Friday, June 17, 2011

Draft Week Post #3: Fetching

The truth is that if you fixate on one thing long enough it becomes a major part of your life. The Edmonton Oilers have a problem in this area, have for years. One of their major themes is making itself known this week throughout the main stream media: the Oilers want to trade up.

If you're an Oiler fan of a decade or more, you know that they were going to trade up for Joni Pitkanen, Braydon Coburn, Drew Stafford, Ryan Johansen and on it goes. You'd think at some point the organization would stop leaking this stuff and then if it doesn't happen it still looks like they know what they're doing.

Oh well.

There's talk of Ales Hemsky, Tom Gilbert, Sam Gagner, the 19th pick, next year's first round pick and all kinds of things going this year.

Should the Oilers trade next year's first round pick I believe it will be the beginning of the end for Steve Tambellini. Edmonton has very little chance of moving out of lottery territory for 11-12 based on the current group, and watching another team select in the top 4 would require another sacrifice. It might even be enough to get Kevin Lowe back in the GM's chair, something I believe we'll see eventually.

The Oilers are now at a point where they are running out of things to trade. They don't have anything worth putting in the Bargain Finder, no one wants the stuff they post on E-bay and soon kijiji will block their account. That'll leave a garage sale at Steve's house and we're down to saddle lamps and decks of 51.

What can the Oilers trade at the draft?
  1. 19th overall: It's a nice pick in the middle of the first round. Oilers could trade up, or they could also deal the pick for two later selections.
  2. 31st overall: As a few insightful posters here have mentioned, the first pick on day two might have exceptional value. Teams will re-set their lists overnight and may be very aggressive if they feel a gem has fallen out of the first round. 
  3. C Andrew Cogliano: I would have bet money that Cogs would be gone by now, but coach Renney seems to have found a role for him and may be lobbying for his return in 11-12. 
  4. D Tom Gilbert: A fine, veteran defender who was overworked and beaten down from another trying season. A change of scenery likely spells re-birth, and he is a quality finesse defenseman capable of helping an NHL team. 
  5. R Ales Hemsky: Injuries and an expiring contract mean he won't have as much value as we think he will, but the Oilers annual rebuild may mean Hemsky is too old to hang around until the times get good (I probably am, too. Fans who are eligible for seniors housing should be on notice). 
  6. C Sam Gagner: Fine young C getting better in small increments. Bad teams flush these kids all the time, and then wonder why they're better on a better, more structured team. 
  7. D Ladislav Smid: There was a rumor he was going at the deadline, which may mean another NHL team was interested. That scenario is sometimes followed by a multi-year overpay in Our Town, but there's still a chance Smid walks the plank.
  8. R Linus Omark: I worry the Oilers may not know what they have here, and a smarter front office (like Detroit, or New Jersey, or Buffalo, or or or) might grab this player before he shows the world how cool he is.
The Oilers would be unwise to trade next year's first round pick, as there's every chance that selection will be inside the top 5. It would be complete idiocy for Steve Tambellini to make this trade, as the knives are no doubt being sharpened for this winter's failure.

If Steve Tambellini trades next year's first round pick, we can be certain he has badly misjudged the fanbase and what Daryl Katz will do to appease the masses. The storyline is available in pretty much every history book, but I suspect history books are pretty dusty at the Oiler office.

80 comments:

  1. I am older than you LT. And getting very
    Tired of missing the playoffs. Patience they say is a virtue. Will we live long enough to see another cup???

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is the type of move that I've been praying that the Oilers' avoid. Dismantling the team to grab a another intriguing but untried prospect. We can only live in the basement so long and I am skeptical of this management team can put together enough smart free agent signings to prevent another lottery pick. I do not want to watch another team draft a future star, like Toronto fans have had to. And although it is important to have a cluster of young talent, it wouldn't hurt to space out our lottery picks, because we will likely run out of cap space before these picks hit their primes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If we pass on top end defensive help this year next years draft is supposed to be a deep one on the blue line. We need that pick still.
    Come visit my new Oiler blog at:

    http://puckpassionate.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  4. Feeling a little down today LT? Your offering has some uncharacteristic negative undertones.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that many Oilers fans are beginning to lose patience.

    It's not the lack of a roster full of prospects, and that we're getting a bunch more next weekend.

    It's that Steve Tambellini can't seem to make a deal to improve the quality on the ice as we start to move back towards respectability.

