Sunday, June 19, 2011

You Never Know

One thing the Expos of Gene Mauch taught me was that you've got to be patient when new recruits arrive. As a kid, Rusty Staub was my hero; big lefty batter who always seemed to do something special when the Expos were on television. Staub was the first big league star for Canadian baseball and when the club dealt him to the Mets for three kids it was a sad day.

Turns out the sun shone the next day, and Ken Singleton was a helluva player. Not only that, Tim Foli and Mike Jorgensen were pretty good too, and Montreal was paid in full for their aging star.

The toughest part of being an Expos fans in those years? About the time you realized Ken Singleton might be better than Staub, the organization traded him for a sore armed pitcher and a load of hay.

Buck Rodgers' Expos were even better in delivering the age old lesson of not judging a book by its cover. As the 1986 season  ended my Expos fandom was in the ditch, mostly because of Awesome Andre's bad knees and a starting rotation that looked broken.

Rodgers and the Expos spent the winter of '86 checking in every warehouse, farmhouse, henhouse, outhouse and doghouse from Anchorage to Caracas. The list of retreads who arrived in training camp 1987 was about two pages long, but that club won 91 games and were in it until the last week of the season.

You never know.
--

The Edmonton Oilers have signed two Finnish free agent forwards.

Lennart Petrell was signed to a one-year deal; he's 27 (6.03, 209) and played in the SM-Liiga this past season. I spoke to Scott Reynolds of Copper and Blue about him on this weekend's Nation Radio show, and Scott's intel suggests he's a veteran winger with checking ability. Scott felt Petrell might be a player who could push someone like Teemu Hartikainen for that 4th line LW job and possibly play for the big club in a support role. Petrell's NHL equivalency:
  • 82gp, 10-18-28
According to capgeek, his one-year two way contract has a $680,000 cap hit, includes a $90,000 bonus and he'll make $67,500 in the AHL this year.

Elite Prospects: A large winger with a lot of power and strength. Plays with high energy and intensity. Effective on the forecheck and always finishes his checks. Good hands and hockey sense.
--

Antti Tyrvainen is 22, 5.11 and 198. Scott told me he's an agitator type who is apparently very good in that role. Elite prospects says he's "a winger with a rough style. Plays with a lot of energy and is a fast skater. A decent shot. Goes aggrissively for rebounds. Sometimes goes too far and takes unnecessary penalties." NHLE:
  • 82gp, 12-8-20
Tyrvainen had 186 PIMS in 52 games. He played for Finland in the 2007 U18 WHC's and would seem likely to spend the entire 11-12 season in the AHL with OKC. He signed a 2-year two-way deal, paying him $55,000 for the AHL portion and dividing the $90,000 signing bonus over the two seasons. Should he play in the NHL, his cap hit will be $570,000. All salary numbers via capgeek.

But remember, you never know.

158 comments:

  1. Totally unrelated, but have you seen the trailer for "Moneyball" yet?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Posted this in the thread where these signings broke, but I've got to think that Zorg will lose his AHL job to a Finn this season.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am no huge fan of Steve Tambellini but one thing we should give him some credit for: he was the Canucks' vice president of player personnel until 2008. That means that 90% of the team the Canucks dressed this year was either drafted by, traded for, or signed as a UFA by under his tenure in that role. We all know Burke was the GM then Nonis now Gillis but Tambo was the Kevin Prendergast on a team that built up pretty dam well, finding players like Kesler late in the first round, Burrows undrafted, Bieksa in the fifth and Edler in the third under his watch.

    That's a hell of a lot better than anything we can say about Lowe.


    I wonder how much Lowe and Quinn influenced the signing of Khabi and the chasing of Heatley.

    I also wonder if Rob Daum influenced them to take O'Sullivan who Daum coached in POS's rookie year in the AHL when he won rookie of the year, and if Daum's endorsement was related to him getting fired.


    In some ways it seems like Tambellini has done a good job, one would have a lot more respect if he did something to upgrade the pro scouting department, if not totally overhaul it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. On a slight tangent, TSN is reporting that the NHL is telling teams that the cap is going up to $64 million next year, almost a $5M increase. That's going to take a lot of pressure of teams like Philly and Pittsburgh to make some kind of deal to clear space (Philly, for example, can open up about $10M in cap room simply by sending Versteeg away for a late round pick and putting Bobrovsky in the minors).

    ReplyDelete
  5. @ oilersfan:

    Are we talking about the kevin lowe who drafted and acquired the majority of the oiler team that also lost in G7 of the SCF or are we talking about the tambo that has led us to 2 straight DFL place finishes.

    I'm not the biggest Lowe supporter but to say that Tambo has more accomplishments than Lowe because a team he hasn't been a part of in 3 years lost in G7 this year?

    That's just silly.

    ReplyDelete
  6. FPB,

    Schitzo is right, Zorg is RFA.

    Derek Zona explores the Oiler's Scoring Chances by Line Combination.

    A very interesting read, and Zorg comes out looking ok.

    A certain Oiler winger comes out looking like Satan created a gravity defying void where scoring chances go to die, gave him long hair and called him Ryan Jones.

    Also,

    Link to TSN salary cap post.

    I have always maintained that the NHL is run by PHI, CHI, NYR, TOR, BOS, MTL.

    What is good for those teams is policy. This is both good and bad depending an where you stand.

    Record revenues and NHLPA enacting the full escalator and the Oilers are one of 6 teams whose payroll last year would not meet the cap floor.

    Oilers came in at $45MM for the year, floor is now $48MM.

    The Oilers have $37.25MM in salary with 14 players under contract for next year. (not including Souray)

    That's $26.75MM they could spend on 9 players (ave. 2.97MM/ player)

    You have to think that many teams are not profitable at the salary floor.

    I look for the salary floor to be renegotiated in the next CBA.

    ReplyDelete
  7. everytime i see the cap go up i think that my $7.50 beer was a direct contributor...or my ticket price increase,etc. I'm tired of seeing the NHL give it to the fans on all turns. wasn't hockey supposed to become more affordable for the fan under this cba?

    i like that we're signing a lot of people, but there had to be "known entities" that went through waivers last year that we know more about and are more NHL ready. both these guys come off like AHL signings, sold with bits of hope to the fanbase. this is no brooks laich.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't recall affordability for the fan ever being a consideration during the lockout. By my recollection the NHL's mantra was "cost certainty" for ownership.

    ReplyDelete
  9. tsn doesn't mention escrow. That 64M could be as low as 55M real $.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Woodguy: interesting speculation about the cap floor. I guess it depends on what's more important to the players: ensuring that hockey stays in non-tradition, Southern US markets or forcing the owners to spend more money. I can't imagine that the owners will be able to secure lower floor without some other concession.

