Alex Plante got sent down today, no big deal since the big league team doesn't play for a few days. However, I checked out twitter this afternoon and saw this from Mark Spector:
Based on the stats and reading about the OKC Barons and how they run their blue, Teubert would have been the better choice.
We talked about it here. Poster Unknown in the comments section takes it from here:
- Since the AHL team's job is to send hired hands to Edmonton as needed, what could possibly keep the team from getting their guy? Either way, Teubert may make his NHL debut later this week.Apparently they were bussing it and since docs were not required, some guys leave them at home because of a previous situation of stuff being stolen from their rooms on pevious road trips.
Teubert is a curious player, whose skill set is similar to the Suttons and Peckhams on the current Oilers. He is one half of the return for Dustin Penner (The Klefbom being the other) and has been much maligned for being a disappointing acquisition based on Penner's skills and contract. It'll be nice to see him in the NHL even if only for a cup of coffee.
That opportunity could come later this week.
He didnt have his passport and documents to travel
ReplyDeleteWell how the hell does that work?
ReplyDeleteAs per coaches comments on 630 at lunch today!
ReplyDeleteApparently they were bussing it and since docs were not required, some guys leave them at home because of a previous situation of stuff being stolen from their rooms on pevious road trips...just passing along the info. ha.
ReplyDeleteGreat blog by the way...never comment...but check daily to read your interesting articles. Thanks
Unknown: Thanks. Well explained, makes sense.
ReplyDeleteWeird.
ReplyDeleteSo I wonder if Barker is indeed ready to go or if a Tuebert call up in the next 48 hours means he's playing Thursday in LA.
Still no word on Sutton,apparently we'll know more tomorrow.
Oops, just left a comment on the last post about this and here you folks are already all over it.
ReplyDeleteOh well, to repeat one part of it:
Worked out OK, Plante got a game & played pretty well, got a point and the win.
Teubert will get his chance on the road trip, I would imagine.
@Gerta
ReplyDeleteMaybe they are waiting until tomorrow on Sutton's announcement to say;
"After sitting down with Andy on Monday we felt that he was sorry about the hit and suspended him to sitting with his nose in the corner for 24 hours. His suspension has now been completed we are happy to inform."
Or they are giving him 4-6 games...
*shrugs*
Nice to get Teubert in a game against LA. I think Plante played well.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if playing LA is te reason they're bringing Teubert instead of just keeping Plante up for a few more games?
could unknown be our bra and panties?
ReplyDeleteWell, by Unknown's own account, he's basing his information on what was said on 630 CHED today. So it's not impossible, but I don't see much reason to believe it.
ReplyDeleteShmantal: Mantle, shmantal.
oh steve...just having a little fun.
ReplyDeleteI don't think bra and panties visits here.
ReplyDeleteShe posted once on ON, so it's not impossible that she lurks.
ReplyDeleteOr... She really is "Steve Smith".
Well, we know the following about her:
ReplyDelete1. She wears women's underwear, and
2. She has insider's knowledge on the Edmonton Oilers.
I am at best halfway there - a quarter on a lot of days.
She can't be "Steve Smith" because his nickname is gonch.
ReplyDeleteAnd you've only scored on yourself once.
ReplyDeleteThat we know of.
spOILer for the win.
ReplyDelete..Or is it "Gonch"?
ReplyDeleteNo, gonch. He's a lawyer now, no capitals.
ReplyDeleteEditorial Note:
ReplyDeleteAccording to Katherine Barber of the Canadian Oxford Dictionary, as quoted in the Edmonton Journal in 2004, this word takes a variety of spellings:
“In Saskatchewan, it’s gauch, gitch or gotch, but in Alberta it’s gaunch, ginch and gonch.
On the Alberta side of Lloydminster, people suddenly get an ‘n’ in their underwear, and we have no idea why.”
Ginch Gonch is a brand name of stylish underwear, begun in 2004.
An unrelated gonch is a gonch hook used to lift the lid of a Dutch oven, a large pot used for outdoor cooking.
what did B&P post on Oilersnation?
ReplyDeleteHere's a quote from NBC Sports Pro Hockey Talk about Dustin Penner getting dropped down to the 3rd line last night.
ReplyDeletePenner has just one point through six games (admittedly, he’s dealt with an injured knee) and hasn’t developed any offensive chemistry with his teammates. This is a problem considering the rest of L.A.’s top six have all had their moments this year. “The first line of Anze Kopitar, Simon Gagne and Justin Williams got off to a strong start,” Hammond writes. “Mike Richards has been a force on the power play. Dustin Brown had a two-point game against St. Louis. Then there’s Penner, who has zero goals and one assist in six games.”
