- That was quick. L Omark, who has played one AHL game since Oilers sent him to OK City, has already said he may not be long for farm team.
- Omark told PuckLife Magazine that Oilers "have a lot of young guys and they believe in them more than me I think."
- Omark does have a clause in his contract that allows him to return to Europe is he is not playing in the NHL. It kicked in this ssn.
Does anyone really believe that is false? Anyone?
I believe he will ask for a trade first. Tambo might decide to be a dick, in that case he'l go to Sweden.
ReplyDeletenot saying this couldnt have been managed better but A: I believe in the other kids more than 23 as well and B: Im fine with Hartski being the next in line for the winger slot.
ReplyDeleteI'm stunned that a team that has gotten one goal out of its bottom six forwards so far has yet to find a place for Omark.
ReplyDeleteI swear, things aren't always what they appear to be, and Omark, despite all the hype surrounding the other kids, may end up being better than some of them.
Really disappointed they opted to pass judgment on a guy who had received five games in the NHL before they deemed him unworthy. After he already proved he could play the year prior!
It seemed pretty clear to me that Omark was sent to OKC with the knowledge that it was a conditioning stint awaiting a reasonably imminent trade of Omark or Gagner, or another forward on the roster.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise Omark would
1) have NOT been sent to OKC, or
2) have been on his way to Sweden already.
If he walks, that's his over confidence and has nothing to do with Tambellini.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry, I realize everyone thinks this is a terrible idea, but the player who can't crack the lineup shouldn't get to dictate managerial decisions by pouting. It's like Renney said in Oil Change - people have to stop looking at the AHL demotion like such a bad thing.
The Oilers are on a 6 game winning streak and at the top of the Western Conference. They've played their best hockey since he's been sat. Looking at these two facts, I see no reason why they need to make a spot for him. However, he can actually PLAY in the AHL. If he doesn't like that, fine. A bit player (which IS what he is at 25 years old and deemed unable to crack the list of 12 forwards) should not determine the teams course of action.
I don't get why everyone is up in arms about offending the guy. We are winning, he is playing to hopefully improve his game and come back. Both sides gain in this set up.
As for the people who were saying he should come in for Eager, Petrell, or Gagner because they aren't producing enough offense - they were responsible for the 2nd and 3rd goals last night, so I don't buy that either.
Omark isn't pouting, he's using his negotiated right to go back to Sweden and resume his career there. I expect the Oil would let go his rights over the summer and Omark would join another team in the fall.
ReplyDeleteAs for being demoted to the AHL, no biggie when you're 20 or 21. Omark is an older player, however.
Acumen: There's no flipping over demotion. There's flipping over being demoted over weaker players.
ReplyDeleteI think the Oilers probably gave Omark a rough estimate of the time it would take to get a trade done.
ReplyDeleteThe Oilers probably have say till Christmas.
No room on the top 6 on the team it would appear. What do you do with him? Ya think they would get a draft pick for him at least (assuming this story is accurate).
ReplyDeleteI watched Omark and the Oil Barons play (and win) against the Heat last night in Abbotsford, and Omark was solid all night and involved in the action whenever he was on the ice. On top of that, he made an incredible defensive play to stop a breakaway where he busted it top speed all the way back into the defensive zone and reached around to knock away the puck just before the shot - it was a great hustle and heart play. This coming in his first night back in the AHL when he could be sitting back feeling sorry for himself but clearly was doing nothing but help his team win.
ReplyDeleteI really hope the Oilers don't continue to undervalue this asset and at the very least (though I'd much prefer to see him playing in Edmonton) get something of value back in trade if we don't have a spot on the big team. On that topic though, I cannot understand how Omark can be valued below at least a couple of guys on the NHL roster right now. Hopefully, he's just down there short term to get some playing time in and get back to the show soon. The Oilers would be crazy to let him bolt to Europe and wait out his contract only to watch him on the highlight reels for another team when he comes back.
Paper Designer - I don't know -- I like Omark very much as a player, but I don't see at all how he fits without losing something on those other lines.
ReplyDeleteWhile we can't expect the team to keep winning by the magic of great save % and reducing shots and chances against -- it's a very good place to start. We all want them to have more offence if they need it -- they just haven't needed it yet. Will/can Linus play the system they want? That's probably the question.
- if he replaces Jones on the 1EVTOI line, does he have the defensive chops to help in the d-zone?
- if he replaces Eager on the 4line, can he be as effective without the more skilled linemates?
- if he replaces Petrell, does that change out the current PK configuration that is currently helping this team win?
- so that really leaves the slot that Gagner or Paajarvi is occupying.
- if Gagner is the player they believe in more, they should -- Sam has 4 years in the league with north of 40 pts.
- if Paajarvi is the player they believe in more, this is the one to question. Is Magnus currently a better player than Linus? Magnus is really just getting EV time and not playing special teams. The 2nd PP unit hasn't been very strong so far, maybe Linus could help there?
To my mind, that's the only slot that would work. That's the politics Linus needs to complain about. Is MPS waiver eligible?
If so Will you send MPS down through waivers in favour of Omark -- that is the question.
His buddy Johan Harju from Overtornea is back playing in Lulea (after last year with Tampa)....can see this story about Omark being true.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry, I realize everyone thinks this is a terrible idea, but the player who can't crack the lineup shouldn't get to dictate managerial decisions by pouting.
ReplyDeleteIs your definition of "a player who can't crack the lineup" more like "a player who, rightly or wrongly, the coach does not dress", or "a player that doesn't deserve to be dressed"? Because denotatively, it looks like you're using the first, but connotatively it looks more like the second.
Or, perhaps more likely, are you just rejecting any distinction between the two?
Omark "talking" actually helps the process along, because teams that need him this year have to make a trade before he bolts.
ReplyDeleteAs soon as he plays a game in Europe, I believe he would have to clear waivers to come back this year.
So sending Omark down was the start of the endgame, probably for him as an Oiler, but the trade offers for Gagner might be better. i.e. It also helps boost the trade offers for Gagner, because if Omark is traded or bolts, Gagner is likely definitively off the market.
Sorry, pouting is admittedly too strong a word but when I read, "[they] have a lot of young guys and they believe in them more than me I think," then I read it as someone who's jilted about this treatment when he shouldn't be. He was outplayed by those young players -- you could make the argument for Paajarvi playing worse, but I've liked his play (moreso) so far despite a lack of results.
