GuestLogin / Register

This day on April 19
None

Happy Birthday To: jari17, trehorse, 5mowill, Dragon_Matt, smyth2007

OILERS INFOOILFANS
Friday, Apr 19, 2024 6:39 PM MT
F.A.Q. Terms of Use F.A.Q. F.A.Q.
Members Members   Search Search     Register Register   Login Login   Home Home
 Oilers » Benson is on waiversPages (2): [ «  <  1  2]
Switch to flat viewSwitch to tree viewCreate a new topicSubmit Reply
 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #801987 is a reply to message #801983 ]
Thu, 17 March 2022 15:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam is currently offline Adam
Messages: 6804
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
6 Cups
mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 14:40

sinfulchimp306 wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 12:34

Well he cleared


I still think it makes sense to try and get some extra cap space for the deadline and have Archibald ready to to go to an American team. Oilers must think Archibald has some actual trade value that they'd lose if he were to hit waivers.


I still think the most sense would have been to send Malone down since he didn't require waivers and could be sent without any risk of losing him. If you really think the team needs that player around, then bring him back up after the deadline when the roster limit expands.

With regards to vaxx status for Archibald, I think it would be silly to keep him in hopes that the governments change the requirements and he can both fly and not face quarantine. Get whatever you can for the player. It's not like he's under contract for next year anyhow. This season is all that matters with that player, and he never was one that added a lot.

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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #801981 is a reply to message #801978 ]
Thu, 17 March 2022 14:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3686
Registered: January 2016
3 Cups
Adam wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 11:56

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 11:13


I am not a professional hockey person, I am a fan who is just going by what the coach is deciding to do. He knows both players because he has coached them for years. It's not a money issue because they literally make the same in salary. It's not a no room on the roster issue because they were both on it. The coach isn't playing him by choice.

He's making league minimum and there is maybe 20ish games left in the year and he's not even signed for next year, he's an RFA. So a team can literally walk away from him next year if they don't like what they see. So what happens if Benson gets passed over by 31 other teams when they can have him for free at next to no cost, does that mean 31 more teams are a bunch of idiots?


You are still making the same mistake you've been making for a couple months in relation to this player. You seem to think that those defending him are suggesting he's a star in the making. That is not the case.

The argument, as always, is that we know what Malone, Shore and Archibald is. Their ceiling is low, their contributions are minimal. There's a chance that Benson can out-perform that, but he needs to see some action to accomplish that. He has, in fact, by the numbers been decent in the Woodcroft era.

I don't know all that's going on behind the scenes, although it's ultimately the GM, not the coach, who decides who goes up and down. I think that it's a mistake based on what I've seen to risk losing a player who may be better than the bottom of the roster, in order to keep those bottom guys up. I don't think Malone would even need to face waivers (having just recently done so), and he's a healthy scratch anyhow. Why not just demote him? This is one of those decisions that doesn't make a lot of sense, especially going in to the playoffs. If Benson is picked, then that's one less option we have, when we could have avoided risking anyone.

If there were some potential cap savings, I could maybe understand, but that also isn't the case. This just seems to be the Oilers taking a needless risk.

See, where you are totally wrong in commenting about what I said over the last few months is I have once never said I think you or anyone else that defends Benson ever thought he was a star. My opinion every single time has been he does not have the skill set to fill a useable role on a team.
He's a meh skating, not overly big, not overly tough, not overly physical, play making winger who has a muffin for a shot. Not many teams and it was just proven by him being passed on waivers see his type of player as a useable player.

Not even a bottom feeder team like a Seattle, knowing he played his junior just up the highway, was willing to give him a 20 game try. On a league minimum contract, with as little time as there is left in the season, it would have cost any team cap hit like 1 couple hundred grand, probably not even that much to bring him in and see what he can do. AND with no contract for next year and having to give up NOTHING to get him, any team could walk from him. But no one claimed him.

If Benson was big, maybe someone would give him a chance. If he had a great shot, maybe. If he could skate really well, maybe. If he was a center. Maybe. He's none of that.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #801986 is a reply to message #801981 ]
Thu, 17 March 2022 15:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam is currently offline Adam
Messages: 6804
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
6 Cups
RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 14:25

Adam wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 11:56

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 11:13


I am not a professional hockey person, I am a fan who is just going by what the coach is deciding to do. He knows both players because he has coached them for years. It's not a money issue because they literally make the same in salary. It's not a no room on the roster issue because they were both on it. The coach isn't playing him by choice.