    As for the dark illuminati running the league, while that may be so, this doesn't demonstrate it. Cap increases were tied to overall revenues and while that may be driven by large increases in the big clubs, that wouldn't be enough to overcome large losses by everyone else.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Jfry: Jon's mostly right - the cap's not there to help out the fans. It affects the teams differently. Lower class teams (Nashville) now have the chance to retain a couple stars and have an idea of their costs (revenue sharing also helps them). Middle class teams (Edmonton) can now spend about as much as teams that used to blow them away in payroll. Upper class teams can't go spend happy anymore, but now have an excuse to generate massive profits for their ownership (the Leafs are the best example of this). For hockey-mad cities in Canada you're not ever going to see lower prices but at least be content that the Rangers can't come poach our FAs anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Lidstrom coming back on a 1 year extension as per @hockeybreak on twitter (he has a good track record on signings and trades)

    ReplyDelete
  13. i seem to recall the league and ownership talking about the cost of their product possibly decreasing so that such an overwhelming percentage of profits wasn't directly on the fan. i don't have time to google it right now, but i could have sworn that the fan was getting fed that line from the NHL propaganda team to appease our loss of hockey for a year.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Cactus: That is only partially right. Case in point: Nashville with Weber.

    They've been able to retain his rights by taking him to arbitration. Which, if they are unable to come to a deal, is only a stay of execution. If he were to become a free agent or even subject to an offer sheet he would get a front loaded deal that would make it very hard for Nashville to match.

    I know the league has shrunken the loophole because of the Kovalchuk deal but it hasn't been closed completely.

    The cap is getting into the kind of territory where you're going to see more teams in trouble.

    As the Phoenix and Atlanta scenarios have indicated there are no potential owners to keep teams in money losing non-traditional cities unless they get a free building with all concessions/parking etc....

    Even the Oilers have to be careful with their arena deal. It could be an anchor but it could be a huge boost as well.

    If there was even a chance Nashville wasn't able to re-sign Weber he would be dealt a la Hamhuis.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Holland says he'll aggressively pursue UFA D on July 1.

    Bieka to Detroit rumors in 5, 4, 3, 2...

    ReplyDelete
  16. SO finally got around to reading the past few blogs and comments.

    I dont think trading the next year's pick is stupid at all. If we are trading next year's pick to get a lottery pick this year then what is the harm?
    Coming out of the draft with RNH and AL would be golden.
    Furthermore, considering we wont have a first round pick next season, there will be added pressure to improve the team this offseason. That coupled with continued develoment of the youg guns and players like Gagner/cogliano ought to get us out of the lottery. Also who is to say that the player we pick next year will be better than Adam Larsson?
    We shouldnt trade next year's pick for the sake of it, but if we can land an impact prospect like Larsson then what is tha harm? It actually is us selecting another lottery pick one season early.

    ReplyDelete
  17. @ PDO

    I think they will go after Markov/Wisniewiski before Bieksa.
    Markov for sure

    ReplyDelete
  18. SumOil: Would highly doubt Markov will go play for EDM tough... Wisniewski maybe.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I don't want Edmonton to deal him and I'm not saying that this would address Detroit's needs but Tom Gilbert has always struck me as a guy that would make a solid #3 or #4 in a place like Detroit. He's a very good player and I think he would excel in any role outside of the top pairing.

    As for the Finns, bring them on! If anything, it's just nice to know the Oilers are trying. Their minor league situation in the Katz era is better than it's ever been.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @ FPB

    talking about Detroit and not edmonotn

    ReplyDelete
  21. SumOil: Oh right sorry. Yes, That would be more likely.

    Lazy mornings.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Does the salary cap going up make a retired Khabibulin valuable to a team struggling to reach the cap floor?

    ReplyDelete
  23. @ FPB

    more like lazy monday.....struggling to stay awake. need to drench in coffee

    ReplyDelete
  24. PDO: If he retires in said uniform yes.

    He has to retire with the other club tough, at that point his salary is frozen.

    ReplyDelete
  25. What happens to Khabby's cap # if he doesn't officially retire but bolts to the KHL? Is it the same deal that the hit would count against his team and only the team that has him at the time he bolts?

    Just asking because it's tough to see him leaving money on the table.

    If he were to express a desire to leave the league and we traded his rights to some low-budget team first, would they get to keep his cap hit for free?

    ReplyDelete
  26. PDO: If he retires in said uniform yes.

    He has to retire with the other club tough, at that point his salary is frozen.


    Are you sure about that?

    I seem to remember something happening to the contrary.

    I could be wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  27. WG

    I doubt he could be traded if he was already retired.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Moving a lottery pick a year forward makes sense at the end of a rebuild, not in the midst thereof. And the price would have to be alright. And the object clearly better than the year after's options.

    None of these things are true.

    ReplyDelete
  29. NJD/SJS worked the Malakov deal for a first... can't remember when Malakov retired, but it was for a lot more cap space under a much smaller cap.

    This would be the other spectrum.

    I don't know if you could get VALUE from Florida, but I think you could do it for virtually nothing (future considerations).

    I'd say getting rid of Bulin for nothing and bringing in Voukoun on a one year deal would be an excellent step in having a hockey team worth watching next year.

    The next step would be bringing in a couple legitimate top 9 guys who can PK and two top 4 D.

    But it's at least one step...

    ReplyDelete
  30. Idk why people would want players so they can get under cap.

    I mean, can't they just overpay a guy who will actually be useful/bring people to the rink instead?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Wolfie: I wasn't meaning to imply that it was an absolute guarantee, but what are the chances that Nashville could keep someone like Weber in the uncapped era? Absolutely nothing because a team like NY or Toronto could come and offer $10M per regardless of their current payroll. Instead, we're talking about teams like Philly having to move players for absolutely nothing just to make it under.

    PDO: Love the idea, but I think I see Florida overpaying a couple players for 1 and 2 year deals than picking up dead Khabi salary.

    ReplyDelete
  32. FPB:

    Yes.

    Except Florida can't spent $48,000,000 while turning a profit.

    ReplyDelete
  33. @ PDO
    concensus seems to be that next season is a deep defensive draft and we would be better off picking a defenseman.
    Furthermore one of the arguements against picking Larsson is the time invested in defensemen to become good enough to contribute to the team's success. So in that case the smnart thing would be to pick up D-men in the middle of the rebuild and forwards towards the end of it.
    But apparently RNH has won everyone's heart and Oilers look set to choose him. So from pure developmental POV, selecting AL this year would be better for the franchise than selecting Ryan Murray or that Windsor kid next year.

    So RNH in 2011 and Ryan Murray in 2012 might not be as good as RNH and AL in 2011.
    Now with Hall, Eberle, MPA. RNH and AL. how many more years would you/organization want stay in alottery position. After that we will need good depth players to complement/help the above said players.
    Furthermore, you dont know if we will be in the basement 3 straight years. We are not as bad as the Sens of early 90s. Even TML finished what 21st this season. Lets agree that there is a high chance we wont be picking 1st overall next season. We know that from history and the fact that ST himself said that he doesnt want to be in this position next year. So now is AL worth a 3-5 pick? IF yes then go ahead.

    ReplyDelete
  34. A retired Khabby with his cap hit but no real dollars would certainly be of value to teams like Florida who can cheat the cap floor.

    ReplyDelete
  35. If the Oilers were in a position to take a Nail Yakupov of Grigorenko. They would likely pass on one of the blue chip dmen again.

    And they should.

    ReplyDelete
  36. @SB

    So where in the standings do you realistically see the Oilers to be next season?

    ReplyDelete
  37. Remember that actual player salaries (not just the cap) are tied to revenue. If total player salaries are greater than 57% of league revenue, then the players do not receive their full salary (hence why a portion of salaries are held in escrow until the end of the year).