ReplyDeleteI like Omark a lot. I don't think he has character issues like some do. I think his bravado is a good thing, and we can use that swagger in the organization. But he shouldn't think he is ABOVE the organization. If he flies, he tells me that that is exactly what he thinks.
There are players he is superior to in some aspects still on the roster. However, he is in a position where he needs to play, unlike someone like Hordichuk who has a certain role and can sit in the pressbox, and he is a player whose skillset doesn't match the role of other players he would replace according to the coach. I'd sit Eager, sure, but Renney's got this team rolling (6 straight wins! I will keep repeating that!). Also, we can send him down without needing to worry about waivers.
(@Steve Smith, I do mean the second option - Renney does not want to dress him, but Renney has this team winning. I see no reason why he should make a spot in the lineup for him when he does not need to. I don't think it is for any perceived lack of skill, that's why it is best that he PLAY.)
To me, the fact that this is an issue (IF it is, I figure the organization probably talked it over with him before proceeding) is a matter of pride. He can 'be an Oiler' in a pressbox or 'be a Baron' on the ice. In one situation he's playing hockey. In the other, he is not.
I don't really care how old he is. Players like Potter and Pisani have put in their time in the past for us. Bigger name players like Alfredssson and Satan were older (24 years old) before they played regularly. Even St. Louis was 25 before he got a full time slot and that was as a grinder on the Flames 4th line.
If he wants to play in the NHL, then let him prove he's good enough to crack what is currently one of its best teams.
All that said, he's a competitive bugger, I don't think he will duck out.
I don't want to sound like I'm coming down on him though, just the complaints about all of this. I love Omark, and I want him to carve a spot in our roster and not look back.
I expect the Oil would let go his rights over the summer and Omark would join another team in the fall.
ReplyDeleteI'm confused, LT. Why would they do that? If a team wants Omark, why not demand something, at least a crappy pick of some sort. I mean, some team in our division might sign him to play against us.
If the reason is compassion only, I don't see this management team as nice in that way.
Darn it!
ReplyDelete@Steve Smith, I meant the first option in my explanation there - "a player who, rightly or wrongly, the coach does not dress"
@Steve Smith, I do mean the second option - Renney does not want to dress him, but Renney has this team winning. I see no reason why he should make a spot in the lineup for him when he does not need to
ReplyDeleteAs was pointed out in a previous thread by Bookie, Ales Hemsky will be pleased to hear that.
Come on man, do I need to explain why that argument is flawed?
ReplyDeleteAles Hemsky has 396 points in 492 games and was the best forward on a team that made it to the Stanley Cup finals. Linus Omark has 27 points in 51 games, most of which were picked up in a stretch where he was loading up on PP minutes for a team that staggered into last place. There are precedents.
The point is that a winning streak is a stupid reason to play a less useful player over a more useful one. Obviously, the offence is worse if it's Hemsky being sat instead of Omark, but the principle is equally applicable.
ReplyDeletekris: Once Omark goes to the SEL, he's not coming back to the Oilers. So, they can hold onto him by keeping him on the 50 man list forever but it doesn't benefit them to do it.
ReplyDeleteHe's a lost cause for them, a distant bell. The assumption would be that another NHL team might invite him to training camp on a tryout, or sign him to a Petrell style deal.
Like Dan Cleary with Detroit. Oilers are extremely unlikely to get value for him if they don't bring him back up this season.
jmo.
Alright, well I guess I disagree with you Mr. Smith.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Omark has shown enough to put himself in the lineup. He didn't do much to help the system Renney has in place while he played, he didn't generate offense, AND the 4th line has been wonderful for us. Again, I'll point out that in the Kings game we had 2 goals generated from the 2 players most likely to sit for Omark: Gagner's wide drive around the net to set up Potter in front, and Eager's bulling his way through the defense to set up Petrell.
Disturbing something that's working fine is NOT equally applicable between 2 players when they are the best forward on the team since Doug Weight left, and an interesting prospect who has some unique offensive dimensions.
Look at Oleg Petrov, a similarly talented bullish and unique undersized offensive player. He put up 27 points in 55 games in his 24 year old year for the 93-94 Habs, a very talented team that went 12 games over 500. In the following 2 seasons he split his time between the show and the AHL. They were a quality team and didn't NEED his particular skillset in the lineup. They fltered a bit in the lockout season but were still 13 games over 500 in 96.
Omark isn't owed anything by Renney. The team is playing fine without him. His showing last year was nice, but the top 6 doesn't have any VandeVeldes or Firouxs this time around. He needs to show where he fits. It is hard to do that in the press box.
I hope I'm not coming off as too snarky here, just want to get my point across.
ReplyDeleteI love the debate and respect both you and Lowetide. This is one of the very rare occasions where I disagree with both of you, so it's a little extra fun to jump in.
I gotta pull myself away from the computer for the night. I'll check in again when I can. :-)
if he replaces Jones on the 1EVTOI line, does he have the defensive chops to help in the d-zone?
ReplyDeleteOmark had a better shot differential and scoring chance differential than Jones last year, and it wasn't even close. I don't understand where this idea that Omark can't play defense comes from. It's certainly not supported by any evidence.
if he replaces Eager on the 4line, can he be as effective without the more skilled linemates?
He ranked 13/13 among forwards for Qualteam last year and still scored 0.53 PPG, and 1.78/60 at 5v5 so...
They've played their best hockey since he's been sat. Looking at these two facts, I see no reason why they need to make a spot for him.
They've also played their "best hockey" since Hemsky's been out, so fuck that guy too. Let's keep playing Ben Eager 5 minutes a night instead.
Two comments.
ReplyDeleteFirst, Omark's reaction here, supposing it is true, is pretty rational. He's only saying what many people here have observed for themselves. It doesn't appear that the Oilers believe in him as a player. Given the very short span of the career of a professional athlete it doesn't serve his interests to rot in the AHL for a team that is never going to give him a chance. It isn't possible to make the NHL from Oklahoma.
Second, it isn't true that there isn't a place for him on the Oilers. The Oilers could send Lander down and play Belanger between Petrell and Eager. In one fell swoop the Oilers would improve the offense out of the third line and the defense out of the fourth line while making the lineup more flexible in a way that is entirely consistent with what has made them successful this year.
Unrelated, but has anyone noticed if the Oilers are still using some semblance of the defamed diamond penalty kill formation?
