This day on November 20
None

Happy Birthday To: d_ottosen, lambofgad, Ofer, JayStyles, oilpride5

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
 Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698381]
Wed, 16 August 2017 23:03 Go to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11761
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Interesting article on Chiarelli and the job he's doing from Sunil Agni:

https://thesuperfan.ca/2017/08/14/assessing-chiarelli/

Basically, he's tried to gauge Chiarelli based on how the supporting cast has done. McDavid's the best player in hockey and has a monumental impact on the team's performance, so how much has Chiarelli really improved the team? You can only compare it by looking at how the team does when he's not on the ice.

I would have liked to see a comparison of the sans-McDavid numbers with the 2015-16 and 2014-15 seasons to get a better idea of the team's trending, but basically, the results suggest that the Oilers haven't been particularly dominant without McDavid on the ice. He tilts the ice so far when he's on it - which is over a third of each game - that he's dragging the team forward.

To be fair to Chiarelli, I think part of that is systems play. McLellan is married to a dump-it-out, dump-it-in system other than when McDavid is on the ice. His preference is to advance the puck from zone-to-zone as fast as possible and battle to regain possession. It's not a great system, and it hasn't played to the strengths of a number of the Oilers' forwards. I do expect that that makes it more difficult to assess how good the team could be under Chiarelli's leadership, but then, he makes the decisions on the coach too.

I tend to share Agni's concern about the way this summer's moves aren't likely to move the needle in the right direction here, although we can hope that third year McDavid is even more dominant and can once again single-handedly pull the Oilers along.



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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698382 is a reply to message #698381 ]
Wed, 16 August 2017 23:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55  is currently offline Kr55
Messages: 11351
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Adam wrote on Wed, 16 August 2017 23:03

Interesting article on Chiarelli and the job he's doing from Sunil Agni:

https://thesuperfan.ca/2017/08/14/assessing-chiarelli/

Basically, he's tried to gauge Chiarelli based on how the supporting cast has done. McDavid's the best player in hockey and has a monumental impact on the team's performance, so how much has Chiarelli really improved the team? You can only compare it by looking at how the team does when he's not on the ice.

I would have liked to see a comparison of the sans-McDavid numbers with the 2015-16 and 2014-15 seasons to get a better idea of the team's trending, but basically, the results suggest that the Oilers haven't been particularly dominant without McDavid on the ice. He tilts the ice so far when he's on it - which is over a third of each game - that he's dragging the team forward.

To be fair to Chiarelli, I think part of that is systems play. McLellan is married to a dump-it-out, dump-it-in system other than when McDavid is on the ice. His preference is to advance the puck from zone-to-zone as fast as possible and battle to regain possession. It's not a great system, and it hasn't played to the strengths of a number of the Oilers' forwards. I do expect that that makes it more difficult to assess how good the team could be under Chiarelli's leadership, but then, he makes the decisions on the coach too.

I tend to share Agni's concern about the way this summer's moves aren't likely to move the needle in the right direction here, although we can hope that third year McDavid is even more dominant and can once again single-handedly pull the Oilers along.


Like you said, can't blame everything on Chia IMO. McLellan need to take some heat. I think McLellan had players to have a good 2nd line, but he needed to get some chemistry going from the start of the year. His stubbornness with the Lucic/McDavid/Ebs trio really delayed a lot of the teams chance to get rolling with at least 2 good lines. Things were better in the last part of the season though. And many debates have been had on here on McLellan's coaching style and how it may have been setting up some of the depth scoring for failure.

McLellan will be the coach for many years to come though, and that's Chia's decision. I hope Strome fits in well and can succeed playing McLellan's style. Nuge on the wing has some potential to add some offence compared to last season too.

[Updated on: Wed, 16 August 2017 23:08]


"The Edmonton Oilers are not where they should be right now and that is unacceptable. We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
-Kevin Lowe, April 2013


"Next year (15/16) I would forecast as another developmental year"
- #2, April 2015

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698388 is a reply to message #698381 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 01:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mightyreasoner  is currently offline mightyreasoner
Messages: 4244
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton

4 Cups

There's some value in these questions and tests, but I'm also sometimes a little leery of them.

Take away the best player from any team, and I think you'll see a drop-off. When that player is one of the best in the game, it's even more the case.

How would (did) Montreal do without Carey Price? Are the Penguins remarkably worse when Crosby isn't in the lineup?

So I get it; but I also am a little reluctant to read TOO much into it because if the Oilers are building around McDavid, that's exactly what they SHOULD be doing.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698393 is a reply to message #698388 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 08:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently online RDOilerfan
Messages: 2169
Registered: January 2016

2 Cups

I absolutely despise these types of articles and haven't even bothered to read it as all they do is stir the pot and there is absolutely no legit way in my opinion of knowing definitively how good the Oilers would have been without McDavid.

First of all, do I think having a player like McDavid makes the Oilers way better than without him? Absolutely, I am not stupid. But how much better? I don't know. I an a HUGE Leon fan, I think on the majority of the teams in the league, Leon is a legit, stud #1 center. But on the Oilers, he's the second best player and he knows that. If McDavid wasn't here, would Leon have stepped up this past season and be the Oilers #1 center and be damn good? I would like to think he would. Do I think he would have scored 100 pts? No, very few players get 90 let alone 100. But do I think he could have gotten 80 being the main guy, I think it is in him. Being from Red Deer, I am a fan of Nuge because I watched him in junior but I am disappointed in what looks to be declining play even at a still young age. But what impact has McDavid had on Nuge's game? Before McDavid, he was the #1 center on the Oilers. He got all the premium offense time, all the PP time. If McDavid isn't here, where is Nuge? In McDavid's spot on the PP. If McDavid wasn't here, would Nuge be getting more ice time? Yes, he was an over 20 mins guy before McDavid, now what is he? 16-17? If McDavid wasn't here, would Nuge be the 60+ pt center he was drafted to be? Maybe, I don't know. Before McDavid, he seemed to be hovering in the 50's but a few injuries slowed him down. He seemed to fall off the year McDavid got drafted. Complete coincidence? Maybe, I have no clue.

In Hall. I liked Hall, prior to McDavid he was my favorite Oiler and the jersey I wore. Now I have no problem with the Hall trade as the Oilers needed a dman and Hall was the only guy worth anything. BUT I also think the Oilers needed a culture change and they wanted the Oilers to be McDavid's team. In order to do that, I feel the team felt they HAD to get rid of Hall. Hall was the alpha dog before McDavid, if you want McDavid to be the alpha dog, you have to get rid of the old one. But if McDavid isn't here, I think Hall still is. How would Hall have played? I don't know.

You can go down the list of guys who were here before McDavid, who were considered go to guy but who saw a little bit of their luster taken away by McDavid. Did that impact them? Maybe, I don't know.

I am sure there are some stats listed in his article because he is a stat guy. But how do you measure what the stats would be like if McDavid wasn't on the team? What other player would step up more if McDavid wasn't here and who differs to McDavid more than they should. I don't know. We all know that teams scheme for McDaivd, they focus on McDavid. If McDaivd isn't an Oiler, do they play the Oilers team differently? Maybe. How differently do the other teams play their lines and defense pairings without McDavid, no one knows. Does the Oilers coaching staff play a slightly different system without McDavid? Maybe, we don't know. They would put a system in that tries to benefit the whole team but I am sure definitely benefits McDavid. If McDavid gets hurt, you aren't throwing out your system while he is out, your carry on without him. If McDavid isn't an Oiler, what would be different about their system? I have to think they would tweak it. Would a tweak benefit say Nuge more and he's be the 60+ pt center he is supposed to be? No one knows.

So like I said, I hate these type of articles because all it does it stir the pot and cause arguments. Take Kane off the Hawks, are they winning all those cups? No freaking way in my opinion. Take Crosby off the Pens, are they winning all those cups? No freaking way in my opinion. Go down the list of all the team with an elite superstar, remove them from the team and ask yourself, is the GM or the team as good. Not a chance in hell.

[Updated on: Thu, 17 August 2017 08:48]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698396 is a reply to message #698393 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 09:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jakey  is currently offline Jakey
Messages: 551
Registered: November 2007
Location: Leduc

No Cups

Totally ludicrous for someone to write about this. what if this didn't happen, what if this did happen..... IT DID HAPPEN!!!

What if I was born in this country? What if I studied harder? What if, what if, what if. Ok I get the hey what would the Oilers be like if, but it isn't, so live in the present/future & let the past educate you on the good and not so good for future decisions.

This guy is just trying to sell his name and stir the pot......which granted he has, but he is not a legit writer if this is all he ca find to write about in the slower summer months.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698397 is a reply to message #698396 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 09:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11761
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Jakey wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 09:25

Totally ludicrous for someone to write about this. what if this didn't happen, what if this did happen..... IT DID HAPPEN!!!

What if I was born in this country? What if I studied harder? What if, what if, what if. Ok I get the hey what would the Oilers be like if, but it isn't, so live in the present/future & let the past educate you on the good and not so good for future decisions.

This guy is just trying to sell his name and stir the pot......which granted he has, but he is not a legit writer if this is all he ca find to write about in the slower summer months.


Did you read the article? I think you've misunderstood.

He's saying that the way to judge the team Chiarelli's assembled is to look at how it does when McDavid isn't on the ice. It's not a What if...it's an analysis of how the team is doing in the 40 minutes a night when McDavid is on the bench.

Right now, the team gets outshot and outscored still when he's not on the ice. If they're going to be a championship team, they probably have to tilt that the other way.



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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698409 is a reply to message #698397 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 12:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
oilerfan79  is currently offline oilerfan79
Messages: 63
Registered: August 2006
Location: Windsor Ontario

No Cups

Take any teams best player off the ice and I think you get the same reaction to varying degrees. I think the only real way to make this comparison is to remove every teams best player and see where their numbers compare to each other. To just say that when you take McDavid off the ice the Oilers aren't as good and don't out score the opposition and give the GM a failing grade because of it without looking at the rest of the league for comparison is naive. I would be surprised if most teams in the league didn't do worse when their best player is off the ice.


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698415 is a reply to message #698409 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 13:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Goose  is currently offline Goose
Messages: 1617
Registered: October 2006
Location: Vancouver

1 Cup

oilerfan79 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 11:21

I think the only real way to make this comparison is to remove every teams best player and see where their numbers compare to each other.


Great idea! Good thing Woodguy has already done this work for us.

It's a long article, with lots of good information, but basically his conclusion:

Quote:

The Oilers are among the best NHL teams when McDavid is on the ice. WOOOT!!!!

They are a middle ground team when he is not.

It seems clear that middle ground teams with their star off the ice are not Cup favorites like many consider Edmonton to be and there is lots of work for Peter Chiarelli to do when it comes to making the team better.

Middle ground teams can make the playoffs, miss the playoffs, win a round, maybe two, but they're not Cup favorites in my opinion.

The Oilers need to significantly upgrade the team, especially in regards to playing against other team's best players, in order to be a perennial Cup favorite.


With the Oilers, the biggest thing they can do to improve their non-McDavid numbers is to split he and Draisaitl up. Is Drai enough to move the needle on those metrics enough to make the Oilers an elite, true Cup contending team? Well that's the $68M question.

http://becauseoilers.blogspot.com/2017/07/a-look-at-nhl-team s-results-with-and.html



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698418 is a reply to message #698415 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 13:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11761
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Very interesting article from Woodguy - definitely shows some of the issues the Oilers have if they hope to become an elite Cup contender.

Quote:

FINAL THOUGHTS

The best players in the NHL drive the best results.

The best teams drives results without their best player on the ice and they also minimize the impact of the other team's best players.

Earth shattering stuff right!?!?

In hockey the best players can still only play about 35% of the available 5v5 time so while they drive a team, the other 65% is very important as well.

I think its really interesting to dig down into those results and post them in an easily digestible form so we can study them further to learn who the best teams are and some of the reasons why.

A post like this has given me more questions to ask and figure out than answers, but that's a good path towards more knowledge about all this stuff.

Seeing teams like PIT, WSH, MIN and NSH near the top of most of the metrics leads me to believe they will continue to be some of the best teams in the NHL.

NSH "surprised" many fans/MSM this year out of the 8 spot in the West, but it wasn't as much of a surprise to those who were paying attention to results other than just wins and loses.