He's making league minimum and there is maybe 20ish games left in the year and he's not even signed for next year, he's an RFA. So a team can literally walk away from him next year if they don't like what they see. So what happens if Benson gets passed over by 31 other teams when they can have him for free at next to no cost, does that mean 31 more teams are a bunch of idiots?


You are still making the same mistake you've been making for a couple months in relation to this player. You seem to think that those defending him are suggesting he's a star in the making. That is not the case.

The argument, as always, is that we know what Malone, Shore and Archibald is. Their ceiling is low, their contributions are minimal. There's a chance that Benson can out-perform that, but he needs to see some action to accomplish that. He has, in fact, by the numbers been decent in the Woodcroft era.

I don't know all that's going on behind the scenes, although it's ultimately the GM, not the coach, who decides who goes up and down. I think that it's a mistake based on what I've seen to risk losing a player who may be better than the bottom of the roster, in order to keep those bottom guys up. I don't think Malone would even need to face waivers (having just recently done so), and he's a healthy scratch anyhow. Why not just demote him? This is one of those decisions that doesn't make a lot of sense, especially going in to the playoffs. If Benson is picked, then that's one less option we have, when we could have avoided risking anyone.

If there were some potential cap savings, I could maybe understand, but that also isn't the case. This just seems to be the Oilers taking a needless risk.

See, where you are totally wrong in commenting about what I said over the last few months is I have once never said I think you or anyone else that defends Benson ever thought he was a star. My opinion every single time has been he does not have the skill set to fill a useable role on a team.
He's a meh skating, not overly big, not overly tough, not overly physical, play making winger who has a muffin for a shot. Not many teams and it was just proven by him being passed on waivers see his type of player as a useable player.

Not even a bottom feeder team like a Seattle, knowing he played his junior just up the highway, was willing to give him a 20 game try. On a league minimum contract, with as little time as there is left in the season, it would have cost any team cap hit like 1 couple hundred grand, probably not even that much to bring him in and see what he can do. AND with no contract for next year and having to give up NOTHING to get him, any team could walk from him. But no one claimed him.

If Benson was big, maybe someone would give him a chance. If he had a great shot, maybe. If he could skate really well, maybe. If he was a center. Maybe. He's none of that.


I know you say all this, but I don't think you actually pay much attention to the player. You just parrot the same lines without checking any of your biases.

Benson has been a physical player for the Oilers this year. His hits per 60 lag behind only Archibald, Malone, Niemelainen and Kassian.

He's not shown any skating issues either. You're basically just inventing a narrative.

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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #801990 is a reply to message #801986 ]
Thu, 17 March 2022 15:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3686
Registered: January 2016
3 Cups
Adam wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 15:19

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 14:25

Adam wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 11:56

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 11:13


I am not a professional hockey person, I am a fan who is just going by what the coach is deciding to do. He knows both players because he has coached them for years. It's not a money issue because they literally make the same in salary. It's not a no room on the roster issue because they were both on it. The coach isn't playing him by choice.

He's making league minimum and there is maybe 20ish games left in the year and he's not even signed for next year, he's an RFA. So a team can literally walk away from him next year if they don't like what they see. So what happens if Benson gets passed over by 31 other teams when they can have him for free at next to no cost, does that mean 31 more teams are a bunch of idiots?


You are still making the same mistake you've been making for a couple months in relation to this player. You seem to think that those defending him are suggesting he's a star in the making. That is not the case.

The argument, as always, is that we know what Malone, Shore and Archibald is. Their ceiling is low, their contributions are minimal. There's a chance that Benson can out-perform that, but he needs to see some action to accomplish that. He has, in fact, by the numbers been decent in the Woodcroft era.

I don't know all that's going on behind the scenes, although it's ultimately the GM, not the coach, who decides who goes up and down. I think that it's a mistake based on what I've seen to risk losing a player who may be better than the bottom of the roster, in order to keep those bottom guys up. I don't think Malone would even need to face waivers (having just recently done so), and he's a healthy scratch anyhow. Why not just demote him? This is one of those decisions that doesn't make a lot of sense, especially going in to the playoffs. If Benson is picked, then that's one less option we have, when we could have avoided risking anyone.