    A deal to add a pick would signal that tanking for a top-3 pick is over and that the Oilers will attempt to be competitive next season.

    As much as I'd love to see the Oilers to draft Nail Yakupov a year from now, the time is now to do something and improve the team, without getting caught in the annual-rebuilding cycles that teams like the Islanders seem to always be in.

    I'm also highly annoyed at the possibility of Kevin Lowe ending up back in the GM chair for the Oilers at any time in the future. Many teams are getting the best and the brightest younger hockey minds as GMs and we seem to always go for boys on the bus or yes men.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Chris: When the Oilers make no sense I get grumpy. I've been pretty grumpy since 2006 spring. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wow - Lowetide you just did a much better job of what I added a comment (poorly worded, but I wish I could have just cut and pasted this!) on oilersnation, when they were talking about giving up next years 1st pick to move up this year. Except on this blog, there seems to be consensus that it would be dumb to give up next years top pick when we have been and are likely to still be garbage. Over there they didn't agree. DUMB DUMB DUMB. Hello?! We suck, so don't give up the reward for sucking: 1st pciks!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I agree LT, but I also think such a deal is potentially workable given two things. I'm not sure how likely either would be, but without at least one, and probably both, I think you are dead on - it's too much risk to take to move teh 2012 1st in such a deal.

    (1) The team plans to aggresively improve through trades and free agency this summer, and is willing to spend to the cap. All the media reports I've heard have been to the contrary, in terms of payroll and "not chasing high proced free agents", but if they are willing and able to improve the club as much as they can, I can see the argument. Not sure I agree with it, but I could see the argument.

    (2) Lottery protection - This is more common in the NBA, but it was a part of the Johnson/Stewart and Shattenkirk trade. If EDM could have protection so that the first rounder is bumped to 2013 if EDM's pick ends up in the top 5 in the 2012 draft, I could see the merits in that case. There would still be the 2013 risk, of course, if you think the team will be lottery bad for two more years, but you could even write protection in for that if the other party would agree. If they don't want to, that's fine, but IMO no deal from an EDM POV.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I don't know what I would do if ST dealt the 2012 pick. On the one hand it would be nice because the debate about his ability would be resolved with utter finality. On the other hand, it would be incredibly hard to cheer for a franchise that trades away a pick that obviously will be 10th overall or better in a very, very good draft.

    If MacT indeed goes to Winnipeg I might consider following the Polar Jet Bears or whatever they will call them for a few seasons.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think talking in anticipation of the next draft seems foolish.

    This year's was supposed to be very weak and ended up looking like a draft for the ages.

    I'd only agree with the clause Speeds talked about.

    Bumped pick if it's in the top 5.

    ReplyDelete
  11. LT, also, I saw you write earlier that you wouldn't move Gagner for a pick that would land you Couturier*.

    I found that kind of surprising (even though I also am a fan of Gagner), largely because of expected value. Gagner is 3 years from UFA. He's signed for one more year, and then RFA for 2 years and a UFA in the summer of 2014, while Couturier would be 7 years from UFA, three of those on an ELC.

    * You used Couturier, and there might be some players others would prefer, but I think the point is kind of the same whether it's Strome, or Hamilton, or Landeskog, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Just to clarify, in the Johnson/Stewart trade, the pick wasn't lottery protected, though the idea was the same.

    That pick was top ten, not lottery protected. Had STL finished in the bottom 10, they would have kept the 2011 1st and instead moved the 2012 1st. As it happened, the pick was 11th, so the pick went to COL. Interestingly (to some maybe, I either didn't know or forgot about this part), part of the condition was that STL got COL's 2nd, so in effect COL just moved up from 32 to 11, and STL moved down from 11 to 32.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Wow, nice post. You're a great read, and even better when you're on edge.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Sorry, in advance for the vitriol

    Any move by the Oilers to put K Lowe back in as GM is, quite simply, unacceptable. Not as a fan, but because it is an IQ test. If you agree with that proposition you are a TOTAL moron.

