Signing Hemsky would give the Oilers exceptional depth on the skill lines for years to come. Hemsky would join Taylor Hall, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins and Jordan Eberle who are the young cluster, with Magnus Paajarvi, Sam Gagner and others also possible long term options.
Hemsky reminds me of Guy Lafleur in style. The Habs couldn't figure him out until they paired him with Jacques Lemaire (who was an excellent 2-way center in his prime) and Lafleur's line really took off when another "attention to detail" forward (Steve Shutt) was added to the group.
Lafleur was more "rover" than right winger, and Lemaire-Shutt learned to fill gaps based on Lafleur's ad libs. I've often thought that Hemsky-Horcoff was an ideal duo, and Horcoff-Smyth-Hemsky may eventually form the "veterans" group among the kids up front for the Oilers.
Before all that, Steve Tambellini must decide if Hemsky is worth a long term contract. It isn't an easy decision. Hemsky is hurt often, appears to have some chronic shoulder problems and as Tyler Dellow detailed recently may be a PP tease.
I'd sign him and not look back. Ales Hemsky is an injury risk, but he's also able to contribute mightily to offense, and is young enough to hang around to see this thing through. The Oilers might have developing offense behind the kid line; Paajarvi, Hartikainen, Pitlick, Hamilton and others could jump in and score 25 a year given the opportunity to mature and the right linemates.
Someday, some of these kids might be what Ales Hemsky is right now. I'd sign him. Would you?
First! Yes. But I've got a man-crush. Seriously: to mount a better argument, I would put three things forward, not in any particular order.
ReplyDeleteFirst, he's good for nearly a point a game, even if he doesn't play many games.
Second, at this point, his trade value is plummeting and his UFA signing value is signing. If the most important decision in the Oilers' thinking is to "get something" in return, they have to ask themselves what kind of trade offers they are going to get - 10 games into the season - for a talented, but injury-prone right-winger who's going to be available for a UFA signing on July 1st. What's a more rational decision for the Oilers: getting a 3rd pairing D-man? A back-up goalie floating between the AHL or the NHL? Or taking a risk - and really, is it that much of a risk - on signing him longer term? Signing Rick Dipietro for 15 years is a risk. A crazy risk. Signing Ales Hemsky for three or four more years is nowhere near that kind of crazy.
Lastly, he's a character player: aside from a slight skirmish with MacTavish, he's never said boo about the organization or the city. Given the legacy of previous players (I'm looking at you, CFP), that's worth something.
Anyway, sign him.
I don't think it's a simple yes/no question LT. The decision on whether to resign this player has to be informed and predicated on what the Oil's medical staff is telling mgmt about his longterm injury outlook.
ReplyDeleteThat said, the three amigos are starting to show us in a big way what they may be capable of, and they are going to be expensive to keep. If you do resign Hemsky, there's no way his deal should carry beyond the expiration of their entry level deals. This club's future lies with the young studs in the lineup and the ones soon arriving from the farm (Pitlick, Hamilton, etc.). Unless Hemsky stays healthy and has a very productive season, I don't see any reason to rate him as a better gamble than prospects with solid pedigree AND without chronic injury issues.
deasess: Lowe's decision making process?
btw, in matters of player mgmt, I often ask myself 'what would Bill Belichik do?'
ReplyDeleteWith brittle players becoming less productive, the Patriot way is to cut them loose and replace them with FA veterans looking for a 2nd chance. The Oilers should become a desirable FA destination if this year's performance continues. That gives Tambellini more options should Ales fail to stay healthy this year.
Couchside GM-ing... Hemsky has a skillset that isn't duplicated on the roster. I hope there's a way to keep him. If Hemsky likes what he sees developing and is realistic about his in injury history, perhaps he'll sign to a very reasonable 2 or 3 year contract to see how things develop.
ReplyDeleteThere are two parts to the problem. The primary one is allocation of assets. Hemsky with Horcoff and Smyth eats a very large part of the team's cap for one line. The secondary one is that Hemsky needs someone to skate with him, receive a pass and put a shot on goal. Oops, Horcoff is not the answer. The two are dump and chase and Hemsky gets to attack one on three after one of his rushes. Then there is that Smyth and Horcoff will not be able to sustain their level of play all season, they'll wear out. And all that is before Hemsky's health. I would suggest - sign Hemsky to a reasonable contract with number of games bonuses. Paajarvi needs to get a chance to develop and a decision needs to be made on Gagner. Lander goes down to OKC until the situation is evaluated.
ReplyDeleteOf course I'd want to sign him, if for no other reason that he made this team bearable to watch over the last 5 years of wandering lost in the woods. He was an exceptional player 5 years ago, and he's been busting ass for this team for years. Now that they have some real depth with real players, there are really only two reasonable options in a cap world:
ReplyDeletea) trade him away and deny him a chance to win with this team, because he's too big of an injury risk
b) be honest with him and his agent, and sign him to a 2 year deal at 3 M per and tell him that if he gets healthy, he'll get a raise, and know that if he doesn't, he'll give young right wing prospects a chance for a look in the NHL.