McDavid is amazing, but the team needs to outplay the opposition still when he's off the ice. That didn't happen last year. In order to happen this year, then we need to see big improvements from guys like Lucic and Nugent-Hopkins, out-of-this world improvement from Strome, and/or the evolution of Leon Draisaitl in to a player who dominates when he's away from McDavid too.

EDIT:

I forgot to include the Oilers rankings on the various stats metrics (for those not interested in reading the articles).

Quote:

Oiler ranking in the 5 results posted:

GF% Star On - Tied 1st *swoon*

GF% Star Off - 13th. Not bad, not "elite". Having a top 5 goalie in Talbot drives this a lot. They were about 4% below the best teams. That's not a short distance to drive.

Percentage of Team Goals Scored Star On - 29th. Yikes!. McDavid being incredible drives this bus quite a bit, but 46.7% of a team's 5v5 goals coming when one player is on the ice is not balance. It is not healthy. If he tweaks a knee they're done.

DFF% vs All Players Star On - 4th. McDavid beating the NHL at this rate is pretty incredible when you consider he was 19 years old for half the season. Lordy.

DFF% vs All Players Star Off - 12th. This was a waaaaay better result than I expected and one that gives me hope. Its goalie independent so Talbot's amazing season wasn't driving this bus. Still not among the elite teams and need to improve ~3% to get there.

DFF% vs Elite Forwards Star On - 11th. The "19 year old" part of McDavid's game is not being an elite defender yet. As mentioned earlier he might need a Kurri to help this part of his game. Not bad, not great.

DFF% vs Elite Forwards Star Off - 15th. This ranking is worse than it looks. They are only 0.8% ahead of the 22nd place team and 2.9% away from the 7th place team. 2.9% is a lot. The elites of this category are far ahead of the Oilers and I think it speaks to a need to upgrade the center position away from McDavid to be the hard match line. RNH hasn't done well at it since McLellan got here and I'm not sure Draisaitl can handle it. He might, but we don't know that yet.

Shot Share (CF%) vs All Competition Star On - 13th. I expected higher. McDavid is one of the elite of the elite players who's GF% will always be higher than his CF% so its not a huge concern, but its still a concern. This is another metric that speaks to McDavid's defensive immaturity at this point.

Shot Share (CF%) vs All Competition Star Off - 18th. Meh. Below 50% and below league average isn't good. Like the DFF vs Elite Forwards, the Oilers results are about 3% below where the better teams tend to congregate.

Total Star On ranking: 1, 4, 11, 13.

Total Star Off ranking: 13, 12, 15, 18

Oilers also rely on McDavid to be on the ice and drive more of their goals than every other team relies on their star other than how much Ottawa relies on Karlsson.

[Updated on: Thu, 17 August 2017 14:03]


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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698430 is a reply to message #698415 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 15:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
oilerfan79  is currently offline oilerfan79
Messages: 63
Registered: August 2006
Location: Windsor Ontario

No Cups

Thanks for the link it was a good article. And as I guessed the Oilers are ok when McDavid isn't on the ice there is much room for improvement but they aren't nearly as terrible as the original article would suggest. I believe splitting up Drai and McDavid should help to improve the star not on ice numbers as I think Nuge's numbers should improve playing 3rd line competition and while Drai's overall numbers may decline I think he's better suited than Nuge to handle the 2nd line competition.
The original article panned Chia for not doing enough just riding McDavid but I don't believe that's correct either. I don't have the proof to back it up but I would bet before McDavid the Oilers were much worse without Hall on the ice. I mean they weren't good with Hall on the ice so I can only imagine what the numbers were without him.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698432 is a reply to message #698430 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 15:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11761
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

oilerfan79 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 15:20

Thanks for the link it was a good article. And as I guessed the Oilers are ok when McDavid isn't on the ice there is much room for improvement but they aren't nearly as terrible as the original article would suggest. I believe splitting up Drai and McDavid should help to improve the star not on ice numbers as I think Nuge's numbers should improve playing 3rd line competition and while Drai's overall numbers may decline I think he's better suited than Nuge to handle the 2nd line competition.
The original article panned Chia for not doing enough just riding McDavid but I don't believe that's correct either. I don't have the proof to back it up but I would bet before McDavid the Oilers were much worse without Hall on the ice. I mean they weren't good with Hall on the ice so I can only imagine what the numbers were without him.


I don't think that the original article suggested they are a terrible team without McDavid on the ice. He suggested they aren't championship calibre, and the projections that have us as a Cup favourite are generous, since really good teams don't just tread water when the star is off the ice.

You are definitely correct with Hall. He's a guy who drives the play (and continued to in New Jersey - who also has a huge drop-off in performance when their star player is on the bench).

You've hit on my initial point - it would be nice to see how this has evolved over the last three or four years, because I do think that the supporting cast is likely better now than it was a couple years back...when Hall was often playing with Nuge and Eberle, the rest of the team was often a tire fire.

That said, if you realized that the team wasn't good enough with McDavid off the ice this past year to be a true contender, then are the moves we've made this summer - re-sign everyone, trade Eberle for Strome straight-up, sign Jokinen, buy-out Pouliot, sign Auvitu - enough to expect that we're going to be a championship calibre team in 2017-18? Especially with the knowledge that we're down one of our top three defencemen for at least the first third of the year? I fear that while there is improvement from under MacTavish, that there hasn't been enough improvement.

We have a lot of pending free agents next year, and it will become much, MUCH harder to balance the cap with McDavid out of his rookie deals, so there's an argument to be made that this might be the best chance the Oilers have to make a serious push until after the cap has risen significantly and bought the Oilers more room to rebuild a supporting cast. If we aren't miles better this year, it's an opportunity lost and it may be a lot tougher to make it work for the next 3-4 years following this.

I'm not saying I think the Oilers are going to miss the playoffs - McDavid is so good that we should be able to get that done each year - but I'm saying that our chances of a Cup run are going to be lower for a few years while we can't afford to bring in good help and while some of these high-profile unrestricted free agent signings we've made decline in performance over the course of their deals. Having a superstar player takes you a long way...but depth wins championships. We don't have that yet, I fear.



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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698398 is a reply to message #698393 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 10:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11761
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 08:41

I absolutely despise these types of articles and haven't even bothered to read it as all they do is stir the pot and there is absolutely no legit way in my opinion of knowing definitively how good the Oilers would have been without McDavid.



While people can read whatever they want, it doesn't make much sense to go posting in threads about an article without reading said article. You've completely misinterpreted the analysis done by the author.

If you want to critique the analysis, go ahead, but at least read and understand the article before you sound off, because otherwise, it's just noise in the thread and completely meaningless.



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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698404 is a reply to message #698398 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 11:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently online RDOilerfan
Messages: 2169
Registered: January 2016

2 Cups

Adam wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 10:02

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 08:41

I absolutely despise these types of articles and haven't even bothered to read it as all they do is stir the pot and there is absolutely no legit way in my opinion of knowing definitively how good the Oilers would have been without McDavid.



While people can read whatever they want, it doesn't make much sense to go posting in threads about an article without reading said article. You've completely misinterpreted the analysis done by the author.

If you want to critique the analysis, go ahead, but at least read and understand the article before you sound off, because otherwise, it's just noise in the thread and completely meaningless.


Why would I waste my time on a garbage article? Like I said, a team is going to play a McDavidless team a whole lot different than when you have him even if he's on the bench. The coach is most likely going to have a slightly different style of play if McDavid isn't an Oiler. How the coaching staff deploys the forwards is going to be different if McDavid isn't on the team. Who the other players play with is going to be different if McDavid isn't on the team. Certain forwards ice time is going to be different which could skew the numbers if McDavid isn't no the team. They might even have a completely different PP set up if McDavid isn't on the team. So how can anyone accurately look at the other pieces of the team and judge them and judge the GM when everything about the team would be modeled around having McDavid on your team? In my opinion, you can't because he affects EVERYTHING whether he is on the ice or not. He even affects how the other team plays the Oilers whether he is on the ice or the bench. We saw it in the playoffs man. Opposing coaches will yank certain guys on and off the ice immediately if McDavid comes on or off the ice. So that will have am impact on what the other guys do on the Oilers as well.

I would also go so far as to say that I believe the GM himself would alter his thinking and who and what he thinks he needs on his team if you have a McDavid vs if you don't. If you have an Art Ross, Hart and Lindsey trophy winner on your team, you can probably get away with maybe being ever so slightly weaker in other positions because he is SOOOOO good. As an example, I believe that the Preds had a vastly superior defense and more forward depth from lines 1-4 than the Pens. The injury to Johansen was a massive blow but the Pens had Crosby and Malkin and the Preds didn't have anyone CLOSE even if Johansen was fine match those 2 and the Pens won. If Crosby isn't on the Pens, do I think the Pens GM manages his team a little differently? Yes. He probably has a few better wingers on his team than he does.

So again, why would I waste my time reading an article that I think is based on a crap topic when I believe that having a McDavid type player affects every single thing your team does on and off the ice?

[Updated on: Thu, 17 August 2017 11:13]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698405 is a reply to message #698404 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 11:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11761
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 11:09

Adam wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 10:02

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 08:41

I absolutely despise these types of articles and haven't even bothered to read it as all they do is stir the pot and there is absolutely no legit way in my opinion of knowing definitively how good the Oilers would have been without McDavid.



While people can read whatever they want, it doesn't make much sense to go posting in threads about an article without reading said article. You've completely misinterpreted the analysis done by the author.

If you want to critique the analysis, go ahead, but at least read and understand the article before you sound off, because otherwise, it's just noise in the thread and completely meaningless.


Why would I waste my time on a garbage article? Like I said, a team is going to play a McDavidless team a whole lot different than when you have him even if he's on the bench. The coach is most likely going to have a slightly different style of play if McDavid isn't an Oiler. How the coaching staff deploys the forwards is going to be different if McDavid isn't on the team. Who the other players play with is going to be different if McDavid isn't on the team. Certain forwards ice time is going to be different which could skew the numbers if McDavid isn't no the team. They might even have a completely different PP set up if McDavid isn't on the team. So how can anyone accurately look at the other pieces of the team and judge them and judge the GM when everything about the team would be modeled around having McDavid on your team? In my opinion, you can't because he affects EVERYTHING whether he is on the ice or not. He even affects how the other team plays the Oilers whether he is on the ice or the bench. We saw it in the playoffs man. Opposing coaches will yank certain guys on and off the ice immediately if McDavid comes on or off the ice. So that will have am impact on what the other guys do on the Oilers as well.

I would also go so far as to say that I believe the GM himself would alter his thinking and who and what he thinks he needs on his team if you have a McDavid vs if you don't. If you have an Art Ross, Hart and Lindsey trophy winner on your team, you can probably get away with maybe being ever so slightly weaker in other positions because he is SOOOOO good. As an example, I believe that the Preds had a vastly superior defense and more forward depth from lines 1-4 than the Pens. The injury to Johansen was a massive blow but the Pens had Crosby and Malkin and the Preds didn't have anyone CLOSE even if Johansen was fine match those 2 and the Pens won. If Crosby isn't on the Pens, do I think the Pens GM manages his team a little differently? Yes. He probably has a few better wingers on his team than he does.

So again, why would I waste my time reading an article that I think is based on a crap topic when I believe that having a McDavid type player affects every single thing your team does on and off the ice?


You don't have to read the article, but if you're going to comment on it, you really should. It impacts your credibility when you comment on something that you haven't seen.

Do you think that teams are likely to put their best or lesser players out against Connor McDavid?

Do you think that if you did the analysis on the Penguins when Crosby is not on the ice, that they get outshot and outscored by any significant margin? Or do you think it's more likely that they still outscore their opposition.

McDavid does impact the team. But Chiarelli gets no credit for having McDavid. That was simply lottery ball luck. If you want to critique, there's space to critique in this article. He shows that they get outscored and outshot this past season without McDavid on the ice, but he doesn't have comparables to the previous two years. I would expect that if you looked at them, that the Oilers were getting outscored and outshot worse under MacTavish, and likely worse in Chiarelli's first year. That would suggest the team is moving in the right direction at least if that is true (which I don't know, because I don't have the data), although slower than you'd like to see.

It also lends itself to the question of whether you think the team will be better this year without McDavid on the ice than it was last year. There's been very few player moves, and the most significant one was a definitive step backwards in terms of player quality. Is there reason to believe that the team will be better in those 40 minutes a game this next year? Only if you think there's some guys who'll bounce-back or that Draisaitl will play most of his time away from McDavid and excel.