    He got kicked upstairs because D Katz loves to have Lowe tell him mid 80's Oiler bedtime stories. He is congenially unable to assemble a hockey team....little alone a real NHL roster. To the extent we wasted 8 of the last 10 years outside of the playoffs by a wide margin: it will be absolutely wasted if Lowe is tasked with "fitting" the last few pieces of the puzzle for a SCF contender

    Put a wee bit more simplistically, Lowe is a real bad GM (understatement) and all of us, even Ducey and Danny, are committed to the Oilers winning with the only question being when. Lowe does not advance that argument in any fashion

    ReplyDelete
  15. I disagree with the timing of the longer term rebuild. but respect the concept.

    I also understand the logic behind the concept completely. It puts the upmost faith in drafting and, in particular, draft clusters of talent. Ducey and Danny are two of the most patient proponents of this this model but even that model is tied to skilled management.

    Not failed 30th place leadership!!

    ReplyDelete
  16. speeds: I wouldn't do it because sooner or later you need to stand and deliver. Gagner was drafted when my son had just finished grade 7 and now he's a year from graduating.

    Soon, I'll be putting my teeth in a glass. I like Couturier a ton but don't believe this organization should move back the cluster yet again.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Tambellini garage sale featuring Decks of 51.

    Best comment since KP Tobacco Rep of the year.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think it's almost a given that Tambellini will try but do nothing to disrupt the 6 year rebuild.

    He really isn't cut out for bold moves.

    He'll almost assuredly piss away Hemsky's trade vale, such as it is, and wonder why Khabibulin and Jacque can't lead him to the playoffs.

    He was passed over for a GM's chair twice for a very good reason.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Trading Smid for Larsson "sets back the cluster" as well.

    Certainly not a very good reason for holding on to the lesser asset.

    Couturier could end up a 35 point center and he would still help win games more than Gagner does.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Traktor: I know you believe it when you say that, but imo it isn't so clear cut. There is a group that holds almost no value for him, but I'm not one of them.

    We've suffered through growing pains and he has some nice things and isn't miles from helping win hockey games.

    That has value, and he's at an age where good years are straight ahead. I think very highly of Couturier, and maybe I'm just being stubborn on a player.

    I keep Gagner.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Maybe you need to stand and deliver at some point, but what makes now that point if they are actually looking at a 4-6 year rebuild? I'm like you (at least, I think we're similar in this respect), I don't think they should have taken the approach they did this year either, but if they are going down that road I'm not sure why they stop now?

    One could argue the Oilers are guilty of straddling the fence right now, in talking about rebuilding, by not really following through and gaining the assets they could. I understand all the reasons to keep guys like Hemsky and Whitney, but if you're truly looking at a 4-6 year rebuild, why not move Whitney for 5OV, and Gagner for 8OV, and Hemsky for 9OV*? 4 picks in the top 10, would also place you, in all likelyhood, top 2 for 2012 and 13, at which point you'd be locked and loaded for the future and tons of cap room. I'm not advocating this approach, but if you truly are going down the rebuilding road...

    *Again, these are just hypotheticals, and arguably very optimistic ones at that. I don't know what you could actually get for those guys in terms of picks/prospects. If you could only get a 35OV pick for Hemsky, or Gagner, or Whitney, obviously you don't make the deal.

    ReplyDelete
  22. speeds: I look at the entry level deals for Hall, MP and Eberle and wonder what the plan is for this organization.

    If you're looking at a 4-6 year rebuild, then why turn Hall pro? Why bring over the Swede?

    At some point you have to say 'you know, this young player (Gagner) is progressing and we need to keep him.'

    I understand windows of opportunity for winning, but this organization is making it look like trying to hit a wormhole with the Borg on their tail.

    ReplyDelete
  23. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Lt

    Your affinity for Gagner is, I believe, tied to so many players that take two to three years to "get it" and hope that Gagner is turning that corner. Problem is there is no evidence to support that conclusion. In fact, evidence to the contrary is thatnhe is regressing. suspect you are thinking of so many players-- Messier, Lafluer that took awhile to get it.

    Gagner will still be undersized forward that loses draws with regularity and remains undersized. get it that Gags may have turned corner.........but if not we get 45 points with mediocre D, bad face offs and no physicIlty

    That being said, I like Gags more than Cogs and would move either for picks

    ReplyDelete
  25. My guess is they turned Hall pro because they think it was the best thing for his development, and also maybe because they wanted a new face of the franchise to market, keep interest high during what they expected to be another poor season ("This team might be terrible, but man is Hall fun to watch!"), and help sell tickets for both the rest of 10/11 and 11/12 season tickets. Hall can't show enticing flashes of brilliance at the NHL level if he's back in Windsor.

