This day on November 24
Acquired: Dave Hannan (1987) Chris Joseph (1987) Moe Mantha (1987) Craig Simpson (1987)
Departed: Paul Coffey (1987) Dave Hunter (1987) Wayne Van Dorp (1987)

Happy Birthday To: meister, Larmal, copperjacket, MacKnife, ljn2002, Oilermeister, MissingOil, ontariooil, spyderjam, pizzaman

F.A.Q. Terms of Use F.A.Q. F.A.Q.
Members Members   Search Search     Register Register   Login Login   Home Home
 Oilers » Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for LarssonPages (16): [ «  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  >  »]
Switch to flat viewSwitch to tree viewCreate a new topicSubmit Reply
 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674734 is a reply to message #674719 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 13:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Skookum Jim  is currently offline Skookum Jim
Messages: 4419
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

4 Cups

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:00

ziltoid wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:52

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:27

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:21

I think the point is clear though - he doesn't think Larsson is enough of a return for Taylor Hall.

That seems to be an across the board belief. The guy in the video beside Dreger (is that Button?) is defending the move, but once again he says "Obviously Taylor Hall is the better player". I've heard Button defend his record as GM saying he lost trades to make his team better so maybe he's feeling for Chiarelli right now. Of course, Button was a horrible GM too...soooo...


Does anyone reasonable think that it's good return though? My issue isn't with not liking the trade, it's the level of piling on that's going on that bothers me.

I want to see thoughtful, well constructed arguments about what Larsson is or isn't and what this means for the Oilers. Not bloggers whining that this is the worst trade of the salary cap era, or saying that Larsson is worse than a guy that the Blackhawks put on buyout waivers (David Rundblad), or filler like Yost posted.


I would also like to add in the narrative that you can't give up the best player in the deal and become a better team overall. That one drives me particularly mad.

Watch me do it right now:

I trade the entire Oilers Roster minus Lander to Pittsburg for their entire roster minus Crosby. Pittsburgh gets the best player in McDavid, but the new Oilers team will be better than they were before... unless of course you believe the Oilers current roster is better than the reigning cup champion's roster (or that Malkin is better than McDavid). Hell, you could make the same trade with ANY of the playoff teams (our entire roster minus our worst player for their entire roster minus their best player) and we would STILL be a better team (last I checked, we've been out of the playoffs for a while).

icon_rolleyes

Now, I don't know if we are a better team with Larsson than with Hall -- that will play itself out over the course of the season -- but I do THINK we will be better off with Larsson for a variety of reasons (0% of which surround Hall's character, FYI).


Little easier to suggest you can win while giving up the best player when you get more than a single worse player back (not a bad player, but worse than what you gave up).

I heard them talking on the radio about how we've balanced the defence. We've added a single guy, who's not elite. I don't think it's that much better yet. Our offence will be worse, because we've taken a driver out of the lineup and have added no other driver to replace him.


True. Most of the commentary out there trying to justify the value lost vs value gained in the trade, comes down to having to believe Larsson will be better, and can be an impactful No.1 D-man.

I'm not a fan of Button, but he thinks Larsson will never be a top 2 NHL defenseman, he's going to be a 3/4 defenseman, and doesn't expect to see any more offense from him than what he produced in NJ. He says he's watched him from junior through the SEL, to the NHL, so he has some background on the guy, more than most.

He says we'll still need No.1/2 D-men. If true we don't have any more ammo to get one, shot the wad with T. Hall... oh we still have McD, maybe we can pry Morgan Rielly loose from Toronto. ;)

Also says he doesn't see Sekera as anything more than an NHL No.4 defenseman (I tend to agree).

If true, next season may not be so rosy as some have hoped, me included.

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/edmonton-1260/audio/button-i-don-t-t hink-larsson-is-a-top-two-guy-1.521061

[Updated on: Tue, 05 July 2016 13:16]


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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674736 is a reply to message #674734 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 13:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 10777
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Skookum Jim wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 13:12

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:00

ziltoid wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:52

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:27

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:21

I think the point is clear though - he doesn't think Larsson is enough of a return for Taylor Hall.

That seems to be an across the board belief. The guy in the video beside Dreger (is that Button?) is defending the move, but once again he says "Obviously Taylor Hall is the better player". I've heard Button defend his record as GM saying he lost trades to make his team better so maybe he's feeling for Chiarelli right now. Of course, Button was a horrible GM too...soooo...


Does anyone reasonable think that it's good return though? My issue isn't with not liking the trade, it's the level of piling on that's going on that bothers me.

I want to see thoughtful, well constructed arguments about what Larsson is or isn't and what this means for the Oilers. Not bloggers whining that this is the worst trade of the salary cap era, or saying that Larsson is worse than a guy that the Blackhawks put on buyout waivers (David Rundblad), or filler like Yost posted.


I would also like to add in the narrative that you can't give up the best player in the deal and become a better team overall. That one drives me particularly mad.

Watch me do it right now:

I trade the entire Oilers Roster minus Lander to Pittsburg for their entire roster minus Crosby. Pittsburgh gets the best player in McDavid, but the new Oilers team will be better than they were before... unless of course you believe the Oilers current roster is better than the reigning cup champion's roster (or that Malkin is better than McDavid). Hell, you could make the same trade with ANY of the playoff teams (our entire roster minus our worst player for their entire roster minus their best player) and we would STILL be a better team (last I checked, we've been out of the playoffs for a while).

icon_rolleyes

Now, I don't know if we are a better team with Larsson than with Hall -- that will play itself out over the course of the season -- but I do THINK we will be better off with Larsson for a variety of reasons (0% of which surround Hall's character, FYI).


Little easier to suggest you can win while giving up the best player when you get more than a single worse player back (not a bad player, but worse than what you gave up).

I heard them talking on the radio about how we've balanced the defence. We've added a single guy, who's not elite. I don't think it's that much better yet. Our offence will be worse, because we've taken a driver out of the lineup and have added no other driver to replace him.


True. Most of the commentary out there trying to justify the value lost vs value gained in the trade, comes down to having to believe Larsson will be better, and can be an impactful No.1 D-man.

I'm not a fan of Button, but he thinks Larsson will never be a top 2 NHL defenseman, he's going to be a 3/4 defenseman, and doesn't expect to see any more offense from him than what he produced in NJ. He says he's watched him from junior through the SEL, to the NHL, so he has some background on the guy, more than most.

He says we'll still need No.1/2 D-men. If true we don't have any more ammo to get one, shot the wad with T. Hall... oh we still have McD, maybe we can pry Morgan Rielly loose from Toronto. ;)

Also says he doesn't see Sekera as anything more than an NHL No.4 defenseman (I tend to agree).

If true, next season may not be so rosy as some have hoped, me included.