Hemsky is not a safe bet right now. But he may be a bet worth taking once you determine the price point. If he's playing between 30-60 games/year, even if he's @0.7-1.1 pts/g, its really hard to justify spending more than 3M on him, when you need Hemsky insurance players too.
Does anyone know if they can add games played performace bonuses?
A base salary of 2.5M + scaling performance bonuses for games played would be ideal for a player with Hemsky's history.
No!
ReplyDeleteMan oh man this is a headscratcher for me. I just don't understand how reasonable men would want to invest approximately 5 million a year to a guy who won't even play 50? 60games?
Get him back in the lineup .. get him producing .. and get fucking rid of him before he walks!!!!
Keep 'em? I don't know. I flip-flop on him almost daily. If I were Tambo, the first thing I'd find out is what kind of market is out there for him right now, and then I'd keep evaluating it for a little while. Surely some GM will panic and be tempted to give up something of interest. Secondly, I'd find out from Hemmer's agent what it's gonna take to re-sign him, both in terms of $ and length. Somewhere in the middle of that, you'll find out if Hemsky is worth more to the Oilers as an trading asset or as a player. Either way, there isn't room for both him and Omark on the team. (Right now, there isn't room for either one.) One of 'em has to go.
ReplyDeleteYes!
ReplyDeleteSign the guy and don't look back is perfect LT.
We know Ales has been a great soldier (a wounded one, but still great) for this team and city. Heck he even moved his best friend from back home here to live with him and play for NAIT. Obviously he doesn't think Edmonton is Siberia.
The Horcoff - Smyth - Hemsky line needs to reunite and then Steve needs to resign Smyth and Hemsky to a combined cap hit of what Smyth's hit is right now. If Steve can do that, then I believe all of us in the room will agree that is an effective use of cap.
I would've signed him in July at the first chance I got. With the summer coming and going without a trade, signing him to an extension basically became the only real option. But I suspect he'll be traded at the deadline for a late 1st
ReplyDeleteWhat does the CBA say about simultaneous negotiation -- is there anything expressly against trying to negotiate a common lower-than-market value for a season's worth of re-signings? The idea being to get everyone to go a bit under market value, knowing that's the only way you can create a winning team in a cap world. Somehow it seems contrary to the spirit of the CBA. It's a nice problem to have... Does such a deal have to be entirely informal, or perhaps all contract negotiations have to be formal closed-door deals?
ReplyDeleteSometimes lost in all the Lowe bashing is the great contract (value for the Oilers) that Hemsky signed last time around. Hemsky may feel he is owed something on this one. Even if he is due a better pay check, the Oilers can't really afford to pay him close to what he is worth (as a player, injury depreciation not included) because of the expected appreciation of the kid's salaries in the near future.
ReplyDeleteI love Hemsky the player, but I would have to see a heck of a home town discount to sign him for more than a year or two.
Absolutely. I would sign him immediately without thinking twice. Team needs the depth and when he is healthy, wow what a player. Just because the Oilers have some kids who can score, you cannot rely on them and Hemsky provides amazing depth. Keep him. If they don't, off with their heads!!
ReplyDeleteI had to leave another comment just because of the word verification...gad "zooks"...
ReplyDeleteNot to be confused with Mike Zuke, former WHA Edmonton Oilers/Racers, NHL Blues/Whalers. A great name if there ever was one.
I would sign him as well as long as the financials were reasonable. This team doesn't need to depend on him being healthy anymore. The kids have shown they can carry the mail.
ReplyDeleteSo the pressure to have him in the lineup on a nightly basis is less. When healthy he would give the Oilers tremendous depth. At the same time, there are serviceable replacements for where he currently fits in the roster. Back when he was the one of the few legit top 6 options the Oilers couldn't afford for him to be out.
I think his trade value is such that we'd be looking at a minimal return unless he blows the doors off until the trade deadline. And if that happens I think the Oilers would be firmly entrenched in a playoff spot.
Sign the man, reward him for being a good soldier during the lean years with a spot on BOTB 2!
I think any reasonable Oiler fan is gun shy of trading, at least until ST (oh please)shows some acumen. He may have pulled the trigger last year if Ales didn't get hurt.
ReplyDeleteDespite fears of getting hosed, I can't see a strong reason to keep Hemsky other than he's talented. The team plays well without him. We have major weak spots elsewhere. He is utterly unreliable to actually play.
Even if he does well on another team, IMO the best thing is to cash him in for help elsewhere. Soft parade for Ales, tell him to start paying attention to surviving first. He is a perfect fit for balanced teams that lack offense, like a Gaborik or Havlat.
One also has to think they want to make room for Harti and Pitlick who while not nearly as gifted do have offense, and size to compliment/offset the tiny top line.
I don't think Hemsky would sign a conditional contract (low base with significant bonuses for games played) without testing the UFA market first.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you can get fair value for him in a trade right now.
So you offer him a 1 year deal for $5.5-6 million, and defer the long term decision till next year.
If he decides to go to free agency, you participate in the bidding. I think most of the offers will be conditional longer term deal, and the Oilers will be able to offer a conditional deal then too that might be accepted.
I love what he brings when he is healthy. You have a window before the rugrats' ELC expire and through that window you can fit in his contract.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of those situations where a decision has to be made - do we value him more than one of 29 other GMs. Given the injury history, I'm afraid the answer will be a yes. If that's the case, then you sign him for a fair price and a relatively short term.
