OilFans.com :: Fan Forum: Oilers => Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27)

Guest

This day on May 30
Acquired: Scott Mellanby (1991)
Departed: David Brown (1991) Charlie Huddy (1991) Jari Kurri (1991)

Happy Birthday To: Headwound, Moog, Jacobcullen, Minorok

OILERS INFO OILFANS
Tuesday, May 30, 2023 10:40 PM MT

F.A.Q.

Members

Home

Oilers » Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27)

Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683000]	Sun, 04 December 2016 21:50

OilFans
Messages: 3935
Registered: February 2006
Location: Edmonton

3 Cups

1 Final (OT)

Score Prediction
Login To See Your Results
No one predicted this!

Edmonton to win:   0%
Minnesota to win:   0%
0 entries          View all picks   Leaderboard

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683004 is a reply to message #683000 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:17

Kr55
Messages: 17118
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Letestu on the 3 on 3. Let that be a lesson McLellan.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

"In Brad we trust"
- All Oilers fans, Present Day

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683008 is a reply to message #683004 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:22

HamBlaster
Messages: 1499
Registered: June 2007

1 Cup

Interesting to see that Minny actually had a serious attack strategy in OT. Cycle, cycle, cycle (and by cycle, I mean a deep cycle back to centre... stretching out coverage)... and WHAM... find a guy that has pushed in behind.

Our attack strategy was.... skating, skate... skate in a circle... pass to a guy on his backhand... pass to a guy on his backhand... skate some more, and line change.

[Updated on: Sun, 04 December 2016 22:24]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683009 is a reply to message #683008 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:25

Mike
Messages: 4129
Registered: August 2005
Location: Moncton, New Brunswick

4 Cups

And as has been mentioned - Letestu? Even Lucic. Those guys should never see the ice 3 on 3.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683005 is a reply to message #683000 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:18

RankinSpankin
Messages: 203
Registered: June 2013
Location: Fort McMurray

No Cups

Ron Hextall made a bad play there on the gwg

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683006 is a reply to message #683005 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:19

HamBlaster
Messages: 1499
Registered: June 2007

1 Cup

Wow. Bad decision having Letestu doing an impression of a pylon in OT there.

Letestu acting like a pylon = goal for Minnesota.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683007 is a reply to message #683000 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:20

Mike
Messages: 4129
Registered: August 2005
Location: Moncton, New Brunswick

4 Cups

F I hate the Wild. They're almost as bad as the Coyotes - something like 45 wins in their last 60 games against the Oil or something stupid like that. Beuh.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683010 is a reply to message #683000 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:26

oilfan94
Messages: 364
Registered: June 2006
Location: USA

No Cups

Gustavsson with kind of a silly poke check on the goal there at the end. It worked a few seconds before, so I guess I couldn't blame him for trying it again. I was watching some old Hasek highlights earlier, and I feel like Gustavsson has a similar style sometimes, but not nearly as good. Really scary watching him play, hard to imagine how he kept it out sometimes.

Dubnyk is a solid goalie, and the Wild played their normal defensive game. A lot of the bounces in the Wild zone seemed to be in the Wild's favour, no one really seem to get any prime chances (from what I saw, I did miss a few minutes).

Kassian had a really good game tonight, too bad that wraparound in the first didn't go it. Not totally sure why he got the slashing match penalty, as his was more of a harmless tap. Same goes for Lucic's slashing penalty in the third, really weak call. Offside call on McDavid was really bad as well. I guess the bad reffing has been talked about though, has it always been this bad? I feel like it wasn't as bad in the past, but maybe I was just younger and didn't worry about it.

I'm glad the Wild aren't in the Oilers division anymore. At least giving up points to them isn't quite as bad as it used to be.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683011 is a reply to message #683000 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:26

Skookum Jim
Messages: 7489
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

6 Cups

Coaching fail.
Never EVER put Mark Lettestu on the ice 3 on 3. Stupid. Speed kills. He doesn't have speed, or mobility. How does a guy get behind you 3 on 3, what, did you lose him in all the traffic?