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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698407 is a reply to message #698405 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 12:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently online RDOilerfan
Messages: 2169
Registered: January 2016

2 Cups

Adam wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 11:31

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 11:09

Adam wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 10:02

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 08:41

I absolutely despise these types of articles and haven't even bothered to read it as all they do is stir the pot and there is absolutely no legit way in my opinion of knowing definitively how good the Oilers would have been without McDavid.



While people can read whatever they want, it doesn't make much sense to go posting in threads about an article without reading said article. You've completely misinterpreted the analysis done by the author.

If you want to critique the analysis, go ahead, but at least read and understand the article before you sound off, because otherwise, it's just noise in the thread and completely meaningless.


Why would I waste my time on a garbage article? Like I said, a team is going to play a McDavidless team a whole lot different than when you have him even if he's on the bench. The coach is most likely going to have a slightly different style of play if McDavid isn't an Oiler. How the coaching staff deploys the forwards is going to be different if McDavid isn't on the team. Who the other players play with is going to be different if McDavid isn't on the team. Certain forwards ice time is going to be different which could skew the numbers if McDavid isn't no the team. They might even have a completely different PP set up if McDavid isn't on the team. So how can anyone accurately look at the other pieces of the team and judge them and judge the GM when everything about the team would be modeled around having McDavid on your team? In my opinion, you can't because he affects EVERYTHING whether he is on the ice or not. He even affects how the other team plays the Oilers whether he is on the ice or the bench. We saw it in the playoffs man. Opposing coaches will yank certain guys on and off the ice immediately if McDavid comes on or off the ice. So that will have am impact on what the other guys do on the Oilers as well.

I would also go so far as to say that I believe the GM himself would alter his thinking and who and what he thinks he needs on his team if you have a McDavid vs if you don't. If you have an Art Ross, Hart and Lindsey trophy winner on your team, you can probably get away with maybe being ever so slightly weaker in other positions because he is SOOOOO good. As an example, I believe that the Preds had a vastly superior defense and more forward depth from lines 1-4 than the Pens. The injury to Johansen was a massive blow but the Pens had Crosby and Malkin and the Preds didn't have anyone CLOSE even if Johansen was fine match those 2 and the Pens won. If Crosby isn't on the Pens, do I think the Pens GM manages his team a little differently? Yes. He probably has a few better wingers on his team than he does.

So again, why would I waste my time reading an article that I think is based on a crap topic when I believe that having a McDavid type player affects every single thing your team does on and off the ice?


You don't have to read the article, but if you're going to comment on it, you really should. It impacts your credibility when you comment on something that you haven't seen.

Do you think that teams are likely to put their best or lesser players out against Connor McDavid?

Do you think that if you did the analysis on the Penguins when Crosby is not on the ice, that they get outshot and outscored by any significant margin? Or do you think it's more likely that they still outscore their opposition.

McDavid does impact the team. But Chiarelli gets no credit for having McDavid. That was simply lottery ball luck. If you want to critique, there's space to critique in this article. He shows that they get outscored and outshot this past season without McDavid on the ice, but he doesn't have comparables to the previous two years. I would expect that if you looked at them, that the Oilers were getting outscored and outshot worse under MacTavish, and likely worse in Chiarelli's first year. That would suggest the team is moving in the right direction at least if that is true (which I don't know, because I don't have the data), although slower than you'd like to see.

It also lends itself to the question of whether you think the team will be better this year without McDavid on the ice than it was last year. There's been very few player moves, and the most significant one was a definitive step backwards in terms of player quality. Is there reason to believe that the team will be better in those 40 minutes a game this next year? Only if you think there's some guys who'll bounce-back or that Draisaitl will play most of his time away from McDavid and excel.


I gave my opinion on this topic because I have been told this is an opinion site and everyone is welcome to express how they feel. I actually gave my opinion twice. It differs from yours and because it differs from yours, you now call into question my credibility. Interesting.

I have read some of Sunil's stuff before. I have heard him countless times on Lowetides show. I don't agree with a lot of the things he says or how views the game. So reading another article from a guy who I personally don't agree with, really won't do a lot for me or my opinion. But I really don't feel like getting into another pissing match with you. So if it makes you feel better. You are right and I am wrong. Happy?



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698406 is a reply to message #698404 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 12:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dragon_Matt  is currently offline Dragon_Matt
Messages: 50
Registered: January 2009
Location: edmonton

No Cups

without reading an article, how do you know if the article is garbage?


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698422 is a reply to message #698406 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 14:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently online RDOilerfan
Messages: 2169
Registered: January 2016

2 Cups

Dragon_Matt wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 12:00

without reading an article, how do you know if the article is garbage?

You know what, I broke down and read the bloody article and it was exactly as I expected.

First paragraph, not surprisingly he expresses his disappoint with Oilers management and how passive they have been, especially this offseason. Since Chia has taken the job. He's signed Sekera, signed Letestu, traded for Kassian, traded for Talbot, traded for Maroon, he signed Lucic, he signed Benning, he signed Russell, he signed Caggulia, All have had MASSIVE impacts on the roster. He traded Hall for Larsson, which is a HUGE move and I believe has worked out. He brought in an actual good coaching staff that knew what they were doing. All that happened in the first couple of years. In 2 seasons, he completely remade the roster and the organization.

Have all of his moves worked out perfectly those first few seasons? Nope. The Reinhart deal sucked, the Gustavvson signing didn't work out, those being the 2 worse ones. But the HUGE majority of his moves completely turned the team around. He came in to a last place team that was a laughing stock, that had no defense and no goalie and hadn't been to the playoffs in almost a decade and in 2 seasons, they got over 100 pts and got screwed out going to the conference finals. Did lucking out and getting to draft McDavid help make his job a little easier? Of course it did but if all he did was walk up to the draft podium and draft McDavid but did nothing else to the roster that he inherited, not a chance in hell they would have been much better. He revamped the ENTIRE roster.

He also had the foresight to resign Klefbom even though he barely played his contract season and it already looks like a STEAL of a contract at 4.2 mill.

This offseason, Sunhil was right, compared to the previous couple of offseasons, it was relatively quiet.

Second paragraph, the first thing he says is he likes the Jokinen signing. I do too, shockingly, I agree with him. But then he goes on too praise the Auvitu signing. The guy is a 28 yr old, undersized, noncompetitive, no physical play, left shooting dman with limited NHL experience, has barely played, that doesn't have much in the way of offensive numbers and who a brutal team that severely lacked defense in the Devils let walk but apparently some spread sheet based on his extremely limited game experience says he's good. Basically they lost Osterle who was the same player a.k.a borderline NHLer at best and replaced him but Sunhil and the rest of the stats guys love the move.

Then predictably, he goes on to bash the Strome acquisition. He was a highly touted offensive center/rw, that skates decent, has some edge to his game, not bad size that unfortunately got drafted by a gong show organization in the Islanders. Strome hasn't even practiced in an Oilers jersey yet but he's junk because Sunhil and the stats boys says so. Then he further goes on to complain that if you move Eberle and his overpaid 6 mill, you have to re-allocate all the dollars to a significant impact player. Does Sunhil have a crystal ball that says the cap is going up by 10 mill real quick? I have to think that prior to the trade that Chia at least had a ball park idea where McDavid and Drai would come in at. Guess what, it will be 21 mill. So you HAVE TO clear some cap space and waiting until the last min would be crazy in my opinion. You do it in stages. Plus Eberle was overpaid and SUCKED all last season and was a joke in the playoffs when the games really mattered. Maybe people don't want to hear this but in order for teams to WIN, your better, higher paid players have to ELEVATE their games when the games get tougher. The players who were once the faces of the team, Hall, Eberle, Nuge, were never able to elevate their games. As the year went on and the games got tougher, Hall's game tailed off because things weren't going his way. Eberle FINALLY got on a winning team that started winning from game one and he had his worst season EVER. As the games got tough, he actually got worse. When the playoffs came, when the games are the hardest, Eberle even got WORSE. Sorry if people don't like to hear this but Eberle had to go.

Then he goes on to bash Russell. SHOCKER!! He says the Oilers overpaid for Russell. They did? I don't think Russell is a world beater but given who was out there, 4 mill is not that bad and I didn't see anyone better. Would people rather have Alzner who can't skate at 4.625? How about Brendan Smith at 4.35 who isn't much better? Shattenkirk was never signing here. Stone signed for 3.5 so you could save 500k but I am not convinced he's better than Russell, the only thing he has going for him is he's a right shot. Vegas let WAY too many teams off the hook so all these dmen we thought would be available weren't. I think bringing in Hamonic at the price the Flames paid was not a good idea for the Oilers. Rolling the dice and praying that Benning and Nurse can fill in as the second pairing with Sekera down would be insanity. Hopefully between the 2 of them, you can get a guy that can hold the fort until Sekera comes back. I hear the likes of Sunhil go on and on about Franson. The guy CAN'T skate. People whine about Gryba's skating, Franson is just as bad but at least Gryba touches someone. If you want to bring in Franson on a PTO, sure go for it. But you don't hang your hat on that guy early in free agency. Sunhil is the same guy that beats the drum of Fayne. Sorry, Fayne is a #6 at best. So if not Russell then who?

So then he gets into the meat and Potatoes of the article. Analyzing the Oilers and their problems with scoring without McDavid. So who does he use as an argument as a bad moves by the Oilers this summer? Eberle and Pouliot. 2 guys who made 10 mill and sucked all last year and were worse in the playoffs.

So like I said, I do agree with Sunhil that in comparison to the last couple of offseasons, this one was relatively quiet in terms of physical guys moving in and out. But I also look at that as a really good thing. It means that the team is actually getting depth and getting to be really good. The bulk of their defense (Klef, Larsson, Benning, Nurse) are all really young and have plenty of room to improve. They have improved their overall depth big time, their 2 best players are locked up long term and haven't even entered their prime yet. They have young guys like Slep, Caggulia, Puljujarvi looking to step in and make impacts. So how many more massive moves does Sunhil expect given all the moves Chia has already made plus with knowing you have 21 mill taken up next season in Leon and McDavid plus Benning, Nurse, Caggulia as significant RFA's and Maroon and Letestu as UFA's to name a couple coming up. I don't see what else Chia can do.

So as I said several times. I knew what to expect in this article because I have heard and read Sunhil and his complaints many times so it was a waste of my time and did not change my opinion. When you whine about Russell when the Oilers needed to sign someone and there was no one else even close to being better, when you sing the praises of an underachieving and overpaid Eberle and then sing the praises of an even WORSE Pouliot, it's a crap topic to me.

There you go boys, you sucked me in again.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698428 is a reply to message #698422 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 15:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PlusOne  is currently offline PlusOne
Messages: 1006
Registered: July 2006
Location: Regina, Sask

1 Cup

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 14:30

Dragon_Matt wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 12:00

without reading an article, how do you know if the article is garbage?

You know what, I broke down and read the bloody article and it was exactly as I expected.

First paragraph, not surprisingly he expresses his disappoint with Oilers management and how passive they have been, especially this offseason. Since Chia has taken the job. He's signed Sekera, signed Letestu, traded for Kassian, traded for Talbot, traded for Maroon, he signed Lucic, he signed Benning, he signed Russell, he signed Caggulia, All have had MASSIVE impacts on the roster. He traded Hall for Larsson, which is a HUGE move and I believe has worked out. He brought in an actual good coaching staff that knew what they were doing. All that happened in the first couple of years. In 2 seasons, he completely remade the roster and the organization.



There you go boys, you sucked me in again.



So I am guessing you answer to the simple question of "Has Chiarelli done a good job?" is yes?

I think a lot of your points might be good ones but I didnt read your post as I knew what you were going to say!!! (Just kidding, I read it)

To the part I quoted yes, a lot of those moves can be seen as good in a list like that.
For most of us that think Chia has done an only ok job it is looking at the details of those deals.
You often like to use the media, the radio you listen to, mainstream hockey guys, etc to defend your opinions. What has that group had to say about the deals you list?

Almost every one of Chia's deals that involve money are an overpayment. Almost every deal has made the window to build a cup contender smaller. Almost every one comes with a no trade clause that most are scratching their heads as to why.

When it comes to trades he has been better overall but still been confusing to a lot of people. An old saying that the team who gets the best player wins the trade, some of Chia's that happens, some it doesnt.