If it is clear that someone will part with real value for him - and I don't think this can simply be more bullets for the Magnificent Bastard - then maybe you make the hard call and deal him but I just don't see a young stud d-prospect on offer for Hemsky given the injury issues.
I suspect that he will want to stay a part of what is being built here and is not oblivious to what his injury history will do to his UFA value.
What you can NOT do is fall into the trap that Florida did with Bouwmeester. If you do not have his name signed to the bottom line two weeks before the deadline, you have to have him dealt. Period. I don't care if we are holding on to 6th place by two points, I don't care if we are leading the conference. Players of 83's calibre can NOT be left unsigned in their UFA year past the deadline. Nothing good (even playoff games) happens to an organization that does that.
Yes I would sign him to a 3 -4 year contract in the $5 M area. Hemsky has had some injury problems and probably will have some more in the future. He has been putting himself in vulnerable positions over the years and with his current injury woes I would expect him to be more careful plus he does not have to carry the team by himself anymore. This hopefully will give him more games. We would never get a trade with the same value...even a D man. definitly keep him because he's going to provide the team with another nucleur threat!
ReplyDeleteSign the man. If he gets injured you can use the cap space anyway.
ReplyDeleteIn that picture he looked more like a lone artist than a hockey player.
Get him back in the lineup .. get him producing .. and get fucking rid of him before he walks!!!!
ReplyDeleteIn spite of the usual "brilliant" commentary from some regarding Hemsky, the fact remains that smart teams do two things well:
- They go get good players
- They KEEP good players
The Oilers have failed miserably at doing the latter, and another deal of an in-his-prime player for more magic beans (because this is what it would be if they dealt #83) is unacceptable at this point. This team needs to be trying to get better, and that means retaining quality veterans.
Smyth-Horcoff-Hemsky is going to be shown, once Ales is back in the lineup, to be an ideal compliment to the Hall-RNH-Eberle line in terms of being their tough minutes "cushion" for at least the next two seasons. Add in another line built around the duo of MPS-Gagner, and the Oilers are in a position to ice a strong top-nine forward group, not to mention a better-than-average 4th line.
3-4 years, 5-5.5 million per year. Get it done, v3.1.
tedizan: Tarzan's brother Teddy.
//You have a window before the rugrats' ELC expire and through that window you can fit in his contract.//
ReplyDeleteThere really is no window. There is only one year, next year. Hall and Eberle will have expensive second contracts.
Which is why you offer Hemsky a one year unconditional deal for good money ($6 million) to extend the window where he has a chance to demonstrate whether he can stay healthy.
Whether one lets a UFA contract expire or not depends on whether one is in the playoffs or not. If the Oilers are sitting in a playoff spot at the deadline, it would be silly to trade Hemsky if he hasn't signed.
If you lose him, you get the cap space to buy other assets in the summer.
Playoff experience if more important than more draft picks at this point. And anybody can win it all in the spring, if you get into the playoffs.
Decisions:
ReplyDelete1. Do not mess with the PK (Smyth, Horc, Lander
(Jones, Belanger, Petrell, Hmmm)
2. Do not mess with PP #1
3. Do not mess with Kid line
4. Do not mess with Smyth-Horc Combo
5. Do not play, RNH, Horcoff, Gagner, Belanger in any combination they are all set-up players.
Hall-RNH-Eberle
Smyth-Horc-XXX
XXX-Lander-XXX
XXX-Belanger-XXX
PK players Jones, Petrell
Pajarvi, Gagner, Hemsky, Omark, Eager
"3-4 years, 5-5.5 million per year. Get it done, v3.1."
ReplyDelete45 games a year at 5-5.5 million ... BRILLIANT!
Would seem that if Hemsky can be signed to another good contract he'd be worth the risk.
ReplyDeleteNext year you have to re-sign Smyth and I think you can structure something that will be cap hit friendly and still give yourself room once it's time to re-up Hall, Eberle and The Nuge.
This gives you a solid top 6.
It would seem to me the tougher decision might be what you do w/Gagner - maybe not for next season but for beyond.
Would you trade him to a team like Nashville for a Ryan Ellis (PP quarterback on the back end) who'll be a value contract for several more years in order to manage your cap?
I think you have to take the risk on Hemsky. I don't think this team without him has the ceiling to win a cup, and I don't think more help is coming any time soon.
ReplyDeleteIf he's healthy and plays a whole season, he's the type of player that, added to the core of kids, might one day put this team over the top.
Or the signing will be a disaster. But I'd roll the dice.
HBomb:
ReplyDeleteThat is true. But nobody is saying trade him for nothing. Good teams also trade good players and make their teams better.
You can't keep everybody. The question remains is Hemsky a cornerstone of this team that warrants the investment, or will he be an overpriced add on meaning the money would be better spent on a hole.
Hemsky won't bring what we need alone, but we have a lot of spare parts and he could be the centrepiece of a deal.
Unless the Oilers turn a new page and leave guys on the farm, we need to open roster spaces up at some time before next season. Harti, Pitlick, and Petry at least are coming next year more likely than not.