Gustavson played a great game, and loses because of coaching and a team that won't shoot the puck. Waste of a good effort back to back.

McDAVID! Oh YEAH Baby!!
Tic-Tac-Tao!
Keep on Rockin' in the Free World
P. Chiarelli math.. T. Hall = A. Larsson, Yak= bag o'pucks (OK he got one right...) K. Russell = $4.1 M+NMC, G. Reinhart= M. Barzal + A. Beauvillier, J. Eberle = R. Spooner,

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683012 is a reply to message #683011 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:37

LetsBawesome
Messages: 10
Registered: November 2016
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

Bad call to " KEEP" Letestu on the ice after he did a good job on the face off win. He has to realize to get off the ice after that. Tough to blame a coach when he did win the face off. Being burnt twice is on the player.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683014 is a reply to message #683012 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:39

Skookum Jim
Messages: 7489
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

6 Cups

LetsBawesome wrote on Sun, 04 December 2016 21:37

Obvious Oilers have no real team strategy 3 on 3, everyone looked like they were just trying to wing it, Wild looked like they had a plan, and it worked twice, on the same shift, on the same guy.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683016 is a reply to message #683014 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:44

LetsBawesome
Messages: 10
Registered: November 2016
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

I agree with the plan and the lack there of, however same play not so much. Letestu did have to play through a pick play set up by the Wild. He was three steps behind that play I'm sure many of us said oh $hi* this pick play is going to make us look bad.....and it did!!

Still 3 out of 4 points was expected if not 1 point more than most would have thought...I was thinking split so i will take this.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683017 is a reply to message #683011 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 23:30

K.McC#24
Messages: 5373
Registered: March 2004
Location: ALBERTA

5 Cups

Skookum Jim wrote on Sun, 04 December 2016 22:26

Coaching fail.
Never EVER put Mark Lettestu on the ice 3 on 3. Stupid. Speed kills. He doesn't have speed, or mobility. How does a guy get behind you 3 on 3, what, did you lose him in all the traffic?

Gustavson played a great game, and loses because of coaching and a team that won't shoot the puck. Waste of a good effort back to back.

Yeah he did, but damn I don't know how....gave up a ton of rebounds, out of position on some overcommitments (led to 2-3 wraparounds), and just damn awkward looking.

That powerplay....I'd rather see a couple at the net and get cleared a couple times on the PP rather than diddling around the perimeter and not even attempting a shot.....good grief.

Could have been a better result, but I guess a loser point with a clumsy backup goalie and on the 2nd of back-to-backs is much better than a regulation loss.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683019 is a reply to message #683017 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 07:50

Adam
Messages: 12703
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

K.McC#24 wrote on Sun, 04 December 2016 23:30

Skookum Jim wrote on Sun, 04 December 2016 22:26

Coaching fail.
Never EVER put Mark Lettestu on the ice 3 on 3. Stupid. Speed kills. He doesn't have speed, or mobility. How does a guy get behind you 3 on 3, what, did you lose him in all the traffic?

Gustavson played a great game, and loses because of coaching and a team that won't shoot the puck. Waste of a good effort back to back.

Yeah, it's hard to have any confidence at all in Gustavsson. He flops around and looks like he's just hoping for the best. There's a lot of ugly rebounds, and times when he clearly doesn't know where the puck went. Some of the scrambles in our zone last night were because he leaked pucks out that he shouldn't have, and the defence is stuck trying desperately to clear.

There was one wraparound which would have scored for sure had Larsson not come back to take the chance away. Would have been an awful goal against.

Pretty boring game all around. I think the Oilers system this year is borderline trap hockey. You really see it when there live. If we give up the puck in the opponent's zone, there's not a lot of attempt to retrieve - rather you've got 4-5 guys retreating to the neutral zone to set up. It makes for some boring games. The Wild sure don't help. It was a pretty ugly game to watch all around.