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/edmonton-1260/audio/button-i-don-t-t hink-larsson-is-a-top-two-guy-1.521061



Keep in mind Button has a flames bias cause of his brother and loves to rail on the Oilers any chance he gets. That was very entertaining them his bashing was directed at Eakins, but less enjoyable in this case. He also said Jankowski was an awesome pick by the flames :)



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

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

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674737 is a reply to message #674734 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 13:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NZ Oiler Fan  is currently offline NZ Oiler Fan
Messages: 1189
Registered: October 2006
Location: Kensington, PEI

1 Cup

Skookum Jim wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 13:12

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:00

ziltoid wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:52

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:27

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:21

I think the point is clear though - he doesn't think Larsson is enough of a return for Taylor Hall.

That seems to be an across the board belief. The guy in the video beside Dreger (is that Button?) is defending the move, but once again he says "Obviously Taylor Hall is the better player". I've heard Button defend his record as GM saying he lost trades to make his team better so maybe he's feeling for Chiarelli right now. Of course, Button was a horrible GM too...soooo...


Does anyone reasonable think that it's good return though? My issue isn't with not liking the trade, it's the level of piling on that's going on that bothers me.

I want to see thoughtful, well constructed arguments about what Larsson is or isn't and what this means for the Oilers. Not bloggers whining that this is the worst trade of the salary cap era, or saying that Larsson is worse than a guy that the Blackhawks put on buyout waivers (David Rundblad), or filler like Yost posted.


I would also like to add in the narrative that you can't give up the best player in the deal and become a better team overall. That one drives me particularly mad.

Watch me do it right now:

I trade the entire Oilers Roster minus Lander to Pittsburg for their entire roster minus Crosby. Pittsburgh gets the best player in McDavid, but the new Oilers team will be better than they were before... unless of course you believe the Oilers current roster is better than the reigning cup champion's roster (or that Malkin is better than McDavid). Hell, you could make the same trade with ANY of the playoff teams (our entire roster minus our worst player for their entire roster minus their best player) and we would STILL be a better team (last I checked, we've been out of the playoffs for a while).

icon_rolleyes

Now, I don't know if we are a better team with Larsson than with Hall -- that will play itself out over the course of the season -- but I do THINK we will be better off with Larsson for a variety of reasons (0% of which surround Hall's character, FYI).


Little easier to suggest you can win while giving up the best player when you get more than a single worse player back (not a bad player, but worse than what you gave up).

I heard them talking on the radio about how we've balanced the defence. We've added a single guy, who's not elite. I don't think it's that much better yet. Our offence will be worse, because we've taken a driver out of the lineup and have added no other driver to replace him.


True. Most of the commentary out there trying to justify the value lost vs value gained in the trade, comes down to having to believe Larsson will be better, and can be an impactful No.1 D-man.

I'm not a fan of Button, but he thinks Larsson will never be a top 2 NHL defenseman, he's going to be a 3/4 defenseman, and doesn't expect to see any more offense from him than what he produced in NJ. He says he's watched him from junior through the SEL, to the NHL, so he has some background on the guy, more than most.

He says we'll still need No.1/2 D-men. If true we don't have any more ammo to get one, shot the wad with T. Hall... oh we still have McD, maybe we can pry Morgan Rielly loose from Toronto. ;)

Also says he doesn't see Sekera as anything more than an NHL No.4 defenseman (I tend to agree).

If true, next season may not be so rosy as some have hoped, me included.

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/edmonton-1260/audio/button-i-don-t-t hink-larsson-is-a-top-two-guy-1.521061



Remember this? icon_wink

Skookum Jim wrote on Thu, 03 March 2016 20:12


That's why Button is still working for TSN and not in management, he makes some real stinker player evaluations, his draft rankings are probably used by NHL teams to pick in the reverse order!




Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674739 is a reply to message #674737 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 13:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Skookum Jim  is currently offline Skookum Jim
Messages: 4419
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

4 Cups

NZ Oiler Fan wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 12:21

Skookum Jim wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 13:12

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:00

ziltoid wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:52

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:27

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:21

I think the point is clear though - he doesn't think Larsson is enough of a return for Taylor Hall.

That seems to be an across the board belief. The guy in the video beside Dreger (is that Button?) is defending the move, but once again he says "Obviously Taylor Hall is the better player". I've heard Button defend his record as GM saying he lost trades to make his team better so maybe he's feeling for Chiarelli right now. Of course, Button was a horrible GM too...soooo...


Does anyone reasonable think that it's good return though? My issue isn't with not liking the trade, it's the level of piling on that's going on that bothers me.

I want to see thoughtful, well constructed arguments about what Larsson is or isn't and what this means for the Oilers. Not bloggers whining that this is the worst trade of the salary cap era, or saying that Larsson is worse than a guy that the Blackhawks put on buyout waivers (David Rundblad), or filler like Yost posted.


I would also like to add in the narrative that you can't give up the best player in the deal and become a better team overall. That one drives me particularly mad.

Watch me do it right now:

I trade the entire Oilers Roster minus Lander to Pittsburg for their entire roster minus Crosby. Pittsburgh gets the best player in McDavid, but the new Oilers team will be better than they were before... unless of course you believe the Oilers current roster is better than the reigning cup champion's roster (or that Malkin is better than McDavid). Hell, you could make the same trade with ANY of the playoff teams (our entire roster minus our worst player for their entire roster minus their best player) and we would STILL be a better team (last I checked, we've been out of the playoffs for a while).

icon_rolleyes

Now, I don't know if we are a better team with Larsson than with Hall -- that will play itself out over the course of the season -- but I do THINK we will be better off with Larsson for a variety of reasons (0% of which surround Hall's character, FYI).


Little easier to suggest you can win while giving up the best player when you get more than a single worse player back (not a bad player, but worse than what you gave up).

I heard them talking on the radio about how we've balanced the defence. We've added a single guy, who's not elite. I don't think it's that much better yet. Our offence will be worse, because we've taken a driver out of the lineup and have added no other driver to replace him.


True. Most of the commentary out there trying to justify the value lost vs value gained in the trade, comes down to having to believe Larsson will be better, and can be an impactful No.1 D-man.

I'm not a fan of Button, but he thinks Larsson will never be a top 2 NHL defenseman, he's going to be a 3/4 defenseman, and doesn't expect to see any more offense from him than what he produced in NJ. He says he's watched him from junior through the SEL, to the NHL, so he has some background on the guy, more than most.

He says we'll still need No.1/2 D-men. If true we don't have any more ammo to get one, shot the wad with T. Hall... oh we still have McD, maybe we can pry Morgan Rielly loose from Toronto. ;)

Also says he doesn't see Sekera as anything more than an NHL No.4 defenseman (I tend to agree).

If true, next season may not be so rosy as some have hoped, me included.

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/edmonton-1260/audio/button-i-don-t-t hink-larsson-is-a-top-two-guy-1.521061



Remember this? icon_wink

Skookum Jim wrote on Thu, 03 March 2016 20:12


That's why Button is still working for TSN and not in management, he makes some real stinker player evaluations, his draft rankings are probably used by NHL teams to pick in the reverse order!



Ha! hey I qualified it by saying "I'm not a fan.." :).. but on the other side, I can be pretty sure he's not in the Oilers pocket. If he's right though, next season looks bleak. I think he's right about that Nurse can progress to a top 2 defenseman, he has NHL level elite skating and was the PP leader in junior. That's how everyone else gets No.1 D-men, they draft and develop.