    However, if total player salaries are LESS than 57%, then the teams OWE players more money. This is part of the reason for the cap floor and why it can not be lowered too much.

    If the cap floor were lowered and too many teams paid close to the cap floor, then total player salaries would be too low as a % of league revenue. So, all those low budget teams have to fork over more money. That's poor cost certainty, which is what the owners' wanted more than anything.

    Cap floors offer cost certainty as much as cap ceilings in the NHL. It does not benefit owners to have too many teams at a low cap floor, if that means forking over more money at the end of the day anyways. So the owners can't negotiate lowering the cap floor too much, they can only negotiate having player salaries be a lesser percentage of total revenue.

    Actually, the problem can be solved entirely at the owner level. The problem is the disparity in revenue between teams. If players salaries are at 57%, profits can be spread around by increased revenue sharing between teams... if only the richest teams would agree to that!

    Side note: I wonder how much league revenue will increase by moving Atlanta to Winnipeg? Could cause another increased salary cap next year!

    ReplyDelete
  38. WheatNOil: Why would any rich team agree to paying more money when the NHL is losing money intentionally in shit markets?

    ReplyDelete
  39. fpb: That was my point with "if only the richest teams would agree to that"... sorry, my sarcastic intonation doesn't come through. What I meant was that the problem is theoretically easily fixed, but practically the richest teams would never actually do that.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Trading next years #1 along with the 19th for the 4th this year would likely be a disaster.

    It would leave EDM with no first rounder next year. Imagine that, we finish 28th and get nothing at the draft except for the #33 pick.

    That would break even my patience.

    If NJ agreed to put in their first next year it would be NJ #4 plus ~#20-28 for #19 and possibly #1-5. It could wind up pretty even - if the Oilers pick winds up at 4 and NJ exits early in the playoffs, but its also could be #4 + #30 for #1 + #19.

    There is little upside for the Oilers (all they get is Larssen a year earlier (is that going to matter in 4 or 5 yrs?)) and a gamble on a lot of downside.

    There is no need for the Oilers to gamble with their rebuild.

    If I do a deal with Lou I offer him #1 this year for #4, his second this year or his #1 next year. Or I offer him #19 and #31 for #4. If he doesn't bite, too bad.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I don't mind dealing the 2012 first round pick for another top selection this year BUT if you do that then you have to be dead-on about the guy you pick up with the extra '11 selection; and just to save your own ass you also better have some additional moves ready to go so that you don't finish in the bottom 10 come the end of the season.

    For a guy like me a trade like the above might be a welcomed suggestion that this team's ready to try and pick up some real players; be it by savvy FA moves or picking up pricey players which are overpays and millstones on their current teams but easier to stomach on the Oilers.

    ReplyDelete
  42. What if the oil protect their pick?

    Trade next year's first, to the condition it's not lottery, if it is, it gets bumped to 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  43. If Edmonton comes out of 2011 with RNH and Couturier its not going to matter who we give up in 2012.

    RNH
    Couturier
    Lander

    RNH and Couturier complement each other like ying and yang.

    On the flip side Gagner doesn't complement RNH's skill set at all. I'm talking zilch. So you perhaps you take a superior prospect next year like Ryan Murray but then you have a situation where RNH isn't even put in a position to maximize his talents.

    If we draft RNH he's already our most physical center. Its between him and Cogs. That's just sad.

    I'd give up Gagner + 19 + 31 for Couturier in a heartbeat. Don't even care if its an overpayment.

    ReplyDelete
  44. A mid top 10 pick next year for a mid top 10 pick this year seems okay. I may even be willing to add a spare 3rd if I thought that pick this year was clearly better than next year's options. My understanding is this isn't the case. In fact most experts say the reverse is true.

    But Brownlee, SumOil and the rest want to add a Top 20 first rounder sheerly for the pleasure of drafting in approximately the same spot a year earlier in a poorer draft?

    Madness. Would you give up a 19 and a 4th for a 4th? With the material risk of giving up a better pick next year than the one we get this year?

    Not to mention the chance that 19 this year turns into Getzlaf or Parise? Why does Tyler Myers still get mentioned around these parts?

    This plan is the road to the unemployment office. LT called it. I can't believe it's getting the discussion that it is.

    ReplyDelete
  45. @ Dennis

    Exactly my point.
    Mt dealing next year's 1st overall, the rebuilding period gets sped up. Then the management will try hard to make the team more competetive next year and we will soon start to watch good hockey.
    Get rid of NK(send him to eu or w/e), I know cap sticks. sig Vokoun. Get players like Wisnewiski and Laich. compete hard get to 20th or over. I am sure I as a fan will be very happy with 2 top 3/4 selections this season and then some actual on ice improvement next one.

    ReplyDelete
  46. @ fpb

    Why would any team trade thier lottery pick this year if they dont get one next year?
    They will be betting on Oil being shitty

    ReplyDelete
  47. I would be happier with both the two top 4 picks AND the 19 AND no risk of having given up a 1-3 pick. But that's just me. I think getting more is better than getting less, I think minimizing risk is better than increasing it.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Spoiler

    1st I did not say that i am adding the 19th. If we do add the 19th then there should be more coming our way.

    2nd you are assuming Oilers to be a lottery team next season, But I am saying that we will be better than a lottery team next season. If we make the trade then we will surely be better than a lottery pick as entire Oilers organisation including players coaches and our GM will be trying thier best to get as many wins as possible next season. We will witness an active FA where we pick up decent to good players.
    So the trade would be more like 19+ 11 for 4th and 38th or whatever.

    ReplyDelete
  49. The only positive thing I'd say about dealing the 2012 pick is when we predictably give up a top 10 pick; we might finally see Tambo kicked to the curb.

    And that'd be about it, because that draft sounds loaded.

    Anyone else remember when there was a shit draft in '07 and the Oilers loaded up and then were left wanting in the monster 2008 draft?

    Same shit, different idiot in charge.

    ReplyDelete
  50. and got Eberle at 22.
    And he turned out to be better than many before him.
    Also remember the mosterous 2003 draft where seemingly everyone else came out on top.

    or again St Loius in 2007 who got 2 really good players out of their 3 1st round selections.
    Shit happens and if Oilers do end up doing well in 2012 and show good signs of improvement as they should, then ST will come out looking like a genuis

    ReplyDelete
  51. SumOil this discussion has been about the recent suggestion that the Oil trade 2012 1st + 19th for 3/4th this year. You prefaced your statement that you HAD READ the blogs recently and used that as an intro into your comment. Apologies for assuming you actually HAD READ and were staying on topic. Since you didn't point out any differences in your plan or even present an alternateplan, I thought the assumption was safe.

    And finally no I am NOT assuming next year's pick is a lottery pick. I am assuming that the probabilities dictate that is the most likely outcome and that the greater the move the Oilers might make in the standings, the lower the probability of such occuring. I know that's dead obvious, AND it has been mentioned before, but I guess I better spell it out again.

    ReplyDelete
  52. . If we make the trade then we will surely be better than a lottery pick as entire Oilers organisation including players coaches and our GM will be trying thier best to get as many wins as possible next season.