ReplyDeleteAND the 4th line has been wonderful for us
ReplyDeleteYou mean the same 4th line that's been buried on the shot clock at evens?
Like Dan Cleary with Detroit. Oilers are extremely unlikely to get value for him if they don't bring him back up this season.
ReplyDeleteThis is the correct answer.
If they have decided he's not here long term, then bolster his value and do something with it.
Up until last night the 3rd and 4th lines hadn't contributed a goal, inserting Omark isn't going to shake the foundation.
If he's being petulant behind the scene, that's a different issue, but there is no evidence for that.
I think Darren nailed a few of the issues in his post as well.
NM,
- if he replaces Jones on the 1EVTOI line, does he have the defensive chops to help in the d-zone?
The fact that everyone, including me, rejoice at the fact that Jones isn't shitting the bed every night, then the answer is probably.
- if he replaces Eager on the 4line, can he be as effective without the more skilled linemates?
It really depends who his team mates are, but I think the answer is no unless you run 23-20-37, but even then he's probably more valuable as a trading chip. Also, many NHL coaches regularly employ an Eager type, so I'll appeal to authority and agree that at least one is needed in a line up at least some of the time.
- if he replaces Petrell, does that change out the current PK configuration that is currently helping this team win?
You don't take Petrell out for Omark (even though they are both RH) I think the choice is 28 and 37, and Finns win. Unfortunately for 23, 14 and 83 are ahead of him on the depth chart. I'd be happy with a RW depth chart of 83,14,23,37, and I think 56 needs to have NHL minutes next year, so something has to give.
- so that really leaves the slot that Gagner or Paajarvi is occupying.
- if Gagner is the player they believe in more, they should -- Sam has 4 years in the league with north of 40 pts.
There's a pile of smoke around a Gagner trade. The New York Post had the Devils as very interested.
- if Paajarvi is the player they believe in more, this is the one to question. Is Magnus currently a better player than Linus? Magnus is really just getting EV time and not playing special teams. The 2nd PP unit hasn't been very strong so far, maybe Linus could help there?
MPS has tools that any NHL team would drool over. Big, fast, defensively conscious. You don't give up on that. Not after one year and a toughish start in the 2nd year and 20 years old.
I still think he can be something really special. Bob Gainey with ridiculous speed and some hands (when they show up)?
They've also played their "best hockey" since Hemsky's been out, so fuck that guy too. Let's keep playing Ben Eager 5 minutes a night instead.
ReplyDeleteThis.
Eager had no pre-season because of the concussion. His minutes have been going up. He is NOT going to be a 5 minute player.
ReplyDeleteUnless the offer for Gagner is exceptional in the next month (a loser in the Turris sweepstakes might overbid), it seems clear Omark is going to be traded.
Omark is getting game ready and trade ready, depending on how things shake out.
The Oilers, not unlike many teams, have decided that their desired makeup will include certain role players - Eager, Jones, etc. Comparing those Oranges to Omark's a
ReplyDeleteApple isn't going to fly so we shouldn't bother.
Omark is a sublimely skilled talent who is sitting now, before Hemsky is back. I trust we can agree that 83 dresses ahead of 23, so what to do with him. Were this the Wings Omark would be in the AHL until he was unambiguously the number one or two option for his designated role in the top six. I think he could do something special for the Oil but we won't get the chance to see it. If the choice is trade or Sweden, then let's deal.
The question comes down to asset management.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't want a player, improve the boxcars and move him. Holding until without value is poor management. That goes for O'Marra and VV and anyone else they don't plan to use.
I see other teams trading minor leaguers, but not the Oil much. Always improve your position.
A team needs a few options on the farm at each position. The other spots should be for those coming in to the farm.
A team doesn't need to be 6-8 deep in a position because they all can't be used, and will devalue if they are good enough to consider in the first place.
If injuries are constantly that much of a problem requiring that much depth, perhaps there is a more significant issue.
Decide and move. Grow some couilles.
Who are the potential dance partners?
ReplyDeleteColumbus needs everything so Omark is a potential upgrade to their 2nd line. Not sure that they would put more than picks on the table but a 2nd could be in the Pitlick range this year. Would they offer d-prospect John Moore? Would we want him?
What would the package be to spring Blum out of Nashville or McBain out of Carolina?
I believe this is a case of the management team having to do their job. The Oilers are, don't say so far, a very different team this year. If Omark played for (add a team having troubles this year needing his skill set), he would be playing in the NHL. This is where Omark BELIEVES he should be and really wants to be.
ReplyDeleteTeam players are, in my opinion, very important.
What the management wants to hear:
'I'm excited that MY TEAM is doing great. I really wanna work at what coach tells me to work at and get on this team.'
What they're actually hearing:
Show Original Post
With the public knowledge that Omark has been sent to the minors and his suggestion he might leave the NHL, Tambellini has devalued another asset to near zero.
ReplyDeleteSee Souray, Sheldon, for reference.
//With the public knowledge that Omark has been sent to the minors and his suggestion he might leave the NHL, Tambellini has devalued another asset to near zero.//
ReplyDeleteNope. It has increased his trade value. A team with a need can't get a player back out of Europe this year. They would have to clear waivers.
Unless a team can see Omark playing, and that he is in game shape, ready to help them immediately, they are going to offer less.
So sending Omark to the minors, knowing that he has the right to bolt, increases his trade value, over sitting in the press box.
I can't say what he should do but I can tell you what I'd do. I'd take a look around me and see that 6 guys from the opening night roster won't play tomorrow night and two more have been dropped/benched and since regained (Peckham, Petry) their spot. A demotion to first line duty in OKC is nothing. He plays his cards right he'll be back in a week. If he doubts that, take a look back to last year. This only becomes an issue if he makes it an issue, which it seems he is willing to do.
ReplyDeleteThe thing that increases Omark's trade value after playing regularly in the NHL last year is points.
ReplyDeleteThey haven't put him in the place to get those much lately.
Time for balls - pump and dump. And Omark wouldn't be my first choice.
The Oilers have a winning streak - I am not certain that the third and fourth line have a winning streak. Tinkering with lines should't affect the magic too greatly. Did Gags play all six games? What about Tuebert?
ReplyDelete@ godot
ReplyDeleteGood grief.
Tambellini has a problem on his hands.
He has a player that could bolt at the earliest opportunity.