Aside from his contract status, I think there is also a real risk that Hemsky is near the end of his NHL career because of his shoulders, and there is a lot of damage done losing a player of that calibre outright.
No no and no! Its time to move on and get something o worth for him... If and its a big IF he can stay healthy until the trade deadline i believe it will be enough to raise his value with some team to either get a Solid top 4 dman... Or maybe a 1st and 2nd round draft pick. What i do know is he cant stay healthy for more then 50-60 games a year at BEST! and that makes him worth about 3.5-4million. Since he wont sign for that trade for some value. I really dont get why this concept is so difficult to understand?! tying up 10% of your teams salary cap in a player that cant stay healthy when we got so much talent thats gonna be getting there 2nd contract from the team. Salary capology is the greatest talent and attribute of any teams GM in this current CBA. Yet all of you think signing a perenially injured Hemsky is a great move?! Unbelievable.
ReplyDeleteIf Hemsky will give the Oilers a discount for his injuries - signing for $3.5 to $4.5 million per season - sign him. Otherwise trade him.
ReplyDeleteThe fact is that Hemsky has had problems with his shoulders for 5 years. He has had two concussions and groin problems.
He is not a fitness nut. Is he going to build himself up and become more durable? Not likely.
So you are going to get 30 - 50 games a year. In a salary cap world you cannot be paying $5 M+ for that.
As for the notion that he "deserves" to be resigned? As William Munny said: "Deserve's got nothin' to do with it."
I think the first choice is to parlay the obvious injury concerns into a superior bargaining position. If the Oilers are concerned about Hemsky's injury history, other teams are as well. Ask him to sign a short (2 year) deal for the same cap hit or similar (4.5 or less). If he balks and is unwilling to sign, that makes the choice for the team.
ReplyDeleteHemsky might think he'll get a Havlat deal, but he won't. Despite being good comparables performance wise, their contracts will not be comparable. Prior to his deal (30 over 6, 5.0 cap hit) Havlat had just come off a healthy season (77 points in 81 games, 15 points in 16 playoff games). Havlat also has other tangible features that Hemsky does not (6'2" 217 lbs).
Havlat is Hemsky's high water mark, and even he was able to show a healthy season to earn his deal.
If Hemsky will take a deal reflective of his injury concerns, keep him. If he won't, send him packing before he walks for nothing. Hopefully Tambellini has enough time prior to the deadline to evaluate the situation sufficiently.
PPG player with a history with an organization on the upswing? Signed to an expiring contract that represents a good deal assuming he plays more often than not?
ReplyDeleteObvious signing, with the exception of the medical issues. And there's a straightforward answer there: extend the contract if his health holds up through the rest of the season, or if there's other (non-public) reasons to believe his long term health will be better next year than this year or last year or the year before. Don't extend if you don't have one of those two things in hand. And then trade him during the summer if you have second thoughts and think someone else wants to roll the dice on his medical history - but to mitigate the smell of deception, be prepared to sell whatever deal you strike as an offer you couldn't refuse.
Now the Oilers are once again leading the world of hockey I expect Hemsky's not stupid enough to leave as a UFA, because if he does then all that hammering he took off Reghier was for nothing.
ReplyDeleteSee Hemsky take a home team discount.
I notice that Jon K has made essentially the same argument I did, immediately before I did. The difference is timing, i.e., whether ST trades him for picks at the deadline if you think his long-term health is suspect. Being skeptical about his rental value (likely below the late 1st/Nilsson/O'Marra return of Smyth) my approach would roll the dice a little bit if my medical staff don't provide me with any additional clarity, and if Hemsky's agent is warm to an extension.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: With Hemsky's injury, is he uninsurable like Matt Lombardi was or does that apply only to head injuries.
ReplyDeleteIt would be good to know because that could eliminate half his suitors (which would probably be the case anyways).
Smyth-Horcoff-Hemsky were the #1 line of a Stanley Cup contending team in 2006. As 2nd line I sure like our top 6. Sign the man if the price is reasonable but we really cant overpay on dollars or more importantly term.
I think 20 million over 4 years is fair given his injury history. But he'd get more on the open market.
I think it's important that he's given a decent option for next year at the least, you aren't getting much back regardless, And... there's a few younger guys who will watch how he's treated and take their lessons re Oiler mgmt accordingly. That doesn't mean you ignore the business side of things, but you handle him a bit differently than, say Smytty got handled. We'll need to be going to the well of good faith trying to get the kids to invest their futures here with this club, it might be wise to make a decent example of that.
ReplyDeleteI think he's already been sold on the rebuild. He should sign for a discount. I think Smyth will as well.
ReplyDeleteOilers have enough veterans to teach the young kids if need be.
ReplyDeleteI think they should shop Hemsky to see what is available to them. Edm would be in a good position in regard to negotiations. Hemsky would be good to trade if the return is right and if not Hemsky would be a good signing for Edm.
So what would you want for Hemsky in a trade to me a 1st round pick in the 2102 draft would have to be in the mix.
I wouldn't be happy if he signed at 5 million. That is elite money, he hasn't made that grade at least yet.
