This day on September 20
None

Happy Birthday To: dk19, mabfan, nemorrison, oilfan94, hackm, oilchamp_34, kev9in, SuperOilerFan

F.A.Q. Terms of Use F.A.Q. F.A.Q.
Members Members   Search Search     Register Register   Login Login   Home Home
 Oilers » Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavidPages (4): [ «  <  1  2  3  4]
Switch to flat viewSwitch to tree viewCreate a new topicSubmit Reply
 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698647 is a reply to message #698645 ]
Tue, 29 August 2017 16:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11327
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Tue, 29 August 2017 16:35


Please tell me you aren't expecting me to comb through post after post in various threads and individually point out where someone says Russell is lousy or a 3rd pairing guy, etc. Maybe you individually didn't call him terrible fine but I never singled out anyone. But in saying that, there are a ton of people in here who have posted many, many times on how lousy Russell is. So my statement isn't wrong.

As I said in my statements. I think the Russell contract is too long personally. But as I said, I do not see any other alternative. I listed off multiple guys who are in the Russell range who got term and money similar to Russell. Agents all talk. So the Russell camp would know the range the others were getting. So you weren't getting Russell or anyone else for 1 yr or 2 at the most. As I said, if you walked away from Russell and went after someone else, you aren't getting them for less money or team than what they got from other teams. All you would be getting is a different name on a jersey and that doesn't do anything. So the only other alternative is to get no one.

Too your questions.
#1 I have never once disputed that in some metrics, Russell ranks low. I used to follow Matt Henderson who hates Russell so trust me, I know Russell ranks low in some metric. In some other metrics, he ranks better. I am sure in some metrics this season, Russell will be ranked low but in other metrics he will be higher up. He is not a perfect dman. I know that, I know there are flaws in his game. I am not disputing that.
If you want me to rank them based on no information today. Fine. Klefbom, Larsson, Sekera, Russell, Nurse, Benning, Gryba, Fayne. I fully expect Nurse or Benning to be better in some categories than Russell and weaker in others. I gave the edge to Nurse over Benning because he has a little more experience. Nurse and Benning are young dmen. Nurse 115 games, Benning 62. Playing defense in the NHL is really hard so experience counts. I hope for the Oilers sake as a team that down the road, Nurse and Benning are capable of being the Oilers second pairing taking over form Sekera and Russell. I expect both of them at times this season too look like they are ready to take over the second pairing but will also look like they aren't close. That's the ups and downs of young dmen. So I think Russell's ability to play both sides is a huge plus because I see both Nurse and Benning being in the second pair until Sekera comes back. My hope is that at some time, not this season but next season, at least one of Benning or NUrse has established himself as a nday to day second pairing guy. When that time comes, Russell will be ending his second year of his contract when the modified No move kicks in and you will maybe need to move him.

2. Playoff pairings. Klefbom-Larsson, Sekera Russell, NUrse Benning.


I don't think you read PlusOne's point very carefully there. He didn't say no one has said Russell is a third pairing guy, or that he's not good. He said that he doesn't remember anyone saying that he doesn't belong in the league at all.

1) I think ability counts more than experience. I predict that one or both of Nurse and Benning are better than Russell consistently this year.

2) What do you think the Oilers depth chart (ie. what are the pairings) looks like for the four years of Russell's deal.



"This team needs an enema!"
#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireBuchberger #FireHowsonAgain #ChiaOnNotice

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698655 is a reply to message #698647 ]
Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 1918
Registered: January 2016

1 Cup

Adam wrote on Tue, 29 August 2017 16:47

RDOilerfan wrote on Tue, 29 August 2017 16:35


Please tell me you aren't expecting me to comb through post after post in various threads and individually point out where someone says Russell is lousy or a 3rd pairing guy, etc. Maybe you individually didn't call him terrible fine but I never singled out anyone. But in saying that, there are a ton of people in here who have posted many, many times on how lousy Russell is. So my statement isn't wrong.

As I said in my statements. I think the Russell contract is too long personally. But as I said, I do not see any other alternative. I listed off multiple guys who are in the Russell range who got term and money similar to Russell. Agents all talk. So the Russell camp would know the range the others were getting. So you weren't getting Russell or anyone else for 1 yr or 2 at the most. As I said, if you walked away from Russell and went after someone else, you aren't getting them for less money or team than what they got from other teams. All you would be getting is a different name on a jersey and that doesn't do anything. So the only other alternative is to get no one.