Omark has bascially made a trade demand.
Just like Turris in Phoenix.
Any smart GM can parlay that into a steal.
If Tambellini is stubborn and won't deal him for pennies on the dollar, Omark bolts and the Oilers get zippo.
You don't think other GM's can't figure that out?
On a different tact, what to do with young Sam Gagner. He really doesn't seem to have the acceleration to play wing at this level. He's one of those guys that produces NHL speed if he can always be in motion but the stop/start nature of the wing doesn't suit him.
ReplyDeleteOn the flip side, his faceoff skills may have cost him his center spot on a team who already has to protect 93 from any important faceoffs. Sam seems to be stuck at 3RW or maybe 4C but if that line continues to get a little and leave nothing I don't see any changes coming. Christ, if he could win a draw you'd slide Belanger down quite easily because the 3rd line is a fucking disaster and then try 91-89-23 and 37-20-55/57. But seriously, this option is off the table because belnager's faceoffs are so much better than 89's.
I really like WG's slotting of 83 because he's actually considering the role these lines are being asked to play. People looking for 23 or 89 to replace Jones aren't getting the point of what Renney is trying to do. If 26 gets pulled it'll be for 83 or 37 and only after a few bad games at home. The trouble spots are still the 3rd and 4th lines. I'd move 91 down to the 4th as a puck mover (his role on line 3 now) so...
89/23-20-83
37/55-57/89-91
Which would be poor asset management.
ReplyDeleteThe Oilers, not unlike many teams, have decided that their desired makeup will include certain role players - Eager, Jones, etc. Comparing those Oranges to Omark's a
ReplyDeleteApple isn't going to fly so we shouldn't bother.
I disagree that Jones and Omark are apples and oranges. I agree that Eager and Omark are.
The success of the 94-10-28 is that they are holding opponent first lines in check (with significant help from 5-77)
Why have they been successful? Besides 10 winning a lot of face offs and being an excellent 2 way center, 94 has added the dimension of deep offensive puck possession.
This line chips it in and holds it deep very well and keeps the opposing 1st line in their D-zone, which is the best way to keep them from scoring.
What is 28 doing to help? He's forechecking very well and has stopped being a basket case in his own zone, making smart short passes to get the puck out and maintain possession.
What Jones is doing to help that line is not mutually exclusive from what Omark does.
In fact, it plays directly into his best abilities. Passing and retaining offensive zone puck possession.
Yes Jones is doing ok to well with 94 and 10, but that doesn't mean a better hockey player would do even better there.
Jones isn't particularly tough to play against, he isn't an agitator, he's good on the PK, but not moreso than others on the roster.
Its wrong to think that Jones is uniquely suited to play RW with 94 and 10.
He's suited for it, and doing good, but there are other players on the Oilers roster who are better hockey players and you would expect them to do just as well, if not better.
@ DSF
ReplyDeleteNo offense to you FastOil...you're just the lucky thousandth customer who used the term. Here's your prize! Please ban the term Pump and Dump. This doesn't exist. It didn't exist with Brule. It didn't exist with Cogliano. It's not going to exist with Omark. What kind of fucking coach is going to replace Eberle on line 1 with Omark for the express purpose of improving the draft pick we get from a 3rd to a 2nd. Why does the coach give a shit?
ReplyDeleteDo players take advantage of injury and opportunity and parlay that into better deals or maybe get traded for more than they are worth? Sure. But to call it a some sort of GM master strategy is bat-shit crazy.
We will see what ST is made of this year. Sitting on hands is not going to fly for more any long.
ReplyDeleteI still don't know why they haven't shared the at-bats among the guys outside the regulars. Ben Eager, Linus Omark, Lennart Petrell, hell Paajarvi could sit in some kind of a rotation.
ReplyDeleteAnd I know Petrell can PK but you can afford to miss him one night a week. What usually happens is a team gets blown out in the course of a two week period and that allows an Omark to draw back in.
Didn't happen.
"Steve Smith" said...
ReplyDeleteIs your definition of "a player who can't crack the lineup" more like "a player who, rightly or wrongly, the coach does not dress", or "a player that doesn't deserve to be dressed"? Because denotatively, it looks like you're using the first, but connotatively it looks more like the second.
Or, perhaps more likely, are you just rejecting any distinction between the two?
Yeah, because the choice of the word "deserve" beholds no connotation. Goodness gracious.
So, they can hold onto him by keeping him on the 50 man list forever but it doesn't benefit them to do it.
ReplyDeleteFair enough LT. But it could benefit them, though, no? If Omark goes to the KHL and leads the league by 15 goals or something crazy, someone will offer a pick.
I was under the impression teams didn't just give up on Euro's for nothing even if they reurned to Europe. Wasn't that the case with Hejda: we paid a 7th to Buffalo for his rights. Buffalo didn't just let us sign him. I mean, a 7th isn't much, but it's something.
IMO, the Oiler would ask for something for his rights.
Mikhnov did just that, and as far as I know no one offered the Oilers one damn thing.
ReplyDeleteOn the flip side, his faceoff skills may have cost him his center spot on a team who already has to protect 93 from any important faceoffs.
ReplyDeleteKT,
I agree with you on many topics, but I'm not sure on this one.
Gagner was 43.8% on FO last year.
Lander is 38.3% this year.
If you move 89 to C with 91 and 83 and move 20 down to C between 55/47 and 37 you actually the faceoff ability of the Oilers line up, not decrease.
It gives you two "soft minute" lines, but both lines aren't butter soft and 57-20=37 is a pretty damn good defensive 4th line.
Renney has already consolidated his bottom two lines into 57-20-37 in late one goal games already, he obviously trusts them.
Image two good scoring lines and two good defensive lines and the coach trusts the 4th line enough to have them out late in one goal games?
Sounds like a winner.
Omark doesn't fit the roster makeup. There's no argument. He's a top 6 winger and is about 9th on the depth chart. Jones is the ONLY guy you could make an argument for replacement based on his PAST numbers(not this year). I'd rather have Hartikainen over both of them
ReplyDeleteTake the "rumored" 3rd rounder and be done with it. He's accomplished very little on a team that was in last place. Is it worth even arguing over??
The past has been littered with little dudes that can tear up the AHL (Jason Krog, Darren Haydar, Brett Sterling) but can't get a foothold in the NHL. It's pretty simple: Teams want size. Life's not fair Linus. You'll have to EARN your way.