[Updated on: Tue, 05 July 2016 13:44]


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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674740 is a reply to message #674739 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 13:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NZ Oiler Fan  is currently offline NZ Oiler Fan
Messages: 1189
Registered: October 2006
Location: Kensington, PEI

1 Cup

Skookum Jim wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 13:41

NZ Oiler Fan wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 12:21

Skookum Jim wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 13:12

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:00

ziltoid wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:52

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:27

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:21

I think the point is clear though - he doesn't think Larsson is enough of a return for Taylor Hall.

That seems to be an across the board belief. The guy in the video beside Dreger (is that Button?) is defending the move, but once again he says "Obviously Taylor Hall is the better player". I've heard Button defend his record as GM saying he lost trades to make his team better so maybe he's feeling for Chiarelli right now. Of course, Button was a horrible GM too...soooo...


Does anyone reasonable think that it's good return though? My issue isn't with not liking the trade, it's the level of piling on that's going on that bothers me.

I want to see thoughtful, well constructed arguments about what Larsson is or isn't and what this means for the Oilers. Not bloggers whining that this is the worst trade of the salary cap era, or saying that Larsson is worse than a guy that the Blackhawks put on buyout waivers (David Rundblad), or filler like Yost posted.


I would also like to add in the narrative that you can't give up the best player in the deal and become a better team overall. That one drives me particularly mad.

Watch me do it right now:

I trade the entire Oilers Roster minus Lander to Pittsburg for their entire roster minus Crosby. Pittsburgh gets the best player in McDavid, but the new Oilers team will be better than they were before... unless of course you believe the Oilers current roster is better than the reigning cup champion's roster (or that Malkin is better than McDavid). Hell, you could make the same trade with ANY of the playoff teams (our entire roster minus our worst player for their entire roster minus their best player) and we would STILL be a better team (last I checked, we've been out of the playoffs for a while).

icon_rolleyes

Now, I don't know if we are a better team with Larsson than with Hall -- that will play itself out over the course of the season -- but I do THINK we will be better off with Larsson for a variety of reasons (0% of which surround Hall's character, FYI).


Little easier to suggest you can win while giving up the best player when you get more than a single worse player back (not a bad player, but worse than what you gave up).

I heard them talking on the radio about how we've balanced the defence. We've added a single guy, who's not elite. I don't think it's that much better yet. Our offence will be worse, because we've taken a driver out of the lineup and have added no other driver to replace him.


True. Most of the commentary out there trying to justify the value lost vs value gained in the trade, comes down to having to believe Larsson will be better, and can be an impactful No.1 D-man.

I'm not a fan of Button, but he thinks Larsson will never be a top 2 NHL defenseman, he's going to be a 3/4 defenseman, and doesn't expect to see any more offense from him than what he produced in NJ. He says he's watched him from junior through the SEL, to the NHL, so he has some background on the guy, more than most.

He says we'll still need No.1/2 D-men. If true we don't have any more ammo to get one, shot the wad with T. Hall... oh we still have McD, maybe we can pry Morgan Rielly loose from Toronto. ;)

Also says he doesn't see Sekera as anything more than an NHL No.4 defenseman (I tend to agree).

If true, next season may not be so rosy as some have hoped, me included.

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/edmonton-1260/audio/button-i-don-t-t hink-larsson-is-a-top-two-guy-1.521061



Remember this? icon_wink

Skookum Jim wrote on Thu, 03 March 2016 20:12


That's why Button is still working for TSN and not in management, he makes some real stinker player evaluations, his draft rankings are probably used by NHL teams to pick in the reverse order!



Ha! hey I qualified it by saying "I'm not a fan.." :).. but on the other side, I can be pretty sure he's not in the Oilers pocket. If he's right though, next season looks bleak. I think he's right about that Nurse can progress to a top 2 defenseman, he has NHL level elite skating and was the PP leader in junior. That's how everyone else gets No.1 D-men, they draft and develop.



Just bugging :)

i think Larsson is the best defenseman we've had since pre-injury Whitney and is absolutely a top pairing guy.
Mind you, the bar for being our best defenseman in the past 10 years isn't set terribly high...



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674767 is a reply to message #674740 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 16:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Skookum Jim  is currently offline Skookum Jim
Messages: 4419
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

4 Cups

NZ Oiler Fan wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 12:46

Skookum Jim wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 13:41

NZ Oiler Fan wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 12:21

Skookum Jim wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 13:12

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:00

ziltoid wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:52

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:27

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:21

I think the point is clear though - he doesn't think Larsson is enough of a return for Taylor Hall.

That seems to be an across the board belief. The guy in the video beside Dreger (is that Button?) is defending the move, but once again he says "Obviously Taylor Hall is the better player". I've heard Button defend his record as GM saying he lost trades to make his team better so maybe he's feeling for Chiarelli right now. Of course, Button was a horrible GM too...soooo...


Does anyone reasonable think that it's good return though? My issue isn't with not liking the trade, it's the level of piling on that's going on that bothers me.

I want to see thoughtful, well constructed arguments about what Larsson is or isn't and what this means for the Oilers. Not bloggers whining that this is the worst trade of the salary cap era, or saying that Larsson is worse than a guy that the Blackhawks put on buyout waivers (David Rundblad), or filler like Yost posted.


I would also like to add in the narrative that you can't give up the best player in the deal and become a better team overall. That one drives me particularly mad.

Watch me do it right now:

I trade the entire Oilers Roster minus Lander to Pittsburg for their entire roster minus Crosby. Pittsburgh gets the best player in McDavid, but the new Oilers team will be better than they were before... unless of course you believe the Oilers current roster is better than the reigning cup champion's roster (or that Malkin is better than McDavid). Hell, you could make the same trade with ANY of the playoff teams (our entire roster minus our worst player for their entire roster minus their best player) and we would STILL be a better team (last I checked, we've been out of the playoffs for a while).

icon_rolleyes

Now, I don't know if we are a better team with Larsson than with Hall -- that will play itself out over the course of the season -- but I do THINK we will be better off with Larsson for a variety of reasons (0% of which surround Hall's character, FYI).


Little easier to suggest you can win while giving up the best player when you get more than a single worse player back (not a bad player, but worse than what you gave up).

I heard them talking on the radio about how we've balanced the defence. We've added a single guy, who's not elite. I don't think it's that much better yet. Our offence will be worse, because we've taken a driver out of the lineup and have added no other driver to replace him.


True. Most of the commentary out there trying to justify the value lost vs value gained in the trade, comes down to having to believe Larsson will be better, and can be an impactful No.1 D-man.

I'm not a fan of Button, but he thinks Larsson will never be a top 2 NHL defenseman, he's going to be a 3/4 defenseman, and doesn't expect to see any more offense from him than what he produced in NJ. He says he's watched him from junior through the SEL, to the NHL, so he has some background on the guy, more than most.

He says we'll still need No.1/2 D-men. If true we don't have any more ammo to get one, shot the wad with T. Hall... oh we still have McD, maybe we can pry Morgan Rielly loose from Toronto. ;)

Also says he doesn't see Sekera as anything more than an NHL No.4 defenseman (I tend to agree).