ReplyDeleteThey were hard on Gagner and Cogliano. Hall, RNH and Eberle aren't going to like seeing a guy they carry (because they actually play) making that much more than them.
To me his home town discount means no higher than he makes now, preferrably less guaranteed and more incentive if it's possible.
A lot of people keep talking about what Hemsky would fetch on the trade market.
ReplyDeleteSeems to me that he and Penner were being shopped last year at the deadline and the consensus was that Oilers management thought more highly of him than other GM's.
I could be wrong on that.
Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't get you a first rounder for 2012. Or maybe he could bring you the d-man that we need.
But his trade value is not going to be as high simply for the reason that other GM's will have the same question us armchair GM's have - how healthy can he be.
Given that, I still go back to you try and sign him on a value deal. When he's healthy, the 83-10-94 line creates lot's of issues for your opponents. And if 89-20-91 can begin to find some chemistry, you might really have something good, which makes 23 expendable.
Hate to trade 23, but with Harski and some of the others coming soon, their's not enough room in the inn.
This is like saying I have an apple and something else, you have to choose between them. Do you want the apple or not?
ReplyDeleteWe need the following information.
1. For how much and for how long?
2. What is the inside info on his shoulders?
3. What is out there in the trade market?
ReplyDelete45 games a year at 5-5.5 million ... BRILLIANT!
A point a game player when he's healthy at 5-5.5 million? Good value. And given that, prior to the last two seasons, the guy played 70+ games in 3 of 4 seasons since the lockout and 64 in the fourth, I'd be comfortable betting on him returning to that level of reliability.
The guy is a damn good player. Any intelligent team keeps those, while being mindful of risks. In this case, those risks should be acceptable, given the track record of performance prior to the last two years.
With Smyth, it's probably not wise to sign him to a long term contract in the offseason, but re-signing him would be a no-brainer. Just keep it to 1-2 year deals.
ReplyDeleteAs for Hemsky, I'd have no problem getting him in on a 4-5 year contract at $5M or so. He's definitely worth the money, and replacing him isn't going to be easy (if not impossible). Trading him at the deadline for a late 1st and letting him walk in July are equally uninspiring options.
Sometimes lost in all the Lowe bashing is the great contract (value for the Oilers) that Hemsky signed last time around. Hemsky may feel he is owed something on this one.
ReplyDeleteI'm having a little trouble with this concept. Oilers offered Ales long-term security, he took it, and he's been getting paid over $4 MM a year despite being unable to deliver for one-to-four months of each season of it. Yet somehow he is owed something?
He is owed fairness, I will agree. But to be fair in the here and now, Ales was unable to deliver much of the value in that value contract. Maybe not his fault but it's not the Oilers' fault either. Unless you choose to take sides in the conditioning/rehab of the player or the admittedly dubious history of the team w.r.t. injured players.
As for the idea of having to trade him at the deadline if he won't re-up, that's a little outdated in the cap era. If Oilers are in the hunt they would have a reason to keep him that is similar to why other playoff-contending teams might trade for him; namely, what he can do for you between the deadline and the end of the season. If at the end of it he walks, well, there's new cap space to sign another good player.
Oilers kept Luke Richardson in 1997 and Curtis Joseph in 1998 with the certain knowledge that both would walk that summer. If they had traded either, they likely would have missed the playoffs or certainly lost in the first round each year. Those were tough decisions, but the right ones at the time, for competitive reasons. And that was before clearing cap space was even on the radar.
Smyth has to go on year-to-year contracts because he is past 35, and multiyear deals 35+ contracts are just far to risky to a team.
ReplyDeleteIf year-to-year is good enough for Nick Lidstrom, it should be good enough for Smyth.
Is Shanny taking Sutton to a Broadway show before they make the announcement on his suspension..?
ReplyDeleteMy patience with Hemsky ran out after his last shoulder surgery.I would see what a Hemsky/Peckham package could get you right now.If there is nobody out there willing to make a deal then I would offer him a 1 year deal.
Moving him at the deadline-assuming he is still in one piece-isn't that appealling...I would either move him now or lock him up for 1 more year.
ReplyDeleteSo you offer him a 1 year deal for $5.5-6 million, and defer the long term decision till next year.
I like this idea (except 5-5.5)
Jari Kurri played his whole career on 1 year contracts. (different times, but point stands)
Allows team to see if Hemsky's shoulders are truly fixed. Allows Hemsky to increase his market worth if he is healthy.
Hemsky put up excellent numbers in the games he played last year, and looked really, really good in the 2 he played this year.
He says his labrum is healed and feels good for the first time in years. The reason he was out this season was shoulder related, but more due to other muscle atrophy from the healing process and not being game ready.
If he's fixed he's a top 20 player (maybe even top 10 based on being 3rd in 5v5/60 scoring last year )in the NHL.
You don't trade players like that, but the health is a gamble so look at it for a year.
Unless he'll sign long term for the $4.0 mark, then you just have to do it.
Also,
When he comes back you don't put him with 94 and 10.
That line has been successful doing what they are doing.
You need to take the pressure and 1st D pairs away from 4-93-14.
You run 91-89-83 together.
If 4-93-14 are seeing 1st pair D, then this line will tear up the opposition.