My biggest problem with Chia is that he seems to have tunnel vision and no patience. He decides a player has to go and is solely focused on that. He sets a chain of events that has to happen in order and wont stray from it, he has a FA target and will pay for it, etc.

Aside from McDavid are the Oilers a better team? My opinion is they are. My fear is that he has dug himself a hole so early that this team might be destined to be a REALLY good team that cant quite turn the corner and win a cup. Maybe for the next decade. Is that better than the decade of darkness, of course, but it seems to be a waste of a generation player.



"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 #698433 is a reply to message #698428 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 15:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
oilerfan79  is currently offline oilerfan79
Messages: 63
Registered: August 2006
Location: Windsor Ontario

No Cups

What always gets me is that lots here keep saying he's been over paying. How do you know that? I look at the Oilers with rose coloured glasses too but what value do players on losing teams really have, how much do you pay to get the best clown at a clown show? Hall is an incredible player but I believe Chia got decent value for a one dimensional player with a perceived attitude problem, he needed a steady d man which he got. Eberle is a well payed goal scorer that isn't helping on d who was perceived to be a big game player but when the big games came along disappeared, he got a younger faster and more versitile c/rw. To overpay you have to pay more than the market but what's the market? Do you know for sure that he was offered better for either player? Or do you just think he didn't get enough based on your biased (I have a biased view too) value of the players?


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698437 is a reply to message #698433 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 16:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently online RDOilerfan
Messages: 2169
Registered: January 2016

2 Cups

oilerfan79 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 15:42

What always gets me is that lots here keep saying he's been over paying. How do you know that? I look at the Oilers with rose coloured glasses too but what value do players on losing teams really have, how much do you pay to get the best clown at a clown show? Hall is an incredible player but I believe Chia got decent value for a one dimensional player with a perceived attitude problem, he needed a steady d man which he got. Eberle is a well payed goal scorer that isn't helping on d who was perceived to be a big game player but when the big games came along disappeared, he got a younger faster and more versitile c/rw. To overpay you have to pay more than the market but what's the market? Do you know for sure that he was offered better for either player? Or do you just think he didn't get enough based on your biased (I have a biased view too) value of the players?

I agree with you. People didn't like the Hall trade for Larsson because Larsson doesn't put up big points. I'm as big of an Oilers fan as there is but even I know Hall isn't worth say a Doughty or whoever that can not only be a stud in the d-zone but also your right shot, puck moving, PP QB, point producing, big mins dman. Hall is a very good player but he is a 60-65 pt player. Still really good but he is not worth a stud, right shot dman that does it all. Larsson did everything else that the Oilers could have asked for except put up big points and he's dirt cheap. So I see it as a good trade but there are still fans who hate the trade and say the Oilers got hosed.

I see the Oilers doing exactly what the Pens did with Staal when Crosby and Malkin and their big contracts back in the day came on the books. Staal was a really good 3rd line center who could easily be an OK #2 center on a lot of teams. But on the Pens he was their #3, a HUGE luxury to have. At the time of the trade in 2012 he was making 4 mill and due for a raise. Given the contacts of Crosby and Malkin, Staal even at 4 mill was was making WAY too much money for the Pens to be their #3. So they traded him to Carolina for Brandon Sutter who was a cheap 3rd line center. Brandon Sutter is a 3rd line center, that is all he is. At the time of the trade and for the next few seasons, Sutter was making just over 2 mill. Player for player, Sutter wasn't even close to being as good as Staal. Staal immediately signed a 10 yr, 6 mill per deal and was slotted as their #2 behind his bro.

So the Pens took on a lesser player in Sutter that could do the job as their 3rd line center and was paid appropriately as a 3rd line center. But they have up the superior player to get cap space because it immediately saved them 2 mill immediately because of the difference between 4 mill - 2 and in the end saved them 4 mill because Staal got 6 in his new contract. So that is what I see happening and some Oilers fans will lose their minds because the Oilers gave up the "better" player in their mind based on what me MIGHT do again even though he has been performing as a 3rd line player for several seasons.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698440 is a reply to message #698433 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 16:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11761
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

oilerfan79 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 15:42

What always gets me is that lots here keep saying he's been over paying. How do you know that? I look at the Oilers with rose coloured glasses too but what value do players on losing teams really have, how much do you pay to get the best clown at a clown show? Hall is an incredible player but I believe Chia got decent value for a one dimensional player with a perceived attitude problem, he needed a steady d man which he got. Eberle is a well payed goal scorer that isn't helping on d who was perceived to be a big game player but when the big games came along disappeared, he got a younger faster and more versitile c/rw. To overpay you have to pay more than the market but what's the market? Do you know for sure that he was offered better for either player? Or do you just think he didn't get enough based on your biased (I have a biased view too) value of the players?


I think that the easiest answer to that is comparables. On salaries, it's pretty easy to build comparables. Lots were done for Leon Draisaitl as we all waited and speculated...Chiarelli paid him higher than all the comps.

With trades, there is also comparables, and there is an assessment of the relative value of the players. I believe that defencemen are more important than wingers, but that a top five left wing in the league - which is where I'd rank Hall - is more valuable than a top-60 defender, which is where I'd put Larsson.

I really like Larsson, but even Chiarelli at the time of the trade said that New Jersey got the better player that day. That could have been compensated for by getting something else included in the deal, but he failed to do that.

Strome versus Eberle - it's just not close on what the two players have historically contributed and it's a stretch to think that Strome can replace the offence you give up losing Eberle. While he's bigger, there's no evidence that Strome is a grittier player. He doesn't hit much and doesn't take many penalties. He hasn't had many fights and he'd fallen out of favour in New York. Again, if the Oilers get something more with him, it could make up for it, but again, it's a straight up deal.

In both situations, there wasn't a necessity to do the deal when it was done. Both were completed very early in the summer, and neither were motivated by immediate cap concerns. With Strome, if the deal works out and he returns to 50+ points, the cap concerns for 2018-19, which is when our cap crunch hits, could be even worse than with Eberle here. (I don't anticipate him approaching 50 points though).

Attitude problems is even more speculation than what else may have been available and what it would have cost. Certainly, Hall still seems close to many of his former teammates (he had an event with McDavid and Nurse last summer, he was at Eberle's wedding this summer). A good coach is able to control a dressing room despite multiple egos to balance and/or rein in.

We won't know what else is available, but I think it's fair for people to assess a deal and decide they think we got less than we should have for a player. You don't have to agree - but I think there's some good arguments, most of which have been made on here ad nauseum.






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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698443 is a reply to message #698440 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 19:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
oilerfan79  is currently offline oilerfan79
Messages: 63
Registered: August 2006
Location: Windsor Ontario

No Cups

I'm not sure we can ever agree you choose to see the deals Chia makes and look at the bad side I tend to look at the good side. I'm not sure there is a comparable for Drai, he did really well beside McDavid but in the playoffs actually outplayed the best player in the world by a good margin to the point if the Oilers had went to the finals I think he would have won the conn smythe. I believe that while it was a small sample size on his own we may be looking at our Crosby & Malkin you pay what you have to to keep them on the same team.

I also believe dmen are more important than wingers but this is where we differ in our perceived value, Hall is great but he is not a top 5 in the league he is in the top 10 but he fades too much when the checking gets tight to be top 5. And with Larsson I believe you're understating the importance of being able to defend. He was a plus 21 the only on better was McDavid and 7 ahead of the next closest dman in Sekera. I know plus/minus is a terrible stat but to me it shows he can keep the puck out of his own net, that to me has extreme value for a dman.

Yes Jersey got the better player but not by nearly as big a margin as some think it was not an extreme overpay. He was also dealing from a position of weakness everyone knew he needed d no one was going to trade him any unless they thought they were winning the trade. And a year later I'm not sure Jersey won the trade they're essentially where Edmonton was before the trade no competent d.

Where you see him dealing a point producing right winger I see him dealing a player that refused to buy in to the system the coach plays. Strome is grittier because he does hit twice as often as Eberle. He may not score as much but is quite a bit faster and that could come as an advantage playing with McDavid if he gets the chance which could lead to increased production. Eberle could not figure out how to play with McDavid and can't play Center which Strome can do. Eberle was being paid 3.5 million more and cap space is a premium. To say Strome fell out of favour in New York and not say Eberle fell out of favour here is shading the issue how you want it too look. They both fell out of favour. Strome is 3 years younger 2 inches taller and 20lbs heavier, so probably better suited to play in the heavier west.

I remember you stating that it was terrible when Chia had to give Boychuck to the Islanders because he got himself into cap hell but now when he's proactive and gets something plus cap space for a player he would have to give away next year if not add to to get a team to take him now he's making a bad deal. Even if Strome gets 50 he's not getting 6 mil a year maybe if he gets 70 but even then he's a possible trade chip and for quite a bit in return too I would think.

So again it's the way you and I look at things. You see Hall a point production machine, I see a very good if not great winger who was no longer needed with McDavid here to put up the points. In Larsson you see a dman that doesn't put up points, I see a dman that doesn't give up goals. In Eberle you see a point producing winger that had a bad playoffs, I see a one dimensional player that had a horrendous playoffs and wouldn't buy into the coaches system so therefore was not likely to see a feature role this year and next summer when he had to be traded would probably have fetched even less.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698431 is a reply to message #698422 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 15:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently online RDOilerfan
Messages: 2169
Registered: January 2016

2 Cups

Here is my next bold prediction for the Oilers.

Because the Oilers will have McDavid and Leon both on the books at 21 mill next season. Plus they have to sign Strome, Slep, Caggiula, Benning, Nurse and Brossoit, all players I would assume they want to keep given their age and them most likely being good players. Then you have to factor in that Letestu, Maroon and Jokinen will be UFA's so you either have to resign them or replace them, that Nuge at some point either mid season or in the offseason will be traded. He will be traded because he makes 6 mill and is the 3rd best center on the Oilers because at some point given how good Leon is and his salary, Leon will be the Oilers full time 2nd line center. So that drops Nuge down to 3rd line center. The return for Nuge will probably be a much cheaper 3rd line center who's actually a 3rd line center, can actually win a faceoff, puts up 3rd line center production and who is PAID like a 3rd line center.

So what will happen is some in Oilers nation will lose it. They will call Chia stupid, talk about how even though Nuge will be finishing probably his 3rd straight down season production wise, they will quote the "what if" and quote the past. "Nuge put up high 50's in pts." It doesn't matter that he hasn't done it in years, he did it back in the day, just like Eberle is a "30 goal scorer" because he did it once 6 years ago. Then the likes of Sunhil will write about the terrible Oilers management. He will lists the Russell contract as part of the problem. Even though it won't be because like it or not 4 mill for a dman that can give you decent top 4 mins is the going minimum rate and if it wasn't Russell, you were giving out at least 4 mill to someone else. Then he will list the Lucic contract. It doesn't matter that Lucic is a big part of the team and contributed to the turn around and helps out Connor. Sunhil doesn't like the contract so it's bad.

So there is my bold prediction.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698438 is a reply to message #698431 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 16:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PlusOne  is currently offline PlusOne
Messages: 1006
Registered: July 2006
Location: Regina, Sask

1 Cup

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 15:21

Here is my next bold prediction for the Oilers.

Because the Oilers will have McDavid and Leon both on the books at 21 mill next season. Plus they have to sign Strome, Slep, Caggiula, Benning, Nurse and Brossoit, all players I would assume they want to keep given their age and them most likely being good players. Then you have to factor in that Letestu, Maroon and Jokinen will be UFA's so you either have to resign them or replace them, that Nuge at some point either mid season or in the offseason will be traded. He will be traded because he makes 6 mill and is the 3rd best center on the Oilers because at some point given how good Leon is and his salary, Leon will be the Oilers full time 2nd line center. So that drops Nuge down to 3rd line center. The return for Nuge will probably be a much cheaper 3rd line center who's actually a 3rd line center, can actually win a faceoff, puts up 3rd line center production and who is PAID like a 3rd line center.

So what will happen is some in Oilers nation will lose it. They will call Chia stupid, talk about how even though Nuge will be finishing probably his 3rd straight down season production wise, they will quote the "what if" and quote the past. "Nuge put up high 50's in pts." It doesn't matter that he hasn't done it in years, he did it back in the day, just like Eberle is a "30 goal scorer" because he did it once 6 years ago. Then the likes of Sunhil will write about the terrible Oilers management. He will lists the Russell contract as part of the problem. Even though it won't be because like it or not 4 mill for a dman that can give you decent top 4 mins is the going minimum rate and if it wasn't Russell, you were giving out at least 4 mill to someone else. Then he will list the Lucic contract. It doesn't matter that Lucic is a big part of the team and contributed to the turn around and helps out Connor. Sunhil doesn't like the contract so it's bad.

