the leaders' debate too, I see.
I wish Bill Torrey was 30 years younger and married an Edmonton girl.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that only the Canadian teams have their GM's at the table.
ReplyDeleteI guess TSN isn't watched closely south of the 49th.
Mind you Chirelli was there last year.
Moving forward we should evaluate the teams picking 2-10 (assuming the Oil get #1) based solely on how Cogliano has performed against them, and build the packages from there.
ReplyDeleteLandeskog is very composed. Man. Remember these kids 25 years ago when they spoke? Wow. Huge improvement in getting these kids ready.
ReplyDeleteEdmonton fans go to the bar to watch the draft lottery.
ReplyDeleteThey sell out and cheer a 30th place team for 2 years running, and have sold out since the economy got better.
BUT YOU BETTER BUILD THE OWNER A NEW RINK OR ELSE EDMONTON DOESNT GET NHL HOCKEY!!!!!
Yeah right.
Of course Lou won.
ReplyDeleteYeah us!
ReplyDeleteGood thing the league didn't take way this year's first from Lou.
ReplyDeleteLou probably demanded to win the lottery in exchange for agreeing to forfeit a 1st.
Well, I guess we have two months to argue about who to pick.
ReplyDeletefor the record: landeskog, larsson RNH in order.
Love the grit.
WG: I've never really noticed it before, but you are bang on about Tambo's voice inflections.
ReplyDelete"We don't want to be good." - Steve Tambellini
ReplyDeleteI know he said some othe stuff too, but that part really jumped out at me. Mission accomplished.
Landeskog is already 100 times better in front if the camera than the fearless leader.
Couturier goes number 4. Couturier is a classic NJ pick. He'll serve them well.
ReplyDeleteFPV,
ReplyDeleteYou included players from 1980 on, but made your point total static (70pts) over 31 years.
Did you know that in 1984 70pts had you tied with Thomas McCarthy for 60th in scoring in the league?
This year 70pts has you tied with Joe Thornton for 24th.
60th place would take 57 points.
Context.
Toonces wins two coin flips in a row!!! Let's see what the draft and offseason bring.
ReplyDeletereyedlu: Lou missed the red-eye, but won the draft lotto.
If Lou doesn't take Couturier at 4, it speaks volumes about the skating concerns
ReplyDeleteIn 1998 70pts has you tied with Doug Weight for 21st in the league.
ReplyDeletesluitarg: Who 4 is eyeing up at the bar right now
WG: That would merely affect Creighton negatively or Gratton positively.
ReplyDeleteWG: Assuming that the number of 70 points season would go down, it would be normal to assume that the 38% of 6''1 ''bust'' would inflate.
ReplyDeleteIt's the same ''context'' for both researches.
I'm happy to see New Jersey win it--they seemed to have #1 locked up in December and were able to go on a great run that always had zero chance of getting them into the playoffs.
ReplyDeleteI think Dallas' 10th is ripe for the picking.
ReplyDeleteJoe's going to feel mass pressure to re-sign Richards. Might be in the market for some cheap forward projects that have "true" potential.
I think he should have waited until 20 games into next season to fire Crawford. That is a "true" 80 ~ point team that just finished way above their ability in the standings.
As long as v3.0 doesn't trade down to 4th with Lou because "the guy he wants should be available at 4", I'm ok with any of the top 3 people talk about.
ReplyDeleteMore good hockey players.
Less bad hockey players.
Please.
Stu is a decisive guy. He will know who he wants, and he will want to pick him at #1.
ReplyDeleteI had him as my #1 at the beginning of the year, and now that the Oilers are picking first, I'd be ecstatic with RNH.
ReplyDeleteWG: Assuming that the number of 70 points season would go down, it would be normal to assume that the 38% of 6''1 ''bust'' would inflate.
ReplyDeleteIt's the same ''context'' for both researches.
Correct.
That's why you throwing around "89%" is pretty hollow.
Woodguy: Not when comparing to the other research with the same context.
ReplyDeleteThen it's only a measurable of how far they're apart.
Anyway, as said earlier, it would merely affect 1 player one way or the other.
Creighton would become a ''bust'' then Gratton a succesful player.
I wish Milbury was still GM of the Islanders so the Oilers could trade Cogliano for Tavares.
ReplyDeleteSurprised they won that lottery although they are rightfully the very worst.
ReplyDeleteI doubt anyone hangs on my posts (nor do I expect anyone to) but this draft is more interesting to me then the last.
For me it was Hall and nobody else and I was vocal about that. This year it much tougher. It comes down to three players for me.
Larsson who might very well be the best player in this draft when everyone is retired 20 years down the road.
Couturier who I believe is the safest pick in this draft. The more I see of him the more he reminds me of Getzlaf (without the grit). We could certainly use that.