For the record: Most teams 4th lines are on the wrong side of the shot chart. It's a dumb argument
WG...
ReplyDeleteRe: your post about Omark and Jones
For whatever reason, Renney feels differently. Why?
Yeah, that makes sense. I've got no problem slotting Gagner in at 4C over Lander (as I mention in my post). I'm just not sure there's a realistic chance that Belanger gets dropped down to 4C. He's solidly in the top six for TOI? But I guess with his PK minutes and now 2nd PP minutes he could still have his role.
ReplyDeleteI started my lineup with these as the unmovables:
4-93-14
94-10-26
xx-20-83
xx-xx-xx
But you're suggesting this:
4-93-14
94-10-26
xx-89-83
xx-20-xx
I could live with that.
I would gather ST is not standing for any kind attitude that is not 100% positive when it comes to his team.
ReplyDeleteEven if it means getting nothing.
I wonder if #23 has a negative attitude and was sent away knowingly.
He's a top 6 winger...
ReplyDeleteWhat does that mean?
WG...
ReplyDeleteRe: your post about Omark and Jones
For whatever reason, Renney feels differently. Why?
Not sure, next time I see him, I'll ask.
To guess, I'm not sure he even does think differently.
They're riding a 6 game win streak and a very hot start. Not many coaches screw with the lineup after a pile of wins.
I honestly think 23 was sent down to get his game legs, and that's about it.
The bogey is if he has a shitty attitude, but I have no idea about that.
Mr. Smith
ReplyDeleteIm sure you know traditionally two the top two lines are the "offensive" lines on a hockey team. Line 3 is a "checking" line. Line 4 "energy"
There are exceptions of course. Omark's not a "checking" line guy and not really an "Energy" player. THe offensive winger slots are already filled. He's redundant.
You ol' ballbuster
Omark doesn't fit the roster makeup. There's no argument. He's a top 6 winger and is about 9th on the depth chart.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand the need to pigeon hole players into top 6, bottom 6.
The 4 teams that made the conference finals last year had more than 6 good forwards on their rosters.
Even players playing the 3rd most minutes at EV contributed. Unreal, I know.
Here's the players the Oilers have played on the line with the 3rd most minutes as a forward group and their average 5v5 TOI/60
Omark 11.77
Belanger 11.67
Gagner 11.16
MPS 11.16
Which of those players "aren't top 6 players" and should be shipped out?
Slot in 83 and add in 2+ minutes for him on the PP and that's a nice way to ease him back into the lineup.
Too many good hockey players is not a problem, its an opportunity to be better than most.
Im sure you know traditionally two the top two lines are the "offensive" lines on a hockey team. Line 3 is a "checking" line. Line 4 "energy"
ReplyDeleteSure I do. And traditionally, your aunt had testicles.
You ol' propogator of argumentum ad antiquitatem, you.
Im sure you know traditionally two the top two lines are the "offensive" lines on a hockey team. Line 3 is a "checking" line. Line 4 "energy"
ReplyDeleteI've been an NHL fan for over 30 years and the "energy line" is a euphemism for "good skaters who are bad at hockey"
Its also a euphemism for "our GM didn't get us enough good hockey players"
Good teams don't have energy lines.
They have the odd "energy" player, but not energy lines.
Here are the regular season rosters for the 4 teams that made the conference finals last year:
There are some enegery players, but no "energy lines"
Tampa:
Martin St Louis
Steven Stamkos
Vincent Lecavalier
Simon Gagne
Ryan Malone
Dominic Moore
Nate Thompson
Adam Hall
Steve Downie
Teddy Purcell
Sean Bergenheim
Dana Tyrell
Boston:
David Krejci
Rich Peverley
Patrice Bergeron
Milan Lucic
Nathan Horton
Mark Recchi
Marc Savard
Chris Kelly
Michael Ryder
Brad Marchand
Gregory Campbell
Tyler Seguin
Daniel Paille
Sharks:
Patrick Marleau
Joe Thornton
Joe Pavelski
Dany Heatley
Ryane Clowe
Logan Couture
Devin Setoguchi
Kyle Wellwood
Torrey Mitchell
Benn Ferriero
Jamie McGinn
Ben Eager
Vancouver:
Ryan Kesler
Henrik Sedin
Daniel Sedin
Alexandre Burrows
Mikael Samuelsson
Chris Higgins
Manny Malhotra
Mason Raymond
Jannik Hansen
Raffi Torres
Jeff Tambellini
Maxim Lapierre
argumentum ad antiquitatem
ReplyDeleteOnly for some teams.
Show me the energy line from the Habs teams from the 70's who dominated.
Mostly just more good hockey players than other teams.
I think Omark is a guy who can help keep the puck miles from the Oilers net. He has the tools. No, putting him with Gagner and Paajarvi a year ago didn't work out but yes he can do some things that help you win.
ReplyDeleteMore things than a few current Oiler roster forwards.
Well, maybe I should have said Argumentum ad populum. I'm not a real doctor.
ReplyDeleteDSF wrote:
ReplyDelete//Tambellini has a problem on his hands.
He has a player that could bolt at the earliest opportunity.
Omark has bascially made a trade demand.//
Tambellini doesn't have a problem on his hands. Tambellini started the damn Omark trade clock himself, by sending him to the minors, so he clearly has started an endgame process of some sort. This is not a random decision. "The games afoot!"
A trade of a forward before Christmas is 99% certainty.
D-Day for Turris is December 1st. There are going to be teams who lose out on Turris. The Oilers have Gagner and Omark potentially on the market. Both have to be playing to be in the game on December 1. Gagner has to clear waivers to be demoted. Omark doesn't. So Gagner plays in the NHL. Omark in the minors. Omark wants to play in the NHL and not in Sweden, so he will go along with the game for awhile, till a short time after Dec 1, when the Turris thing shakes out....i.e. Christmas time. (European teams have a Christmas break, do they not. Omark would want to be back after Christmas.)
It could be Gagner, or it could be Omark. They are the likely candidates for a trade.
@ Acumen
ReplyDeleteI am one of the biggest supporters of Omark and his potential value to this team. But I have nothing more to add to your analysis of the situation. You are a 100% correct.
If Omark can't handle this situation, we do not need him on our team!
D-Day for Turris is December 1st.