The Kings, a generally solid NHL hockey team, have awful depth at the wing. If you assume Penner just isn't a fit (and remember, he was dreadful last year) they're wing depth is Gagne, Brown and Williams as the only Top 6 options and two of those guys have major injury issues. After that it's Scott Parse, Kevin Westgarth, Trent Hunter, Kyle Clifford and Ethan Moreau. Also, they're pretty tight to the cap so would likely like some relief there.
On the flip side, you've gotta think the Oilers would like Penner back especially with no term left on the contract. He could play all over the depth chart...tough minutes, 1st line for size on the road, get Gagner going etc.
Kings would probably want someone who can play in their Top 9 right away and I think they need skill more than size. I also don't think they'd trade a contributing roster player. They also wouldn't mind restocking the cupboard after moving some youth this summer.
Ales Hemsky- They wanted him last year but wouldn't part with Schenn (for him). If he can come back healthy, Penner + Voynov or Forbort.
Sam Gagner- 2nd line, 2nd power play guy with tremendous upside. Gagner + Hamilton for Penner + Bernier (they've got Zatkoff and Martin Jones).
Linus Omark- Perhaps for Penner straight up. We get the better player but they get the upside and the cap relief.
Of course, the fly in the ointment's name is pride and its shows up in two ways:
1. Lombardi vs. Tambellini is unlikely.
2. Lombardi dumping Penner for 20 cents on the dollar is essentially an admission of failure, which GM's aren't fond of.
Speaking of gonch:
ReplyDeleteTracy Lane
TreenasOil Tracy Lane
Oilers close to moving a forward lots of interest in Gagner from jets and habs.
I thought Lombardi said the Oilers had Penner in poor condition and the vaunted King's Franchise had whipped him into shape for this season.
ReplyDeleteTracy Lane
ReplyDeleteTreenasOil Tracy Lane
Bluejackets offer 3rd rd pick for Omark. Oilers seriously considering it APG
2 minutes ago
Wow, good stuff from KT.
ReplyDeleteI saw the play where Penner got hurt - he came to someone's aid and fought a guy and twisted his knee. I love the guy and love that he's coming off the books but I worry about that injury.
As for Tuebert, I put two and two together last night but didn't post it here. First, I follow a few of the Barons on Twitter and saw someone - I think it was Cornet - throw a jab at Teubert about Plante getting an assist and had a hashtag of passport. Later on during the postgame Renney addressed a question about passports but the audio's so bad on the incoming questions that I couldn't hear for sure who they were referring too even though I pretty much knew.
Lots of neat subplots for Thurs:
- Lombardi vs Tambellini
- doughty vs hall
- 94 on fire; 27 on the fizzle
- Kings on fire for 83 last year; possibly in play again this year.
- tuebert vs original org
- ethan moreau vs reality: will he take credit for early season Oilers success? he didn't take any blame for their failures. Maybe he'll just take two offensive zone penalties.
Maybe he'll throw Gagner out of the faceoff circle. :-)
ReplyDeleteFussy britches is rumors could apply to all kinds of teams. Matty mentioned Carolina today, Boston, hell Detroit could use Omark.
Goalies are ahead of the snipers this season.
I can't see anyone on the Habs or in their org that I like. One of their young Dmen? Seems we have plenty to break in ourselves.
ReplyDeleteUnless it's something like Hemsky straight across for Cammalleri, a passer for a shooter. Both have injury history, of a similar age... But then there's the Squid's contract. $6M cap hit for another two seasons.
I hope we don't sell Omark for anything less than a 2nd.
Bringing Penner back seems contradictory to the path they're taking. I don't think he would be happy to return. And Lombardi would want an overpay, considering what a couple months of eating Dustin Donuts cost him. Unless we're trading him again at the deadline. ;o).
Habs probably loathe to deal a young dman given how they lose rearguards like flies and also how that american is playing with the rags.
ReplyDeleteLT: it was easy to call Schremp to the Isles so we should be able to figure out where Omark's going.
So is Mark Stuart the guy "we" want from the Jets for Gagner?
ReplyDeleteI've been wanting a RH Dman since the 2nd week of July but with the emergence of Harry Potter and Whitney's health,I would take either a righty or a lefty at this point.I hope they don't move Omark for a pick.
ReplyDeleteThe Jets would be insane to part with Stuart. He's just about their only physical d-man.
ReplyDeleteByfuglien doesn't play D in real life. That's where he is on the roster but he's all over the place. I think the real reason he's back there is because Enstrom and and Oduya are pip squeaks and get pushed around quite a bit.
Winnipeg is getting Fehr back shortly so I don't really see a need for them at centre or a real pressing need in their top 6. Kane is finding his stride with Antropov and Burmistrov.
Ideally the Little, Ladd and Wheeler are a little light offensively for a 2nd line but they're still top 6ers. They probably should be 3rd liners on a deep team but acquiring Gagner by himself won't solve that problem. Wellwood has also helped a ton for the Jets so far.