    I don't think they have this worry this summer, since they've been pretty vocal in saying they aren't opposed to sending whoever back to junior if they aren't completely ready. I would guess they are a little bit surprised that they've been able to retain as many tickets as it sounds like they have, and that may actually allow them to look a bit more long term than they might have thought they'd be able to.

    But that's all conjecture. I think the argument for sending Hall back to junior was pretty compelling if you don't need him to sell tickets, but other may (and have) disagree.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Other John: I believe Gagner has made progress, and has shown nice growth especially when given established veterans as linemates (Penner, Hemsky).

    His season hit a cliff when MP and Omark joined his line and I'm completely willing to agree he had poor chemistry with them.

    However, he's a talented player who delivered the 2nd best offensive number 5x5 this season. He's a talented, young player with legit NHL experience.

    How many of those do we have?

    ReplyDelete
  27. speeds: I agree re: Hall, and in fact imo he was worth keeping because of his development.

    However, if the Oilers are just going to throw these kids to the wolves like they did with the Gagner's and Cogliano's then what will we have in three years?

    There's so reason this team can't have structure and a plan.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Hall being here was all about his development, and judging by what hehad done, Juniors would've been wrong and the only other option was Europe.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Trading the 2012 first is utter stupidity. Unless it is straight across for the COL 2nd.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Gagner's GAON/60 was 3.81, which places in dead last in the leauge among centers with >30 games played.

    That's improvement? D.E.A.D. L.A.S.T.

    He's the same kind of quality as Patrick O'Sullivan.

    ReplyDelete
  31. LT

    I do not dislike Gagner but he has not progressed the way I would have liked. Expect he was rushed to the NHL and has struggled to develop. That is a management flaw

    If he cannot win face offs, he may not be able to play centre. If we could draft Couturier with a pick we could get for Gags I would do that deal in a heartbeat. Similar skillset but much bigger frame and will be able to win face offs

    Who's up on Nation radio tomorrow?

    ReplyDelete
  32. LT: Drafting RNH puts Gagner on the clock for the death knell, Hemsky is likely a goner and Omark would be very redundant. At some point strength has to be addressed in the top 6.

    Already going through the 2007 models doesn't bode well for the Oilers, at what point do the Oilers say they are good enough and start building sround them instead of endlessly replacing them?

    I don't mind throwing youth to the wolves, but at least give them something they ccan survive with. Cover some bases, win some matchups and allow the skill to take over some games. They out smarted, out muscled, out competed, out goaltended, start working on covering some of those.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I guess the question is does the Oilers mgmt have a plan? or is the plan trying to draft BPA over and over again until they fall into a team that will miraculously have everything they need?

    ReplyDelete
  34. The Other John: I understand the faceoffs, but if we take that one stat and put it aside then there's a story to tell in Gagner's season.

    He had the best CorsiRel among forwards, his zone start/end was positive and he delivered well at 5x5 points-per-60.

    Now he doesn't have Horcoff's range of skills and he needs to post those numbers against tougher opposition.

    But there's progress. And I think it would have been more obvious if Gagner hadn't been placed with the two rookies.

    MP and Omark showed chem together but it appears to have been a black hole for Gagner.

    His performance with Penner and Hemsky was much better, and I believe Gagner has shown enough--even in a tough season--to warrant the Oilers staying the course.

    ReplyDelete
  35. CorsiRel is 4th best among FWDs, sorry about that.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Put a wee bit more simplistically, Lowe is a real bad GM (understatement) and all of us, even Ducey and Danny, are committed to the Oilers winning with the only question being when. Lowe does not advance that argument in any fashion


    Wow, even a lugnut like me, eh?

    How about we wait 'til Tambo makes one of these bad moves before we hang him for them.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Ducey: Where did that quote come from? I can't find it.

    ReplyDelete
  38. TOJ said...

    Your affinity for Gagner is, I believe, tied to so many players that take two to three years to "get it" and hope that Gagner is turning that corner. Problem is there is no evidence to support that conclusion. In fact, evidence to the contrary is thatnhe is regressing. suspect you are thinking of so many players--Messier, Lafluer that took awhile to get it.