If the opposing coach runs 1st pair against 83 then the kids run wild.
Not having Hemsky with 10-94 doing the heavy lifting is absolutely crucial to getting the kids softer ice on the road.
Run 57-20-37 as your 4th line that you don't have to worry about.
Renney's been running those 3 together at the end of games anyhow.
if at least 16 of those 55 games a year are in the playoffs, i'm happy.
ReplyDeleteat some point, though it may not be this year, people need to stop thinking in term of what the team can do to desperately scratch their way to the playoffs.
in pittsburgh, the penguins are paying crosby a cool 8 million and may only get 60 regular season games out of the guy, and that's a great deal so long as they are able to keep succeeding in the regular season without him.
ales hemsky is no sidney crosby, but no one is going to be paying him 8 million dollars either.
i'd like to see a 2 year contract at 4.5 to 5.0 million. this'll take him off the payroll if necessary before RNH gets his big 3rd birthday present, and will make him very tradable in advance of that if he does perform.
currently his hit is 4 million and we can find the rest by not resigning Hordichuck or something.
if you can get something good for him in return, you do that but trading him for the sake of trading him seems silly to me.
Also,
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like the Oilers have pegged Hemksy's return to Nov 8th in Montreal.
As it happens a company I buy a pile of wood from is flying me out to Montreal to tour a new facility and they also grabbed some tickets to the Oilers game.
I'll have my Oilers jersey on somewhere in the lower bowl and will bring 83 some good luck.
/bragpost
Put me down for a one year extension. Let's see how many games he plays for the next 2 seasons.
ReplyDeleteI might even run this by the agent. I will overpay by 2 or 3 million for one year. Let's say 1 year @ 7 million. Then, if we decide to re-up you for a long term deal, we knock that 2 or 3 off to clear cap room when the kids are due for a raise. If not, keep the money. Probably not CBA approved, but something to think about.
Use a two-step approach to get around the salary cap. Sign Hemsky to a two-year deal for significantly more money than you would deliver on a multi-year deal (to compensate his hometown discount on his current contract)--obviously Hemsky's agent would have to be involved with such discussions and good-faith planning. Such an approach may be appropriate for three reasons: 1) sweeten the pot for a front-loaded multi-year deal with Hemsky at the end of the two year deal 2)enable the kids to develop, as individual players and as a line, for another two years with softer minutes 3) demonstrate to all the players that the franchise rewards loyalty...eventually. Same could be said about Smyth's new contract--keep it to two years. Probably less of a contractual term on any renewal contract afterwards due to Smyth's age.
ReplyDeleteWG - I presume you deal in hardwoods? Do you sell to the public?
ReplyDeleteI'm having a little trouble with this concept. Oilers offered Ales long-term security, he took it, and he's been getting paid over $4 MM a year despite being unable to deliver for one-to-four months of each season of it. Yet somehow he is owed something?
ReplyDeleteMore to the point
The Cap was $39mm when Hemsky signed that contract.
That translates to a $6.78mm contract today.
Also, if you lok at hemsky's actual salary on this contract, its risen steadily throughout, this seasn its $5mm.
Damn, hit post by accident
ReplyDeletelook
Hemsky
season
A good discussion so far, but I think a few of these posts are focusing a bit too much on signing Hemsky in a vacuum. There are a number of considerations, including the already-mentioned future salaries of our star kids. A few thoughts on this:
ReplyDelete-Performance bonuses for Hemsky may help Katz sleep better at night knowing his money isn't being wasted, but it doesn't matter where the salary cap is concerned - the full potential of the contract will count. Given the Oilers' relatively good financials, the issue is cap management and not actual salary.
-We need more time to evaluate Hemsky's injury status (yeah, I know I sound like Tambellini). As Woodguy alluded to, Hemsky hasn't been injured again this year - it's more accurate to say that he hasn't fully recovered. As such, I think we'll need to wait to January to get a better idea of where his health is currently at.
-In my mind, Hemsky is NOT the Oilers' #1 priority for resigning. In fact, he's probably #3. Assuming the performance of our players generally holds up, here's my suggestion come January:
1) Negotiate an extension with Smyth - either 2 or 3 years with a cap hit no greater than $4M. I'd see if he's willing to take the security of $10M over 3 years. He wants to be here, so that's quite possible.
2) Assuming his play holds up, get Potter signed to a 3-4 year deal. Given that he's come out of nowhere, you might be able to get another reasonable deal here. His point totals at that point may dictate the asking price.
3) Deal with Hemsky come early February. If he's been healthy, see if he'll take the hometown discount over 2-3 years. If not, the 1 year Godot contract might work. Failing that, keep him or deal him based on playoff hopes.
Given their contributions to this team, Smyth and Potter are the more important UFAs at this point.
The 1 year signing sounds like a nice idea, but why would Hemsky agree to that? Hemsky knows his injury history better than anybody and he'll want some security.
ReplyDeleteIn reference to Simon's first post, When has Hemsky ever been a PPG player? The only year he achieved this status was 90-10 when he played 22 games.
ReplyDeleteFrom the small sample we have seen we dont' need him anymore..get what you can for him and free up the space in future years to resign the youngs
I'm sure Hemsky knows that Gaborik only played 17 games in his UFA year and still got a full-value long-term deal from the Rangers.