So there is my bold prediction.


This post I can 100% agree with. The problem that many of us have that you seem to be missing is THIS is exactly the hole that Chia has dug.
He clearly has a plan based around McDavid and Drai. That is fine but the rest of the supporting cast is going to be harder and harder to be even close to decent.
After this season there will have to be a couple major changes. As you state, RNH will be one of them.
Next year they have Strome, Letestu, Maroon, Jokinen, Slep, Pakarinen, Fayne, Benning, Nurse and Brossoit who are free agents, RFA or UFA. Also, Korpikoski's buyout comes off.
They will have 14 mill in cap space + the expected 6 from losing RNH so 20
That is now a lot of spots to fill with that money.

After that it gets worse as Talbot is a UFA. The only other guys coming off the cap are Khaira, JP who you would hope will be good enough to resign but likely only JP will be.

So your bold predicition is exactly correct and exactly the fear I have in what Chia has done. I have no problem at all with McD's contract.
I think given comparable and the number of UFA years that were bought the Drai contract is too high or too long. You dont get max contract AND max money when you have multiple RFA years left. On top off that Chia throws in a no move clause. Yikes.
Even with all that I dont hate it. It is what it is for a "star" player. Now we pray he is one and not a one year wonder.

But even a simple knowledge of the cap world can see that Chia is overpaying for role players. Anyone outside of the top 2 C's, the top D's or the #1 goalie cant be making top dollar for the role they play.
Is Russell terrible? No, is he overpaid compared to almost EVERY player in a comparable role or comparable results, yep!

Is Lucic great in the role he plays, yep, I think so. Is that contract going to screw the team as soon as 2019-20? Pretty likely barring a massive surprise or him retiring due to his back condition.

As soon as next year is Gryba overpaid? Yep

Sekara's contract going to be an issue sooner than later? Likely

As I mentioned earlier, giving out big numbers with too much term to role players will be the downfall of the Oilers long term success IMO. Drai and McD wont be the issue, it will be the guys above, among a couple others that will cause the headaches.

Chia has created a window of 2 years to win a cup. Of course with McDavid anything is possible but it will take some creative cap management gymnastics to extend it.
(this short term all in strategy is off considering his trade of Eberle for short term cap relief but that is a whole different annoyance)




"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 #698445 is a reply to message #698381 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mightyreasoner  is currently offline mightyreasoner
Messages: 4244
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton

4 Cups

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698446 is a reply to message #698445 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 20:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55  is currently offline Kr55
Messages: 11351
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


Think it only makes sense if the Oilers pro scouts are convinced Strome has ~50-60 point upside. So, you get the same production back with a bigger body (hopefully can take a hit to make a play?) that costs less money. Sounds pretty damn good when you put it that way doesn't it? :)

I would consider RW a position of weakness too, even without trading Eberle.



"The Edmonton Oilers are not where they should be right now and that is unacceptable. We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
-Kevin Lowe, April 2013


"Next year (15/16) I would forecast as another developmental year"
- #2, April 2015

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698447 is a reply to message #698446 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 20:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mightyreasoner  is currently offline mightyreasoner
Messages: 4244
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton

4 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:43

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


Think it only makes sense if the Oilers pro scouts are convinced Strome has ~50-60 point upside. So, you get the same production back with a bigger body (hopefully can take a hit to make a play?) that costs less money. Sounds pretty damn good when you put it that way doesn't it? :)

I would consider RW a position of weakness too, even without trading Eberle.


Yeah, I guess I should clarify. I think RW is a position of need too, but I see a lot of cheap vet wingers available every year that could potentially have helped filled those out, at least in the short-term. But yes, RW was a weakness with Eberle and it is a weakness without Eberle.

I guess it's just confusing for me because if you are going to move Eberle, and you had a chance to fill a need with it (i.e. Hamonic), that seems to make some sense at least.

As it is, you move Eberle for the less-proven, and likely less good Strome. And nothing against Strome - I actually think he could have career years here - but why now, why this summer? Wouldn't Eberle give the Oilers a better chance to win THIS year than Strome? I thought there would be a Part B that would make it make more sense and that just never came.

That said, I'm also not sure Eberle's value wouldn't be less next summer, so maybe they thought this was the time they'd get the most return for him. I don't know, but it's hard to see it as anything but lateral at best, and potentially a step backwards for this season. Or else maybe Strome has that chemistry with McDavid and lights it up. Who really knows.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698448 is a reply to message #698447 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 21:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55  is currently offline Kr55
Messages: 11351
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:59

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:43

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


Think it only makes sense if the Oilers pro scouts are convinced Strome has ~50-60 point upside. So, you get the same production back with a bigger body (hopefully can take a hit to make a play?) that costs less money. Sounds pretty damn good when you put it that way doesn't it? :)

I would consider RW a position of weakness too, even without trading Eberle.


Yeah, I guess I should clarify. I think RW is a position of need too, but I see a lot of cheap vet wingers available every year that could potentially have helped filled those out, at least in the short-term. But yes, RW was a weakness with Eberle and it is a weakness without Eberle.

I guess it's just confusing for me because if you are going to move Eberle, and you had a chance to fill a need with it (i.e. Hamonic), that seems to make some sense at least.

As it is, you move Eberle for the less-proven, and likely less good Strome. And nothing against Strome - I actually think he could have career years here - but why now, why this summer? Wouldn't Eberle give the Oilers a better chance to win THIS year than Strome? I thought there would be a Part B that would make it make more sense and that just never came.

That said, I'm also not sure Eberle's value wouldn't be less next summer, so maybe they thought this was the time they'd get the most return for him. I don't know, but it's hard to see it as anything but lateral at best, and potentially a step backwards for this season. Or else maybe Strome has that chemistry with McDavid and lights it up. Who really knows.


I do wonder what Eberle's value was around the league. I don't doubt he has a Vanek-like reputation around the league right now. Right or wrong, the NHL is still full of the old school line of thinking, and nothing turns off the old guys like a perceived lack of effort. Snow probably would have much rather had those picks than Eberle for Hamonic.

Some food for though, look at the way everyone is passing up on Jagr this summer while damn near any angle you look at him with analytics, he looks like a top line forward still. It confuses the heck out of many right now, but maybe it seems perfectly rational to almost all of the GM's in the league. They see Jagr is old, so he can't be that good anymore, simple as that. Vanek as well, he had a good regular season, but he has a reputation around the league as a slacker that is going to buckle any time something gets tough. No one will look beyond the obvious punch line of the player and go out of their way to bring him in.



"The Edmonton Oilers are not where they should be right now and that is unacceptable. We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
-Kevin Lowe, April 2013


"Next year (15/16) I would forecast as another developmental year"
- #2, April 2015

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698449 is a reply to message #698448 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 21:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mightyreasoner  is currently offline mightyreasoner
Messages: 4244
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton

4 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 21:31

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:59

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:43

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


Think it only makes sense if the Oilers pro scouts are convinced Strome has ~50-60 point upside. So, you get the same production back with a bigger body (hopefully can take a hit to make a play?) that costs less money. Sounds pretty damn good when you put it that way doesn't it? :)

I would consider RW a position of weakness too, even without trading Eberle.


Yeah, I guess I should clarify. I think RW is a position of need too, but I see a lot of cheap vet wingers available every year that could potentially have helped filled those out, at least in the short-term. But yes, RW was a weakness with Eberle and it is a weakness without Eberle.

I guess it's just confusing for me because if you are going to move Eberle, and you had a chance to fill a need with it (i.e. Hamonic), that seems to make some sense at least.

As it is, you move Eberle for the less-proven, and likely less good Strome. And nothing against Strome - I actually think he could have career years here - but why now, why this summer? Wouldn't Eberle give the Oilers a better chance to win THIS year than Strome? I thought there would be a Part B that would make it make more sense and that just never came.

That said, I'm also not sure Eberle's value wouldn't be less next summer, so maybe they thought this was the time they'd get the most return for him. I don't know, but it's hard to see it as anything but lateral at best, and potentially a step backwards for this season. Or else maybe Strome has that chemistry with McDavid and lights it up. Who really knows.


I do wonder what Eberle's value was around the league. I don't doubt he has a Vanek-like reputation around the league right now. Right or wrong, the NHL is still full of the old school line of thinking, and nothing turns off the old guys like a perceived lack of effort. Snow probably would have much rather had those picks than Eberle for Hamonic.

Some food for though, look at the way everyone is passing up on Jagr this summer while damn near any angle you look at him with analytics, he looks like a top line forward still. It confuses the heck out of many right now, but maybe it seems perfectly rational to almost all of the GM's in the league. They see Jagr is old, so he can't be that good anymore, simple as that. Vanek as well, he had a good regular season, but he has a reputation around the league as a slacker that is going to buckle any time something gets tough. No one will look beyond the obvious punch line of the player and go out of their way to bring him in.



For me though, that is EXACTLY where you find bargain contracts. It doesn't always work; but sometime it works out spectacularly. Look at Radulov in Montreal last year; this year, they got Hemsky for league minimum. Versteeg last year is another example of a late season bargain.

I don't doubt what your saying, but for me, that is EXACTLY where I'd be looking to fill out a roster, and I'd be taking one of those guys every season to create some organizational depth and competition.

As for the Islanders, wasn't the line of thinking they are trying to get some players for Tavares in an effort to demonstrate their commitment to winning and get him to sign a long-term deal? If so, I think they'd take Eberle over the picks if given the choice. They are in trouble if Tavares doesn't get locked up.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698450 is a reply to message #698449 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 22:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55  is currently offline Kr55
Messages: 11351
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 21:37

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 21:31

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:59

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:43

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


Think it only makes sense if the Oilers pro scouts are convinced Strome has ~50-60 point upside. So, you get the same production back with a bigger body (hopefully can take a hit to make a play?) that costs less money. Sounds pretty damn good when you put it that way doesn't it? :)

I would consider RW a position of weakness too, even without trading Eberle.


Yeah, I guess I should clarify. I think RW is a position of need too, but I see a lot of cheap vet wingers available every year that could potentially have helped filled those out, at least in the short-term. But yes, RW was a weakness with Eberle and it is a weakness without Eberle.

I guess it's just confusing for me because if you are going to move Eberle, and you had a chance to fill a need with it (i.e. Hamonic), that seems to make some sense at least.

As it is, you move Eberle for the less-proven, and likely less good Strome. And nothing against Strome - I actually think he could have career years here - but why now, why this summer? Wouldn't Eberle give the Oilers a better chance to win THIS year than Strome? I thought there would be a Part B that would make it make more sense and that just never came.

That said, I'm also not sure Eberle's value wouldn't be less next summer, so maybe they thought this was the time they'd get the most return for him. I don't know, but it's hard to see it as anything but lateral at best, and potentially a step backwards for this season. Or else maybe Strome has that chemistry with McDavid and lights it up. Who really knows.


I do wonder what Eberle's value was around the league. I don't doubt he has a Vanek-like reputation around the league right now. Right or wrong, the NHL is still full of the old school line of thinking, and nothing turns off the old guys like a perceived lack of effort. Snow probably would have much rather had those picks than Eberle for Hamonic.

Some food for though, look at the way everyone is passing up on Jagr this summer while damn near any angle you look at him with analytics, he looks like a top line forward still. It confuses the heck out of many right now, but maybe it seems perfectly rational to almost all of the GM's in the league. They see Jagr is old, so he can't be that good anymore, simple as that. Vanek as well, he had a good regular season, but he has a reputation around the league as a slacker that is going to buckle any time something gets tough. No one will look beyond the obvious punch line of the player and go out of their way to bring him in.



For me though, that is EXACTLY where you find bargain contracts. It doesn't always work; but sometime it works out spectacularly. Look at Radulov in Montreal last year; this year, they got Hemsky for league minimum. Versteeg last year is another example of a late season bargain.

I don't doubt what your saying, but for me, that is EXACTLY where I'd be looking to fill out a roster, and I'd be taking one of those guys every season to create some organizational depth and competition.