ReplyDeleteThe Oilers have Gagner and Omark potentially on the market.
Maybe we should be putting these two thoughts together...
So back to the implied question, what does Omark fetch us? And from whom?
ReplyDeleteIf, as suggested, we link Omark (or Gagner) to the Turris "sweepstakes" then we are looking at Calgary, Ottawa or Toronto. I think we all agree that the Flames are not an option but would Burke go Franson for Omark? What would we get from Ottawa?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI have just assumed that teams have "energy players" and "gritty defencemen" because it's too hard to acquire and/or afford enough quality players to ice Bobby Ryan on your 4th line, or Ryan Suter on your 3rd pair, not because guys like Ben Eager and Theo Peckham are better options due to their style.
ReplyDeleteBut who knows how important the style concerns are to some teams, for all you hear about it in the media perhaps it is more important than I presume?
The 4th line scored last night but as JW pointed out elsewhere, time didn't look to be on it's side.
ReplyDeleteHow's 55's TOI looking compared to year's past on other clubs? I have a feeling that he's gonna have a bit of a hard time fitting in here.
I agree that they should have avoided the mess and subbed in guys every game. There was no need to send Omark down. If these are the end days for The Waffle King, they are unecessary.
ReplyDeleteI should also say that I think it'd be pretty silly for Omark to go back to Sweden if the NHL is really his goal.
ReplyDeleteI've said it before and I'll say it again - Linus Omark is a wizard and probably just too unique for the NHL, with its plodding and tedious systems and general lack of creativity. This is a league that scorned him for showing Martin St. Louis how to score a shootout goal. This is a league where the colour men aren't smart enough to pronounce his name, for Christ's sake.
ReplyDeleteI'm really enjoying the Oilers' success this season and the young guys and it's given me hope that we'll actually see hockey become an exciting and interesting sport again.
But seriously - the NHL game's been in the tank for at least a couple decades, run as it is by tired old men who still can't figure out that a punch to the temple is a head shot. So what do you expect? I'm betting Linus goes back to Sweden and has a great career, playing in an environment that places a higher premium on skill and ingenuity than gratuitous violence.
And those that say good riddance? Forgive them, they just don't know any better.
Hey if Linis wants more NHL ice then let him grow his hair and change his name to Ryan.
ReplyDeleteIMO Omark is a better player than Gagner is today and in 5 years he will be a better player than Gagner. I just don't see the upside in Sam Wise .Way to soft with the puck no shot holds the puck to long .Weak in the corners.A strong breeze knocks him over.All that except for holding the puck to long is not going to change.I see Omark as another Satan mistake.Time will tell.
ReplyDeleteWhat is Omark's value as a draft pick around the league? I can never peg these things, but I'm thinking maybe a 3rd rounder? There can't be a great wailing and gnashing of teeth over a risk of a loss of a 3rd rounder.
ReplyDeleteLT your overall point is very important, however: Tambellini's in the horse trading/wheeling dealing phase rather than the pick collection phase. As the roster fills with viable NHLers and prospects with long term possibility, they need to start making good bets and good trades.
Lets assume that the drafting team is as good as billed and the parent club is going in the direction of a largely more veteran roster. Then Omark is probably the tip of the iceberg. Agreed? How many decisions on young players of 4th-rounder+ value will need to be made in the next 3-4 years? Five? Maybe ten? A third rounder level of loss here and there is almost impossible to avoid and risk of loss should not be paralyzing in this phase.
In the present case, Omark is currently providing value the club as a backup and shakeup for when the big club falters, and putting pressure on the bottom end of the roster. I should hope to heck that Tambellini doesn't see the current squad as a lock to finish top 5 overall in the NHL. I should hope to heck that he wants enough NHL-ready talent to be able to shift out young players as they falter, or plug holes created by injury.
Regardless of whether Omark is the right person to demote currently, he's still serving the club a relevant current purpose and so the remaining management evaluation question is: is that role worth the risk of losing a 3rd round pick?
This is one of my boring posts where I argue my views. It was a lot more fun running my leaf blower under Hunter's magic carpet of impetuous optimism in the previous thread. I actually kind of enjoy the way Hunter buzzes the grumpy old men wringing their hands in worry with his Persian Landspeeder of maiden rescue. However, when he mentions the main prize 12 strokes off the tee box after a DFL twopeat, it's hard to resist agitating his magic carpet flight controls with the trusty Husqvi.
ReplyDeleteYou think other GM's can't figure that out?
You know what, DSF? The fact that every capable agent can infer market dynamics is the foundation of the market capitalism. The situation you describe occurs when there is only one GM interested in obtaining your asset. So your statement would be correct if you wrote "the other GM" and you had reason to know that 28 other GMs wouldn't touch Omark with a ten foot pole.
If you actually have a competitive market-- which the NHL is supposed to at least approximate (otherwise it wouldn't meet minimum requirements for the antitrust exemption extended to major professional sports leagues)--then the price of an asset is determined by what the asset delivers to the receiving party who wins the auction by valuing the asset higher than anyone else.
I concede there are ways to ruin an asset though mismanagement. Having a young guy sit in the PB and rot until his skills have atrophied and his confidence has evaporated and his window of development has elapsed would be the leading case.
If another GM plays horsetrader power games by offering you a tiny fraction of their willingness to pay (which smart market actors tend to smell) you tell them to go hump a log and take your loss; maybe the other guy returns to the table to move the game from lose-lose to win-win by making a more realistic post-bluff offer.
It's a perfectly rational market tactic to risk a public loss from time to time to remind the people you bargain with that you don't live in DSF world where your assets can be pried away for pennies on the dollar any time your back is up against the wall.
The only real downside to standing your ground and risking the outright loss is ignorant fan rage. The least rational things that GMs do is driven by minimizing ignorant fan rage (the least enjoyable part of the job), not by the shrewd tactics of their counterparts (which fan forums alternatively paint as morons / conniving geniuses).
The other side of this argument makes me shake my head the other direction, because it commits the opposite sin: over-reliance on commodity substitution. Now we've moved from DSF's view of rope burn illiquidity to frictionless human pulleys.
Every book I've read about teamwork says that when you get a group of people to buy into a program, and everyone is blocking shots and going the extra painful mile because the room believes in each other, you need to be extremely careful about substituting a more talented guy in place of a less talented guy. If you know for a fact that your result depends on chemistry not the least bit, then by all means, assign a numeric value to each resource, slot the numbers into a giant matrix, and solve for optimal widget combination.