    (Emphasis mine)

    Now that's funny stuff. Who knew these were sure things? Shit we should have done it last year.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Mt dealing next year's 1st overall, the rebuilding period gets sped up. Then the management will try hard to make the team more competetive next year and we will soon start to watch good hockey.


    Sure. Instead of taking out that $300K mortgage you can afford, take out a $600K mortgage. It will make you work harder :-)

    ReplyDelete
  54. SumOil: I think the Leafs had the same idea in mind when they traded for Phil Kessel. It'll be a fairly big risk no matter what.

    As someone who is concerned about Larsson's upside and some of the recent misses at top-of-the-draft defencemen, I'd rather just stick with what we have. The only way moving next year's pick makes sense is as part of some kind of miracle deal to secure a real star like Carter or Weber (in other words, not going to happen).

    ReplyDelete
  55. So with a lot of teams scrambling to hit the cap floor and a shitty and small UFA market does that make Souray tradeable?

    His hit is 1MM more than the real $.

    Contract year too, you probably busts his ass.

    FLA, NYI, CAR,COL, etc might be interested.

    Even getting a 5th rounder beats a buyout.

    ReplyDelete
  56. SumOil: Trade for a pick like 12 instead of 8?

    Anyway. Maybe Omark could fetch a 1st?

    ReplyDelete
  57. I'd give up Gagner + 19 + 31 for Couturier in a heartbeat. Don't even care if its an overpayment.

    Thankfully you don't have access to the nuclear codes.

    That would be a horrible trade (veritably Mike Keenanesque), that places far too little perceived value on Gagner and far too much on Couturier. I get it that you don't like Gagner, but spite gets you nowhere in the GM chair (witness for the defence: Lowe losing Corey Perry over salary payback demands to the departing Comrie). In one breath, you intimate the value of someone like Lander while casually tossing aside the kind of premium picks that land such players. Bottom line, the Oil are not 2 players removed from contending. They're deficient in all 3 zones.

    Funny, how the wishful thinking on this thread mirrors the activity from last year when we also thought Tambi might be able to secure another Top 5 pick. If Mr. Inertia has taught us anything, it's that we shouldn't expect much beyond the picks we already have. I just hope they make them count. In Stu we trust, everybody else gotta pay cash.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Not to threadjack (because today has been a very good read), but this caught my eye from Bob McK.

    http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=369517

    Possible return for Ryan Smyth?

    dessin: Not guessing, just dessin

    ReplyDelete
  59. @ Spoiler.

    Maybe. Seguin may end up being a better player than RNH. Noone knows that. So that might have been a good thing.

    @ Ducey.

    Its not the same thing. Think again.

    @ Cactus.

    First of all Leafs got thier shit kicked due to Toskala. If they had gotten someone like Garon/Biron tandem going noways they would have picked where they did. Again they traded for a player with 2 lottery picks and in my scenario we are trading one 'maybe' lottery pick for a sure fire lottery pick. So rather than picking a 1st overall this year and another high pick next year we are picking 1st overall and a hight pick this year.
    I dont understand hwo this is like the leafs? If anything the team trading its lottery pick this year is the one taking the greater risk as they dont know where they will pick with our pick next year.

    @ Ducey

    If you really want to go for a scenario this is it. Do you take 50 bucks from me today or 2 months later a coin flip to get either 70 bucks or 30 bucks.

    ReplyDelete
  60. @ fpb.

    I am ok with even maintaining status quo and grabbing a player like Puempel or Morrow at 19.
    My contention was with the thread where everyone keeps bashing the idea of involving next year's pick.
    But yeah moving upto 12 and grabbing someone like McNiell would be great too.

    ReplyDelete
  61. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=369517

    ...you never know.

    ReplyDelete
  62. SumOil: If they move up it's to get into lottery.

    I think just moving 19 to 12 would be silly. There's always a prime time guy slipping trough the cracks.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Maybe. Seguin may end up being a better player than RNH. Noone knows that. So that might have been a good thing.

    That was tried. Not that it matters when you miss the point so completely.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Wow Ryan Smyth coming back would be awesome!
    Even though his salary doesnt justify his production, it would be great to see Smythe back in C&B. Furthermore, he could be an excellent mentor to Hall/Eberle/MPS.

    ReplyDelete
  65. So long as he's cheap asset wise, you absolutely HAVE to take Smyth back here; LW is in shambles right now.. and while Smyth isn't Penner, it's still an infinite improvement on Jones.

    ReplyDelete
  66. @ Spoiler

    I did. I thought you meant that maybe we should have put this year's 1st overall selection into play for Seguin. My bad.

    But yeah last year it failed because Hall and Seguin were both touted to be 1st overall selections depending on which draft service you looked at, but this year it seems that RNH is clearly 1 whether some fans agree or not.

    ReplyDelete
  67. "Bottom line, the Oil are not 2 players removed from contending. They're deficient in all 3 zones."

    Here's the catch:

    The hardest and most important positions to fill are 1c and 2c.

    Getting those two positions taken care of is like having your house and car paid for.

    You can worry about the flat screen tv later on.

    This club still needs a 2c if we draft RNH and there is literally no prospect this year or next year that complements RNH's game like Couturier would.

    ReplyDelete
  68. As someone who is concerned about Larsson's upside and some of the recent misses at top-of-the-draft defencemen, I'd rather just stick with what we have.

    Drew Doughty, Victor Hedman, Tyler Myers, etc.

    Or if you prefer, we can go back a little further with players like Scott Niedermayer, Chris Pronger, Larry Murphy, Ray Bourque or Scott Stevens to expose the myth?

    I hope the Magnificent Bastard pushes for the best pick not the safest one.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Edmonton was miles from the new cap floor, and Smyth's contract has a $6.25 million cap hit with a real payout of $4.5 million. This is an excellent opportunity for Tambellini to bend Lombardi over the table. Give him a couple of low end prospects and a low draft pick as compensation, and chalk it up to you win some, you lose some...

    ReplyDelete
  70. If you really want to go for a scenario this is it. Do you take 50 bucks from me today or 2 months later a coin flip to get either 70 bucks or 30 bucks.

    Perfect analogy!

    Everyone would take the coin flip since they know it is weighted towards $70 in two ways that I will repeat yet again: The probability of the Oilers finishing close to or same as their past performance is greater than the probability of them finishing farther from last year's performance. And next year's draft is deeper than this year's.

    And the trade scenario as presented (since you have still yet to present one) has us paying an additional $20 to get the $50 now.

    It's a no-brainer. Don't pay the extra $20 and take the coin flip weighted towards $70. Who would do otherwise?

    ReplyDelete
  71. "Possible return for Ryan Smyth?"

    6.25M in open cap space is a pretty nice return in itself.

    I wouldn't give much more in return.

    Definitely wouldn't trade our 2nd or any B grade prospects like Pitlick, Hamilton.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Lee: Hedman was the wrong pick at #2. The best guy in that draft went #3.

    The "safest" pick in this equation is Adam Larsson, but the best upside is Ryan Nugent-Hopkins. That's not just my opinion, that's overwhelming consensus.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Have to ask this. People are saying don't pick Larsson because d-men take too long to develop.