As for the Islanders, wasn't the line of thinking they are trying to get some players for Tavares in an effort to demonstrate their commitment to winning and get him to sign a long-term deal? If so, I think they'd take Eberle over the picks if given the choice. They are in trouble if Tavares doesn't get locked up.


I think we are stuck with an old school guy as GM. Other teams may go for bargains, but you are not worth a 2nd look from the Oilers org now if you are known as a "lazy" player.

I probably took the wrong angle trying to estimate Eberle's value before he was traded. I do have a feeling that Snow would have known Strome was all he needed to put on the table to get Ebs. I'd hope Chia isn't nuts enough to have taken Strome over better players that teams were offering for Ebs. Maybe Snow would have moved Hamonic for him if he was more desperate, but the market Chia was seeing for Ebs may have had the bidding topping out at the Strome level. I highly doubt we could have got a 1st and 2 2nd's for Eberle. Picks still have some decent value. Can be used to get players you know are performing pretty well at the deadline, and good players in the summer, like a Hamonic :)



"The Edmonton Oilers are not where they should be right now and that is unacceptable. We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
-Kevin Lowe, April 2013


"Next year (15/16) I would forecast as another developmental year"
- #2, April 2015

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698452 is a reply to message #698450 ]
Fri, 18 August 2017 08:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently online RDOilerfan
Messages: 2169
Registered: January 2016

2 Cups

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 22:04

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 21:37

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 21:31

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:59

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:43

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


Think it only makes sense if the Oilers pro scouts are convinced Strome has ~50-60 point upside. So, you get the same production back with a bigger body (hopefully can take a hit to make a play?) that costs less money. Sounds pretty damn good when you put it that way doesn't it? :)

I would consider RW a position of weakness too, even without trading Eberle.


Yeah, I guess I should clarify. I think RW is a position of need too, but I see a lot of cheap vet wingers available every year that could potentially have helped filled those out, at least in the short-term. But yes, RW was a weakness with Eberle and it is a weakness without Eberle.

I guess it's just confusing for me because if you are going to move Eberle, and you had a chance to fill a need with it (i.e. Hamonic), that seems to make some sense at least.

As it is, you move Eberle for the less-proven, and likely less good Strome. And nothing against Strome - I actually think he could have career years here - but why now, why this summer? Wouldn't Eberle give the Oilers a better chance to win THIS year than Strome? I thought there would be a Part B that would make it make more sense and that just never came.

That said, I'm also not sure Eberle's value wouldn't be less next summer, so maybe they thought this was the time they'd get the most return for him. I don't know, but it's hard to see it as anything but lateral at best, and potentially a step backwards for this season. Or else maybe Strome has that chemistry with McDavid and lights it up. Who really knows.


I do wonder what Eberle's value was around the league. I don't doubt he has a Vanek-like reputation around the league right now. Right or wrong, the NHL is still full of the old school line of thinking, and nothing turns off the old guys like a perceived lack of effort. Snow probably would have much rather had those picks than Eberle for Hamonic.

Some food for though, look at the way everyone is passing up on Jagr this summer while damn near any angle you look at him with analytics, he looks like a top line forward still. It confuses the heck out of many right now, but maybe it seems perfectly rational to almost all of the GM's in the league. They see Jagr is old, so he can't be that good anymore, simple as that. Vanek as well, he had a good regular season, but he has a reputation around the league as a slacker that is going to buckle any time something gets tough. No one will look beyond the obvious punch line of the player and go out of their way to bring him in.



For me though, that is EXACTLY where you find bargain contracts. It doesn't always work; but sometime it works out spectacularly. Look at Radulov in Montreal last year; this year, they got Hemsky for league minimum. Versteeg last year is another example of a late season bargain.

I don't doubt what your saying, but for me, that is EXACTLY where I'd be looking to fill out a roster, and I'd be taking one of those guys every season to create some organizational depth and competition.

As for the Islanders, wasn't the line of thinking they are trying to get some players for Tavares in an effort to demonstrate their commitment to winning and get him to sign a long-term deal? If so, I think they'd take Eberle over the picks if given the choice. They are in trouble if Tavares doesn't get locked up.


I think we are stuck with an old school guy as GM. Other teams may go for bargains, but you are not worth a 2nd look from the Oilers org now if you are known as a "lazy" player.

I probably took the wrong angle trying to estimate Eberle's value before he was traded. I do have a feeling that Snow would have known Strome was all he needed to put on the table to get Ebs. I'd hope Chia isn't nuts enough to have taken Strome over better players that teams were offering for Ebs. Maybe Snow would have moved Hamonic for him if he was more desperate, but the market Chia was seeing for Ebs may have had the bidding topping out at the Strome level. I highly doubt we could have got a 1st and 2 2nd's for Eberle. Picks still have some decent value. Can be used to get players you know are performing pretty well at the deadline, and good players in the summer, like a Hamonic :)

I guess the question I would have for anyone is taking your Oilers colored glasses off for a minute which based on what some people seem to think former Oilers players were worth seems to be difficult, what was Eberle's value?

Eberle finished his 7th season with the Oilers. What's Eberle's rep after 7 seasons?
What he does well: Over his 7 year career he has been a pretty good offensive player. Excluding the last season, he was typically good for 25+ goals, 60 pts. So a pretty productive player. He's a legit top 6 winger on most teams if not all of them and he's good in the shoot out.

What does he lack or not do well: He is small. At 181 lbs he's not winning very many puck battles. Along the wall, he tends to get pushed off the puck way to easy and being a winger, good wall play is kind of important. He has never been a good skater. For a shooter, he doesn't have a quick release, he likes to hold the puck. For a shooter, he doesn't one time the puck overly well. He is not physical. He doesn't have any kind of edge to his game. He can be a streaky scorer. He has a rep of not competing at times. Though he improved a bit last year, he has a rep of being a very poor defensive player. He doesn't kill penalties.

What I described above isn't new as in it just happened last season in a bad year. It's not me picking on the player That's who he has been for 7 years. That is who he is. He has a 6 mill contract. People can debate with me if he is overpaid or not but at 6 mill, I think we can at least agree he's not a bargain player, he is making TOP dollar for what he does and doesn't do. If you go from the goal in the offensive zone and draw a 15 ft diameter box around the goal, Eberle is really good. An NHL rink is 200 feet. So for the other 185 feet, he can be a real liability.

So what is a guy like that worth in peoples minds keeping in mind what he lacks and the fact that there is another GM that has to agree to a trade? I am asking to not start a fight, I would like to know because I believe he is not worth anywhere close to what some think. This isn't Eberle hate, I just look at the player, what he does and doesn't do and in a cap world, he makes a hell of a lot for what he lacks shift to shift.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698456 is a reply to message #698452 ]
Fri, 18 August 2017 09:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PlusOne  is currently offline PlusOne
Messages: 1006
Registered: July 2006
Location: Regina, Sask

1 Cup

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 08:35


I guess the question I would have for anyone is taking your Oilers colored glasses off for a minute which based on what some people seem to think former Oilers players were worth seems to be difficult, what was Eberle's value?




If you read through our discussion the issue isnt necessarily with the return, it is the confusion with why Chia felt he HAD to trade Eberle this offseason.
With the deals he has made this year outside of McD and Drai it is clear he is going for it ASAP. This means he needs to ice the best team possible.
The Eberle trade can only be defended from a cap savings point of view. Anyone who argues otherwise is bending the truth on the quality of players involved.

Is a younger, cheaper, lesser player the value of Eberle? Yes, it likely is. Did that trade make the Oilers a better team? Unknown but most people would bet on no based on everything we know.



"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 #698458 is a reply to message #698452 ]
Fri, 18 August 2017 09:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55  is currently offline Kr55
Messages: 11351
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 08:35

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 22:04

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 21:37

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 21:31

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:59

Kr55 wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:43

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


Think it only makes sense if the Oilers pro scouts are convinced Strome has ~50-60 point upside. So, you get the same production back with a bigger body (hopefully can take a hit to make a play?) that costs less money. Sounds pretty damn good when you put it that way doesn't it? :)

I would consider RW a position of weakness too, even without trading Eberle.


Yeah, I guess I should clarify. I think RW is a position of need too, but I see a lot of cheap vet wingers available every year that could potentially have helped filled those out, at least in the short-term. But yes, RW was a weakness with Eberle and it is a weakness without Eberle.

I guess it's just confusing for me because if you are going to move Eberle, and you had a chance to fill a need with it (i.e. Hamonic), that seems to make some sense at least.

As it is, you move Eberle for the less-proven, and likely less good Strome. And nothing against Strome - I actually think he could have career years here - but why now, why this summer? Wouldn't Eberle give the Oilers a better chance to win THIS year than Strome? I thought there would be a Part B that would make it make more sense and that just never came.

That said, I'm also not sure Eberle's value wouldn't be less next summer, so maybe they thought this was the time they'd get the most return for him. I don't know, but it's hard to see it as anything but lateral at best, and potentially a step backwards for this season. Or else maybe Strome has that chemistry with McDavid and lights it up. Who really knows.


I do wonder what Eberle's value was around the league. I don't doubt he has a Vanek-like reputation around the league right now. Right or wrong, the NHL is still full of the old school line of thinking, and nothing turns off the old guys like a perceived lack of effort. Snow probably would have much rather had those picks than Eberle for Hamonic.

Some food for though, look at the way everyone is passing up on Jagr this summer while damn near any angle you look at him with analytics, he looks like a top line forward still. It confuses the heck out of many right now, but maybe it seems perfectly rational to almost all of the GM's in the league. They see Jagr is old, so he can't be that good anymore, simple as that. Vanek as well, he had a good regular season, but he has a reputation around the league as a slacker that is going to buckle any time something gets tough. No one will look beyond the obvious punch line of the player and go out of their way to bring him in.



For me though, that is EXACTLY where you find bargain contracts. It doesn't always work; but sometime it works out spectacularly. Look at Radulov in Montreal last year; this year, they got Hemsky for league minimum. Versteeg last year is another example of a late season bargain.

I don't doubt what your saying, but for me, that is EXACTLY where I'd be looking to fill out a roster, and I'd be taking one of those guys every season to create some organizational depth and competition.

As for the Islanders, wasn't the line of thinking they are trying to get some players for Tavares in an effort to demonstrate their commitment to winning and get him to sign a long-term deal? If so, I think they'd take Eberle over the picks if given the choice. They are in trouble if Tavares doesn't get locked up.


I think we are stuck with an old school guy as GM. Other teams may go for bargains, but you are not worth a 2nd look from the Oilers org now if you are known as a "lazy" player.

I probably took the wrong angle trying to estimate Eberle's value before he was traded. I do have a feeling that Snow would have known Strome was all he needed to put on the table to get Ebs. I'd hope Chia isn't nuts enough to have taken Strome over better players that teams were offering for Ebs. Maybe Snow would have moved Hamonic for him if he was more desperate, but the market Chia was seeing for Ebs may have had the bidding topping out at the Strome level. I highly doubt we could have got a 1st and 2 2nd's for Eberle. Picks still have some decent value. Can be used to get players you know are performing pretty well at the deadline, and good players in the summer, like a Hamonic :)

I guess the question I would have for anyone is taking your Oilers colored glasses off for a minute which based on what some people seem to think former Oilers players were worth seems to be difficult, what was Eberle's value?

Eberle finished his 7th season with the Oilers. What's Eberle's rep after 7 seasons?
What he does well: Over his 7 year career he has been a pretty good offensive player. Excluding the last season, he was typically good for 25+ goals, 60 pts. So a pretty productive player. He's a legit top 6 winger on most teams if not all of them and he's good in the shoot out.

What does he lack or not do well: He is small. At 181 lbs he's not winning very many puck battles. Along the wall, he tends to get pushed off the puck way to easy and being a winger, good wall play is kind of important. He has never been a good skater. For a shooter, he doesn't have a quick release, he likes to hold the puck. For a shooter, he doesn't one time the puck overly well. He is not physical. He doesn't have any kind of edge to his game. He can be a streaky scorer. He has a rep of not competing at times. Though he improved a bit last year, he has a rep of being a very poor defensive player. He doesn't kill penalties.

What I described above isn't new as in it just happened last season in a bad year. It's not me picking on the player That's who he has been for 7 years. That is who he is. He has a 6 mill contract. People can debate with me if he is overpaid or not but at 6 mill, I think we can at least agree he's not a bargain player, he is making TOP dollar for what he does and doesn't do. If you go from the goal in the offensive zone and draw a 15 ft diameter box around the goal, Eberle is really good. An NHL rink is 200 feet. So for the other 185 feet, he can be a real liability.