If there were some potential cap savings, I could maybe understand, but that also isn't the case. This just seems to be the Oilers taking a needless risk.

See, where you are totally wrong in commenting about what I said over the last few months is I have once never said I think you or anyone else that defends Benson ever thought he was a star. My opinion every single time has been he does not have the skill set to fill a useable role on a team.
He's a meh skating, not overly big, not overly tough, not overly physical, play making winger who has a muffin for a shot. Not many teams and it was just proven by him being passed on waivers see his type of player as a useable player.

Not even a bottom feeder team like a Seattle, knowing he played his junior just up the highway, was willing to give him a 20 game try. On a league minimum contract, with as little time as there is left in the season, it would have cost any team cap hit like 1 couple hundred grand, probably not even that much to bring him in and see what he can do. AND with no contract for next year and having to give up NOTHING to get him, any team could walk from him. But no one claimed him.

If Benson was big, maybe someone would give him a chance. If he had a great shot, maybe. If he could skate really well, maybe. If he was a center. Maybe. He's none of that.


I know you say all this, but I don't think you actually pay much attention to the player. You just parrot the same lines without checking any of your biases.

Benson has been a physical player for the Oilers this year. His hits per 60 lag behind only Archibald, Malone, Niemelainen and Kassian.

He's not shown any skating issues either. You're basically just inventing a narrative.

If he is all that, and I am just making stuff up again, then why didn't someone pick him up? They could have had him for FREE. He didn't even have a contract for next year so there is no concern he would be blocking anyone else or cap concerns. 31 other teams said no thanks.

I get that you think you are all knowing and that your opinion is always the right one but 32 NHL teams have decided he can't play in the NHL. Now I understand that the Oilers management are the worst in the NHL and filled with complete morons but are you telling me that every NHL team has no clue what they are doing and you do?

[Updated on: Thu, 17 March 2022 15:29]

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #802010 is a reply to message #801990 ]
Thu, 17 March 2022 16:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mightyreasoner is currently offline mightyreasoner
Messages: 508
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton
No Cups
RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 15:27


If he is all that, and I am just making stuff up again, then why didn't someone pick him up? They could have had him for FREE. He didn't even have a contract for next year so there is no concern he would be blocking anyone else or cap concerns. 31 other teams said no thanks.


I mean Nedeljkovic passed through waivers at the beginning of last season, and I sure wish he were on the Oilers now. Waivers definitely don't always seem to make a lot of sense, with who gets claimed and who doesn't.

I do wonder if contract limits play a role as well in waivers. A lot of teams run pretty close to that 50-contract limit, and so unless you are quite confident that it is a player you want to add, you probably want to leave some flexibility, and might be reluctant to take gambles on players without another contract going back the other way. I imagine this is especially true near the deadline where buyers and sellers both want to create the most opportunity and flexibility they can to get the deals done that they need to.

[Updated on: Thu, 17 March 2022 16:44]

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #802050 is a reply to message #802010 ]
Fri, 18 March 2022 11:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3686
Registered: January 2016
3 Cups
mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 16:40

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 15:27


If he is all that, and I am just making stuff up again, then why didn't someone pick him up? They could have had him for FREE. He didn't even have a contract for next year so there is no concern he would be blocking anyone else or cap concerns. 31 other teams said no thanks.


I mean Nedeljkovic passed through waivers at the beginning of last season, and I sure wish he were on the Oilers now. Waivers definitely don't always seem to make a lot of sense, with who gets claimed and who doesn't.

I do wonder if contract limits play a role as well in waivers. A lot of teams run pretty close to that 50-contract limit, and so unless you are quite confident that it is a player you want to add, you probably want to leave some flexibility, and might be reluctant to take gambles on players without another contract going back the other way. I imagine this is especially true near the deadline where buyers and sellers both want to create the most opportunity and flexibility they can to get the deals done that they need to.