If true, next season may not be so rosy as some have hoped, me included.

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/edmonton-1260/audio/button-i-don-t-t hink-larsson-is-a-top-two-guy-1.521061



Remember this? icon_wink

Skookum Jim wrote on Thu, 03 March 2016 20:12


That's why Button is still working for TSN and not in management, he makes some real stinker player evaluations, his draft rankings are probably used by NHL teams to pick in the reverse order!



Ha! hey I qualified it by saying "I'm not a fan.." :).. but on the other side, I can be pretty sure he's not in the Oilers pocket. If he's right though, next season looks bleak. I think he's right about that Nurse can progress to a top 2 defenseman, he has NHL level elite skating and was the PP leader in junior. That's how everyone else gets No.1 D-men, they draft and develop.



Just bugging :)

i think Larsson is the best defenseman we've had since pre-injury Whitney and is absolutely a top pairing guy.
Mind you, the bar for being our best defenseman in the past 10 years isn't set terribly high...


You are probably correct, but as you say pre-injury Whitney is setting the bar pretty low, especially for trading our best player before we lucked out and landed McD. I think what Button was saying that Larsson might be an Oiler top 2, but not an NHL top 2.



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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674720 is a reply to message #674717 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 11:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 10777
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

ziltoid wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:52

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:27

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:21

I think the point is clear though - he doesn't think Larsson is enough of a return for Taylor Hall.

That seems to be an across the board belief. The guy in the video beside Dreger (is that Button?) is defending the move, but once again he says "Obviously Taylor Hall is the better player". I've heard Button defend his record as GM saying he lost trades to make his team better so maybe he's feeling for Chiarelli right now. Of course, Button was a horrible GM too...soooo...


Does anyone reasonable think that it's good return though? My issue isn't with not liking the trade, it's the level of piling on that's going on that bothers me.

I want to see thoughtful, well constructed arguments about what Larsson is or isn't and what this means for the Oilers. Not bloggers whining that this is the worst trade of the salary cap era, or saying that Larsson is worse than a guy that the Blackhawks put on buyout waivers (David Rundblad), or filler like Yost posted.


I would also like to add in the narrative that you can't give up the best player in the deal and become a better team overall. That one drives me particularly mad.

Watch me do it right now:

I trade the entire Oilers Roster minus Lander to Pittsburg for their entire roster minus Crosby. Pittsburgh gets the best player in McDavid, but the new Oilers team will be better than they were before... unless of course you believe the Oilers current roster is better than the reigning cup champion's roster (or that Malkin is better than McDavid). Hell, you could make the same trade with ANY of the playoff teams (our entire roster minus our worst player for their entire roster minus their best player) and we would STILL be a better team (last I checked, we've been out of the playoffs for a while).

icon_rolleyes

Now, I don't know if we are a better team with Larsson than with Hall -- that will play itself out over the course of the season -- but I do THINK we will be better off with Larsson for a variety of reasons (0% of which surround Hall's character, FYI).


THat's a fun concept.

How about if you had 9 Crosby's and your D had 4 Nikitins.

Which team would be better?

Crosby Crosby Crosby
Crosby Crosby Crosby
Crosby Crosby Crosby
Lucic RNH Ebs

Klefbom Nikitin
Sekera Nikitin
Nikitin Nikitin

Or

Crosby Crosby Crosby
Crosby Crosby Ebs
Lucic Crosby Crosby
Pouliot RNH Yak

Klefbom Larsson
Sekera Barrie
Nikitin Nikitin

If you traded 2 of your Crosby's for Larsson and Barrie horribly losing in both deals :)



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

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

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674723 is a reply to message #674720 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 11:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ziltoid  is currently offline ziltoid
Messages: 150
Registered: January 2011

No Cups

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 11:09

ziltoid wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:52

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:27

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:21

I think the point is clear though - he doesn't think Larsson is enough of a return for Taylor Hall.

That seems to be an across the board belief. The guy in the video beside Dreger (is that Button?) is defending the move, but once again he says "Obviously Taylor Hall is the better player". I've heard Button defend his record as GM saying he lost trades to make his team better so maybe he's feeling for Chiarelli right now. Of course, Button was a horrible GM too...soooo...


Does anyone reasonable think that it's good return though? My issue isn't with not liking the trade, it's the level of piling on that's going on that bothers me.

I want to see thoughtful, well constructed arguments about what Larsson is or isn't and what this means for the Oilers. Not bloggers whining that this is the worst trade of the salary cap era, or saying that Larsson is worse than a guy that the Blackhawks put on buyout waivers (David Rundblad), or filler like Yost posted.


I would also like to add in the narrative that you can't give up the best player in the deal and become a better team overall. That one drives me particularly mad.

Watch me do it right now:

I trade the entire Oilers Roster minus Lander to Pittsburg for their entire roster minus Crosby. Pittsburgh gets the best player in McDavid, but the new Oilers team will be better than they were before... unless of course you believe the Oilers current roster is better than the reigning cup champion's roster (or that Malkin is better than McDavid). Hell, you could make the same trade with ANY of the playoff teams (our entire roster minus our worst player for their entire roster minus their best player) and we would STILL be a better team (last I checked, we've been out of the playoffs for a while).

icon_rolleyes

Now, I don't know if we are a better team with Larsson than with Hall -- that will play itself out over the course of the season -- but I do THINK we will be better off with Larsson for a variety of reasons (0% of which surround Hall's character, FYI).


THat's a fun concept.

How about if you had 9 Crosby's and your D had 4 Nikitins.

Which team would be better?

Crosby Crosby Crosby
Crosby Crosby Crosby
Crosby Crosby Crosby
Lucic RNH Ebs

Klefbom Nikitin
Sekera Nikitin
Nikitin Nikitin

Or

Crosby Crosby Crosby
Crosby Crosby Ebs
Lucic Crosby Crosby
Pouliot RNH Yak

Klefbom Larsson
Sekera Barrie
Nikitin Nikitin

If you traded 2 of your Crosby's for Larsson and Barrie horribly losing in both deals :)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_proof#Proof_by_co ntradiction



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674718 is a reply to message #674703 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 10:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 7176
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 10:27

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:21

I think the point is clear though - he doesn't think Larsson is enough of a return for Taylor Hall.

That seems to be an across the board belief. The guy in the video beside Dreger (is that Button?) is defending the move, but once again he says "Obviously Taylor Hall is the better player". I've heard Button defend his record as GM saying he lost trades to make his team better so maybe he's feeling for Chiarelli right now. Of course, Button was a horrible GM too...soooo...


Does anyone reasonable think that it's good return though? My issue isn't with not liking the trade, it's the level of piling on that's going on that bothers me.

I want to see thoughtful, well constructed arguments about what Larsson is or isn't and what this means for the Oilers. Not bloggers whining that this is the worst trade of the salary cap era, or saying that Larsson is worse than a guy that the Blackhawks put on buyout waivers (David Rundblad), or filler like Yost posted.