    Actually there is a ton of evidence to support LT's position, not yours. The prodigy's (like Crosby) who can step into the league and be difference makers within 2 yearsvare absolute rarities. What you are describing as the exception is actually the rule, and your rule, the exception.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Speeds:

    The whole marketing, sell tickets, sell jerseys angle is what worries me most about the Oilers picking RNH.

    1) Will they leave the guy in the WHL next year as he surely needs?

    2) Will the additional pressure of having to live up to what Hall has done in the spotlight weigh heavily on this kid, who has had only one year of CHL hockey with varying levels of success, especially at even strength where the space on the ice is surely more than he'll see in the NHL.

    3) It's not easy to quantify hockey sense, vision and playmaking ability. If the numbers don't add up after a few years will the fans turn on him, akin to Gagner? BTW - Gagner should be moved to RW to maximize his career.

    I'm convinced that picking Larsson first and solidify the defense, be a hockey move - not a marketing move, and will correct a glaring issue on the roster in a much earlier timeframe.

    ReplyDelete
  40. TOJ said...

    I do not dislike Gagner but he has not progressed the way I would have liked. Expect he was rushed to the NHL and has struggled to develop. That is a management flaw.

    An impossible statement to prove, one way or the other, except from the pov of your own expectations.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Ducey,

    Is that a Dennis quote? Just askin bc Danny is in there.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Ducey: Where did that quote come from? I can't find it.

    The Other John 8:25 above

    ReplyDelete
  43. Ducey: Ah, got it.

    TOJ: I'm not endorsing Lowe as GM, but I'll bet you a 2-4 he's a GM again and another 12 that it's in Edmonton.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Rick:
    Assuming the Oilers draft RNH

    (1) What makes you think it's a certainty he "surely needs" the WHL? He's the kind of guy that I think you'd need to evaluate at camp, he could need the seasoning or look better than you think right away playing with better players.

    (2) I don't think living up to Hall is an issue. To the contrary, the fact that Hall, Eberle, and Paajarvi are around IMO takes a bunch of the pressure of RNH.

    (3) The fans will eventually sour on any highly touted player that doesn't turn out as expected.

    As for Larsson, I disagree but that's because I generally believe forwards to be more valuable and important than defencemen if they turn out. I would generally be looking to draft forwards in the first two rounds unless the BPA is CLEARLY a D or G, if it's close I would take the F.

    ReplyDelete
  45. LT

    Do not dispute Lowe will be GM again. Simply expect it will end very badly. The draft our way to success model has as many failures as there are successes

    To the extent you believe Gagner was not rushed to the show, we agree to disagree. Instead of learning his craft and developing his skillset against lesser killed players..... Learning to defend...He was thrown in the deep end of NHL play and told to swim. He has been getting slightly better offnsivelywith little improvement defensively.

    Has he turned the corner? Maybe

    Ducey

    ......wait for a bad move? What move has Tambellini made over the last 3 years do you think made the Oilers a better team in the short term? Intermediate term? Long term?

    You believe in a 5 year plan I get it. I understand that's your belief. You also understand that FLA, NYI, STL, ATL all shared that same view. Sometimes relying on the draft alone does not work. I might be more optimistic if we did not have the worst record in the league over the last 5 years: with the same management

    If the managing partner of your law firm had 8 years of bad results with a single year of solid performance, they would no longer be your managing partner. Or your law firm would cease to exist. Partners would leave in droves. Similarly if your firm had performance over the last 3 years of: bottom third in the City, followed by two successive of the worst performances in the City, you would not listen to whatever your managing partners "Plan" was, you would have a new MP. I suspect your MP would also be invited to leave your firm

    But thats the real world

    ReplyDelete
  46. Bob Mackenzie reporting that Nashville has filed for arbitration with Shea Weber-no offer sheets allowed.

    ReplyDelete
  47. LT, In all honesty, if trading next year's first round pick means that the Oil end up flushing Tambo (the guy who couldn't make it in Vancouver, the City of "Champions"), then trade away.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Instead of trying to move up at a time when picks and their position are at their highest value, maybe the Oilers should be thinking about helping somebody else move up.

    For example, if Winnepeg is interested in moving into the top 3 or 4 to make a splash with Larsson or Huberdeau, they'll need another first rounder to offer NJ/FLA. The Oilers could give them that piece and get something of value in what would amount to the following 3-team deal done in two transactions.