Mark me down as hating the Larsson/Russell pairing. Just getting dominated in possession and zone time. They have not looked good.

Also not a fan of playing it safe in OT. For some reason, Oilers were concerned about match-ups in OT, rather than just trying to take it to Minnesota. They sent out Nuge/Eberle to start OT rather than McDavid/Draisaitl, and then they put out Letestu because there was a defensive zone faceoff. Last night, Letestu wasn't beating Koivu (who went 21 of 23 on the dot) either, so was there a really good reason to believe he was going to win that? Draisaitl actually had the best numbers last night on draws anyhow. I didn't like the move.

"Thinking that a bad team's best players are the reason the team is bad is the "Tambellini re-signing Lennart Petrell" of sports opinions." @Woodguy55
#FireLowe ~~#FireChiarelli~~ #FireBobbyNicks #FireKeithGretzky #FireKenHolland ~~#FireTippett~~

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683021 is a reply to message #683019 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 08:33

NZ Oiler Fan
Messages: 1756
Registered: October 2006
Location: Kensington, PEI

1 Cup

Sekera has been playing some great hockey lately. If they're not going to put Klefbom back up there I'd like to see Sekera - Larsson as our top D pair.

Really hope that Oilers management isn't considering a long term extension for Russell. He's an OK third pairing guy, but if they're looking at extending him you've got to think that it's not at any less than the 3.1 he's making now, and that's far too much for a 3rd pairing guy.

In an ideal world, with no injuries I'd like to see something like:

Klefbom / Sekera - Larsson
Sekera / Klefbom - Davidson
Russell - Benning

Nurse eating up big mins in the AHL

Speaking of the AHL, isn't it about time we sent JP down there so he can be playing lots?

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683029 is a reply to message #683021 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 10:35

mightyreasoner
Messages: 2365
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton

2 Cups

NZ Oiler Fan wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 08:33

Nurse can't go to the AHL anymore. Oilers missed their opportunity.

Moving forward, I would probably return to the Klefbom / Larsson pairing too. I haven't been as enamoured with Klefbom this year as a lot of the analytics community, but I still think he is one of our best defensemen, and that the Klefbom / Larsson pairing is a decent option against top opposition.

I'd probably go with:

Klefbom / Larsson
Sekera / Russell
Davidson / Benning
Fayne

Honestly, I don't like the thought of the Oilers reupping wtih Russell, for two reasons...

First, he's been more of a fix than a fit for that second pairing. He has been better than advertised, has actually be a contributing member, and has allowed others to play further down the depth chart (where they should be). BUT... he's not the perfect fit there. The Oilers really should be trying to find a Top-4 RH puck-mover for that spot.

Secondly, why sign him when you could just lose him to Vegas? I certainly hope they wouldn't sign him with any sort of NMC.

I guess the one argument you could make is that if you have Russell and Davidson signed and exposed, you will only lose one and the other could slide into that 3LD spot. All that said... where does Nurse fit into the lineup?

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683022 is a reply to message #683019 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 08:38

Kr55
Messages: 17118
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Adam wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 07:50

K.McC#24 wrote on Sun, 04 December 2016 23:30

Skookum Jim wrote on Sun, 04 December 2016 22:26

Coaching fail.
Never EVER put Mark Lettestu on the ice 3 on 3. Stupid. Speed kills. He doesn't have speed, or mobility. How does a guy get behind you 3 on 3, what, did you lose him in all the traffic?

Gustavson played a great game, and loses because of coaching and a team that won't shoot the puck. Waste of a good effort back to back.

Letestu for a faceoff in OT was ridiculous. Even if he wins it, you're playing a 2 on 3 basically. Very bad example of over coaching.

We played scared that entire 3 on 3, even McDavid and Drai seemed worried about taking any chances.