There's always going to be a difficulty to analyze what Larsson is outside of the way he has been used. It becomes difficult to project. You're right, Yost doesn't say if it's 4 or 5 or 20 games that he's using as his sample size, and the smaller the sample, the more it can be swayed by one good or bad result.

I had not seen the Rundblad comment.

Personally, having read everything I can about the deal and looking at all the stats I could, I think Larsson is a good defensive defenceman with pretty middling offence. I think he's top 60 in the league at defence, which makes him a top pairing guy.

I think you needed a top 15 guy to make a straight-up trade for Hall worthwhile. I think it's shameful that the Oilers couldn't manage to get anything else but Larsson and that it shows a real lack of management ability, and goes towards confirming that Peter Chiarelli is prone to making moves in a panic and losing deals that way.

I'm fine with this article, because really, it's saying the same thing. He's good at defence, he may not be good at offence. Hall was a big overpay for him. Does anyone really disagree with that? I think there could be clarifications, but that doesn't seem like piling on to me. Just seems accurate. Chiarelli did a bad job. He should be publicly flogged for it.




"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
#FireBobbyNicks

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674741 is a reply to message #674718 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 13:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Goose  is currently offline Goose
Messages: 1098
Registered: October 2006
Location: Vancouver

1 Cup

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:53



I'm fine with this article, because really, it's saying the same thing. He's good at defence, he may not be good at offence.



See this is where I disagree and feel it is piling on. I don't think Yost's analysis does say that. He says that's what it means, but if you dig into it, it's a bunch of meaningless noise.

Just like his draft value analysis says that Toronto would have got fair value for the first overall pick by trading Matthews for 4 garbage picks from Winnipeg (the one pick with real value was 22nd overall). He even backs it up with charts and numbers and stuff. Doesn't make it true.

Over the past two seasons, Larsson has 33 even-strength points. Good for about 49th among all defencemen in the league. That's not great, but it's definitely in the range of 1st pair. If you don't like that because Larsson plays a lot of minutes, and your argument is that of course he's going to get a few points just by being on the ice, fine: his pts/60 rate among all d-men with min 1500 minutes over the past two years is about .80 - good for 59th. A little worse but still among the top 60. Higher than Doughty, Shattenkirk, Lindholm, Ryan Suter, and Seth Jones. Higher than any other Oiler not named Oscar Klefbom, including Petry, Sekera and Schultz. Keep in mind Larsson played on the lowest scoring team in the league.

But guys like Yost don't want to provide context like that. He'd rather light his hair on fire, call Larsson "one dimensional", when he clearly isn't (unless you think Doughty, Shattenkirk, et al are one dimensional), and pile on this trade because it's the cool thing to do.

Numbers from Corsica.hockey



Oilers Goal Differential
17/18: 234 GF / 263 GA (-29)
18/19: 232 GF / 274 GA (-42)
19/20 (82 game pace): 257 GF / 254 GA (+3) in 64 games
2021 (82 game pace):269 GF / 235 GA (+34) after 38 games

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674742 is a reply to message #674741 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 13:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
WhoreableGuy  is currently offline WhoreableGuy
Messages: 592
Registered: August 2006
Location: Calgary

No Cups

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/free-agency

Looks like Taylor Hall can still live with Gazdic, New Jersey has just signed him.

I wonder if this was a request from Hall. Gazdic is not even close to being an NHL player in my eyes.



"Bah Gawd! Would somebody stop the damn draft!"

- Jim Ross calling the NHL Draft Lotto 2015 as the Oilers win

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674768 is a reply to message #674742 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 16:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Skookum Jim  is currently offline Skookum Jim
Messages: 4419
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

4 Cups

WhoreableGuy wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 12:56

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/free-agency

Looks like Taylor Hall can still live with Gazdic, New Jersey has just signed him.

I wonder if this was a request from Hall. Gazdic is not even close to being an NHL player in my eyes.


I don't know we only saw him 2-3 minutes a night, in just a few games a season, NJ is so low on forward talent he might get a shot and turn into the next Matt Martin.



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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674779 is a reply to message #674768 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 18:26 Go to previous messageGo to next message
WhoreableGuy  is currently offline WhoreableGuy
Messages: 592
Registered: August 2006
Location: Calgary

No Cups

Skookum Jim wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 16:47

I don't know we only saw him 2-3 minutes a night, in just a few games a season, NJ is so low on forward talent he might get a shot and turn into the next Matt Martin.


HAHAH daaaamnn.

I think at least one thing the Hall trade has brought is a little bit of life into the Oilers forums in the off season. As the days go on the trade doesn't hurt as bad since time heals all wounds but for the first time in a while I have no idea how things are going to pan out this season.



"Bah Gawd! Would somebody stop the damn draft!"

- Jim Ross calling the NHL Draft Lotto 2015 as the Oilers win

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674752 is a reply to message #674741 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 15:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 10777
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 13:48

Adam wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:53



I'm fine with this article, because really, it's saying the same thing. He's good at defence, he may not be good at offence.



See this is where I disagree and feel it is piling on. I don't think Yost's analysis does say that. He says that's what it means, but if you dig into it, it's a bunch of meaningless noise.

Just like his draft value analysis says that Toronto would have got fair value for the first overall pick by trading Matthews for 4 garbage picks from Winnipeg (the one pick with real value was 22nd overall). He even backs it up with charts and numbers and stuff. Doesn't make it true.

Over the past two seasons, Larsson has 33 even-strength points. Good for about 49th among all defencemen in the league. That's not great, but it's definitely in the range of 1st pair. If you don't like that because Larsson plays a lot of minutes, and your argument is that of course he's going to get a few points just by being on the ice, fine: his pts/60 rate among all d-men with min 1500 minutes over the past two years is about .80 - good for 59th. A little worse but still among the top 60. Higher than Doughty, Shattenkirk, Lindholm, Ryan Suter, and Seth Jones. Higher than any other Oiler not named Oscar Klefbom, including Petry, Sekera and Schultz. Keep in mind Larsson played on the lowest scoring team in the league.

But guys like Yost don't want to provide context like that. He'd rather light his hair on fire, call Larsson "one dimensional", when he clearly isn't (unless you think Doughty, Shattenkirk, et al are one dimensional), and pile on this trade because it's the cool thing to do.

Numbers from Corsica.hockey


6 games last year he had >50% offensive zone starts 5v5. 2 against the pens, 1 against Det, 1 against Edmonton, 1 against Anaheim and 1 against CBJ. Massive sample size ;)



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

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

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674754 is a reply to message #674752 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 15:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 7176
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Given that Chiarelli said that Oilers fans just had seen Hall more than Larsson, I was curious about what Larsson played like in the games Chiarelli was most likely to watch - versus Chia's team:

2015-16 2GP, 0-0-0, -1, 0 PIM, 2 hits, 3 blocked shots
2014-15 3GP, 0-1-1, -2, 2 PIM, 4 hits, 8 blocked shots
2013-14 2GP, 0-0-0, 0, 0 PIM, 3 hits, 2 blocked shots
2012-13 0GP
2011-12 4GP, 0-0-0, -4, 2PIM, 4 hits, 4 blocked shots
Total - 11GP, 0-1-1, -7, 4 PIM, 13 hits, 17 blocked shots




"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
#FireBobbyNicks

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674886 is a reply to message #674752 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 10:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Goose  is currently offline Goose
Messages: 1098
Registered: October 2006
Location: Vancouver

1 Cup

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 14:39


6 games last year he had >50% offensive zone starts 5v5. 2 against the pens, 1 against Det, 1 against Edmonton, 1 against Anaheim and 1 against CBJ. Massive sample size ;)


That's probably worse than I would have even expected. Geez.