RNH I think has the highest ceiling in terms of skill. I get the dub fans that say Sakic as he prowls around the ice similar to the way Joe did in speed creek. I also think he carries the most risk.
I'm fine with whoever the Oilers take as long as it's one of those three.
Landeskog seems like a guy with a 60 point ceiling and potential injury issues.
Hamilton seems like such a dropoff from from Larsson.
The L.A. pick is more interesting. I'd be really happy with Mark Mcneil who won me over as the season went on and he was great against the Blades in the playoffs.
If Siemens happens to slip and the Oilers can get him with that second pick then we have our Seabrook. (In terms of playing style not draft position)
There's also a 100% chance of me trying that Baileys-Guinness combo Dennis recommends.
ReplyDeleteI've been on my ass a couple of times from said Irish car-bomb. But for the love of God don't call it that at a Republic bar.
Smarmy:
I remember a tweet a couple weeks past either from Tencer or equivalent that said they were scouting MM heavily. He's worth a looksee, especially if we go Larsson at #1. If however (and hopefully) it's RNH first, then I'm targetting Oleksiak with LA's pick. You can't teach size folks.
I wonder if Katz is going to have dinner with Hemsky again this spring.
ReplyDeleteAnyone else get the feeling that if we take RNH this year one or both of Cogs and Gagner are gone in the next 18 months?
ReplyDeleteIt may not be Hemsky as the draft bait. What could Gagner and the 19th pick get you? 8th?
It's nuts to trade Gagner. Even if its RNH, because RNH might need another year in junior to fill out, and you probably don't want to throw RNH to the wolves early.
ReplyDeleteGagner has a year left on his contract. Take the year, and make the decision on him next summer.
Cogliano is the guy who should be the bait in a deal to trade up.
I conducted a scientific poll* of mentally disabled Edmonton Oilers fans and the consensus pick of who should be drafted forst overall was Adam Larsson.
ReplyDeleteThe dominant factor being that "we need Swedes".
I can't say I disagree.
*Only a single person was approached in the poll and only three options were provided (RNH, SC & AL).
FBV,
ReplyDeleteMaybe its the language, so I'll be clear.
You picked a threshold of 70pts in the NHL.
You failed to account for different eras when 70pts meant different things.
70 pts today means you are 24th in the league.
In 1987 you needed 86 points to get 24th.
You need to move you target around with the era.
@ Woodguy:
ReplyDeleteWas just some numbers I threw together in the comments section of this thread that Scott rightly pointed out were not entirely accurate. Despite that, I still think that the result are close, and paint a picture of near enough to reality that it's worth noting.
If they take RNH #1:
ReplyDeleteWho was the last #1 overall to go back to juniors? Or even wait a year, as larsson might too?
What is your thought on this article?
ReplyDelete"THE FIRST OVERALL PICK: AVOID NUGENT-HOPKINS"
http://oilersnation.com/2011/2/5/the-first-overall-pick-avoid-nugent-hopkins
Yeah let's talk about old Doug Wickeneiser, fpb. Not a good example for you to build your size argument when you know the whole story.
ReplyDelete1st overall, 6'1", 196 lbs, an amazing 89G/81A in his draft year. By fpb's argument, he should be picked ahead of a 5'10", 170 lb guy with only 63G/118A. I mean that's 3 inches and 26 lbs bigger, right? 6'1" is the average in the NHL now, back then that was a decent sized center for a skill guy.
As a Habs fan, fpb, you should know who I am talking about and why raising Doug Wickenheiser as an example doesn't help your cause. By the standards of G/A and size differential, Wickenheiser would be the obvious pick over Denis Savard.
Funny thing about talent, eh?
Lets trade the first pick for Colorado's 2nd and 11th picks. I think Colorado will be after Larsson because they have a few good young centers. We take RNH with #2 and grab a dman at 11. Maybe someone that slips out of the top 10, I.E. Siemans.
ReplyDeleteIrish car bomb is Guinness and a whiskey I think dg, not a Baileys.
ReplyDeleteShould be interesting but I think they go with RHN. He's got pace and they probably see him dishing to Hall and Eberle.
I think EDM would trade their #1 and #19 to Colorado for #2 and #11. If Colorado wants something different from Edm at #1. Let the games begin. Would be nice if EDM got their #1 pick at #2 and then had the #11 pick.
ReplyDeleteMalcolm - Your right they probably want more for the 2nd and 11th. I totally trade 1 and 19 for 2 and 11!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.edmontonsun.com/sports/myoilers/2011/04/12/17972201.html
ReplyDelete- The Puppet forgot that NJ wasn't in the bottom five.
- The hubris surrounding MacGregor and the quotes that come from the brass are equally mind-blowing.
Surprised they won that lottery although they are rightfully the very worst.