Larsson has been bad the last 2 games. Lots of throwing the puck to no one when he should be helping a breakout.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

"In Brad we trust"
- All Oilers fans, Present Day

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683013 is a reply to message #683000 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:38

Skookum Jim
Messages: 7489
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

6 Cups

M. Fayne has actually looked OK out there last two games, I'm pleasantly surprised, he's used his time off to good advantage, maybe he's benefited from listening to all the coaching during practice and sitting through team video reviews. Maybe old dogs can learn new tricks.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683015 is a reply to message #683013 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 22:43

Kr55
Messages: 17118
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Skookum Jim wrote on Sun, 04 December 2016 22:38

Definitely nice to see Fayne play like he gives a crap out there. If he came out half-arsing it again like before, we would have been totally screwed these last 2 games.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

"In Brad we trust"
- All Oilers fans, Present Day

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683018 is a reply to message #683015 ]	Sun, 04 December 2016 23:31

K.McC#24
Messages: 5373
Registered: March 2004
Location: ALBERTA

5 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Sun, 04 December 2016 22:43

Skookum Jim wrote on Sun, 04 December 2016 22:38

Definitely nice to see Fayne play like he gives a crap out there. If he came out half-arsing it again like before, we would have been totally screwed these last 2 games.

The caveat being, 14 minutes a night or less.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683020 is a reply to message #683018 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 08:30

RDOilerfan
Messages: 5212
Registered: January 2016

5 Cups

I usually watch an Oilers game from start to finish. I had to flip a bit. OMG that was boring. I hope the Wild don't charge a lot for their tickets.

I thought Gustavsson played pretty good. He was letting out some big rebounds but in saying that he was directing them to spots where there was no one but Oilers. Made a few good saves.

I thought Fayne was actually pretty good. I would expect him to play well as I think he's playing for his career. Waived and unclaimed twice in a span of a year. I have to think he will be bought out at the end of this season but if he wants another deal, he needs to show something.

The concussion spotter. Conner gets tripped, bangs his chin and he gets pulled? Why didn't they pull Dubnyk, he took a shot in the head. I get it, they are protecting the players But really. That's all it takes.

[Updated on: Mon, 05 December 2016 08:33]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683023 is a reply to message #683000 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 08:59

cosmicheretic
Messages: 323
Registered: November 2007

No Cups

How may times as a team do you have to get stripped at their blue line before realizing you have to dump and chase at least some of the time? Also, shoooooooot! Drai I'm talking to you.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683024 is a reply to message #683023 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 09:02

Kr55
Messages: 17118
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

cosmicheretic wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 08:59

How may times as a team do you have to get stripped at their blue line before realizing you have to dump and chase at least some of the time? Also, shoooooooot! Drai I'm talking to you.

I think we are dumping a good amount, but as Adam brought up, we are not committing to the retrieval like we should. We played a lot of scared hockey last night, probably the most blatant example of it this year.

David Staples tallies scoring chances, and he got the Oilers down for 2 (Two!!!) grade A chances last night. That's a horrible night. 9 for Minny.

"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013

"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015

"In Brad we trust"
- All Oilers fans, Present Day

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683025 is a reply to message #683024 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 09:58

cosmicheretic
Messages: 323
Registered: November 2007

No Cups

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 09:02

cosmicheretic wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 08:59

How may times as a team do you have to get stripped at their blue line before realizing you have to dump and chase at least some of the time? Also, shoooooooot! Drai I'm talking to you.

I did say 'chase' but I should be more specific as in 'chase the puck after dumping it in' not chase your man. That's an aweful but telling stat by the way.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683026 is a reply to message #683024 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 10:04

Adam
Messages: 12703
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 09:02

cosmicheretic wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 08:59

How may times as a team do you have to get stripped at their blue line before realizing you have to dump and chase at least some of the time? Also, shoooooooot! Drai I'm talking to you.