    Well ok, if that's the case, but next year's supposed to be a great year for d-men, why should we waste a top pick on a d-man then versus Larsson now? The same "develop by sundial" issue still applies.

    And lastly, be a nice way on many fronts for bridges to be repaired if they brought Smytty back.

    And get us to the cap floor.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Honestly, Smyth from LA to Edmonton would help both teams.

    Smyth is a veteran who instantly makes LW a lot deeper and can still play tough minutes adequately enough. Edmonton, as mentioned elsewhere, is one of 6 teams whose 2010/2011 would be below the cap floor this season*. $4.5M or $6.5M in cap hit on a one year overpay would be just fine and the PR would be absolutely huge.

    As for LA, they have other players to pay and Smyth is no longer a #1LW - simple as that.

    ReplyDelete
  75. This club still needs a 2c if we draft RNH and there is literally no prospect this year or next year that complements RNH's game like Couturier would.

    This statement assumes Gagner's development curve has flat-lined. This is the impatient GM approach (hence the Keenan comment or Milbury if you prefer). Samwise was drafted 6th overall. I'd prefer we sell high as opposed to bundling him with 19 and 31 to get a 4th overall! Given that we got Pitlick (a projected first rounder) with that 31st pick last year, that's giving up 3 blue chip picks for a debatable gain IMO.

    Not to mention the fact Horcoff isn't going anywhere and when healthy CAN play the 2c slot. You're too obsessed with the C position on this hockey club. We need a blue chip D and goalie in addition to a stud center.

    ReplyDelete
  76. *Forgot where I read this first. Apologies for the lack of citation!

    ReplyDelete
  77. and while Smyth isn't Penner, it's still an infinite improvement on Jones.

    Yea, he's better then Penner.

    Well at least according to career statistics, and how the coach in LA doled out the ice time in last season's playoffs.

    ReplyDelete
  78. How about Souray and Teubert for Smyth?

    ReplyDelete
  79. Teubert fills a void missing since Gator was traded - even if its on the 3rd pairing.

    Ugly trade.

    ReplyDelete
  80. @ Mark Ryan

    I still think the 2009 top 3 picks in a redraft will go the same way. Isles will pick JT, TB Hedmand and Col Duchene.

    @ Spoiler

    That is interesting as I would take the 50 bucks and worry about next month when that comes.

    Furthermore, I am not saying that the Oilers should trade thier 2012 1st rounder; but it is not as insane an idea as some of you think. I remember someone calling those people crazy who think putting 2012 1st rounder in play is not a bad idea. I am speaking for those people.

    Again the idea of Oilers finishing 3 years in the basement in absurd and I would like to know when was the last time and existing franchise picked 3 consecutive top 5 picks.
    If Oilers sign another competetive goalie and bech NK, send him to europe or w/e do you think we still will be the joke that we are now?
    Ottawa is primed for a lottery finish, Colorado kinda looks to be in the same boat. Islanders/Panthers will be fighting for that too. Winnipeg is a wild card as is Columbus and who knows maybe even Dallas falls down given Lehtonen's injury history. Or st louis.
    We have all our young players developing. A full season from Hall, Gagner, Whitney. What I am saying is that while Oilers may not be ready to make a playoff push, we are certainly ina position to get out of the lottery if the GM plays his card right in the off season.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Lee: Hedman was the wrong pick at #2. The best guy in that draft went #3.

    Duchene unequivocally better than Hedman two years into their pro careers? Wow.

    Whether or not Duchene is better than Hedman is immaterial to my point, which is to decry this myth that taking D at the top end of the draft is a guaranteed bust move. Plenty of blue chippers have proved otherwise.

    This forward v d debate is kind of similar to the RB v OT debate in the NFL. Yes, an elite RB will typically have a more immediate impact as a rookie but a blue chip OT can be a cornerstone on your team for 15 years once they've been properly developed. To extend the metaphor further, someone has to get the puck up ice to that forward just as someone needs to open the holes for that rb.

    Take the bpa shouldn't mean take the bpa provided he's not a defenseman.

    ReplyDelete
  82. SumOil: my reference to Toronto was in response to your assertion that everyone in the organization would do everything to try and win. I'm just pointing out that their best intentions don't always yield commensurate results. You chalk it up to a goaltending issue (an oversimplification to be sure) which makes the comparison even more frightening. Anyone want to completely rule out that a problem with goaltending might undermine other improvements to the team?

    Lee: I should have been clearer - forwards going early seem to have a much greater success rate than D-men recently. That said, I'm happy with taking the BPA and not the safest pick and all evidence is pointing to RNH being that guy.

    ReplyDelete
  83. To everyone who thinks the Oilers may not be in the lottery next year: which teams will they finish ahead of?

    Probably Florida, maybe Ottawa, Colorado, Minnesota or Toronto but that's all I see.

    I'd say a lottery pick is very very likely again next year barring significant changes.

    ReplyDelete
  84. OK Islanders did it stay bottom 5 3 years in a row. But i still think that Oilers can move out of that lottery position next year

    ReplyDelete
  85. Re the Smyth trade: you offer them a 4-5th rounder, no more. They take the huge cap space and run with it. LA can get another D man and a 3rd line winger with similar boxcars for Smyth's cap hit.

    ReplyDelete
  86. "This statement assumes Gagner's development curve has flat-lined."

    Gagner is NEVER going to be a defensive two-way center. What part of that don't you get?

    Sure, he could better his offensive numbers but that's complementing RNH's skillset.

    "Not to mention the fact Horcoff isn't going anywhere and when healthy CAN play the 2c slot."

    Horcoff is never healthy and he is well past his best before due date.

    Do we really want to RNH to be our most physical center right out of the gate?

    Supplying Gagner and Horc as RNH's help is like giving Marc Andre Bergeron to Ryan Murphy for his defense partner.

    "You're too obsessed with the C position on this hockey club."

    Because its been garbage since Weight left town.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Tough deal to work out... LAK are pot committed on Smytty. He's still one of the workhorses on the team, they're looking for top 6 winger help and trading Smytty digs an even bigger hole. He's worth far more to them than what the market would return for a 6.25M 35 yo. He's probably going to have to play that contract out, unless LAK feel they can replace him from the UFA market.

    ReplyDelete
  88. @ cactus

    I agree I am oversimplifying it, but if you take league average goaltending and apply to TML of 09-10, I will be damned if they dont finish in the 6-8 catagory

    ReplyDelete
  89. Spoiler

    Trade Smyth and sign Laich.
    Problem solved

    ReplyDelete

  90. Smyth is on the final year of a contract that will pay him $4.5 million this season although the cap hit is $6.25 million. The finances of all of this may also be an issue for the Oilers.

    Sources say the Oilers' management team may only be lukewarm to the idea of Smyth returning "home." The reality is that the Oilers are in a major rebuilding phase and going with a youth movement. Adding $4.5 million to the payroll, with a $6.25 million cap hit, for a 35-year-old forward, even one with the local marquee value of Smyth, isn't a slam dunk unless the Oilers can offload some salary.


    LaForge does know that any fan can go to capgeek.com and see this is a load of shit, right?

    We're $10,000,000 below the cap floor as it stands, and ticket prices, beer prices and parking have only gone north during back-to-back finishes DFL.