ReplyDeleteBut they didn't win the lottery! New Jersey did!
Talk about a confused girlfriend in my living room today. All was fine once she realised she didn't care how it worked and she got very angry with the Oilers for losing on purpose. Pretty funny stuff, really. Maybe I'll fix her a Spiced Root Beer to calm her down...
Blogger Grant said...
ReplyDelete"0ne 70pt season, does not an NHL player make."
Just curious how many Oiler players have had one 70 point season?
Couturier's stats are good. They are measurable. The things that are dragging him down seem to be not measurable... or are they.
ReplyDeleteIn Football/Baseball guys run a 4.4 sec 40 yard dash. I know there's no test that measures a skater's ability to get from the half-boards to the slot directly.
hockeyguy10 said:
"RobVD: The problem with Couturier is he can't skate?Seriously?He skated well enough to make Team Canada,he skated well enough to rack up a ton of points in the Q.
Liam Reddox can skate,so can Cogliano and JFJ."
I would suggest that skating at the junior level and at the NHL level are miles apart.
I know it's not currently being measured but skating ability(by that I mean quickness, acceleration, change of direction, top end speed) is one of the more subjective aspects in hockey. However, you can tell by watching a player whether or not he's a good skater relative to his peers. That's kind of what scouting does.
According to McKenzie no scout surveyed for his top 10 had Couturier at #1 in his last ranking.
Skating is a huge issue and if Couturier isn't quick enough to get to the scoring areas he won't be successful at the NHL level. I know some guys have done it before, Robitaille, Hull. However, there are more Alex Giroux's in the world then there are Luc Robitaille's.
It looks to me in this case math doesn't tell the whole story.
What's the knock on RNH? It's not skating ability. His numbers are PP heavy... well maybe that helps the Oilers. He's smallish weight wise. I'm pretty sure he'll fill out.
I think RNH is the pick. Couturier isn't even in the conversation at this point. I think defenceman are too all over the map to risk at #1.
I got this one!
ReplyDelete2.
Have I won the password to the secret website?
Email verification: HORCOFFSUCKS
ReplyDeleteGot it! Thank-you. Look forward to commisserating with you andyour gang in the near future.
Blogger slipper said...
ReplyDeleteI got this one!
2.
Have I won the password to the secret website?
Can't get anything past you :)
Is "packie" a racial slur?
I feel so dirty.
This seems like years ago. It was nice when we had a team to be proud of. Draft lotteries suck.
ReplyDeleteLine Brawl Vs the Nucks
These lottery rules were made up after Pittsburg played NJ for the top pick Mario Lemieux. Pittsburg tanked the game and the rest is history.
ReplyDeleteMalcolm, I think Ottawa tanking for Daigle might have been the final straw:
ReplyDeletehttp://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_n9_v216/ai_14317274/
19 different oilers have put up 70 point seasons. Total of 62 such seasons in team NHL history.
ReplyDeleteI have one problem in respect to the the development of the guys of coming out of Major Junior(Hall Included). Watching Hall and Eberle during an Oil Change episode, the food that was in their fridge was not that of a professional athlete. With the amount of money to be made in the NHL, should these kids not have nutritionists/cooks available to cook for them properly?
ReplyDeleteYou can hit the gym all you want, but proper rest and nutrition will help put on the muscle especially at that young age.
OilLeak, I'm all for sending Eberle, Hall et al to Camp Gary Roberts. Would do them a world of good.
ReplyDeleteFrom the anecdotes Ribs mentioned of MPS running up and down a ski resort hill during the offseason 10-15 times a session, I think he's probably exempt from this discussion.
Dennis, I'll definitely give that a go as the Spring rolls along and I can squirrel some disposable income away.
ReplyDeleteA full beer mug seems like quite a bit though, of course now I have to go out and acquire a beer mug that'll frost up nicely; my brother swiped my last set 2 Christmases ago.
Doritogrande, I used to know a guy who would always offer to make whatever you were having 'Irish'. "Want me to make that coffee Irish?", "Would you like me to Irish up that orange juice?" and so forth.
Quite good fun especially since he'd use his whimsical Irish accent. One night though, a grade A [insert colourful euphemism here] made a remark about his lady friend. Dead serious, and with the scariest twinkle I've ever seen in someone's eye, he leans over and says, "Careful laddie, you wouldn't want me to make your car Irish now, would you?".
OilLeak: I don't get it either. You're a young millionaire who is trying to play in the best league in the world. How can you not be at least vaguely aware of how pivotal nutrition is?
ReplyDeleteIt should be a short conversation too:
Hall: Coach, who do I talk to if I want help getting elite level nutrition so I can score 35-40 goals next year instead of 30-35?
You'd think the young man would get an answer in an awful hurry.