Too your questions.
#1 I have never once disputed that in some metrics, Russell ranks low. I used to follow Matt Henderson who hates Russell so trust me, I know Russell ranks low in some metric. In some other metrics, he ranks better. I am sure in some metrics this season, Russell will be ranked low but in other metrics he will be higher up. He is not a perfect dman. I know that, I know there are flaws in his game. I am not disputing that.
If you want me to rank them based on no information today. Fine. Klefbom, Larsson, Sekera, Russell, Nurse, Benning, Gryba, Fayne. I fully expect Nurse or Benning to be better in some categories than Russell and weaker in others. I gave the edge to Nurse over Benning because he has a little more experience. Nurse and Benning are young dmen. Nurse 115 games, Benning 62. Playing defense in the NHL is really hard so experience counts. I hope for the Oilers sake as a team that down the road, Nurse and Benning are capable of being the Oilers second pairing taking over form Sekera and Russell. I expect both of them at times this season too look like they are ready to take over the second pairing but will also look like they aren't close. That's the ups and downs of young dmen. So I think Russell's ability to play both sides is a huge plus because I see both Nurse and Benning being in the second pair until Sekera comes back. My hope is that at some time, not this season but next season, at least one of Benning or NUrse has established himself as a nday to day second pairing guy. When that time comes, Russell will be ending his second year of his contract when the modified No move kicks in and you will maybe need to move him.

2. Playoff pairings. Klefbom-Larsson, Sekera Russell, NUrse Benning.


I don't think you read PlusOne's point very carefully there. He didn't say no one has said Russell is a third pairing guy, or that he's not good. He said that he doesn't remember anyone saying that he doesn't belong in the league at all.

1) I think ability counts more than experience. I predict that one or both of Nurse and Benning are better than Russell consistently this year.

2) What do you think the Oilers depth chart (ie. what are the pairings) looks like for the four years of Russell's deal.


Question for you. Why do you and Plusone keep asking me questions that realistically I have no chance of answering correctly? How do you expect me to know what the pairings will be like 4 yrs from now? As much as I would love too, I can't see into the future.

Nurse and Benning: I am fans of Nurse and Benning and believe they will be good. But:
What if they don't? What if they plateau and all they are is decent 3rd pairing guys? Then there is no problem right?
What if Benning, an Edmonton guy, the son of a former Oilers says "I dreamed of being an Oiler all my life. I am living my dream. I want to win a cup here and I want to help the team do it. So I am going to sign a 3yr deal at 1 mill per season because I am young, I want to win and I know that the money will be there for me after this deal is up. If that happened, who cares if Benning passes Russell as the #4, he'd be making 1 mill so it balances out. Do I think it happens? Not a chance in hell. But could it? Nothing other than death is a 100% guarantee.
The same could be said about Nurse. Will it happen? Not likely but again, only death is 100% guaranteed.
Russell used to be a puck rushing, puck moving offensive dman in junior. He put up some pretty big numbers in junior. In Calgary, he had a 29 & 34 pt season. So he does have offense but by his own admission, he holds back to concentrate on defense. What if Russell, with the urging of his coaches, opens it up a little and has some good seasons. So if Russell is playing decent defense, rushing the puck and putting up 25-30 pts, and a whole bunch of these advanced stats that he is weak in turn around, wouldn't that be good and people would be OK with him? Most likely.
What if, Russell plays pretty well over the next 2 seasons then after the second year of his deal, when the No Move turns into a modified with a list, some team steps up and says, you got Nurse and Benning, could Russell be available, we need him and he gets traded? The way the contract is structured, it is a lot easier to trade in the 3rd and 4th years because the cap is 4 mill but the actually money goes down.
What if after the first year where he still has a complete No Move, some team comes calling to the Oilers for Russell. Russell gets wind of the team because teams and agents talk all the time even though they aren't "supposed too" and the wife says "Hell yeah, I'd move there." So he waves his no move and he gets traded. Players do wave their complete no moves.
What if Sekera wants to leave in a season or 2? Maybe the wife has had enough and he waives his no move to go somewhere warmer.
What if Sekera's knee injury becomes continuing problem and he's done in a year or 2?
What if the cap jumps up 10 mill in 2 years?

I could create more what if's if you want. The point is I do not know what is going to happen with the players, the team, the league, the cap, the needs of other teams to speculate what the Oilers defense pairs will be 3 yrs from now.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698657 is a reply to message #698655 ]
Wed, 30 August 2017 09:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11327
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

I think you're trading in rainbows and unicorns here. Almost every hypothetical you threw out there is an absolute fairy tale.

If Chiarelli's managing by hoping for the best possible outcome with moves like Russell's contract, then we have a major problem.

The Oilers have not shown any ability to trade their mistakes away. They couldn't trade Fayne, couldn't trade Ference, couldn't trade Pouliot, couldn't trade Nikitin, couldn't even trade Souray. Signing long expensive deals for borderline players has not worked for the Oilers in the past, and this time the cap consequences are so much worse because we can't afford to have as many mistakes against our salary cap.

It was a completely unforced error, and it's going to eventually bite the team. Unless we find a leprechaun to help us out of the jam.