    ReplyDelete
  91. @ PDO

    ROFL.
    Thats exactly what I thought. So much crap.
    If Smitty wants to come make it happen

    ReplyDelete
  92. The return should be no more than what Philly got for Gagner.

    Scott Walker and a 4th.

    So, Curtis Foster and a 4th.

    That's if you want Smyth. Personally I think trading for him is thinking with your heart and not your brain.

    If he never played a game for Edmonton there wouldn't be one person campaigning to bring him in.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Trade Smyth and sign Laich. Problem solved

    Yes it does. On NHL2011.

    And it doesn't resolve the other top 6 forward they're looking to add.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Well, I would love to see 94 come home. The guy is still useful and if he'd agree to 2/4 deal for 13-14 then we'd have a good top nine guy who'd play the right way and the kids could learn a bit from just watching him.

    Plus, we'd be set on the left side with 4-91-94 and Hamilton in the pipe.

    Without looking at the TOI or matchups - I'm pretty sure he's still playing top six and doing it well- although I wouldn't give him another 6 mill deal - last year looks to be the start of his counting stats falling.

    Still, I'm willing to bet he can put up 20 goals and 40 points and be a plus player playing top six and considering he's only got one year left on his deal - and that we've got room and if he wants to come home you'd imagine he's ready to bargain for the future - then let's get this thing done.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Adding $4.5 million to the payroll, with a $6.25 million cap hit, for a 35-year-old forward, even one with the local marquee value of Smyth, isn't a slam dunk unless the Oilers can offload some salary.

    LaForge does know that any fan can go to capgeek.com and see this is a load of shit, right?


    LaForge? Surely you mean Bob McKenzie, the author of that misguided statement?

    ReplyDelete
  96. @ Spoiler

    I dont know why you say that.
    But there are other forwards too like Upshall.
    You seriously think they cannot add 2 top 6 forwars in the 6.25 cap relief that they get?

    If I was Lombardi I would sign the forwards and then trade smyth if he really wants to.

    ReplyDelete
  97. @ Spoiler

    I think he is merely reporting the vibe/feelers he got from the Edmonton side.

    ReplyDelete
  98. "Supplying Gagner and Horc as RNH's help is like giving Marc Andre Bergeron to Ryan Murphy for his defense partner".

    Draft R N-H, then send him straight back to juniors.

    This way, we tank another season, burn another year off Horcoff's 300 pound piece of shit contract, and hey, even Gagner might improve a bit.

    Re: Oilers trading away their 1st pick next season; exactly when was the last time the Oilers took a gamble that paid off?

    I can only recall many recent ones that blew up in their faces.

    ReplyDelete
  99. No problems with Smytty, but "just make it happen" comments are ridiculous. I wouldn't want to give up too much for him.

    Traktor's analogy to Gagne is wrong though. Gagne was a salary dump. The Kings would be trading Smyth only as a favour to him. There's no gun to their heads.

    ReplyDelete
  100. How about we take Smyth back and agree to take Penner back of their hands

    ReplyDelete
  101. so i finally got around to reading Robin Brownlee's article about trading next year's 1st overall and I must say, for the 1st time I agree with his analysis of the situation.
    Also I too am not really sold on Yakupov. All those who talk about him now are going to start complaingin about another smurf when it comes to draft date 2012.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Would LAK signing Gagne, Laich or some other forward at $4-4.5m be better $$ spent than Smytty? If so, Smytty's leaving is non issue for theLAK. it would not get them much going other way

    Although his contract would be attractive to another team trying to get ton the floor

    Have no idea how anyone thinks we are not going to finish 20th or worse next year. Top 10 pick next year could be a very good player

    ReplyDelete
  103. Yeah, I think Gagne's a better player when he's healthy but that last statement is the rub.

    The main thing from my perspective is that once 94 said he wants to leave and go to Edm, then it's basically over for him in LA.

    Players saying they want out is pretty much the same thing as teams asking fellows to waive the no-trade clause.

    It's one party's way of letting the other know they're no longer happy with the agreement and usually there's no going back.

    And advantage edm for once considering they are targeted as the desired destination.

    ReplyDelete
  104. I think he is merely reporting the vibe/feelers he got from the Edmonton side.

    Ahhhh. Another assumption. Been a real day for those.

    As to the Smyth thing, I take it then you are agreeing with my statement "unless LAK feel they can replace him through the FA market". My only problem was with the blithe flippancy of your response, the assumption that it is that easy in reality. Or that UFAs don't have a mind of their own.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Without considering the asset and financial cost of acquiring Smyth, his return to the Oilers seems like a no-brainer.

    He could very easily slot into a role on the first or third line, depending on home/road games, and would be a great mentor for the young players.

    Fortunately, the Oilers also have a financial situation where we could easily accomodate his return.

    The only real sticking point is what LA might expect for him. McKenzie correctly points out that losing Smyth would create a hole on the wing for LA. Something around Omark is what I would suspect, but at the same time I don't feel that is a move the Oilers would win over time.

    It will be extremely interesting to see how this plays out.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Players saying they want out is pretty much the same thing as teams asking fellows to waive the no-trade clause.

    It wasn't presented like that. There was no statement saying he wouldn't play out his contract for LA. However, BobbyMac taking this public might put a different spin on things, and may even have been at the prompting of Smyth or his agent.

    ReplyDelete
  107. If the Oil pull the trigger on Smyth, does that tell us that they're going to re-sign Hemmer? Does that mean we will see 94-10-83 reunited? If so, does that increase the odds of RNH making the team out of camp?

    ReplyDelete
  108. OK so LA has financial/organisational and location advantage over many teams. If they want to get a player in the FA market, they can easily go ahead and do it.
    And yes i do agree that they need to find a replacement and you were stating the obvious. Not only that, you were stating what has already been said in the article.

    Also about the assumption part,
    it is clearly stated in the start of the paragraph that "sources say" So yeah he was merely reporting the vibe he got from the management.

    ReplyDelete
  109. I would assume that this came from Don Meehan and that Smyth won't be surprised to read about it. This is trade time and this will undoubtedly create some pressure on Tambo to make it happen if the price is reasonable.

    ReplyDelete
  110. He is exactly the kind of leader to teach the kids about hard work and play around the net.

    Make it happen.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Trade Smyth and sign Laich.
    Problem solved

    Why not the Oilers sign Laich and forgot about Smyth.One of the Oilers problems solved.

    ReplyDelete
  112. @ Hockeyguy

    I would love the Oilers to sign Laich. But the question is will he come here? after playing for a successful franchise like the Caps

    ReplyDelete
  113. Okay, I guess we're actually going to have to actually parse some simple English, unbelievably...

    "Sources say the Oilers' management team may only be lukewarm to the idea of Smyth returning "home."

    That's all that's in direct reference to sources say. Anything more is an assumption. There was no "sources also said" anywhere else in the piece. The finances bit was actually raised before there was any indirect quote, and it seems fairly obvious the author is guessing at the reasons for the tepid response cited in that quote since he then raises two unrelated issues back to back: youth movement and cap hit.

    As sources and managment team are separate entities in that statement, the source is likely not part of the management team although we cannot know for certain.

    ReplyDelete
  114. What's he worth in a trade?

    Would LA rather have Smyth at 6.25 mil, or the cap room?