ReplyDeleteHe's also aware that NHL GMs throw big money around on crazy signings every Canada Day.
I don't think the Oilers have any particular leverage with him in this negotiation, and the only way we'll get a value deal is if he really, really wants to be here.
If he isn't committed, we'll probably have to pay top dollar to keep him.
Since I think that would be a big mistake, here's hoping he's really committed to being here.
Since I think that would be a big mistake, here's hoping he's really committed to being here.
ReplyDeleteIf he is committed to being here, then trade him at the deadline. Come July 1 he can always come back.
Bookie,
ReplyDeleteNope. I'm wholesale only.
Also,
Saying that team doesn't need Hemsky os ridiculous.
You find and keep good players.
Hemsky is a good player.
You keep him.
Never under estimate inertia. On the whole people would rather not change or move.
Add to that Hemsky stating publically he's excited to play here and it can get done.
I wouldn't put him on the shutdown line though. Wastes his talent there.
Where there's no smoke, there's no fire - if Hemsky was in the long term (or medium term) plans, we'd have heard that the two sides were talking.
ReplyDeleteThink about it. If the Oilers wanted to resign him, they're never going to get him signed to a cheaper contract than now when he's hurt. And from Hemsky's point of view, why wouldn't he take a little less from a team that's still willing to guarantee him a paycheck despite his injury problems?
If he can actually come back and play, his price tag is only going higher. The higher his price tag, the less his value to the Oilers, who need to think about all the raises they're handing out in 2 to 3 years. Not to mention that if he can put a couple months of healthy hockey together, his value on the trade market is going to go up.
The simple fact that he hasn't re-signed yet means he's gone by the deadline. Book it.
It's a shame too. I think that if you had him on a line with Gagner and Omark, you'd have a helluva one-two punch with the kid line, and I'd put MPS with Horcov and Smyth, as he's looking more and more like he's going to be a shutdown winger anyway.
4-93-14
94-10-91
23-89-83
55-57-28 or 37
A third line of Omark-Gagner-Hemsky would be filthy!
I'm down with a one year deal - it works for both Hemsky and the Oilers. The Oilers need to see if this guy is capable of being healthy - and if he is - they will have two nice options next year. Either sign him long term or trade him at max value. Right now his trade value is crushed by injury concerns. Hemsky also needs to prove he is capable of being healthy to get a contract from the Oilers or anyone else - he's in a weak bargaining position now as well. Lastly - a one year deal also recognizes that we will need cap space in the summer of 2013 for Hall, Eberle and MPS.
ReplyDeleteSo let's see what the guy can do when he gets back and then work out a one year deal - it works for both the Oilers and Hemsky.
He may not be worth as much as Penner, this years draft 2012 has been advertised as the best draft for d-men ever.
ReplyDeleteAccording to TSN, Sutton has been suspended for 5 games. The game on Sunday counts to that so he'll miss the next 4 as well.
ReplyDeleteI'm not seeing this on here, but Sutton gets 5 games, per Mackenzie.
ReplyDeleteimpark - only thing hated more than Toronto in Calgary.
Sutton's reaction
ReplyDeleteApparently he's no expert either.
ReplyDeleteHemsky or Paajarvi on the Horcoff line - Race Horses pulling a plow.
ReplyDeleteLet them skate free. Add Gagner and see if he finally is fish or fowl.
Bar Q, that's comedy gold.
ReplyDeleteI've been enjoying the debate so far. I like Hemsky as much as anyone on here and if V.0385 re-signs him, I won't be complaining. But if it was up to me, I couldn't justify commiting a large slice of my available salary cap to #83. He's a fantastic player, able to play tough minutes and bring people out of their seats but he seems fragile now and I'm not sure how much you could rely on him going forward.
ReplyDelete2003 - 59 GP
2004 - 71 GP
2006 - 81 GP
2007 - 64 GP
2008 - 74 GP
2009 - 72 GP
2010 - 22 GP
2011 - 47 GP
I don't like the way this is trending.
It would be worth watching to see how a 91-89-83 line would look and play. However, having Belanger playing with between Eager and Petrell may not be the best plan. Perhaps having Omark play with Belanger and Petrell would work better? Having 4 lines that can play in any situation would certainly make for some interesting game dynamics.
ReplyDeleteI really like what Lander has done, but we should send him down andmove gagner back to C. We need to know what he can do with solid winger. then you have him with the Swedes, or a swede with Hemsky, and run Omark with Belander and Petrell in the 4th line, and you can move Eager in for "tough lineup night". Ideally I would like to see this lineup
ReplyDeleteHAll-RNH-Eberle
Smyth-Horcoff-Hemsky
Petrell-Belanger-Jones
MPS-Gagner-Omark
2 tough minute lines, 2 scoring lines. Gagner gets 2 offensive players to play with, and they'll get gravy minutes. And you can start the belanger and Horc line anywhere on the ice and be confident that the puck should go the right direction.
I like DBO's lines best on paper. But the cynic in me says they won't work in real life and we'll wind up disappointed in Gagner and MPS again.