I've heard a rumour that the human touch matters in the locker room.
(fetches lava lamp)
(blisses to the glow)
ReplyDeleteIf I'm the coach, every player on the up-slope has been given a precise role, and within that role, a skill deficit has been circled that demands improvement, in most cases to prepare the player to expand into larger roles as circumstances permit or require. With continuity (what the coach must promise to elicit maximum effort), first the player struggles with the skill demand, then the player experiences improvement and success, and then finally the skill becomes ingrained habit (see Gilbert, Tom). The transition from conscious effort to unconscious habit is usually a bumpy road with a few setbacks: the conscious and unconscious minds do a lousy torch pass. The coach facilitates this tricky stage by coming down on you like a ton of bricks to narrow the mental chasm. You'll thank him later.
There's a limit to the number of conscious skills a player can be tasked to work on without becoming so burdened that the instinctive foundation is crushed. I don't know the skill tree for hockey, but when I played squash, it was clearly useless to task a person to improve their swing if their footwork was messed up arriving at the ball. Even if you succeed in improving the swing before the footwork, when you get to the footwork, the swing will fall apart again and need to be relearned with the correct balance.
I think Renney is building in MPS a foundation of automatic defensive instincts upon which to base charging the paint. Many coaches used to say that Bobby Hull was invisible on the ice until the puck hit the twine.
Maybe MPS becomes the guy who lulls you to sleep with discipline and discretion, then pounces when you least expect it. We already have enough bulls driving the pace. Renney might be thrilled with MPS sitting on a warm goose egg if his consistency, discipline, and discretion are progressing as programmed. I saw the clip where MPS was robbed on the through-the-legs back pass from Smytty. He didn't look like a guy suffering from snake bite. Against a lesser goalie, he scores. MPS said afterwards that the right move was to pull the puck away from the goalie before releasing it, to give him more of the top of the net to shoot at. But he also said that in the moment it's pure instinct, and you don't have time to think those things consciously, which is so true.
If you shovel Omark into his slot because of a perceived weakness on the stats sheet that isn't even costing you wins (after reducing all your horses to counting numbers) what do you end up with? A team of individuals worried more about their counting numbers than about winning as a group.
It's not the coach's job to manage assets. It's the coach's job to put the guys on the ice that he feels has the best prospect for winning and/or developing into a winning culture. He's responsible for chemistry and morale. That includes a fair amount of straight shooting with the players about where they stand, but it doesn't include solving perceived asset value problems on behalf of the GM.
Imagine Renney goes to Smytty and Horc and says "you want Jones or Omark tonight?" and Smytty goes "you know what, we're enjoying the simple north/south game for the moment while we get used to playing together again" and then Horc goes "yeah, I think Omark has real talent, but he's not the most predictable guy out there, we're sure to flub up a few times finding our groove which won't set a good example for the young guys, and Hemmer will be back again in six games so any chemistry we develop with Omark over such a short time will be wasted anyway".
There it is. He's a coach not an auxiliary GM. Is he going to say "well, you need to play with Omark anyway because Tambi is in asset management thrall"? And then Horc and Smytty nod and walk away and contemplate the loss of their leadership cred within the room.
(the purple bubble waxes)
(the purple bubble breaks free)
ReplyDeleteEven from Tambi's seat, he deserves some slack. It was far from certain that RNH would lock down his roster spot in the first month. Other additions were unknown. Even if he suspected the log jam would backfire, it's too soon to know exactly what to trade for. Is Whitney good for 60 games or not? Even your most glaring need is far from obvious.
If all the other tentative arrows point upward (lucky you in the GM chair of prayers answered), and Omark isn't willing to bide his time for a month or two until someone falls or falters or the trade wheels spin, then c'est la vie. You can't win every battle against a sea of uncertainty. No military commander expects to navigate the fog of war without an asset casualty or two. If you get caught up in penny wise, pound foolish, you just end up in DSF world with not much to show for it.
Last year the strident refrain was that the team needs to start learning how to win. The idea was that losing begets losing. It appears we've broken the curse (a year ahead of my personal expectation). We've landed the big fish, yet we're freaked out about the small fish getting away--and it's still on the hook playing out the line.
Dubnyk has also suffered a major set back through no fault of his own. And what about Cory Schneider? When you type his name into Google, it comes back with the suggestion: Did you mean "personal hell"?
I'm a big believer in cultivating real talent wherever you find it. Talent is rare and precious. But I'm an even bigger believer in due process and sticking to your guns in how you go about it. Under the current CBA, roster moves are difficult. Unless you're the full meal deal (Eberle or better), interludes in the dingy bus station are a fact of life.
DMW: One of your least esoteric posts is also one of your best. You've summed up most of my arguments and I urge everyone to take the time to read this cogent defence of the status quo.
ReplyDeleteI will add two things myself:
1) For some of you, this anxiety is approaching Ryan Smyth trade levels. Some of you wanted to lynch Tambellini because he wasn't offering the farm for this player and instead being patient. Similarly, you need to settle down about this. Omark is a chirpy guy who's pissed off. OF COURSE HE'S GOING TO SAY SOMETHING. He wants to be on the roster or traded to a team that will play him, and he's not afraid of doing what he can to realize this goal. But please relax, he's not running off to Sweden. The guy clearly has self-confidence and if he's as good as he thinks, he'll do far better in money and fame in the NHL. Seriously, there must be PR execs who reads boards like these and rub their hands with glee, saying "Man, this is just too easy!"
2) Bruce highlighted this in a post over at the Cult, but I thought it was worth asking here: what do you do with the glut of wingers next year? Some of Omark's strongest advocates are the same people who are happiest to resign Hemsky. And what of Gagner? His future may lie at RW, given that the Oilers now have some depth up the middle with RNH-Horc-Belanger-Lander (Pitlick on the way in 1-2 years). Should we send away Jones and Petrell? Can Omark or Gagner play 2-3M a night on the PK?
We need to stop looking at a player's worth in a vacuum and figure out where they fit both this year and next. The idea of "trading off" seems nice on paper to some (I think it's basically lineup communism that does little to motivate/reward effort), but it is not a solution for 6 or 12 months.
Unmentionables mentions the Oil are listening to offers on Omark, hoping to move two pieces for a Dman.