So what is a guy like that worth in peoples minds keeping in mind what he lacks and the fact that there is another GM that has to agree to a trade? I am asking to not start a fight, I would like to know because I believe he is not worth anywhere close to what some think. This isn't Eberle hate, I just look at the player, what he does and doesn't do and in a cap world, he makes a hell of a lot for what he lacks shift to shift.


Yeah, the point I was trying to make was basically what you say. His value was not good around the league. And the line of thinking that I think many GM's share is basically your entire description of Eberle in your post.

There are lots of ways to look at historical and even recent numbers to show that Eberle is a very good regular season producer in the NHL. He can help you make the playoffs, no question. And 14 teams last year missed the playoffs and have plenty of cap space. But, I think the stigma around players can make them a no go with many teams. Weak physically, soft play, loser attitude from being an Oiler through the decade of failure. This stuff matters to GM's in the NHL IMO, as much as some people that have loud voices in the media and blogger world object. And Chia falls in place along that thought process. I think he felt he had to move Eberle because of his weak play, specifically in the playoffs. Snow was willing to take him because of the Tavares connection, and got him cheap because the market value for Ebs was crap.

[Updated on: Fri, 18 August 2017 09:47]


"The Edmonton Oilers are not where they should be right now and that is unacceptable. We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
-Kevin Lowe, April 2013


"Next year (15/16) I would forecast as another developmental year"
- #2, April 2015

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698451 is a reply to message #698445 ]
Thu, 17 August 2017 22:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PlusOne  is currently offline PlusOne
Messages: 1006
Registered: July 2006
Location: Regina, Sask

1 Cup

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


I am with you 100% on this one. I am one that didn`t hate or love the Hall trade but accepted it given the huge gap in the lineup that was filled.
This is a trade that made the team worse by any measure I can find outside of unproven rumors, silly thinking that he doesn`t care, etc.
I cant wait until RNH is traded for scraps given the cap hell that Chia has now created with a few contract that range from confusing (term and value for Drai) to putrid (Russell)

I wish I could defend Chia but a GM becomes highly respected based on shrewd deals that benefit the team. Almost every single one of the deals he makes has to be justified and many take some real creativity to do so.
Yes, there have been some wins, but they seem to be few and far between.

[Updated on: Thu, 17 August 2017 22:31]


"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 #698453 is a reply to message #698451 ]
Fri, 18 August 2017 08:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently online RDOilerfan
Messages: 2169
Registered: January 2016

2 Cups

PlusOne wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 22:30

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


I am with you 100% on this one. I am one that didn`t hate or love the Hall trade but accepted it given the huge gap in the lineup that was filled.
This is a trade that made the team worse by any measure I can find outside of unproven rumors, silly thinking that he doesn`t care, etc.
I cant wait until RNH is traded for scraps given the cap hell that Chia has now created with a few contract that range from confusing (term and value for Drai) to putrid (Russell)

I wish I could defend Chia but a GM becomes highly respected based on shrewd deals that benefit the team. Almost every single one of the deals he makes has to be justified and many take some real creativity to do so.
Yes, there have been some wins, but they seem to be few and far between.


Since you think that Nuge will be traded for scraps and it will be very likely you will hate the trade, what do you think is fair value for Nuge today? I hope you can do this exercise without Oilers colored glasses on and put yourself in the rival GM's chair. What would you trade for an undersized center who can't win a faceoff overly well. I think is OK defensively but according to numbers guys like Woodguy, isn't as good defensively as we all make him out to be. Who was paid 6 mill to be an offensive center but has a career high 24 goals, 56 pts. IN the last 2 seasons, he hada 55 game, 34 pt season and then last year 82 games 43 pts. Last year, the Oilers had 30 players play games. For simplicity I counted everyone, even if they only played a couple of games. Here is their stats. https://www.nhl.com/oilers/stats/regular-season/skaters/pm The Oilers as a team were pretty good defensively. Out of 30 guys, only 9 players had negative +/-. Defensively while we all think he is good defensively, he was a team worst -10. A full 5 points less than the next guy.

So personally, I don't know what Nuge is worth because I don't know what Nuge is anymore. I thought he was a 60+ pt, good 2 way center. If he is that, he is definitely worth 6 mill. But he has never cracked 60 pts and is coming off back to back poor offensive years. Could Nuge hit 60+ pts, maybe but I wouldn't bet money on it. Defensively, I thought he was a good defensive player but I am not so sure now. I know there is sentiment out there that faceoffs aren't as important anymore but I see value in winning draws. In the age of possession, every time you lose a draw, you give up possession and then you have to spend part of your shift, maybe all of it trying to get the puck back. If you win the draw, you can immediately go on the attack either by attacking and getting out of your own zone quickly, pushing the puck out of the neutral zone towards the offensive end or creating a scoring chance in the offensive zone. In the playoffs as we saw where match ups seem to be more heavily used, winning draws can really help in that area. So I find his inability after 6 seasons to even improve on faceoffs a little bit really troubling because that is in a centers job description.

I see Nick Bonino as a really good 3rd line center that has enough offensively ability that he can moonlight in short spurts when injury happens as a #2. He signed with Nashville for 4.1 mill which I think is top dollar for 3rd line center. On paper, based on his draft pedigree and what Nuge is supposed to be able to do offensively, Nuge should be a better 2 way center. But on the ice, is he actually that much better? I can't answer that but I do believe that Nuge isn't 2 mill better than Bonino.

[Updated on: Fri, 18 August 2017 09:05]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698457 is a reply to message #698453 ]
Fri, 18 August 2017 09:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PlusOne  is currently offline PlusOne
Messages: 1006
Registered: July 2006
Location: Regina, Sask

1 Cup

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 08:56

PlusOne wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 22:30

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


I am with you 100% on this one. I am one that didn`t hate or love the Hall trade but accepted it given the huge gap in the lineup that was filled.
This is a trade that made the team worse by any measure I can find outside of unproven rumors, silly thinking that he doesn`t care, etc.
I cant wait until RNH is traded for scraps given the cap hell that Chia has now created with a few contract that range from confusing (term and value for Drai) to putrid (Russell)

I wish I could defend Chia but a GM becomes highly respected based on shrewd deals that benefit the team. Almost every single one of the deals he makes has to be justified and many take some real creativity to do so.
Yes, there have been some wins, but they seem to be few and far between.


Since you think that Nuge will be traded for scraps and it will be very likely you will hate the trade, what do you think is fair value for Nuge today? I hope you can do this exercise without Oilers colored glasses on and put yourself in the rival GM's chair. What would you trade for an undersized center who can't win a faceoff overly well. I think is OK defensively but according to numbers guys like Woodguy, isn't as good defensively as we all make him out to be. Who was paid 6 mill to be an offensive center but has a career high 24 goals, 56 pts. IN the last 2 seasons, he hada 55 game, 34 pt season and then last year 82 games 43 pts. Last year, the Oilers had 30 players play games. For simplicity I counted everyone, even if they only played a couple of games. Here is their stats. https://www.nhl.com/oilers/stats/regular-season/skaters/pm The Oilers as a team were pretty good defensively. Out of 30 guys, only 9 players had negative +/-. Defensively while we all think he is good defensively, he was a team worst -10. A full 5 points less than the next guy.

So personally, I don't know what Nuge is worth because I don't know what Nuge is anymore. I thought he was a 60+ pt, good 2 way center. If he is that, he is definitely worth 6 mill. But he has never cracked 60 pts and is coming off back to back poor offensive years. Could Nuge hit 60+ pts, maybe but I wouldn't bet money on it. Defensively, I thought he was a good defensive player but I am not so sure now. I know there is sentiment out there that faceoffs aren't as important anymore but I see value in winning draws. In the age of possession, every time you lose a draw, you give up possession and then you have to spend part of your shift, maybe all of it trying to get the puck back. If you win the draw, you can immediately go on the attack either by attacking and getting out of your own zone quickly, pushing the puck out of the neutral zone towards the offensive end or creating a scoring chance in the offensive zone. In the playoffs as we saw where match ups seem to be more heavily used, winning draws can really help in that area. So I find his inability after 6 seasons to even improve on faceoffs a little bit really troubling because that is in a centers job description.

I see Nick Bonino as a really good 3rd line center that has enough offensively ability that he can moonlight in short spurts when injury happens as a #2. He signed with Nashville for 4.1 mill which I think is top dollar for 3rd line center. On paper, based on his draft pedigree and what Nuge is supposed to be able to do offensively, Nuge should be a better 2 way center. But on the ice, is he actually that much better? I can't answer that but I do believe that Nuge isn't 2 mill better than Bonino.


That is a really good question and I agree. I dont know what he is worth. If I had to guess he will be traded in the offseason for picks and prospects. Assets that count zero against the cap.

But that really isnt the problem I have with his inevitable trade for scraps.
The issue I have, and the same one that you missed in my annoyance over the Eberle trade, is that Chia has dug this hole for himself with some bad deals. This will lead to more bad deals. Next thing you know us fans are wondering how a team with McDavid and Draisatl in the top ten in scoring can consistently underwhelm by not being a cup contender.



"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 #698462 is a reply to message #698457 ]
Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently online RDOilerfan
Messages: 2169
Registered: January 2016

2 Cups

PlusOne wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 09:43

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 08:56

PlusOne wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 22:30

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 August 2017 20:32

With the summer coming to a close, I have to say that the Eberle trade baffles me.

He didn't need to be moved for cap space this year. And if he was going to be moved, why not move him for a position of need? Why just settle for an inferior player?

If the Oilers trade Eberle for Hamonic, don't sign Russell up for 4 years, and then sign Jagr or Hemsky, I genuinely believe that's a better summer.

I mean it's all hypotheticals, but the Eberle trade doesn't make sense to me; I gave it some time for the rest of the pieces to drop and they never really did.


I am with you 100% on this one. I am one that didn`t hate or love the Hall trade but accepted it given the huge gap in the lineup that was filled.
This is a trade that made the team worse by any measure I can find outside of unproven rumors, silly thinking that he doesn`t care, etc.
I cant wait until RNH is traded for scraps given the cap hell that Chia has now created with a few contract that range from confusing (term and value for Drai) to putrid (Russell)

I wish I could defend Chia but a GM becomes highly respected based on shrewd deals that benefit the team. Almost every single one of the deals he makes has to be justified and many take some real creativity to do so.
Yes, there have been some wins, but they seem to be few and far between.


Since you think that Nuge will be traded for scraps and it will be very likely you will hate the trade, what do you think is fair value for Nuge today? I hope you can do this exercise without Oilers colored glasses on and put yourself in the rival GM's chair. What would you trade for an undersized center who can't win a faceoff overly well. I think is OK defensively but according to numbers guys like Woodguy, isn't as good defensively as we all make him out to be. Who was paid 6 mill to be an offensive center but has a career high 24 goals, 56 pts. IN the last 2 seasons, he hada 55 game, 34 pt season and then last year 82 games 43 pts. Last year, the Oilers had 30 players play games. For simplicity I counted everyone, even if they only played a couple of games. Here is their stats. https://www.nhl.com/oilers/stats/regular-season/skaters/pm The Oilers as a team were pretty good defensively. Out of 30 guys, only 9 players had negative +/-. Defensively while we all think he is good defensively, he was a team worst -10. A full 5 points less than the next guy.

So personally, I don't know what Nuge is worth because I don't know what Nuge is anymore. I thought he was a 60+ pt, good 2 way center. If he is that, he is definitely worth 6 mill. But he has never cracked 60 pts and is coming off back to back poor offensive years. Could Nuge hit 60+ pts, maybe but I wouldn't bet money on it. Defensively, I thought he was a good defensive player but I am not so sure now. I know there is sentiment out there that faceoffs aren't as important anymore but I see value in winning draws. In the age of possession, every time you lose a draw, you give up possession and then you have to spend part of your shift, maybe all of it trying to get the puck back. If you win the draw, you can immediately go on the attack either by attacking and getting out of your own zone quickly, pushing the puck out of the neutral zone towards the offensive end or creating a scoring chance in the offensive zone. In the playoffs as we saw where match ups seem to be more heavily used, winning draws can really help in that area. So I find his inability after 6 seasons to even improve on faceoffs a little bit really troubling because that is in a centers job description.