"This team needs an enema!"
#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireBuchberger #FireHowsonAgain #ChiaOnNotice

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698660 is a reply to message #698657 ]
Wed, 30 August 2017 09:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 1918
Registered: January 2016

1 Cup

Adam wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 09:02

I think you're trading in rainbows and unicorns here. Almost every hypothetical you threw out there is an absolute fairy tale.

If Chiarelli's managing by hoping for the best possible outcome with moves like Russell's contract, then we have a major problem.

The Oilers have not shown any ability to trade their mistakes away. They couldn't trade Fayne, couldn't trade Ference, couldn't trade Pouliot, couldn't trade Nikitin, couldn't even trade Souray. Signing long expensive deals for borderline players has not worked for the Oilers in the past, and this time the cap consequences are so much worse because we can't afford to have as many mistakes against our salary cap.

It was a completely unforced error, and it's going to eventually bite the team. Unless we find a leprechaun to help us out of the jam.


How many more times would you like me to say in a post that I don't believe my scenario's are likely. I think I said it what, 2 or 3 times? What's the number that would satisfy you? 4 times, 6, 8 times?

So since you think I live in a fairy tale land even though I qualified that I don't believe my scenario's are going to happen. Here is a scenario that actually has a chance of happening. Not a big chance but it is not a crazy one. The Oilers have Nurse and Benning needing new contracts. With Russell making 4 mill and the potential of at least one of those 2 passing him, that is a concern for the future. What if one or both of those guys signs a contract similar to what Ryan Ellis did? After the 13-14 season where he had 27 pts, Ellis signed a 5 yr deal at 2.5 mill. Pretty damn good contract. At that point he had 144 NHL games, scoring 44 pts. Nurse will have more NHL games than Ellis but right now he only has 22 pts. He'd have to double his pts this season to match Ellis. Nurse has been OK, a bit up and down. I would rank him today as a legit #5 dman. What's a #5 worth? 2-3 mill? He could sign a 2-3 yr deal at 2.5 mill, a bridge deal and I don't think on a short deal, Nurse given his age would be screwing himself. Same goes for Benning. He had 15 pts in 62 games last year. If he plays all 82 this year, he will match Ellis's games played. He's have to have a 29 pt season this year to match Ellis's totals. So given that, is it completely out to lunch that he signs a 2 -3 yr bridge deal at 2.5 mill? At the end of this season he would have not even 2 seasons of experience and not a lot of points yet.

People don't like the fact that in a year or 2, there is a chance that Russell could be making 4 mill in the 3rd pair. I agree, not the best scenario. If Russell was making high 2's as an example or even 3, no one would give a crap. Go look at the Pens, their entire 3rd pairing makes over 2 mill a piece. Hunwick 2.25, Cole, 2.1. Their entire top 6 defense makes 25.283 mill combined. You calculate out the Oilers mostly likely top 6. Sekera, Larsson, Klefbom, Russell, Nurse, Benning. The first 4 makes 17.834 combined. That means you have 7.449 mill or 3.725 a piece to pay Nurse and Benning to equal the Pens top 6. If you just signed Klefbom to a 7 yr, 4.167 mill per season contract and no offense to Nurse or Benning but Klefbom has a hell of a lot more tools in the tool box and was a better player at a young age than they were now. I have a hard time believing you are going to pay either of them the same or more on a long term deal and if Klefbom, your #1 dman makes 4.167 on a 7 year deal, you should be able to get the Nurse and Benning for significantly less on a short term deal which I believe would be a good idea given the unknowns of what they will be with Benning and even more so with Nurse. So if you are getting Nurse and Benning in high 2's on short deals which isn't totally out to lunch given their limited experience and small point totals. So other than "optics" maybe looking not so great is Russell in a couple of seasons is in your 3rd pairing at 4 mill, what difference does it make who has a 4 in their contract and who has a 2 in their contract?

[Updated on: Wed, 30 August 2017 09:43]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698661 is a reply to message #698655 ]
Wed, 30 August 2017 09:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PlusOne  is currently offline PlusOne
Messages: 827
Registered: July 2006
Location: Regina, Sask

No Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


If you want me to rank them based on no information today. Fine. Klefbom, Larsson, Sekera, Russell, Nurse, Benning, Gryba, Fayne. I fully expect Nurse or Benning to be better in some categories than Russell and weaker in others. I gave the edge to Nurse over Benning because he has a little more experience. Nurse and Benning are young dmen. Nurse 115 games, Benning 62. Playing defense in the NHL is really hard so experience counts. I hope for the Oilers sake as a team that down the road, Nurse and Benning are capable of being the Oilers second pairing taking over form Sekera and Russell. I expect both of them at times this season too look like they are ready to take over the second pairing but will also look like they aren't close. That's the ups and downs of young dmen. So I think Russell's ability to play both sides is a huge plus because I see both Nurse and Benning being in the second pair until Sekera comes back. My hope is that at some time, not this season but next season, at least one of Benning or NUrse has established himself as a nday to day second pairing guy. When that time comes, Russell will be ending his second year of his contract when the modified No move kicks in and you will maybe need to move him.