I looked at capfriendly and there is 1 team - Canes - at 49 contracts. The bulk of the rest of the teams are in the 44-46/47 range. Seattle has 35. Arizona has 44 contracts and if you look at next season they have 10 players total signed for next season. So I don't think there taking on a contract is an issue for a lot of teams if they think he can help them. Plus as I said, at league minimum with maybe 1/4 of the season yet, the cap hit would be next to nothing and since he needs a new deal for next season, there is no risk of being forced to keep him. If you don't like him, just don't qualify him and let him walk and because you got him off waivers, you aren't out anything.

So if a team thought he could help them, there is literally zero risk.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #802089 is a reply to message #802050 ]
Fri, 18 March 2022 16:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mightyreasoner is currently offline mightyreasoner
Messages: 508
Registered: October 2005
Location: Edmonton
No Cups
RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 March 2022 11:33

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 16:40

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 15:27


If he is all that, and I am just making stuff up again, then why didn't someone pick him up? They could have had him for FREE. He didn't even have a contract for next year so there is no concern he would be blocking anyone else or cap concerns. 31 other teams said no thanks.


I mean Nedeljkovic passed through waivers at the beginning of last season, and I sure wish he were on the Oilers now. Waivers definitely don't always seem to make a lot of sense, with who gets claimed and who doesn't.

I do wonder if contract limits play a role as well in waivers. A lot of teams run pretty close to that 50-contract limit, and so unless you are quite confident that it is a player you want to add, you probably want to leave some flexibility, and might be reluctant to take gambles on players without another contract going back the other way. I imagine this is especially true near the deadline where buyers and sellers both want to create the most opportunity and flexibility they can to get the deals done that they need to.

I looked at capfriendly and there is 1 team - Canes - at 49 contracts. The bulk of the rest of the teams are in the 44-46/47 range. Seattle has 35. Arizona has 44 contracts and if you look at next season they have 10 players total signed for next season. So I don't think there taking on a contract is an issue for a lot of teams if they think he can help them. Plus as I said, at league minimum with maybe 1/4 of the season yet, the cap hit would be next to nothing and since he needs a new deal for next season, there is no risk of being forced to keep him. If you don't like him, just don't qualify him and let him walk and because you got him off waivers, you aren't out anything.

So if a team thought he could help them, there is literally zero risk.


I just remember when Derek Roy hit waivers and the Oilers passed only to trade Mark Arcobello for Derek Roy after he cleared. They could have had him for nothing, but chose to get him for something instead, simply because they didn't want to take on an extra contract. It was bizarre then, but it made me really start to believe how conservative a lot of GMs must operate. Not that the Oilers are a good blueprint for other organizations to emulate.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #802091 is a reply to message #802089 ]
Fri, 18 March 2022 16:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
CrudeRemarks is currently offline CrudeRemarks
Messages: 1698
Registered: November 2010
Location: Edmonton
1 Cup
mightyreasoner wrote on Fri, 18 March 2022 16:35

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 March 2022 11:33

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 16:40

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 15:27


If he is all that, and I am just making stuff up again, then why didn't someone pick him up? They could have had him for FREE. He didn't even have a contract for next year so there is no concern he would be blocking anyone else or cap concerns. 31 other teams said no thanks.


I mean Nedeljkovic passed through waivers at the beginning of last season, and I sure wish he were on the Oilers now. Waivers definitely don't always seem to make a lot of sense, with who gets claimed and who doesn't.

I do wonder if contract limits play a role as well in waivers. A lot of teams run pretty close to that 50-contract limit, and so unless you are quite confident that it is a player you want to add, you probably want to leave some flexibility, and might be reluctant to take gambles on players without another contract going back the other way. I imagine this is especially true near the deadline where buyers and sellers both want to create the most opportunity and flexibility they can to get the deals done that they need to.

I looked at capfriendly and there is 1 team - Canes - at 49 contracts. The bulk of the rest of the teams are in the 44-46/47 range. Seattle has 35. Arizona has 44 contracts and if you look at next season they have 10 players total signed for next season. So I don't think there taking on a contract is an issue for a lot of teams if they think he can help them. Plus as I said, at league minimum with maybe 1/4 of the season yet, the cap hit would be next to nothing and since he needs a new deal for next season, there is no risk of being forced to keep him. If you don't like him, just don't qualify him and let him walk and because you got him off waivers, you aren't out anything.