    To NJ/FLA: 7th and 19th picks
    To Winnepeg: 3rd/4th pick and Teubert (maybe Smid)
    To Oilers: Bogosian

    ReplyDelete
  49. So, what would be so terrible about trading next years 'maybe a lottery pick' for this years lottery pick (a 2-5th)?

    I presume its the add on's such as this year's 19th or some fear that the add on will be Hemsky.

    Is it about the quality of the two draft years?

    Otherwise, its just about timing.

    ReplyDelete
  50. TOJ: I certainly agree Gagner was rushed for PR reasons, and should have been sent back to junior.

    What I'm arguing is that despite the history of this player, he's worth keeping.
    --

    bookie: By trading next year's number one, you are at great risk. What if the Oilers trade their pick, finish 27th and win the lottery?

    What if one of the gifted 2012 kids emerges as a generational talent?

    We don't know what it looks like, therefore cannot place a ceiling on the pick's value.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Lowe returning to fuck up everything should be the icing on the cake for about half the old-school fans who will forget about hockey until playoff time(when they can pick and choose a nice bandwagon team to cheer for).

    Kevin Lowe has been proven to be one of the stupidest men in the game of hockey today.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Lowetide, you surely talk about Lowe returning to GM the Oilers simply to drive me crazy, right?

    ReplyDelete
  53. ......wait for a bad move? What move has Tambellini made over the last 3 years do you think made the Oilers a better team in the short term?

    What good trades has he made? He's lost a bunch, has we won any? I have no confidence in Tambellini or perhaps the Oilers Pro scouting to identify undervalued players to trade for. Under Lowe they could find D-men, but what since? Ug. Tambellini is going to screw this up, has he done anything to inspire confidence since he got here, in anything? What we've seen, is all we'll get from his abilities. It's right there in front of us - reality. Haha, someone pass me a hand gun.

    ReplyDelete
  54. And while I'm on the topic of mentioning washed up useless ex-Oilers employees, I see MacT has been rejected for yet another NHL head coaching job. What a surprise, lol.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Bookie,

    People who know a lot of drafts are saying next year is the best one since 2003. Some really high end forwards and bunch of kids who can be franchise Dmen.

    In particular, Sarnia had two kids, Yakupov and Galchenyuk who put up 101pts and 83 pts this year.

    No mean feat for two kids who were 16 years old when the puck dropped last October.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Don't any of you understand present value. Assuming the Oilers got a two of the top three picks in this years draft is vastly more valuable than an unknown pick a year from now.

    Moreover, if the Oilers make other obvious trades flushing out the over rated and forever underachieving Gagner & Hemsky for real hockey players, massive improvement should not be counted on. The future is now. Do it Steve

    ReplyDelete
  57. @ matmik: The future is now? Oilers 30th place and in place the past 2 seasons, about as close to contending as the Canucks looked in game 3 of the finals?

    Lowetide is so right about Gagner it isn't even funny.

    ReplyDelete
  58. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Matmilk,

    Steve Smith isn't around so I'll take it upon myself.

    1) Don't any of you understand present value. Assuming the Oilers got a two of the top three picks in this years draft is vastly more valuable than an unknown pick a year from now.


    I don't think Present Value means what you think it means.

    2) Moreover, if the Oilers make other obvious trades flushing out the over rated and forever underachieving Gagner & Hemsky for real hockey players

    Hemsky had the 3rd best 5v5 pts/60 in the entire NHL, behind only Crosby and D.Sedin.

    I don't think under achieving means what you think it means.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Re Gagner: I have to admit the past 2 seasons have pissed me off mightily about this guy, watching him skating around looking earnest yet a little lost.

    This is the perfect sort of player that can suddenly break out. Oilers would be insane to trade him now. His value must be in the dirt.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Gagner's GAON/60 was 3.81, which places in dead last in the leauge among centers with >30 games played.

    That's improvement? D.E.A.D. L.A.S.T.

    He's the same kind of quality as Patrick O'Sullivan.


    While I agree that Gagner's biggest weakness is his defensive game, the fact that he was last among C's listed at BTN in GAON/60 has to be tempered with the fact that he also had the lowest ON ICE SV% with .873.