    I wonder if waivers works here, or if LA would place a higher value on him than that?

    ReplyDelete
  115. I like the thought of getting Smytty back, but only if it doesn't do anything to compromise our future.

    It's too bad Souray didn't light the AHL on fire, as he'd be the perfect piece to send back.

    I wonder if Brule would intrigue them at all. He's pretty Hollywood now what with the Bono thing.

    ReplyDelete
  116. @ Spoiler

    "the source is likely not part of the management team although we cannot know for certain."


    And hence cannot joke about it without being policed right?

    And I am not convinced that he is pondering why Oilers are lukewarm to the idea.

    ReplyDelete
  117. MC, that's my best guess too... the agent. Likely trading Smyth wasn't getting the attention he felt it deserved from Lombardi and this is added pressure, but still not quite a pointed gun.

    Could get very interesting. I wonder about the timing though, just before the draft. Makes me think there's already been some negotiation already, perhaps involving the conditional pick, but Lombardi won't pull the trigger.

    ReplyDelete
  118. What MC said. This looks exactly like a controlled leak.

    ReplyDelete
  119. @ SumOil:

    I don't consider the Caps a success.They have won 1 more playoff series then the Oilers have in the last two years.

    ReplyDelete
  120. @hockeyguy

    Meh...Bad luck- Injuries, or Halak.

    They have been a very very good club and will only get better with development of Carlson and Alzner.

    ReplyDelete
  121. A controlled leak: in Edmonton that is when Tencer, Stauffer or Matheson are directed to "float" an idea"

    ReplyDelete
  122. "You're too obsessed with the C position on this hockey club."

    Because its been garbage since Weight left town.

    Still doesn't answer the question of why you'd waste your 2nd top 5 pick on 2c when you could address 1c and 1d instead? Or have you already given up on Pitlick and Lander potentially filling that 2c role at the same time you stuck a fork in Gagner at the age of 21?

    I think our odds of 1 of either Gagner, Pitlick, Lander or Horcoff filling the 2c slot are a helluva lot better than the odds of Whitney, Marincin or Petry becoming THE cornerstone on the backline.

    ReplyDelete
  123. SumOil... this exchange is coming more ridiculous by the post.

    Not only that, you were stating what has already been said in the article.

    Really? Enlighten me with a quote of that part of the article that I plagiarized.

    ReplyDelete
  124. If (as some on this blog have alleged) the Oilers are intending to bring in limited help this offseason and cruise to another bottom 10 finish, bringing in Smyth might help a lot from a PR standpoint. Another terrible season will definitely lead to more calls for the heads of Tambellini, etc. so it might be helpful for him to be able to say "But look! I brought back Ryan Smyth!"

    ReplyDelete
  125. "In other words, the Kings, who are desperately seeking to upgrade their top-six forward positions,"

    And i agree. we must stop

    ReplyDelete
  126. @SumOil

    They need more development out of Backstrom.The teams that comprised the final 4 were the 4 teams that were deepest at centre.
    Other than Chicago only because Bolland arrived too late to the party.

    ReplyDelete
  127. @ Spoiler "the source is likely not part of the management team although we cannot know for certain."

    And hence cannot joke about it without being policed right?


    No. That was a freebie part of the parse, it had nothing to do with you. It had to do with the prior comments about Laforge and Meehan. So any time you want to deliver this joke, you go right ahead.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Yeah agree with that one.
    They need better depth at center and looks like Arnott just didnot get it done. They need a bolland/Kesler type second line center

    ReplyDelete
  129. @ Spoiler
    Yes I know.
    My response all started because of your objection to the joke regarding Laforge.

    ReplyDelete
  130. @ hockeyguy

    Backstrom is a very good center. Looks like thier entire 1st line had an off year and it hurt them

    ReplyDelete
  131. SumOil:

    Ovechkin played on a donut line....no centre.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Ryan Smyth (without a Cup) is on a stacked Stanley Cup contender with deep pockets and exceptional young talent, and he wants to leave?

    What does this say about Lombardi and/or Terry Murray and/or Anze Kopitar and/or Drew Doughty?

    Sounds like there is trouble in paradise.

    ReplyDelete
  133. The "safest" pick in this equation is Adam Larsson, but the best upside is Ryan Nugent-Hopkins. That's not just my opinion, that's overwhelming consensus.

    The very fact that RNH is the consensus pick MAKES him the safe choice. For the Oil to pick Larsson, they'd have to ignore the conventional wisdom that says he has less upside than RNH. In other words, they'd have to break from the herd and make the pick based on their own assessment as opposed to the silent majority. And let's be blunt, aside from media pundits, it is a silent and supposed majority touting RNH as the top pick as no team's director of scouting is actually tipping their hat or has gone on record as to whom they'd actually pick. It's all conjecture at this point. Many times teams will hype a player externally in the hopes that they player they really want falls to them in a lower spot.

    This 'overwhelming consensus' hoopla is a poker face until the picks are actually made.

    ReplyDelete
  134. @ Lee

    I would agree with you. RNH is the safest choice. I now am kinda excited that we will be drafting him. And it is all due to Scott's artice over at C&B where he says that we are overemphasizing on ES scoring

    ReplyDelete
  135. Smyth's last 4 years:

    37pts in 55 games
    59pts in 77 games
    53 pts in 67 games
    47 pts in 82 games

    If the Oilers keep Hemmer, Smyth might be the Oilers 5th or 6th highest scoring winger next year (After Hemmer, Hall, Eberle, Omark and perhaps MPS).

    And he is going to take PP and TOI from youngsters.

    And he is somewhat brittle.

    On the plus side, his Rel Corsi at evens was third best among forwards on the Kings last year.

    Given where the Oilers are (in no danger of making the playoffs) and the fact he is a FA after this season, why not wait and just sign him as a FA next July? You give up nothing.

    LA needs the cap room and have Schenn ready to slot in.

    I love the guy, but I think the Oilers can sit back and wait for the price to come down to something in the Chorney, Fraser, Foster or 5th rounder range. If not, see you next year.

    ReplyDelete
  136. Oh. I see. You know PDO's mind and were responding for him. Ah well, that does clear some of it up, despite the fact I didn't object to PDO's statement but asked for clarification. So if you care to quote where I policed that alleged joke along with where I repeated the article about Lombardi looking to the FA market, I would appreciate you actually backing up these unsupported assertions.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Lee: we clearly have very different definitions of "safe". It seems from what you wrote that "safe" means the pick that will most likely escape criticism. In contrast, I view the "safe" pick as a selection that has the lowest probability of a bad outcome (i.e. the smallest possibility of washing out).

    I think the latter definition is the more interesting and controversial one. Of the top 9, I think the safe picks are Landeskog (at least a 2nd/3rd liner) Larsson (at least a 2nd pairing guy) and, if we believe FPB, Couturier. Taking the safe selection would be getting one of those. In my opinion, however, the 1st overall pick should give strong consideration to upside and that's what's swayed me to RNH.

    One last thing: I fully respect others who are in the Larsson, Couturier, etc. camps - drafting is far from a science so while we can all have a preference for one selection, there's no point asserting that one is a definite slam dunk. That said, it is also foolish to argue that there's not a clear consensus that has formed at number 1 and it's far from silent. In less than an hour, we'll here from more scouts through McKenzie's rankings and in a preview he's said that 9/10 scouts have the same player at #1. Any guesses on who it is?