Curtis Leblanc at Copper&Blue shared similar concerns about the Yost article that I and others had.

Quote:

I wish I could see the data Yost was working with, because the WOWY table above suggests that Larsson was playing with subpar linemates in almost all cases of favourable OZS%. Over a small sample with those linemates, the shot attempt share remained reasonable but the share of goals dropped considerably for the Devils.


http://www.coppernblue.com/2016/7/7/12121560/adam-larsson-of fensive-zone-starts-goals-for-percentage#main_comment_form

Out of curiosity Kr55 what site did you use to see Larsson's zone starts on a game by game basis? Natural Stat Trick?



Oilers Goal Differential
17/18: 234 GF / 263 GA (-29)
18/19: 232 GF / 274 GA (-42)
19/20 (82 game pace): 257 GF / 254 GA (+3) in 64 games
2021 (82 game pace):269 GF / 235 GA (+34) after 38 games

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674887 is a reply to message #674886 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 11:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
6zeppelin6  is currently offline 6zeppelin6
Messages: 10
Registered: May 2006

No Cups

Saw this as well from over on HFBoards...

Quote:

In 2014/15, the season before Larsson and Greene got buried as the NHL's most abused shutdown pairing, Larsson posted 24 points in 64 games (21 EV and 3 SH). He lead all defencemen on his team in points.

Using the powers of NHL.com and Microsoft Excel, the Devils scored 133 goals during Adam Larsson's 64 games. They scored 104 even strength goals, which is a rate of 1.63 even strength goals a game. Larsson had a rate of 0.33 even strength points a game. This means that Adam Larsson had a point on 20.2% of all even strength goals scored by New Jersey.

Now I am going to compare the 14/15 Devils with the 14/15 Canadiens. I'll be using GF% because it's a decent indicator of who's winning the war on ice. Three crappy shots versus one stretch pass leading to a breakaway may be better for Corsi, but it doesn't account for quality. Adam Larsson's PDO was 1015. The target for my comparison's PDO was 1019.

PK Subban had 39 even strength points across 82 games at a rate of 0.48 even strength points a game. The Canadiens scored 181 even strength goals, which is a rate 2.21 even strength goals a game. This means that Subban had a point on 21.5% of all even strength goals scored by Montreal.

Now, of course Subban is better than Larsson offensively. That's not what I'm getting at. Subban drives play. He's a wonderful skater, has a cannon of a shot, sees the ice fantastically, and takes risks. He's going to help his teammates produce.

But the top five New Jersey Devil scorers had 31, 27, 25, 24, and 22 even strength points. That's a combined 129 points. The top five Montreal Canadien scorers excluding Subban had 58, 44, 39, 37, and 34 even strength points. That's a combined 212 points, which is 64% higher.

And what impact did Larsson have on their GF%? Well, when they were on the ice together, 31's GF% went from 50% to 63.2%, 27's went from 43.6% to 66.7%, 25's went from 55% to 61.5%, 24's went from 36.1% to 45.0%, and 22's 55.2% to... 53.8%. Thanks Jagr.

Larsson and Greene together had a 51.1% GF share, which means that when Larsson was given an offensive push by playing with this players, he had a positive impact. All of Greene's WOWY numbers (unless I'm missing something) with the top scorers were worse than Larsson's in 14/15 for GF%.

And Subban? 58's went from 75% to 61%, 44's went from 51.1% to 51.4%, 39's went from 56.8% to 60.%, 37's went from 69% to 57.1%, and 34's went from 48.8% to 65.9%.

Larsson had a more significant positive impact on the top scorers of his team than Subban did. This would suggest that there was nobody on the Devils save for Jagr who could win the war on ice without Larsson. On the Canadiens, Pacioretty and Plekanec were fine without Subban in controlling the ice.

None of this means that Larsson is equal to or better offensively than Subban, but it does suggest that Adam Larsson helps his teammates score more frequently when he's on the ice. The numbers suggest that Subban had a stronger supporting cast that season, too, which should be pretty obvious when you compare 129 points to 212 points for the top five producers. 2014/15 is with Hart trophy Carey Price in net too, which I assume more than makes up for Cory Schneider being in the Devils' net.

In sum, this was complicated and took forever. If only I could genuinely multiply Adam Larsson's 0.33 by 1.64 (as per the top five scorers aggregate % difference) to say that Larsson would have put up 0.54 EVP/game for the Canadiens in 2014/15. But I can assure you that Larsson's EVP/game would be a damned sight better than 0.33 were he swapped with Subban for that season




When you get all set to watch the game, and within 10 minutes the Oilers are losing:

http://i59.tinypic.com/2wd0gth.gif

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674891 is a reply to message #674886 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 12:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 10777
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

Goose wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 10:56

Kr55 wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 14:39


6 games last year he had >50% offensive zone starts 5v5. 2 against the pens, 1 against Det, 1 against Edmonton, 1 against Anaheim and 1 against CBJ. Massive sample size ;)


That's probably worse than I would have even expected. Geez.

Curtis Leblanc at Copper&Blue shared similar concerns about the Yost article that I and others had.

Quote:

I wish I could see the data Yost was working with, because the WOWY table above suggests that Larsson was playing with subpar linemates in almost all cases of favourable OZS%. Over a small sample with those linemates, the shot attempt share remained reasonable but the share of goals dropped considerably for the Devils.


http://www.coppernblue.com/2016/7/7/12121560/adam-larsson-of fensive-zone-starts-goals-for-percentage#main_comment_form

Out of curiosity Kr55 what site did you use to see Larsson's zone starts on a game by game basis? Natural Stat Trick?


Yup, naturalstattrick.com is the only play I know that hasn't been shut down yet cause the owner is hired by an NHL team where you can see a guys game by game zone starts easily:

http://www.naturalstattrick.com/playerreport.php?playerid=84 76457&sit=5v5&stype=2



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

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

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674704 is a reply to message #674697 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 10:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Magnum  is currently offline Magnum
Messages: 839
Registered: June 2009
Location: Rogers' Arena > Banff

No Cups

Goose wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 09:58

WhoreableGuy wrote on Tue, 05 July 2016 08:20

Travis Yost on the Hall trade: http://www.tsn.ca/why-one-dimensional-larsson-wasn-t-enough- for-hall-1.521260

Why are fancy stats so polarizing sometimes? I guess I'm the problem if I don't take the time to understand them. It's tough to get over this trade when I read an article like this every day.