    You also may have wanted to add that other C's at or near the bottom include:

    Gagner worst (3.81GA/60 - .876 OISV%)
    Kane 3rd worst (3.53 - .892)
    Spezza 4th worst (3.39 - .897)
    Duchene 6th worst (3.31 - .896)
    Tavares 7th worst (3.29 - .900)
    E.Staal 9th worst (3.22 - .907)
    Dubinsky 10th worst (3.22 - .892)
    Malkin 11th worst (3.20 - .884)

    ReplyDelete
  62. ......wait for a bad move? What move has Tambellini made over the last 3 years do you think made the Oilers a better team in the short term? Intermediate term? Long term?


    The last three years have to be split into the pre and post rebuild phase. I am sure you feel that the the last 8 years are all relevant but the reality is that the rebuild has been on since about March 2010. In that time:

    1) jettsoned Moreau
    2) turned POS into JVM
    3) oversaw a great 2010 draft
    4) traded Penner for 19th, Tuebert, and 3rd
    5)Staios for 3rd
    6)signed two Finns, Fedun, House
    7)rebuilt the farm system
    8)rebuilt the player development system including hiring Silinger
    9)grabbed Jones off waivers
    10)turned a -'ve clubhhouse atmosphere into a +'ve one
    11)traded Nash for a 2nd (Marincin)
    12)bought out Nilsson
    13)Grebs for 2nd (Curtis Hamilton)
    14)Vishnovsky for Whitney and 6th (Davidson)

    Tambo has also correctly identified the fact that key FA's are not going to come here and big names that are traded for are not going to stay. The only way to build this team up is from the foundation and that is now in place.

    In any event, my point was that we should not be getting all negative about the draft for transactions that have not happened and are just rumoured.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I wrote this on another Blog (oops) But the comment is worth repeating.

    Last year it seems "Mr.Dithers" tried to acquire Boston's pick and draft both Seguin and Hall, maybe this year he will be more successful. I think the "trump card" is that if they trade their pick next year (2012) is that if Hemsky does not sign by the trade deadline is that they will trade him for a first round pick in 2012. So they will still have a 1st rounder in 2012 just not as high as their own.

    Basically they walk away with RNH and possibly Larsson and a later round 2012 pick. So is there really a downside??

    ReplyDelete
  64. In any event, my point was that we should not be getting all negative about the draft for transactions that have not happened and are just rumoured.

    I agree.

    There are lots of actual deeds done that we can bitch about.

    Bitching about things that *might* happen is a little silly.

    TOJ: I certainly agree Gagner was rushed for PR reasons, and should have been sent back to junior.

    Oilers centers the year they kept Gagner as an 18 year old:

    Horcoff
    Stoll
    Reasoner
    Brodziak
    Cogliano (rookie)

    There was no hockey reason to keep Gagner on the NHL team.

    Now he'll have UFA years starting at 25 years old, and like the majority of NHL players, his prime years will probably be 23-30.

    Wasting RFA years (especially ELC years) on kids 18-20 is very rarely the right decision.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Basically they walk away with RNH and possibly Larsson and a later round 2012 pick. So is there really a downside??

    If that's the case, then probably not.

    The key is actually getting RNH and Larsson. Anything less is probably an overall negative move given that the Oilers are a lottery team next year and there are very good talented kids from 1-8 from what I hear.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Woodguy,

    I agree. Only if this nets them RNH and Larsson.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Maverick:

    Sure there's a downside - the one LT mentioned.

    the net trade is:

    Hemsky, 2012 EDM 1st, 19OV

    for

    Larsson, 2012 1st from some unknown team (likely to be 15-30)

    Trading Hemsky doesn't reduce the downside disaster that would be moving a top 2/3 pick in next year's draft. And they can move Hemsky either way, including now. Obviously the deal would turn depending where EDM's 2012 pick ends up, and while that's unknowable I don't think it's unreasonable to think it will be top 5 again next year given what we know now.

    I guess my point is I'd rather pick 19th, move Hemsky now if you can get good value in a trade and can't get him extended at terms you can live with, and keep the 2012 1st, than what you're suggesting. JMO.

    ReplyDelete
  68. LT: If we trade the 19th and next year's first for Larsson (and only Larsson), I think we win. Next year's first maybe 1OV or 10OV and I think we may have a generational talent in Larrson and would do well with the other Swedes.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Die Hard: You lose if there's a generational talent at your spot in 2012. You probably get fired before draft day.

    ReplyDelete
  70. LT: I can agree but "if" is what makes it intriguing.