    ReplyDelete
  138. Lee, I think safest in this context refers to downside. The downside risk to RNH is a little greater than Larsson, from the reports I've read. That is, he's more of an NHL player than RNH is right now... there's less reliance on projections which may or may not pan out.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Ducey and I tend to a agree on nothing but I agree with him I would not give LAK much more than Fraser/Foster or low pick....Martindale maybe?

    ReplyDelete
  140. Ryan Smyth (without a Cup) is on a stacked Stanley Cup contender with deep pockets and exceptional young talent, and he wants to leave?

    What does this say about Lombardi and/or Terry Murray and/or Anze Kopitar and/or Drew Doughty?

    Sounds like there is trouble in paradise.


    Well, the "source" didn't say anything about going anywhere else than EDM.

    He has been with the NYI, COL and LA. Perhaps its not so much that he has tired of LA as much as he just wants to come home?

    *I think I'm starting to tear up*

    ReplyDelete
  141. I'd bet Hamilton is the guy Lombardi wants, maybe with sweetener. Plays LW, plays with Schenn, has some pedigree...

    ReplyDelete
  142. You deal for Smyth and give up as little as possible. Would people like Brule for Smyth Or would LA only want prospecta or picks? Gives LA the cap room they need to pursue Richards (they want to upgrade their top 6).

    And not to beat a dead horse, but we need actual NHL players. You get Smyth while he is somewhat productive, and you can do 2 big things:

    1. You can re-sign him for cheap for 2-3 years to finish out his career as an oiler ($2 mill per or so). And you retire his Jersey in the new arena when he retires.
    2. You can make him Captain. Horc would give it to him no doubt, then in 3-4 years when he retires you turn it over to Hall or Eberle.

    You then add a vet centreman and make a solid deal (trade for Coburn or Carle from Philly. You send them picks or prospects only since they will still have cap problems even with the cap coming in high)/signing of a top 4 dman and you have a team who can compete for a playoff spot.

    ReplyDelete
  143. So... here's the thing, do the Oilers have anything of value to offer the Kings for Smyth? The Kings' franchise is at a point where they're finished rebuilding and are looking to add top 6 forwards to become legitimate Cup Contenders (i.e. what Penner was supposed to be). Even with Smyth's declining production, he still scored 20 goals last year.

    Question: How many legitimate 20 goal scorers do the Oilers have that aren't named Taylor? Only Eberle and Jones came close last year, the next highest had 15. Unless you count a healthy Hemsky (which may be an oxymoron). Now, if we could convince them to take Jones...

    If the Kings get someone in Free Agency that makes Smyth redundant, then maybe the Oilers can get a steal, but not before. In the absence of that, ask yourself, if you were the GM of the Kings, do the Oilers have anyone not named Taylor, Jordan, or Magnus that you want AND can replace a 20 goal scorer today?

    ReplyDelete
  144. Not to mention that we haven't exactly been the place UFA's want to come and our recor with players have been poor of late. Smyth is one of the good guys int he NHL, an dfrom a player PR standpoint, taking Smyth back, giving him the C and signing him to allow him to retire an Oiler is a huge step in making us an attractive place to UFA's. yes, winning is the best step, but for the next 2-3 years he is good enough to be in our top 9 and will bring it for 60 games per year. Do ti Tambellini. Make it happen.

    ReplyDelete
  145. After next season, the Oilers left side will likely be Hall, Paajarvi, Hamilton, and Hartikainen.

    Why bring Smyth back, when it would be counterproductive to offer him another contract, and the backward looking folks would have to go through all that heartache again?

    Bringing Smyth back screws up Hartikainen's development.

    You only bring him back with Smyth understanding that it is not likely he is getting a contract offer next summer, and the deals if offered will be low and one year at a time. No more drama, and crying.

    ReplyDelete
  146. WheatNOil: They need cap space, and a top 2 centreman. They know we won't trade one of our kids. It is a salary dump for them.

    ReplyDelete
  147. godot: Gives more time to develop Hamilton, and that's also assuming Smyth even wants to play hockey after this year (although he does have that rinkrat quality that leads me to believe he'd play till 50 if he could).

    ReplyDelete
  148. godot: Paajarvi can play RW as well. You don't add a player based on the possibility of some kid needing a place to play. Let Hamilton play a few years in the minors, Hartikanen as well. And since MPS can play RW as well, it gives you tradeable assets in him and Omark a;omg with all the prospects like Hamilton, etc. if you need to make a move for a top centreman.

    ReplyDelete
  149. Batman isn't going to slice Tambellini's robe at the first trick-or-treater to bang on his door dressed up as an overturned police car. No sacrifice before his time. A DFL threepeat is just the first act of the striptease. Sacrificial GMs don't come in Costco family packs.

    What it would take to rise from two-time DFL champion is a Cory Schneider signing and at least a 2C stud up front. That would buy this team a February falter, which would be a nice step forward.

    I don't see anything along those lines happening until next summer, at the earliest.

    Some day in the distant future Tambi will wake up and go "shit, we've got a buy between the pipes with a 0.930 save percentage" and he'll hear the creaking of the rope in the back of his mind accelerating like a clock on amphetamines. As long as our duo remains south of 0.900 he can lean back in his lounge chair and continuing stockpiling crates of Corona.

    Khabibulin has at least another year in him as an industrial strength flak jacket. When they signed the guy, he was promised lead roles in Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket, and Eyes Wide Shut. 2012 will bring the awkward Spielberg rescue.

    I have this strange feeling that in the restored version of Metropolis, the giant Frankenlever is captioned "save percentage". It's not going to happen as a result of some gypsy moves at the draft prospect flea market.

    ReplyDelete
  150. @Cactus. I'm in full agreement with your post.

    For the record, I'm down with the Oil picking RNH or Larsson - whoever MBS thinks is the bpa. I'm just not down with this mindset that says picking defenseman high is always a bad idea. If Larsson and RNH had identical upsides, I'd hope the Oil would choose Larsson as he meets the obvious need in the org. That's not to say 1C isn't a need a well but RNH does have some baggage (small, needs to go back to junior, PP% of points, etc.) that Larsson doesn't appear to.

    ReplyDelete
  151. Hamilton seems like the kind of guy who a few of us will love so I wouldn't move him for 94 but I wouldn't mind him having to play a year in the AHL because 94 is here either.

    As for the young rugged Finn, he looks like a keeper but let's not assume all prospects will turn out, either.

    If you can get 94 for a decent price then you do it. He Doesn't have to play on PP; you can still leave that for 4-91 if you like though I don't think 2nd PP TOI like 91 would most likely get will make a difference anyway.

    And imagine a 94-10-83 line that can take on the toughs? And then 4-89-14 not having to play against the first line? and you're just looking for a pivot for 91-23 and 28-56 are your 4th line wingers so you need two pivots.

    and 2 dmen.

    and a goalie to help bring DD along.

    basically, you need real players and 94 is one of them so bring him in if it makes sense from an asset-trade perspective. and keep 83 if he's being sensible about his price.

    ReplyDelete