Agree with you on Larsson. When he and Russell are out there, it's like we're playing pong. We just chip it off the boards and back to the other team. It's not good. I think Larsson needs a good puck mover with him who he can defer to with the puck. Russell needs to play as little as possible against top lines. It worries me all the talk that the Oilers might want to extend him in January.

I'm really not sure what Klefbom did to get in the doghouse. Are they just trying to limit his minutes right now? If I'm coaching, there is never a night when Russell sees the ice more than Klefbom.

And the Oilers do still seem to think they need to get to the perfect spot before shooting. Quite a few times where they had a step on the defender, but rather than put it to the net, they're circling back. Everyone needs a little more killer instinct. Draisaitl and McDavid both passed up good opportunities because they thought they needed to get closer.

At this rate though, we'll finally be that team that Lowe wanted - fighting to be in the mix for one of those last few playoff spots.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683027 is a reply to message #683026 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 10:26

NZ Oiler Fan
Messages: 1756
Registered: October 2006
Location: Kensington, PEI

1 Cup

Regarding Russell: I'd never noticed it until Henderson pointed it out in his posts over on ON about why we shouldn't re-sign Russell, so I made a point to watch for it last night:

He mentioned that the opposition nearly always targets Russell's side of the ice for zone entries, because he gives them lots of time and space for an easy entry. Sure enough, every time the Wild had the puck when Russell was on the ice they targeted his side and gained entry to the zone really easy.

That'd explain why he's always a league leader in shot blocks I guess.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683030 is a reply to message #683027 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 10:43

mightyreasoner
Messages: 2365
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton

2 Cups

NZ Oiler Fan wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 10:26

Partially explains it.

Zone entries and zone exits are an important stat, but like every other statistic to draw conclusions strictly on that and nothing else is a gross simplification.

All things equal, I want a player who is good at preventing zone entries. It is a very good thing; I like that in defensemen.

But it's silly to think that a team is going to spend no time in their own end during the game... even the best teams are largely split. Having a player that is good in his own end isn't in and of itself a damning trait. Someone like that can prove useful on the PK; he can prove useful late in the game with an extra attacker out. He is someone you can use a lot in defensive zone starts.

But you want to know the strengths / weaknesses of players and try and maximize strengths and minimize weaknesses. In the case of Russell, pairing him with a puck-mover who is good at zone exits is probably a best scenerio. In other words, not Larsson, but perhaps Klefbom.

I'm not on board with re-signing Russell right now, especially long-term, but it is for reasons beyond him just not being very good at controlling zone entries.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683036 is a reply to message #683030 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 11:46

Adam
Messages: 12703
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

mightyreasoner wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 10:43

NZ Oiler Fan wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 10:26

You're more bullish on Russell than I am. I don't think he's a second pairing guy. He's soft on zone entries, and his preferred exit is to swap it back to centre...surrendering possession in the process. I see the puck either getting hemmed in our zone, or given back up in the neutral zone for a quick re-entry again and again when he's on the ice. I think he's been as advertised, other than a handful of good games at the start of the season. I'm far from a Corsi acolyte, but I don't think he's been good at all.

There's no chance I sign Russell this year. If I really, REALLY liked him, I'd talk about a deal and then not have it inked until after the expansion draft, as it basically protects against him getting claimed.

Not liking him, I wouldn't sign him at all. It is likely we lose Brandon Davidson this summer, but I'd still look at possibly adding a fourth defenceman prior to the expansion draft this summer. There are teams looking at losing very good players for nothing (better than Davidson), so getting a draft pick for that guy ahead of the draft is going to be preferable.

Anaheim is one team I'd be targeting. They've got too many guys to protect them all. I believe Bieksa has a no-move clause, so they're stuck protecting him and then have to make a choice between Vatanen, Lindholm, Fowler and Manson as to who to expose. Something has to give there. I'd rather have any of those guys than Russell...