2. Playoff pairings. Klefbom-Larsson, Sekera Russell, NUrse Benning.





Fair guesses. I disagree in that I believe one or both of Nurse or Benning will pass Russell in ice time/usefullness by the playoffs but I can agree to disagree as that is an opinion.

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


Question for you. Why do you and Plusone keep asking me questions that realistically I have no chance of answering correctly? How do you expect me to know what the pairings will be like 4 yrs from now? As much as I would love too, I can't see into the future.




I can only speak for myself but I ask those questions as I think that is, in a simplistic way, what Chia should have been asking himself first.
Much like above I am ok if he thinks, like you, that Russell would be in the top 4 this season.

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


Nurse and Benning: I am fans of Nurse and Benning and believe they will be good. But:
What if they don't? What if they plateau and all they are is decent 3rd pairing guys? Then there is no problem right?




Decent question, but that is what a GM needs to do. Figure out what he thinks will happen. You seem to think some of us flat out hate Russell when the truth is that I think he is useful but not at the expense of losing one of Nurse or Benning

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


What if
What if
What if
What if
What if




You have a lot of what ifs, some more likely than others. First off, that is again the GM's responsibility. Second, if even one of your what ifs comes true it still wont help the fact that Russell will likely be an overpaid 3rd liner as soon as next season.



"My wife told me Edmonton was going to win the pick that day," said Gretzky. "That was the day that I retired 16 years ago. So, she said, for whatever reason, the Oilers have good luck today. Connor McDavid went to Edmonton."

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698663 is a reply to message #698661 ]
Wed, 30 August 2017 10:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 1918
Registered: January 2016

1 Cup

PlusOne wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 09:52

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


If you want me to rank them based on no information today. Fine. Klefbom, Larsson, Sekera, Russell, Nurse, Benning, Gryba, Fayne. I fully expect Nurse or Benning to be better in some categories than Russell and weaker in others. I gave the edge to Nurse over Benning because he has a little more experience. Nurse and Benning are young dmen. Nurse 115 games, Benning 62. Playing defense in the NHL is really hard so experience counts. I hope for the Oilers sake as a team that down the road, Nurse and Benning are capable of being the Oilers second pairing taking over form Sekera and Russell. I expect both of them at times this season too look like they are ready to take over the second pairing but will also look like they aren't close. That's the ups and downs of young dmen. So I think Russell's ability to play both sides is a huge plus because I see both Nurse and Benning being in the second pair until Sekera comes back. My hope is that at some time, not this season but next season, at least one of Benning or NUrse has established himself as a nday to day second pairing guy. When that time comes, Russell will be ending his second year of his contract when the modified No move kicks in and you will maybe need to move him.

2. Playoff pairings. Klefbom-Larsson, Sekera Russell, NUrse Benning.





Fair guesses. I disagree in that I believe one or both of Nurse or Benning will pass Russell in ice time/usefullness by the playoffs but I can agree to disagree as that is an opinion.

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


Question for you. Why do you and Plusone keep asking me questions that realistically I have no chance of answering correctly? How do you expect me to know what the pairings will be like 4 yrs from now? As much as I would love too, I can't see into the future.




I can only speak for myself but I ask those questions as I think that is, in a simplistic way, what Chia should have been asking himself first.
Much like above I am ok if he thinks, like you, that Russell would be in the top 4 this season.

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


Nurse and Benning: I am fans of Nurse and Benning and believe they will be good. But:
What if they don't? What if they plateau and all they are is decent 3rd pairing guys? Then there is no problem right?




Decent question, but that is what a GM needs to do. Figure out what he thinks will happen. You seem to think some of us flat out hate Russell when the truth is that I think he is useful but not at the expense of losing one of Nurse or Benning

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


What if
What if
What if
What if
What if




You have a lot of what ifs, some more likely than others. First off, that is again the GM's responsibility. Second, if even one of your what ifs comes true it still wont help the fact that Russell will likely be an overpaid 3rd liner as soon as next season.

We can disagree with the d-pairings but coaches tend to go with Vets when the games get tougher especially in playoffs.