The misunderstanding is that the fans against this trade were totally against trading Hall but all fans were open to it if the return was somewhat fair. This trade wasn't even close.

I hope I get to eat crow on this one.


Ugh, Travis Yost is not smart. He writes well, and on the surface it can seem like he knows what he's talking about. But I find his analysis is so superficial.

Take his analysis of the value of draft picks where he uses games played as proxy for player value. Sounds good on the surface, but are we really assuming that a game played by Sidney Crosby has the same value as a game played by Luke Gazdic:

http://www.tsn.ca/examining-the-true-value-of-toronto-s-firs t-overall-pick-1.491169

Based on his analysis, Toronto would have got fair value for Austin Matthews by trading with Philly for 2 seconds, 2 thirds, a fifth and a sixth round pick. Does anyone think that makes any sense?

As for this article, just using raw Corsi or raw GF numbers is immediately a red flag as NJ was one of the worst Corsi and the worst goal scoring teams in the league. So I'm not sure how much you can expect the needle to move, or how much of that can be attributed to Larsson. REL numbers in these scenarios are much more informative.

Second, he says there are "plenty of instances in which he saw decent or favourable offensive zone starts". Great. What does that mean? 10 games? 15 games? Considering how brutal his zone starts were overall, my assumption is that the number of games in which he had positive zone starts is pretty small, meaning that there may be sample size issues there. Yost doesn't give us that detail though, so I can only speculate, and I don't have time to go and look at all of Larsson's games right now.

Also, he provides zero context. What do these graphs look like for other defencemen with brutal zone starts. Or even what do the graphs look like for all the other d-men on NJ? Is this Larsson issue or a NJ issue?




The fact that he is using/comparing different sample sizes is evidence of bias. You can't say, in the small sample he had X, therefore the large sample results suggest Y. You have to use the same or similar sample sizes, otherwise you're manufacturing conclusions - this is eXpecially true considering the ware and tare of a full NHL season. So yeah, that article sounds bunk. The saddest part is Yost knows about zone starts stats and is abusing the stat, it would be more forgivable if he was ignorant.

Anyone who sees Larsson's advanced stats and thinks he's anything short of a top 1 or 2 shutdown d-men is not very good at reading advanced stats, or is biased, or is trying the earn website clicks. Sure there are qualitative items (such as his pairing with Greene), which are speculative, and would suggest that he's not, but there's nothing in the numbers suggests otherwise.



2015/2016 - This Kool-Aid tastes like McDavid flavoured Drain-O.
2016/2017 - This Kool-Aid is starting to taste like juice.
2017/2018 - I'm drinking this Kool-Aid, in hopes that it's Drain-O.
2018/2019 - Another round of Drain-O, good sir!

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674725 is a reply to message #674704 ]
Tue, 05 July 2016 11:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

The supposed big knock on Larsson that everyone seems to be focusing on is he doesn't score enough. So the question I have is how does everyone know he can't score?

He's played on a team that doesn't score much in general. All the stats guys have said the Devils play a style of game that is a "low event style" so they don't generate a lot of scoring or even chances and focus a ton on defense. For some reason, he gets NO pp time. People can rattle off all these stats about pots per game and pts per 60 and whatever the hell else you want to show. But if the team he plays on scores very little, if the majority of forwards he players with aren't overly offensive, if the team plays a style that focuses a lot on defense and they play a style that doesn't generate a lot of offensive chances and he's not given any PP time and he's put into a defensive role, how exactly is Larsson supposed to score?

Everyone that thinks Yak is a top 6 player blames the coaches for Yak not scoring and they use the argument of this linemates not being offensive enough and he's playing the 3rd line and he's not getting put into offensive situations. So if you can make the argument about Yak, why can't it translate to Larsson? If all he gets is defensive zone starts and asked to constantly defend and doesn't get ANY gravy PP time, how can anyone expect offense from him?

People should go look up Hedman's numbers. He didn't score much at all for the fist 258 games of his career.

[Updated on: Tue, 05 July 2016 11:44]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674895 is a reply to message #673755 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 13:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 7176
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Had a thought today over lunch. I've been wondering about the timing of this deal - why would you do this when Lucic is still meeting with other teams and there's a possibility he doesn't sign with you? After all, there was little buzz around Larsson, and Taylor Hall is a stupendous return for New Jersey. They almost certainly would have still done that deal in a few days time.

My first thought was that it was just panic. They fooled themselves in to thinking July 1 was a real deadline for them on this deal, because it was a real deadline with Montreal as Subban's no-trade was going to kick in. That may be the case.

But then I thought about the way the Oilers handled this trade in relation to the fanbase. There were leaks to Curtis Stock and Gene Principe the day before the trade happened, saying that Lucic-to-Edmonton was as good as done. With Larsson, Stauffer had clearly been let in to the loop a couple days early. Rishaug had suddenly started saying emphatically how important it was that the Oilers lose a trade to get a RH shot defenceman. Rishaug got the scoop when the deal was done, and then continued to fight the good fight, saying this was a good and necessary deal for the Oilers. Chiarelli did as many press availabilities in the days following the trade as he had done in the whole season preceding it, showing up on radio shows to talk about how the Devils got the best player, but they're still happy with the deal.

So maybe the real reason they rushed this trade is so that they were able to get the bad news in first - in hopes that signing Lucic revived everyone's spirits? If that is what happened, it's a ridiculous risk to take just so that you get a few less volumes of hate mail but it's consistent with my belief that the Oilers are more concerned about what the fans think than about making sure they're doing the right things for the franchise. It becomes a problem, because I don't think management should consider the fans when making any moves that don't involve ticket prices. The sole goal should be icing the best team so that you're best positioned to win. If that angers the fans, then you bear the brunt for a while, confident that in your belief that you're doing the right things and that it will show in the end. There's a great part of the Moneyball movie where fans are calling for Billy Bean's head, and he just does what he can to drown it out while waiting to be proven right.

I'm concerned sometimes that the Oilers look as much at the fans as their opposition as they do the other 29 teams. Certainly, the level of disclosure over the past few years has been obscene and damaging to the team. It's been better under Chiarelli, but you get the feeling that the Oilers felt they needed to open up around the Hall deal, so I wonder if that even affected the timing.



"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
#FireBobbyNicks

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674898 is a reply to message #674895 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 14:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ziltoid  is currently offline ziltoid
Messages: 150
Registered: January 2011

No Cups

Adam wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 13:31

Had a thought today over lunch. I've been wondering about the timing of this deal - why would you do this when Lucic is still meeting with other teams and there's a possibility he doesn't sign with you? After all, there was little buzz around Larsson, and Taylor Hall is a stupendous return for New Jersey. They almost certainly would have still done that deal in a few days time.

My first thought was that it was just panic. They fooled themselves in to thinking July 1 was a real deadline for them on this deal, because it was a real deadline with Montreal as Subban's no-trade was going to kick in. That may be the case.