ReplyDeleteHAll-RNH-Eberle
ReplyDeleteSmyth-Horcoff-Hemsky
Petrell-Belanger-Jones
MPS-Gagner-Omark
I know its not a popular position around here but that is the softest lineup in the league. There is one guy there that can throw a decent hit (Petrell) and no one who can fight.
I don't mind it for 30-40 games (or maybe even into the offseason) but then they need to make some decisions on Hemmer, Omark, and Gagner. 1 or 2 of them need to be traded.
If they dumped Gagner they could go,
Kids
94-10-91 (MPS has the defensive chops)
23-20-83
with the fourth line a choice of Eager, Petrell, Lander, and Jones
I really want to sign the guy but it comes down to cost and the medical advice that the Oilers get from their doctors.
ReplyDeleteOn the one hand you have a guy that plays at a position where we are our weakest up front and that's RW. Plus, he's damn good and he's also young enough that he could produce lockstep with the three talented kids.
On the other hand just how bad are his shoulders and how much will be be looking for? What we need is for 83-94 to give us decent bargains in order to keep the core together; sorta like Kesler and Burrows did for the Dys.
BTW, I'm with Bruce in that I would hold on to him and let him play out the year instead of dealing him at the deadline; that is unless you're blown away by any offer.
Dennis - why not sign him for one year? It works for both the Oilers and the player who needs to prove he can stay healthy in order to get any kind of money on his next contract. Nobody is unloading the truck for this guy next summer under these conditions.
ReplyDeletePersonally I like Paajarvi with Nuge and Hall at least on away games but that creates a shambles of the lines lower down. Paajarvi would add size and defensive smarts to that line. I repeat, adding Hemsky or Paajarvi to Horcoff is a total waste.
ReplyDeleteFly free boys but before you do, let us add these two lead weights.
Hahahahahahaha. Sorry Lowtide. The team is winning and playing better then when Hemsky is on the the team. Why. Team Play and Hemsky isn't a team Player.
ReplyDeleteDon't Sign Him, Don't let Him walk away, Do like the good teams (Chicago, Philly, Boston) and trade him for draft picks they can develop over the next few years.
If you want to keep him where does he fit? Not with Hall, Ebs and RNH. He doesn't play defence so the hard minute line doesn't work, plus Jones has some chemistry there and it seems to be working. SO you want to put him on the 3rd line??? DO you really think that PRV and Belanger would click with him? Maybe but I doubt it.
Sorry Hemsky's time with the Oilers ran out last year. Time to say thank you and move on.
ANd just because I think ST traded the wrong guy last trade dead line...Home about Hemsky for Penner, A First, and one of their young prospects (Hickey).
Ah Penner...the gift that keeps giving...Plus Penner, Balanger and PRV would look good.
AO: I would do that for sure but I can't see why 83 would. Last time we saw that happen with really good players was Hossa with the Wings and Vokun with wsh and those were situations where a guy thought he had a great chance for the cup and a guy was older and didn't get the offers he originally imagined.
ReplyDeleteI don't see 83 fitting either of that criterion.
Dennis - I don' t mean taking a pay cut - I mean resigning him for 1 year at say $5 million. If he is healthy then we get him until the 2013 trade deadline and his value will be much higher than now. No way the guy stays any longer since we have to sign the kids that summer.
ReplyDeleteI can't see Hemsky signing a contract with the oilers that is
ReplyDeletea) less than $5 million
b) one year in length
I think either condition is no-starter for Hemsky.
Is he damaged goods? yes. When playing, is he a dynamite player, close to ppg player? yes.
can the oilers afford to lose him?
I don't think so. Omark is simply not a replacement for Hemsky. I would rather sign Hemsky for 3 years at $5 million and take the health risk. I'm 100% convinced that he could get a better deal as a UFA than that.
As much as I love Hemsky, and living in Vancouver, I have had the opportunity to meet him a couple times, I would say his time in Edmonton is up. He needs a fresh start and the Oilers are not where I believe he wants to be. I had the chance to talk briefly to Pat Quinn and I asked him about Hemsky, he told me that this guy has all the talent in the world but lacks the heart and soul needed to be a super star especially in Edmonton. Quinn suggested that Hemsky "does just not want to be in Edmonton" and that the Oilers needs to get rid of him. I know Quinn might be a bite bitter for the way the Oilers cut him loose but maybe he has a point.
ReplyDeleteMLok - Hemsky is not getting $5 million a year for 3-5 years from anyone with his injury issues. What he gets is a cheap $2-3 million 1 year deal with an attractive locale with a promise for much more if he proves to be healthy. The Oilers can easily top that and he gets the chance to prove his health here. Of course he may just want out and doesn't care about the money - and in that case - just trade him this spring for whatever you get.
ReplyDeleteTo a long term deal, not a chance. You can't risk carrying deadweight contracts in a salary cap world, and if the injury trend continues, that's what he becomes.
ReplyDeleteI also beleive having top players in and out of the line up disrupts the chemistry of the top 6, so its about more than just money.
That said, if he would sign a 1 year deal, I would do that and give him the chance to prove he can stay healthy. He's earned that.
If he goes, a RW depth chart of Eberle, Gagner, Omark, Pitlick is pretty damn good.