So if a team thought he could help them, there is literally zero risk.


I just remember when Derek Roy hit waivers and the Oilers passed only to trade Mark Arcobello for Derek Roy after he cleared. They could have had him for nothing, but chose to get him for something instead, simply because they didn't want to take on an extra contract. It was bizarre then, but it made me really start to believe how conservative a lot of GMs must operate. Not that the Oilers are a good blueprint for other organizations to emulate.

I think it's similar to offer sheets in that GMs think if they steal a guy then the other team will be watching to grab their own player when they send someone down. So many times, with horrible Oiler teams, a guy hit waivers and it seemed like a no-brainer that they would improve the roster and yet they'd clear.

You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you just might find, you can get a lottery pick.


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #802096 is a reply to message #802089 ]
Fri, 18 March 2022 17:11 Go to previous message
Adam is currently offline Adam
Messages: 6804
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
6 Cups
mightyreasoner wrote on Fri, 18 March 2022 16:35

RDOilerfan wrote on Fri, 18 March 2022 11:33

mightyreasoner wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 16:40

RDOilerfan wrote on Thu, 17 March 2022 15:27


If he is all that, and I am just making stuff up again, then why didn't someone pick him up? They could have had him for FREE. He didn't even have a contract for next year so there is no concern he would be blocking anyone else or cap concerns. 31 other teams said no thanks.


I mean Nedeljkovic passed through waivers at the beginning of last season, and I sure wish he were on the Oilers now. Waivers definitely don't always seem to make a lot of sense, with who gets claimed and who doesn't.

I do wonder if contract limits play a role as well in waivers. A lot of teams run pretty close to that 50-contract limit, and so unless you are quite confident that it is a player you want to add, you probably want to leave some flexibility, and might be reluctant to take gambles on players without another contract going back the other way. I imagine this is especially true near the deadline where buyers and sellers both want to create the most opportunity and flexibility they can to get the deals done that they need to.

I looked at capfriendly and there is 1 team - Canes - at 49 contracts. The bulk of the rest of the teams are in the 44-46/47 range. Seattle has 35. Arizona has 44 contracts and if you look at next season they have 10 players total signed for next season. So I don't think there taking on a contract is an issue for a lot of teams if they think he can help them. Plus as I said, at league minimum with maybe 1/4 of the season yet, the cap hit would be next to nothing and since he needs a new deal for next season, there is no risk of being forced to keep him. If you don't like him, just don't qualify him and let him walk and because you got him off waivers, you aren't out anything.

So if a team thought he could help them, there is literally zero risk.


I just remember when Derek Roy hit waivers and the Oilers passed only to trade Mark Arcobello for Derek Roy after he cleared. They could have had him for nothing, but chose to get him for something instead, simply because they didn't want to take on an extra contract. It was bizarre then, but it made me really start to believe how conservative a lot of GMs must operate. Not that the Oilers are a good blueprint for other organizations to emulate.


This is right. Add to that that taking someone on waivers means you need to keep them on your active roster, and everyone has their own prospects, most of whom they'll have some bias towards. To add someone off waivers, you need to have some comfort that they're significantly better than someone on your roster, since you'll in turn need to demote or move someone to make room.

Timing is also everything on these things. Someone who thinks they may add pieces on deadline day is unlikely to add an extra guy who they would just be waiving again in a couple days to make room for the new acquisition.

There have been a lot of good players who've gone through waivers and turned out to be decent, so it's not as simple an equation as "he didn't get claimed ergo he sucks and I hate him" as some people like to make it out to be.

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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Benson is on waivers [message #801988 is a reply to message #801981 ]
Thu, 17 March 2022 15:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dragon_Matt is currently offline Dragon_Matt
Messages: 709
Registered: January 2009
Location: edmonton
No Cups
I bet you're really fun to play mini-golf with.

Send a private message to this user  

Pages (2): [ «  <  1  2]  
Previous Topic:Review: Buffalo @ Edmonton (Game #61)
Next Topic:GDT: Buffalo @ Edmonton (Game #61)
Oilers NHL Minors Speculation For Sale 


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

Hosted by LogicalHosting.ca