I think the Jets are looking for blueline help if anything. They are atrocious defensively.
Omark for a 3rd is outright robbery and everyone with a brain should know that. I realize that he's not getting playing time, but then again it's not like he's been outplayed by all of the guys on this roster.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I don't like the Omark deal - his sideburns alone should net us a third.
ReplyDeletewhy is omark for a 3rd insane?
ReplyDeletegrebs got us a 2nd at the deadline, staois a 3rd.
those guys were both "real" NHL players. i've been a huge omark fan since we drafted him, but this seems like reasonable value to me for a guy who has less than 60 NHL games played. the blogosphere seems to be very glass half full on this guy, for good reason, but we can't let it blind us.
a third rounder is another bullet for stu, but most likely a throw in on another trade. CLBs third will most likely be pick 61-65 range. we spent very little developmental time on the kid and if we can manage to increase his worth from a 97th pick to a 60-something pick, i think we come out ahead on that.
i think it's a lot more realistic than thinking he'll be alfredsson.
grebs got us a 2nd at the deadline
ReplyDeleteGrebs was making $3.5 million per year and wasn't going to get qualified.
staois a 3rd
Steve Staios was a worse player then than Omark is now. Also he was an impending UFA (which, in his circumstance, increased his value, but which normally decreases value).
A third for Omark may or may not be a bad deal,* but your comparators are completely irrelevant.
* It is.
at SS, what i'm suggesting is that a 3rd is decent value. i picked those players because they actually had measurable results in the NHL. Right now, all we have from omark is a lot of sizzle and a dude who met his desjardin equivalencies to a T. i'd love to know what 4th rounders who haven't cracked the roster on the 30th place team, but i can't think/find a lot of exact comparables. if you, or anyone, has some examples, i'd love to hear them. we traded riley nash (albeit in a weird situation) for a 2nd...so going from a 4th, to a 3rd sounds good to me.
ReplyDeletemy main point is that drafting in the 60s has value, and is perceived by GMs as having worth. i'm not sure why omark for a 3rd is "insane". is there anything we can use as a measuring stick to say he has more value?
The Jets would be insane to part with Stuart. He's just about their only physical d-man.
ReplyDeleteThe Jets would be insane not to part with Stuart if the Oilers offered Gagner.
As for 'Omark for a third round pick' the problem isn't value, the problem is risk/reward.
ReplyDeleteThe Oilers dealt Cogliano for a second, and it was reasonable because there wasn't a spot for him.
Is there a spot for Omark? There should be, and trading a third for him could be a great deal for the team picking him up.
I'd hate to see the move made, but I can't see the Oilers doing much better than a 2nd/3rd in the picks department if they decide to trade him.
If the Oilers don't trade Omark, he is going back to Europe next year. i.e. He is, effectively, just like Grebeshkov or Staois, an UFA next year.
ReplyDeleteAn early sixties pick is not horrible, especially since the Oilers don't really have the luxury of showcasing him, since they don't want to lose games.
Nugent-Hopkins, Eberle, and Gagner are clearly better and more versatile players.
4 smallish top six forwards is too many.
The clock has run out on Omark in Edmonton. Edmonton just isn't the right fit for him at this point in time. Life is about making choices.
You also do right by the player by trading him to a team that can use him, rather than forcing him to go back to Sweden because management can't make a decision in a timely fashion. See Kyle Turris.
is there anything we can use as a measuring stick to say he has more value?
ReplyDeleteWhat are the odds that a third round pick yields a more useful player (to the Oilers) four years after the draft?
4 smallish top six forwards is too many.
ReplyDeleteNot if they can all outscore in their respective lineup positions/matchups. I see no reason that all four need to be top six in icetime, either, unless there are cap concerns. And if the value of Omark on the trade market is a third rounder, I don't see cap concerns with him.
I understand Klefbom is getting more ice time now and is playing a regular shift. He's not getting any points, but his +/- is at even, so he's not hurting the team.
ReplyDelete@Jfry
ReplyDeleteI think the question becomes when does acquiring "bullets for Stu" lead to continually trading NHL players for hopes and dreams?
O'Mark will likely have an NHL career - at least it looks possible. What are the chances of a 3rd rounder turning into an NHL player? Didn't Gregor look into this a while back? He figured something like 15%.
I think if the Oilers want to start thinking playoffs, they need to package NHL players that "don't fit" for NHL players that "do fit". Otherwise we are just perpetually hoping draft picks turn out for the best.
@SS
ReplyDeleteExactly. That's where I'm going, only you got there with far less words :)
@stephen
ReplyDeletei don't think we need to view it as bullets, necessarily...but as asset management. it appears that omark could be rotting on the vine this year.
a 3rd could be used in any number of ways. perhaps we use it to get staois at the deadline ;)
SS said: What are the odds that a third round pick yields a more useful player (to the Oilers) four years after the draft?