ReplyDeleteAnd finally DMW, out of all the intelligentsia that inhabit these parts, takes a shot at answering "why".
ReplyDeleteSo much more refreshing to read. That hypothesis than the one that Renney, with more information and experience than us, is wrong or stupid or foolish.
I believe his value is very low. He is a tweener. He is way too slow. Allan, I love what you do, but your love affair with Linus is a little off here. If we could get a second for Linus, I would be over the moon.
ReplyDeleteThat hypothesis than the one that Renney, with more information and experience than us, is wrong or stupid or foolish.
ReplyDeleteI don't think any said that.
We're on the outside looking in and can only speculate as to "why", but no one said he's wrong, stupid or foolish, but promoted what we'd like to see.
I have a weakness for trying to optimize anything. Good isn't good enough, if you think it can be better.
Look at what WAS is doing with their 4th line
Last game it was:
Troy Brower, Cody Eakin, and Marcus Johansson.
The average Oiler fan would scream about "wasting" Eakin and Johansson on the "4th line", and how they are "top 6 players and should only play there or in the AHL"
Meanwhile George McPhee and Boudreau put out a better 4th line than any other team in the league that's scoring points and winning games.
The energy of this fourth line is Eakin and Johansson busting their asses trying to move up on the roster.
There is more than one way to skin this particular cat, and NHL coaches and GM's are doing it.
The Oilers are in a pretty good position with good players on ELC's and I am of the opinion they should take advantage of it and play good hockey players on each line.
WAS also leads the NHL in number of different goal scorers with 17.
ReplyDeleteTalent on all lines.
Amazing.
Your Washington Capitals:
ReplyDelete8 ALEX OVECHKIN "C" 6' 3" 230
17 DJ KING 6' 3" 231
22 MIKE KNUBLE "A" 6' 3" 229
42 JOEL WARD 6' 1", 226
83 JAY BEAGLE 6' 3" 215
19 NICKLAS BACKSTROM "A" 6' 1" 213
28 ALEXANDER SEMIN 6' 2" 209
21 BROOKS LAICH 6' 2" 210
83 JAY BEAGLE 6' 3" 215
20 TROY BROUWER 6' 3" 213
25 JASON CHIMERA 6' 3" 213
26 MATT HENDRICKS 6' 0" 211
90 MARCUS JOHANSSON 6' 1"205
50 CODY EAKIN 6' 0" 190
15 JEFF HALPERN 6' 0" 200
85 MATHIEU PERREAULT 5' 10" 185
Your Edmonton Oilers:
20 ERIC BELANGER 5' 11" 185
14 JORDAN EBERLE 5' 11" 184
89 SAM GAGNER 5' 11" 195
83 ALES HEMSKY "A" ** 6' 0" 185
93 RYAN NUGENT-HOPKINS 6' 1" 175
<<23 LINUS OMARK 5' 10" 180>>
4 TAYLOR HALL 6' 1" 194
57 ANTON LANDER 6' 0" 194
37 LENNART PETRELL 6' 3" 198
94 RYAN SMYTH 6' 1" 192
10 SHAWN HORCOFF "C" 6' 1"207
16 DARCY HORDICHUK ** 6' 1" 212
28 RYAN JONES 6' 1" 205
91 MAGNUS PAAJARVI 6' 2" 204
55 BEN EAGER 6' 2" 240
<<56 TEEMU HARTIKAINEN 6' 1" 215>>
knighttown:
ReplyDeleteBat shit crazy is letting skilled players go for diddly.
The roster is a mess, the farm is out of balance. This year shouldn't be about winning for the sake of winning (given that it isn't going anywhere, we aren't winning the Cup), it should be about setting the landscape for the future, starting next year.
If you don't want Omark, and there are at least several teams that HAVE to win soon and need offense, the answer is simple.
Play Omark with Horcoff and Smyth and let him get some points, thus increasing his value and exposure. And he is a better hockey player than Jones, period. Trade him in a package to maximize his value and not alone where he isn't going to bring as much. Letting him sit or play on the farm is foolish unless the plan is to trade someone else and keep Omark.
And any GM that would protect Jones' playing time or the line he's on and trade a player like Omark for a third is Batshit Crazy.
Omark for Ryan Ellis
ReplyDeletemake it happen
@ DMW
ReplyDeleteAt the risk of getting drawn into a bout of mutual, verbal onanism,(never use 326 words when 1 will do)....
[I]You know what, DSF? The fact that every capable agent can infer market dynamics is the foundation of the market capitalism. The situation you describe occurs when there is only one GM interested in obtaining your asset. So your statement would be correct if you wrote "the other GM" and you had reason to know that 28 other GMs wouldn't touch Omark with a ten foot pole.[/I]
You are working from the assumption, once I penetrate your obfuscatory fog, that there is a hot market for Omark and by golly every GM in the league is beating down Steve's door to have a shot at him.
If that were an accurate assumption I would think it's also fair to assume Omark would already have a new area code that is not 405.
Since he doesn't, I think it's also fair to assume that there are a limited number of teams that have the team need, roster space or cap room to acquire Omark.
Now, as someone mentioned, that Tambellini has triggered the trade process, he is showcasing his prized possession by burying him in the minors while also running the risk that Omark can use his outclause at any moment.
A much more prudent approach, as some have suggested, would have been to spot in him in and out of the lineup and raise his value.
Lord knows, there are more than a few regulars not pulling their offensive weight.
I expect we'll soon see Omark opine "Later, rather than Sooner"
@ Perry K - Thanks! :)
ReplyDelete@ DMW - Very good summary
@ Everyone else - Awesome thread, like seeing both sides. Don't comment here much, but I love seeing debates where everyone knows to keep it civil. This is pretty much the only place that happens.
Just to be clear, when I suggest subbing in players, I don't mean to ask for the top two lines to make room for a guy like Omark.
ReplyDeleteThe third line is perfect for sitting guys. You have a group of semi-skilled players that can be switched out pretty easily right now in Gagner, Omark, Paajarvi, and Belanger. I don't feel there would be any harm in sitting any of those guys at this moment.
OW doesn't post nearly as often as he used to but when he does he's still on the money.
ReplyDeleteI can see the argument that 23 could have gotten a shot with different linemates but OW makes the best point when he says that if the Oilers really are good then we'll see a few fellows moved out who perhaps might have made more of a contribution if we weren't so, GULP, "deep."