I agree that Russell in a season or 2 could be making too much money for a "3rd pairing guy". But as I stated in my last post to Adam, if Benning and Nurse are making contracts in the high 2's which is where I think they should be and Russell makes 4, what difference does it make in the grand scheme of things other than optics. If Benning, Nurse and Russell are making 4 mill a piece, then yes, its a big problem. I just don't see a scenario that Benning and Nurse are making that much. Nurse makes 863K, Benning 925K. If you triple their money on a 2-3 yr deal, that is more than fair. Nurse is 22, Benning is 23, they sign a short, show me deal. They play on a good team, winning lots of games, pad the stats. When their contracts are up, they should be just entering their absolute prime of being dmen and will cash in. These guys if they play a full season will have very little NHL games under their belt, Nurse 197, Benning 144 and not a lot of points. They have a guy on their team, Klefbom, who locked himself in on a long term deal and is already underpaid. Fantastic deal for the Oilers. Klefbom is the Oilers best dman, on their #1 PP, will easily score over 40 pts this season and is making barely over 4 mill. Klefbom is probably a 5 mill dman today and if he has as good or most likely better season this year, he will be worth more. So Nurse and Benning would be crazy in my opinion to lock themselves into a long term deal at this time.

[Updated on: Wed, 30 August 2017 10:16]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698665 is a reply to message #698663 ]
Wed, 30 August 2017 10:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PlusOne  is currently offline PlusOne
Messages: 827
Registered: July 2006
Location: Regina, Sask

No Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 10:05

PlusOne wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 09:52

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


If you want me to rank them based on no information today. Fine. Klefbom, Larsson, Sekera, Russell, Nurse, Benning, Gryba, Fayne. I fully expect Nurse or Benning to be better in some categories than Russell and weaker in others. I gave the edge to Nurse over Benning because he has a little more experience. Nurse and Benning are young dmen. Nurse 115 games, Benning 62. Playing defense in the NHL is really hard so experience counts. I hope for the Oilers sake as a team that down the road, Nurse and Benning are capable of being the Oilers second pairing taking over form Sekera and Russell. I expect both of them at times this season too look like they are ready to take over the second pairing but will also look like they aren't close. That's the ups and downs of young dmen. So I think Russell's ability to play both sides is a huge plus because I see both Nurse and Benning being in the second pair until Sekera comes back. My hope is that at some time, not this season but next season, at least one of Benning or NUrse has established himself as a nday to day second pairing guy. When that time comes, Russell will be ending his second year of his contract when the modified No move kicks in and you will maybe need to move him.

2. Playoff pairings. Klefbom-Larsson, Sekera Russell, NUrse Benning.





Fair guesses. I disagree in that I believe one or both of Nurse or Benning will pass Russell in ice time/usefullness by the playoffs but I can agree to disagree as that is an opinion.

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


Question for you. Why do you and Plusone keep asking me questions that realistically I have no chance of answering correctly? How do you expect me to know what the pairings will be like 4 yrs from now? As much as I would love too, I can't see into the future.




I can only speak for myself but I ask those questions as I think that is, in a simplistic way, what Chia should have been asking himself first.
Much like above I am ok if he thinks, like you, that Russell would be in the top 4 this season.

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


Nurse and Benning: I am fans of Nurse and Benning and believe they will be good. But:
What if they don't? What if they plateau and all they are is decent 3rd pairing guys? Then there is no problem right?




Decent question, but that is what a GM needs to do. Figure out what he thinks will happen. You seem to think some of us flat out hate Russell when the truth is that I think he is useful but not at the expense of losing one of Nurse or Benning

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


What if
What if
What if
What if
What if




You have a lot of what ifs, some more likely than others. First off, that is again the GM's responsibility. Second, if even one of your what ifs comes true it still wont help the fact that Russell will likely be an overpaid 3rd liner as soon as next season.

We can disagree with the d-pairings but coaches tend to go with Vets when the games get tougher especially in playoffs.

I agree that Russell in a season or 2 could be making too much money for a "3rd pairing guy". But as I stated in my last post to Adam, if Benning and Nurse are making contracts in the high 2's which is where I think they should be and Russell makes 4, what difference does it make in the grand scheme of things other than optics. If Benning, Nurse and Russell are making 4 mill a piece, then yes, its a big problem. I just don't see a scenario that Benning and Nurse are making that much. Nurse makes 863K, Benning 925K. If you triple their money on a 2-3 yr deal, that is more than fair. Nurse is 22, Benning is 23, they sign a short, show me deal. They play on a good team, winning lots of games, pad the stats. When their contracts are up, they should be just entering their absolute prime of being dmen and will cash in. These guys if they play a full season will have very little NHL games under their belt, Nurse 197, Benning 144 and not a lot of points. They have a guy on their team, Klefbom, who locked himself in on a long term deal and is already underpaid. Fantastic deal for the Oilers. Klefbom is the Oilers best dman, on their #1 PP, will easily score over 40 pts this season and is making barely over 4 mill. Klefbom is probably a 5 mill dman today and if he has as good or most likely better season this year, he will be worth more. So Nurse and Benning would be crazy in my opinion to lock themselves into a long term deal at this time.