ReplyDeletei think we could ask the same question of omark. what are the odds he's a useful player to the oilers in 4 years.
it's all speculation on both our parts, but if we remove the fancy packaging, i will go 4th for a 3rd almost any day and feel like i made a good move.
so let me get this straight, we are trading a guy who is an NHL player for a pick that has a 15% chance of becoming an NHL player.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't seem like the best choice, does it?
i must have got the percentage right, or stephen was wrong too:)
ReplyDelete@eidy
ReplyDeletethat's correct if you view the pick as only a pick.
the 3rd rounder can be used in any number of ways. in the recent OilChange doc, they showed tambi trying to move from 31 to 25th. he offered a 4th rounder as the pot sweetener. it was rejected, but i think shows that early/mid-round picks are a currency.
also, using LT's criteria, 200 games played is an NHL player. Right now, Omark is a relatively old prospect who is piling up the HSs.
i think we could ask the same question of omark. what are the odds he's a useful player to the oilers in 4 years.
ReplyDeleteThe odds of Linus Omark being a useful player to whatever team has him four years from now are far, far greater than the odds of a pick in the low sixties being one.
But the reason I chose four years is that Omark is four years past his draft; I was comparing the draft pick four years beyond the draft to Omark today.
This neglects the competitive window, of course: when should the Oilers be looking to win the Stanley Cup? I'd say it should be somewhere in the three to four year range (though I think the mismanagement of ELCs has jeopardized that). So with that in mind, who's going to be more valuable to the Oilers: Linus Omark at age 27, or a third round draft pick three years after the draft? It's not even close.
You'll note that I qualify "more useful" with "to the Oilers": this is to acknowledge Willis' Cogliano point, which says that a player who cannot crack a team's lineup is useless to that team. But Omark is one of the Oilers' twelve best forwards right now, and the odds of his being able to usefully crack the lineup when the Oilers should be aiming to compete is far greater than the odds of a random third rounder being able to do the same.
Given the desperate state in CLB am I out to lunch wondering if there is a deal to be had for Johansen if it helps them a lot right now and saves a job or two? I feel an opportunity to really take advantage of somebody here.
ReplyDeleteA long term 1-2C of RNH and Johansen could be pretty strong.
comente - this section on the Spanish version of Lowetide?
at SS
ReplyDeletei appreciate your perspective, but we're just not going to agree on this one. i just can't agree that it's a foregone conclusion that omark is going to be a productive NHL player for us or anyone.
night all.
hessesca - i haven't had a decent word ver in ages.
i just can't agree that it's a foregone conclusion that omark is going to be a productive NHL player for us or anyone.
ReplyDeleteWell, we're on the same page there, then.
Omark is facing a tough numbers game. If someone told me I could only keep one of these three players--Hemsky, Gagner and Omark--which would I choose? Pretty obvious.
ReplyDeleteI know Jones is also in the RW mix and sometimes so is Eager, and there's also the possibility of Hartikainen. Plenty of numbers. Now I agree, jones is not a more talented hockey player than Omark, but he offers larger size, which isn't as duplicated on the roster, he fulfills a role and, I strongly suspect, he's more coachable--all of which means he may do more to help the team win in the eyes of the coach.
Omark only has a few games left before being waiver eligible, which may also be playing a role in his healthy scratch situation. And then there's his out clause to Europe, which he'd likely exercise if he's not playing.
I dislike giving up the depth of Omark, but if it's difficult to find him a role to play, then we might lose him nothing.
I just have difficulty believing a 3rd is the best we can get. If it is, then what else can you do but get something for him? I won't be happy about it, but if the choice is losing him for nothing or the 3rd...
If you're considering moving Omark, might you also be thinking that the chances are strong that you will try to retain Hemsky as well?
ReplyDeleteOr does one have nothing to do with the other?
Rich: Logical question, I see no evidence the Oilers have married the two items together.
ReplyDeleteI don't give my credence to the latest twitter rumour that Omark is on the move. I think Renney and Oilers management will want to see him in the lineup for at least one more stint before any decision is made, but when the team's won 5 games straight, it's hard to justify a lineup change.
ReplyDeleteThis success may be keeping Omark out of the lineup, but it also buys the Oilers extra time to make a decision. Last year, it was clear: deal existing talent for prospects and picks. If the early success this year is even somewhat sustainable, Tambellini may want to acquire actual players that can contribute now.
Long story short: I don't see a move prior to the end of November's long road schedule.
JW: I'm not at all saying that Stuart for Gagner is a fair trade for the Oilers. Gagner is the superior player but the Jets are severely lacking in physical defencemen.
ReplyDeleteI don't think they can afford to part with Stuart even for a player like Gagner.