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683031 is a reply to message #683027 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 10:46

RDOilerfan
Messages: 5212
Registered: January 2016

5 Cups

NZ Oiler Fan wrote on Mon, 05 December 2016 10:26

I always thought that Russell was a one year stop gap. It's really hard to get dmen, they made the trade for Larsson. To get another one would be hard. Plus you add in the expansion draft so bringing in a guy you don't have to protect made some sense. Plus with Klefbom having not even 2 seasons, Nurse not even 1 season, Davidson not even having 1 season, You had potentially 3 our of 6 of your top 4 as barely playing before. So they are young and inexperienced. Then you have Fayne who clearly the coach doesn't like/trust and they are down to 2 vets - Sekera and Larsson. Larsson isn't even that old, he only had 300 games. Then on top of it, Davidson missed most of camp, then got got hurt the first game. So bringing in a vet was a good idea.

Moving forward for next year. Fayne will be gone. Probably bought out as he will have only 1 year left. When you get waived twice in barely a calendar year, you are probably not in the teams plays. I think/hope that they go after another right hander. Personally, I don't see a situation where they get a top 4 guy, the cost will be just too much. I think the hope and if he continues along the way he is going is that Benning turns into that #4 right shot and then you are bringing in a 3rd pairing guy that can maybe be a right shot on the PP.

For Russell if you want to sign him to a cheap deal as a 3rd pairing/depth guy, I guess that is OK. Injuries happen so defensive depth is a must. Plus he has shown the ability to be able to play both sides and be OK. Not great but OK at times. But if you are signing him to be an everyday guy, I don't see the fit especially since he is left handed.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683028 is a reply to message #683000 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 10:29

mightyreasoner
Messages: 2365
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton

2 Cups

Quick question, if anyone knows:

Are there timeouts allowed in overtime, or is that something the NHL doesn't allow?

My guess is probably they aren't allowed, but if they are, I'm not sure why you wouldn't call a timeout and go back with Draiasitl and McDavid.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683033 is a reply to message #683028 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 11:30

Javer
Messages: 83
Registered: October 2006
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

Yeah I was thinking about a time-out in OT too to get McDavid back out there for 3 on 3.

Perhaps it's an effort to save it in case an icing occurs? With a couple minutes to go probably worth the risk.

Could only find the 2015-2016 rule book, but there doesn't look to be a restriction in OT, just in the shootout:

Quote:

Each team shall be permitted to take one thirty-second
time-out during the course of any game, regular season or playoffs. All
players including goalkeepers on the ice at the time of the time-out will
be allowed to go to their respective benches. [...]

No time-out shall be granted following a face-off violation.
When a penalty shot has been awarded to either team by the
Referee, no time-out will be granted once instructions have been
given to the player taking the shot and the goalkeeper defending the
shot. No time-out will be granted during the shootout.

(pg 132: http://www.nhl.com/nhl/en/v3/ext/rules/2015-2016-Interactive -rulebook.pdf)

Report message to a moderator

Re: Review: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27) [message #683035 is a reply to message #683033 ]	Mon, 05 December 2016 11:42

RDOilerfan
Messages: 5212
Registered: January 2016

5 Cups

I will say as boring as it was, I had this as a guaranteed lose night for the Oilers. Ther are playing the second game in 2 nights, 3rd in 4 nights. They just won a hard fought, OT win over the Ducks. The Wild were apparently sitting their waiting for them for a couple of days. You have the back up playing. So they got a point from a very good defensive team that plays a style that would be hard to get up for especially coming off you played the night before.

[Updated on: Mon, 05 December 2016 11:45]

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic:	Pregame: Edmonton @ Buffalo (Game #28)
Next Topic:	GDT: Minnesota @ Edmonton (Game #27)

Oilers

NHL

Minors

Speculation

For Sale

Copyright © OilFans.com 1996-2022.
All content is property of OilFans.com and cannot be used without expressed, written consent from this site.
Questions, comments and suggestions can be directed to oilfans@OilFans.com
Privacy Statement

Hosted by LogicalHosting.ca