I am fine agreeing to disagree on the d-pairings. I do believe in my prediction but as you have mentioned, none of us know 100% and all we have are opinions.

Moving on to your second point, and the one that actually is the biggest issue to me. I dont think the scenario you propose has a hope in hell of coming true. By that I dont mean the contracts for Benning and Nurse. You might not be far off. The issue is that it is a lose lose for the Oilers.
Outcome one; neither Benning or Nurse, surpass Russell on the depth chart. This would mean they get smaller cap hits. Perfect, no cap issue caused by Russell. Downside is Russell is still on the second pairing and that wont be good enough. It also means we have no money to upgrade the D
Outcome two; one of them passes Russell. Great, out D is better! Nope whomever that is needs a bigger contract and we will have a lot of trouble fitting another 3.5 mill plus contract in there.
Outcome three; both are better than Russell. Great for this years playoffs but next year one or both are gone because we are handcuffed to Russells contract.

According to capfriendly we have 13 players next season and just over 14 mill in cap space.
That is where we are screwed. I dont think anyone believes Russell is going to get better. If the young guys are good, we likely cant afford them. If they arent, we keep them but that means an aging, declining Russell is counted on for years to come.

Either way I think this has screwed the team and there simply no logical way anyone has been able to convince me otherwise.

PS. I also believe this will be an untradable contract. I will though be entertained to no end if it is a young D like Bear that we have to give up to entice some team to take him off our hands in a couple years.



"My wife told me Edmonton was going to win the pick that day," said Gretzky. "That was the day that I retired 16 years ago. So, she said, for whatever reason, the Oilers have good luck today. Connor McDavid went to Edmonton."

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698670 is a reply to message #698665 ]
Wed, 30 August 2017 11:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 1918
Registered: January 2016

1 Cup

PlusOne wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 10:31

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 10:05

PlusOne wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 09:52

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


If you want me to rank them based on no information today. Fine. Klefbom, Larsson, Sekera, Russell, Nurse, Benning, Gryba, Fayne. I fully expect Nurse or Benning to be better in some categories than Russell and weaker in others. I gave the edge to Nurse over Benning because he has a little more experience. Nurse and Benning are young dmen. Nurse 115 games, Benning 62. Playing defense in the NHL is really hard so experience counts. I hope for the Oilers sake as a team that down the road, Nurse and Benning are capable of being the Oilers second pairing taking over form Sekera and Russell. I expect both of them at times this season too look like they are ready to take over the second pairing but will also look like they aren't close. That's the ups and downs of young dmen. So I think Russell's ability to play both sides is a huge plus because I see both Nurse and Benning being in the second pair until Sekera comes back. My hope is that at some time, not this season but next season, at least one of Benning or NUrse has established himself as a nday to day second pairing guy. When that time comes, Russell will be ending his second year of his contract when the modified No move kicks in and you will maybe need to move him.

2. Playoff pairings. Klefbom-Larsson, Sekera Russell, NUrse Benning.





Fair guesses. I disagree in that I believe one or both of Nurse or Benning will pass Russell in ice time/usefullness by the playoffs but I can agree to disagree as that is an opinion.

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


Question for you. Why do you and Plusone keep asking me questions that realistically I have no chance of answering correctly? How do you expect me to know what the pairings will be like 4 yrs from now? As much as I would love too, I can't see into the future.




I can only speak for myself but I ask those questions as I think that is, in a simplistic way, what Chia should have been asking himself first.
Much like above I am ok if he thinks, like you, that Russell would be in the top 4 this season.

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


Nurse and Benning: I am fans of Nurse and Benning and believe they will be good. But:
What if they don't? What if they plateau and all they are is decent 3rd pairing guys? Then there is no problem right?




Decent question, but that is what a GM needs to do. Figure out what he thinks will happen. You seem to think some of us flat out hate Russell when the truth is that I think he is useful but not at the expense of losing one of Nurse or Benning

RDOilerfan wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 08:43


What if
What if
What if
What if
What if




You have a lot of what ifs, some more likely than others. First off, that is again the GM's responsibility. Second, if even one of your what ifs comes true it still wont help the fact that Russell will likely be an overpaid 3rd liner as soon as next season.

We can disagree with the d-pairings but coaches tend to go with Vets when the games get tougher especially in playoffs.