I see Nick Bonino as a really good 3rd line center that has enough offensively ability that he can moonlight in short spurts when injury happens as a #2. He signed with Nashville for 4.1 mill which I think is top dollar for 3rd line center. On paper, based on his draft pedigree and what Nuge is supposed to be able to do offensively, Nuge should be a better 2 way center. But on the ice, is he actually that much better? I can't answer that but I do believe that Nuge isn't 2 mill better than Bonino.


That is a really good question and I agree. I dont know what he is worth. If I had to guess he will be traded in the offseason for picks and prospects. Assets that count zero against the cap.

But that really isnt the problem I have with his inevitable trade for scraps.
The issue I have, and the same one that you missed in my annoyance over the Eberle trade, is that Chia has dug this hole for himself with some bad deals. This will lead to more bad deals. Next thing you know us fans are wondering how a team with McDavid and Draisatl in the top ten in scoring can consistently underwhelm by not being a cup contender.


So what do you call the bad deals? I am sure you will say Russell is one of those bad deals.

Do I hate Russell like some people do? No but they needed a dman that can play in the top 4 and they especially needed a vet that can play in your second pairing with Sekera out until at least December. No way should you roll with Nurse at 115 games and Benning at 62 games as your second pairing for half the season. That in my opinion is insanity. The hope is that between the 2, they can combined be a decent top 4 dman until Sekera comes back. So you need at least one for sure guy that can be in your top 4 and do a remotely decent job at it. Russell is not a world beater and wouldn't be my first choice but he is capable of playing OK top 4 mins. But if not Russell then who? Russell makes 4 mill which for a guy that can play top 4 mins is pretty fair based on what other guys make. I am sure your first response will be "they should have got Hamonic". Totally fair. I would like Hamonic over Russell too but I think the cost to acquire him was too high for the Oilers because with McDavid and Leon making 21 mill, they need continuing prospects coming to replace guys that become too expensive too keep. Plus if you look at what Hamonic makes, he is relative a bargain BUT he makes 3,857143, so 142,857 less than Russell. Shaving 142K off the cap isn't going to save Eberle.

So who else could they sign? Alzner was 4.625, Brendon Smith was 4.35, Kulikov 4.333. Even Michael Stone who's a 3rd pairing guy resigned in Calgary for 3.5. Does 500k save Eberle? I doubt it. Where are all these cheaper guys that could have saved Eberle who is better than Russell?

The next contract you will probably mention is the Lucic contract. Lucic makes 6 mill. They traded Hall out who made 6 mill. So they replaced a 6 mill contract with another 6 mill contract. Did they give Lucic too many years? I think they did. But when Okposo signs for 6 mill at 7 years, Eriksson signs for 6 mill at 6 years, Ladd signs for 5.5 over 7 years. I don't think dollars wise per season they overpaid for Lucic.

Larsson at 4.166 mill for what he does isn't overpaid.
Klefbom at 4.167 looks like a bargain.
Talbot at 4.166 is a steal.
Letestu makes 1.8 mill. The guy is your 4th line center who also kills penalties, is on your first unit PP and had 16 goals last year. I don't think he is overpaid.
Kassian 1.95. That is good value for a bottom 6 player that can kill penalties, play up and down the lines and if not for some bad luck with goals called back would of had 10-11 goals and over 30 pts.
Jokinen at 1.1 is a steal.
Maroon only counts 1.5 mill and is a steal.
Gryba at 900K isn't over priced.
Sekera at 5.5 mill. He's a 2/3. Is he overpaid? Hard to say. He was a UFA and you always overpay for UFA's and he came to the team when they had NO defense. So maybe the case can be made that me makes 500K more that he should. But at the time, he has been the Oilers best dman for the most part since he signed.
Fayne makes 3.625 and will thankfully be gone soon. That wasn't Chia's contract.
Pouliot was bought out by Chia. Cap hit of 1.333 for a while. But again Pouliot's 4 mill contract wasn't Chia's contract.
Leon just signed for 8.5. I thought 8 would be the ceiling. So maybe he makes 500k more. Johansen signed for 8 mill, Kuznetsov for 7.8mill. I wouldn't trade Leon for either of those guys personally because I think Leon is better. So in saying that, if I think that Leon is better than both Johansen and Kuznetsov and Johansen makes 8, shouldn't he make more then? I don't know.

He signed McDavid to an 8 yr, 12.5 mill deal. Given that Toews/Kane makes 10.5, Kopitar makes 10, even Price is set to make 10.5 which is insanity for a 30 yr old goalie. I don't see McDavid who's WAY better than all of them as grossly overpaid. I think he could have gotten more easily.

So where are all these terrible contracts you speak of?



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698489 is a reply to message #698462 ]
Fri, 18 August 2017 17:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PlusOne  is currently offline PlusOne
Messages: 1006
Registered: July 2006
Location: Regina, Sask

1 Cup

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


So what do you call the bad deals? I am sure you will say Russell is one of those bad deals.

Do I hate Russell like some people do? No but they needed a dman that can play in the top 4 and they especially needed a vet that can play in your second pairing with Sekera out until at least December.




Yes, That is the first one I would mention. I dont hate Russell either. I think he is a decent stop gap in a pinch, IE this year but now he is a 4 yr overpaid 3/4 dman.
It is too high in money and way too long in term. Not to mention the limited no trade clause that Chia seems to add in to every deal

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


The next contract you will probably mention is the Lucic contract. Lucic makes 6 mill. They traded Hall out who made 6 mill. So they replaced a 6 mill contract with another 6 mill contract. Did they give Lucic too many years? I think they did. But when Okposo signs for 6 mill at 7 years, Eriksson signs for 6 mill at 6 years, Ladd signs for 5.5 over 7 years. I don't think dollars wise per season they overpaid for Lucic.


Nope, I dont hate that one. I do hate the length but do accept that is the price you pay for top talent in FA. I do think that it will screw the team in a few years but it is what it is and he did fill a need that was huge at the time, not knowing what Maroon would turn into.

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


Larsson at 4.166 mill for what he does isn't overpaid.



Chia didnt sign that deal. That aside I am one that accepted the Hall trade quite early. Do I still think he could have done better in getting a pick or two, a prospect, something to even it out? Yes, I do, but that is nothing against Larsson or his contract. Then again, this point is moot given Chia didnt sign that deal.

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


Klefbom at 4.167 looks like a bargain.



LOOKS is the key word here. While he has been trending up he is still not a legit top pairing D man without someone like Larsson there riding shotgun
Overall I like this deal as sometimes you do have to take a risk to lock a young guy up early. Plus, if I remember right, the amount of UFA years that were bought was significant.

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


Talbot at 4.166 is a steal.




Agreed 100%, if I had to rank Chia's moves, this trade and subsequent signing was his best

I have no problem with Letestu, Kassian, Jokinen as anything under 2 mill for a player that fills a key role is fine. In fact, these are the deals he should be making for everyone outside as any player seen as core

Marroon he didnt sign. It was a great trade but I dont think even Chia would have the balls to say he knew what Maroon was about to do

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


Gryba at 900K isn't over priced.



I dont think he should be on the team at all so by definition he is over priced. Plus, 2 years. As usual, Chia gives too long of a term to a "role" player. I put role in quotes as I dont think he serves one on this team anymore

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


Sekera at 5.5 mill. He's a 2/3. Is he overpaid? Hard to say. He was a UFA and you always overpay for UFA's and he came to the team when they had NO defense. So maybe the case can be made that me makes 500K more that he should. But at the time, he has been the Oilers best dman for the most part since he signed.



Again, I agree that is the price you pay in FA. Not the worst contract and I like most of what Sek brings to the ice.

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


Fayne makes 3.625 and will thankfully be gone soon. That wasn't Chia's contract.



Agreed, not his deal, but why does he get credit for contracts he didnt sign then?

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


Pouliot was bought out by Chia. Cap hit of 1.333 for a while. But again Pouliot's 4 mill contract wasn't Chia's contract.



A head scratcher as to why he was bought out this offseason. We dont need the cap space yet. Why not wait, buy him out next off season, soften the length of the penalty? If it is addition by subtraction send him to the minors.

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


Leon just signed for 8.5. I thought 8 would be the ceiling.



This was higher than every single opinion I read from fans to writers to hockey professions, etc.
EVERY single one thought it would come in at 8 MAX. Yet there it is.
When you are buying less RFA years the team usually wins on term or cap hit. not give max of both. And there is the trademark no trade clause.
All of this is very slanted toward Drai and after only one really good year. I dont care how much he played with MCDavid or didnt. I think he was great, but you dont hand out max term, high end, no trade contracts after one year.
I love Drai, I actually think he is key to the teams success out side of the obvious McDavid and Talbot answer but this contract is baffling from a few angles.

I have no comment on the McDavid deal. A player like that gets whatever he wants. That said, Chia himself said that it was McDavid who brought up taking less than max to help build a team.

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40



So where are all these terrible contracts you speak of?


I didnt say terrible I said bad. Might be splitting hairs but in my vernacular those are different.
Almost every single contract is too long or too much money or both. If you go back to Boston it was his calling card there as well.
Once again I will mention the NTC clause seems to include everywhere.
It is those things that are going to cause the teams problems. Working around McDavid and Drai isnt impossible.

Having a bunch of guys who are overpaid for the role they fill for too long will be!






"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 #698492 is a reply to message #698489 ]
Fri, 18 August 2017 18:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 11761
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

PlusOne wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 17:07



RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 August 2017 10:40


Klefbom at 4.167 looks like a bargain.



LOOKS is the key word here. While he has been trending up he is still not a legit top pairing D man without someone like Larsson there riding shotgun
Overall I like this deal as sometimes you do have to take a risk to lock a young guy up early. Plus, if I remember right, the amount of UFA years that were bought was significant.




That Klefbom deal looks good, but it was a big risk when it was signed. We got him for seven years, but he was coming off his first (mostly) full big-league season, having scored 20 points in 60 games (with 9 more in the AHL) . He'd had battled injury issues over the previous couple years too, and had just 77 NHL games and 23 NHL points to his name.

Those numbers aren't bad - but they're not a lot different than Matt Benning's 15 points in 62 games last year.

Chiarelli did the deal having barely ever seen Klefbom play too...it was signed before the Oilers first game with Pete as the GM.

Oscar covered the bet last year with 38 points and 82 games played. He should have won the Lady Byng too with just 6 penalty minutes as a blue-liner. But in retrospect, there was some risk to that deal. Here's hoping Draisaitl can justify his to the same extent.



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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Comparing Chiarelli's team without McDavid [message #698463 is a reply to message #698457 ]
Fri, 18 August 2017 10:42 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
oilerfan79  is currently offline oilerfan79
Messages: 63
Registered: August 2006
Location: Windsor Ontario

No Cups

Wow that's a pretty big jump from getting screwed out of a trip to the conference final which would make them one of the last 4 teams playing for the Cup to now consistently underwhelming and not contending for the cup. Did you travel forward in time or something? What are next weeks lotto numbers?

You say he's always making bad deals and I'll give you Reinhart but what else? Russel is two years too long but he can be traded in 2 years to any of 19 teams so it's not terrible. And as far as dollars go what do #4 dmen get paid because that's where the coach is playing him whether you or I think he should be there or not. Gustavsson was a cheap bet that was made in case Brossoit wasn't ready so to me no harm no foul. Talbot was robbery so was Maroon and Kassian. What bad deals? Hall for Larsson has turned out alright, I'd make that deal again and again seeing the way it turned out.

Eberle was a downgrade for sure but do you really want to hold on to him till next summer and get picks and prospects if that even? Chia was proactive so he didn't have another Boychuck situation on his hands. Eberle would not play the coaches system and after the playoffs if you don't think he fell out of favour you're kidding yourself. So to not be in cap hell and not get a few more magic beans he got an NHL caliber hockey player that also needed a change of scenery. I know everyone here thinks I hate Eberle as well, I didn't until the playoffs, but after watching him give the effort he did I knew he had to go. I saw a player who was not willing to sacrifice his body at all to make a play and you don't get far in the playoffs with that attitude and 29 other GM's saw the same plays. So I don't think getting Strome and 3.5 million in cap space for Eberle was a bad deal in fact much like Hall for Larsson the Oilers may be better for it.

I can understand the skepticism after so long having a bunch of inept clowns running the team but Chia has taken them from cellar to cup contender in 2 years, I'll give him another year to see what he can do.



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