    ReplyDelete
  71. turned on the tv to watch the US open but found the Bruins parade instead.
    Nary a burning car to be found.

    ReplyDelete
  72. L.T, Speeds,

    Somehow I missed it would cost 83 + 19th.

    Given that the Oilers are probably a lottery team again I agree that unless Larsson is worth the value of 83 + 19th above a lottery pick next year, you can't do that deal.

    Not unless v3.0 has 2 vet D and a vet C I'm the bag for July 1. Then its intriguing.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Renney saw fit to play Gagner with two rookies, Omark and Paajarvi, against Kopitar, Brown, and Williams.

    I doubt Logan Couture would look very good given that assignment either. Or Pat Kane and two rookies against that LA line.

    One has to look at the context of who Gagner was playing with and against to evaluate last season.

    ReplyDelete
  74. LT, I get WG's arguement that next years draft is considered to be better than this year. If that is the argument you are making then I get it.

    Otherwise, I don't get it. If the Oilers could get a guaranteed #2 pick this year for a 'maybe lottery pick' next year, why wouldn't they do it? The odds of getting a pick higher than #2 are not very good. It would require finishing last overall and then winning the lottery.

    If you were Colorado's GM and had the #2 overall this year, would you trade it for the Oilers first round pick next year?

    ReplyDelete
  75. L.T, Speeds,

    Somehow I missed it would cost 83 + 19th.


    I missed that two. If the suggestion is to trade 83 + 19th overall for #2 this year + next year's first round pick, then I agree that would not make any sense.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Please don't trade Hemsky. Please don't trade Hemsky....Please don't trade Hemsky!

    ReplyDelete
  77. Hemsky had the 3rd best 5v5 pts/60 in the entire NHL, behind only Crosby and D.Sedin.

    Woodguy:
    1. who you play with.
    2. the time you play.
    can create a perception.

    Look at MR. Nillsson 07/08 3rd best assist/60 rw in that year. rolling out with Cogliano, Gagner. there best years.

    That year our outscorers nillson #1, Glencross, Horcoff Storts,

    Next year They get broke up and cogs and gagner have not been the same offensively.

    Nilsson starts time with the dregs who couldn't score a lick. Still ends up an outscorer. But (O,sullivan; Moreau; Reddox; Storts) Plus he is just behind Gagner and Penner in 1st assists, just ahead of hemsky. Nilsson gets first line PP time top 10 Set-up on the PP.

    Next year he plays with Moreau, O sullivan, still our best set-up player for the season.

    So the first year with us he is top 10 EV assist player in the league.

    2nd year the teams best even set-up player and top 10 PP set-up guy.

    Play him with dregs and his numbers crash. What do we do. Buy him OUT!

    High assist players on the team or past
    Career: (high)

    Hemsky 70% (58A)
    Horcoff (65%) (51A)
    Gagner 66% (36A)
    Nilsson 75% (31A)
    Cogliano 60% (27A)

    ReplyDelete
  78. rickibear,

    I agree that context is important.

    Nilsson's numbers didn't demand a buyout, especially considering who they kept (JFJ, etc)

    Nilsson's buyout was all about "changing the culture"

    ReplyDelete
  79. If ST goes we really need a GM that is well liked enough to make some deals. It seems to me me that ST and KL aren't that. I truly hope he doesn't have so much hubris that he comes back.

    Every year when the finals are over, it's clear to me the same kinds of players rise to the top.

    Players that succeed deep in the playoffs refuse to be dominated. They are aggressive (not violent). They have extra drive, have grit. Often have speed.

    It's not a matter of experience, Marchand is smaller, a later pick and only a year older than Gagner - it's innate. There are only 2 small forwards with the right jam on the Oilers - Eberle and Omark, and that is enough for me.

    It is critical to judge players and get it right. Only invest time in players with the right stuff to win in the playoffs. San Jose and the Canucks might have blown it methinks. Boston has made tough choices and got them right - they got the Cup before Thornton. They waited quite a while on him and got nowhere.

    You can't move players and get nothing of value back. You also can't just keep every player with a pulse that you draft or you end up with a very unbalanced team, say like the Oilers.

    As for the draft, if 2012 is so deep and 2011 so thin, use the 2011 #1 and sell the rest for 2012. It will be easier to get several first rounders in the future than get them for this year anyway.

    ReplyDelete