I agree that Russell in a season or 2 could be making too much money for a "3rd pairing guy". But as I stated in my last post to Adam, if Benning and Nurse are making contracts in the high 2's which is where I think they should be and Russell makes 4, what difference does it make in the grand scheme of things other than optics. If Benning, Nurse and Russell are making 4 mill a piece, then yes, its a big problem. I just don't see a scenario that Benning and Nurse are making that much. Nurse makes 863K, Benning 925K. If you triple their money on a 2-3 yr deal, that is more than fair. Nurse is 22, Benning is 23, they sign a short, show me deal. They play on a good team, winning lots of games, pad the stats. When their contracts are up, they should be just entering their absolute prime of being dmen and will cash in. These guys if they play a full season will have very little NHL games under their belt, Nurse 197, Benning 144 and not a lot of points. They have a guy on their team, Klefbom, who locked himself in on a long term deal and is already underpaid. Fantastic deal for the Oilers. Klefbom is the Oilers best dman, on their #1 PP, will easily score over 40 pts this season and is making barely over 4 mill. Klefbom is probably a 5 mill dman today and if he has as good or most likely better season this year, he will be worth more. So Nurse and Benning would be crazy in my opinion to lock themselves into a long term deal at this time.



I am fine agreeing to disagree on the d-pairings. I do believe in my prediction but as you have mentioned, none of us know 100% and all we have are opinions.

Moving on to your second point, and the one that actually is the biggest issue to me. I dont think the scenario you propose has a hope in hell of coming true. By that I dont mean the contracts for Benning and Nurse. You might not be far off. The issue is that it is a lose lose for the Oilers.
Outcome one; neither Benning or Nurse, surpass Russell on the depth chart. This would mean they get smaller cap hits. Perfect, no cap issue caused by Russell. Downside is Russell is still on the second pairing and that wont be good enough. It also means we have no money to upgrade the D
Outcome two; one of them passes Russell. Great, out D is better! Nope whomever that is needs a bigger contract and we will have a lot of trouble fitting another 3.5 mill plus contract in there.
Outcome three; both are better than Russell. Great for this years playoffs but next year one or both are gone because we are handcuffed to Russells contract.

According to capfriendly we have 13 players next season and just over 14 mill in cap space.
That is where we are screwed. I dont think anyone believes Russell is going to get better. If the young guys are good, we likely cant afford them. If they arent, we keep them but that means an aging, declining Russell is counted on for years to come.

Either way I think this has screwed the team and there simply no logical way anyone has been able to convince me otherwise.

PS. I also believe this will be an untradable contract. I will though be entertained to no end if it is a young D like Bear that we have to give up to entice some team to take him off our hands in a couple years.



I am going to bow out of this debate after this response because we are just going to go back and forth arguing the same point because we both disagree.
1. I don't see how Benning and Nurse in their next contracts make more than what I said. I just don't see it. It doesn't make sense for them to lock up long term nor does it make sense to the team.

2. I don't see a scenario regardless of if Russell made 4 mill, 3, 2, 1 mill or was gone where the Oilers are adding a significant piece to their defense any time soon. The time to do that was last year when guys like Subban were available. It didn't happen thank god given the supposed ask. Even if Leon was making 7.5 mill, they would still be on the hook for 20 mill. If you have 2 guys locked up for 20-21 mill, you aren't adding a big, expensive dman. Not happening. I believe that the Oilers feel like the improvement of their defense will be internal growth of their players. I believe they think that their "Core" is Sekera, Klefbom, Larrson, Benning and Nurse. Sekera is 31. With the way he plays, I think he can stay at his level till the end of his contract which will have him at 34. Not old. Klefbom is only 24. Barely entering his prime years as a dman. Larsson is 24, barely entering his prime years. Nurse 22, hasn't entered his prime years. Benning, 23, hasn't entered his prime years. So I believe they think they will have 5 really good, some unproven dmen with 4 being under 25. SO they are in a good position.

3. While I don't think Russell is this amazing dman, I completely disagree that he is an aging, declining dman. He's 30 yrs old, he just turned 30 yrs old in May. He's not a Ference where he was 34 when he signed. He will be 34 when his contract is up. If Russell was when he was 25-26 at best a average skater, then maybe I could buy that at 30 he might take a step back but he's a good skater. If you think at 30 he is in declining years and his play will drop off drastically at 30, then you must think Sekera is even worse because he is already 31.

4. I do not believe for a second that this contract is untradeable. He is being paid as a versatile, plays both sides, #4 dman so I don't think at 4 mill, he is overpaid for a top 4 dman. We can disagree that he is a top 4 guy which is fine but I can go down the list of teams and I could easily pick out close to half of them (taking cap space out of it) where Russell would be in their top 4 today over who they have listed on their roster and not all the teams are bottom feeders. Yotes, Devils, Avs, Habs, Sabres, Kings, Vegas, Tampa,Hawks, Wings, Leafs, Sens. I don't know all the teams I listed young guys, so maybe there is a young guy listed that is really good that I don't know about. I am just going off who I recognize. After year 2, the No Move goes away and in yr 3, its a 10 team list, year 4 its a 15 team list and the money actually paid is less than the cap hit. A lot of crap contracts get traded all the time.

Anyway, like you said, no one will convince you which is totally fine. I understand your opinions and concerns. There is some validity to them. However, the only way I see for the Oilers to do everything you say needs to happen is for them to not sign anyone this past offseason. Maybe you wait until the end of August or Sept and sign the scraps left over but nobody note worthy or that you expect a lot of because their salary is such a concern to you. I am talking like a Franson or a Wideman, guys who just want to stay in the league so they will take anything. With Sekera out until xmas, you hope and pray that Nurse and Benning can play above their heads and you survive until Sekera is back. This assuming no one else important (Klefbom,Larsson, Nurse, Benning) misses any time. With Sekera out until xmas and probably a shadow of himself until Feb because he didn't train normally, had no camp, no preseason to knock off the rust, hasn't played a game since May and everyone in the league has 3-4 months on him, you pray that in that time while Sekera was out, that one of Benning or Nurse has emerged as a legit, every day top 4 guy, that can carry Sekera until he gets up to speed, not the up and down they currently are. If those 2 don't step up as much as the Oilers need them too and do what usually happens to most young dmen which is have peaks and valleys in their play because NHL defense is really hard and it takes time to learn the position, you pray that a Wideman or Franson or Gryba can play, way, way, way over their heads and be your #4 for the year and they can carry Sekera for awhile while he gets his game back. You do this all while you are supposed to be challenging for the division and maybe a cup. I personally think that would be a mistake but its one way they could have gone.





Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698666 is a reply to message #698381 ]
Wed, 30 August 2017 10:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mightyreasoner  is currently offline mightyreasoner
Messages: 4192
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton

4 Cups

Matt Benning isn't actually that young. He's not old, but he's already 23. It's easy to forget that, because he was in college and so his first year in the NHL is after what is typical for NHL rookies.

He's only one year younger than Klefbom and two years younger than Larsson. He's a year older than Nurse. He had four years of college to grow his game, so the hope is that he has a quicker learning curve at the NHL level than a 19-year-old out of junior.

For me, I'd rank the Oilers defense like this:

Klefbom
Larsson
Sekera
Benning
Russell
Nurse
Auvitu
Gryba

In four years, it's impossible to tell, and not all of these guys will be here (my guess being one of Benning or Nurse is moved, as I've said). But my guess would be:

Klefbom
Larsson
Benning
Sekera
Nurse
Russell...

... with perhaps one of Jones or Bear or one of the other prospects forcing their way in there.

By the end of the season I'd kind of expect these pairings:

Klefbom / Larsson
Sekera / Benning
Nurse / Russell

... though it wouldn't surprise me if Benning and Russell were flip with some regularity. Russell will get lots of PK time because if there is one area he excels at, I think that would it. He's a heck of a shot blocker, and all you are trying to do is get possession and clear your zone.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698671 is a reply to message #698666 ]
Wed, 30 August 2017 11:52 Go to previous message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 1918
Registered: January 2016

1 Cup

mightyreasoner wrote on Wed, 30 August 2017 10:52

Matt Benning isn't actually that young. He's not old, but he's already 23. It's easy to forget that, because he was in college and so his first year in the NHL is after what is typical for NHL rookies.

He's only one year younger than Klefbom and two years younger than Larsson. He's a year older than Nurse. He had four years of college to grow his game, so the hope is that he has a quicker learning curve at the NHL level than a 19-year-old out of junior.

For me, I'd rank the Oilers defense like this:

Klefbom
Larsson
Sekera
Benning
Russell
Nurse
Auvitu
Gryba

In four years, it's impossible to tell, and not all of these guys will be here (my guess being one of Benning or Nurse is moved, as I've said). But my guess would be:

Klefbom
Larsson
Benning
Sekera
Nurse
Russell...

... with perhaps one of Jones or Bear or one of the other prospects forcing their way in there.

By the end of the season I'd kind of expect these pairings:

Klefbom / Larsson
Sekera / Benning
Nurse / Russell

... though it wouldn't surprise me if Benning and Russell were flip with some regularity. Russell will get lots of PK time because if there is one area he excels at, I think that would it. He's a heck of a shot blocker, and all you are trying to do is get possession and clear your zone.

You are totally right. Age wise, Benning is not young but experience wise he is. If he played junior at 23, he's had 2-3 years of pro under his belt. He doesn't even have 1 full season yet. So that is my concern with Benning. While I think he will he good, I am not ready to put the fortunes of the Oilers top 4 on the shoulders of a player who in experience will have a season and a half at the end of this year. If he was out of junior and had 1.5 seasons of experience and people had him as the #4, most people would think the Oilers were nuts. But because he's out of college, it's OK? College hockey is not far off from junior.



Send a private message to this user  

Pages (4): [ «  <  1  2  3  4]  
Previous Topic:2017-18 Home Opener vs. Flames
Next Topic:Oilers Cap and potential savings.
Oilers NHL Minors Speculation For Sale 


Copyright © OilFans.com 1996-2017.
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