But then I thought about the way the Oilers handled this trade in relation to the fanbase. There were leaks to Curtis Stock and Gene Principe the day before the trade happened, saying that Lucic-to-Edmonton was as good as done. With Larsson, Stauffer had clearly been let in to the loop a couple days early. Rishaug had suddenly started saying emphatically how important it was that the Oilers lose a trade to get a RH shot defenceman. Rishaug got the scoop when the deal was done, and then continued to fight the good fight, saying this was a good and necessary deal for the Oilers. Chiarelli did as many press availabilities in the days following the trade as he had done in the whole season preceding it, showing up on radio shows to talk about how the Devils got the best player, but they're still happy with the deal.

So maybe the real reason they rushed this trade is so that they were able to get the bad news in first - in hopes that signing Lucic revived everyone's spirits? If that is what happened, it's a ridiculous risk to take just so that you get a few less volumes of hate mail but it's consistent with my belief that the Oilers are more concerned about what the fans think than about making sure they're doing the right things for the franchise. It becomes a problem, because I don't think management should consider the fans when making any moves that don't involve ticket prices. The sole goal should be icing the best team so that you're best positioned to win. If that angers the fans, then you bear the brunt for a while, confident that in your belief that you're doing the right things and that it will show in the end. There's a great part of the Moneyball movie where fans are calling for Billy Bean's head, and he just does what he can to drown it out while waiting to be proven right.

I'm concerned sometimes that the Oilers look as much at the fans as their opposition as they do the other 29 teams. Certainly, the level of disclosure over the past few years has been obscene and damaging to the team. It's been better under Chiarelli, but you get the feeling that the Oilers felt they needed to open up around the Hall deal, so I wonder if that even affected the timing.


I would be hard-pressed to believe that there isn't a team in the league that does not, on some level, use the press in this way. I'm glad that Chia seems to use the press far less than his predecessors, and I have no problems with him softening the fanbase re: the Hall trade. The overwhelming majority of fans operate under emotion, not reason. Chia new he would get roasted by those too quick to rush to judgement -- despite the fact the trade is no where near as lopsided as it seems -- so he softened them up because $$$ (ticket sales, merch, etc.). I don't think he, personally, cares what the fans think of him -- or that he is in fear of his job -- and I am inclined to believe his use of the presses was more-so for financial reasons (a happy fan is a paying fan, especially with the new rink).



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674899 is a reply to message #674898 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 14:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
CrusaderPi  is currently offline CrusaderPi
Messages: 7803
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

ziltoid wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:16

Adam wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 13:31

Had a thought today over lunch. I've been wondering about the timing of this deal - why would you do this when Lucic is still meeting with other teams and there's a possibility he doesn't sign with you? After all, there was little buzz around Larsson, and Taylor Hall is a stupendous return for New Jersey. They almost certainly would have still done that deal in a few days time.

My first thought was that it was just panic. They fooled themselves in to thinking July 1 was a real deadline for them on this deal, because it was a real deadline with Montreal as Subban's no-trade was going to kick in. That may be the case.

But then I thought about the way the Oilers handled this trade in relation to the fanbase. There were leaks to Curtis Stock and Gene Principe the day before the trade happened, saying that Lucic-to-Edmonton was as good as done. With Larsson, Stauffer had clearly been let in to the loop a couple days early. Rishaug had suddenly started saying emphatically how important it was that the Oilers lose a trade to get a RH shot defenceman. Rishaug got the scoop when the deal was done, and then continued to fight the good fight, saying this was a good and necessary deal for the Oilers. Chiarelli did as many press availabilities in the days following the trade as he had done in the whole season preceding it, showing up on radio shows to talk about how the Devils got the best player, but they're still happy with the deal.

So maybe the real reason they rushed this trade is so that they were able to get the bad news in first - in hopes that signing Lucic revived everyone's spirits? If that is what happened, it's a ridiculous risk to take just so that you get a few less volumes of hate mail but it's consistent with my belief that the Oilers are more concerned about what the fans think than about making sure they're doing the right things for the franchise. It becomes a problem, because I don't think management should consider the fans when making any moves that don't involve ticket prices. The sole goal should be icing the best team so that you're best positioned to win. If that angers the fans, then you bear the brunt for a while, confident that in your belief that you're doing the right things and that it will show in the end. There's a great part of the Moneyball movie where fans are calling for Billy Bean's head, and he just does what he can to drown it out while waiting to be proven right.

I'm concerned sometimes that the Oilers look as much at the fans as their opposition as they do the other 29 teams. Certainly, the level of disclosure over the past few years has been obscene and damaging to the team. It's been better under Chiarelli, but you get the feeling that the Oilers felt they needed to open up around the Hall deal, so I wonder if that even affected the timing.


I would be hard-pressed to believe that there isn't a team in the league that does not, on some level, use the press in this way. I'm glad that Chia seems to use the press far less than his predecessors, and I have no problems with him softening the fanbase re: the Hall trade. The overwhelming majority of fans operate under emotion, not reason. Chia new he would get roasted by those too quick to rush to judgement -- despite the fact the trade is no where near as lopsided as it seems -- so he softened them up because $$$ (ticket sales, merch, etc.). I don't think he, personally, cares what the fans think of him -- or that he is in fear of his job -- and I am inclined to believe his use of the presses was more-so for financial reasons (a happy fan is a paying fan, especially with the new rink).


The extra amount of money the can be made off the fans through softening up via media manipulation must pale in comparison to the amount of money the could potentially be made off a run of 5 consecutive years in the playoffs.



Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674902 is a reply to message #674899 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 14:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ziltoid  is currently offline ziltoid
Messages: 150
Registered: January 2011

No Cups

CrusaderPi wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:23

ziltoid wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:16

Adam wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 13:31

Had a thought today over lunch. I've been wondering about the timing of this deal - why would you do this when Lucic is still meeting with other teams and there's a possibility he doesn't sign with you? After all, there was little buzz around Larsson, and Taylor Hall is a stupendous return for New Jersey. They almost certainly would have still done that deal in a few days time.

My first thought was that it was just panic. They fooled themselves in to thinking July 1 was a real deadline for them on this deal, because it was a real deadline with Montreal as Subban's no-trade was going to kick in. That may be the case.

But then I thought about the way the Oilers handled this trade in relation to the fanbase. There were leaks to Curtis Stock and Gene Principe the day before the trade happened, saying that Lucic-to-Edmonton was as good as done. With Larsson, Stauffer had clearly been let in to the loop a couple days early. Rishaug had suddenly started saying emphatically how important it was that the Oilers lose a trade to get a RH shot defenceman. Rishaug got the scoop when the deal was done, and then continued to fight the good fight, saying this was a good and necessary deal for the Oilers. Chiarelli did as many press availabilities in the days following the trade as he had done in the whole season preceding it, showing up on radio shows to talk about how the Devils got the best player, but they're still happy with the deal.

So maybe the real reason they rushed this trade is so that they were able to get the bad news in first - in hopes that signing Lucic revived everyone's spirits? If that is what happened, it's a ridiculous risk to take just so that you get a few less volumes of hate mail but it's consistent with my belief that the Oilers are more concerned about what the fans think than about making sure they're doing the right things for the franchise. It becomes a problem, because I don't think management should consider the fans when making any moves that don't involve ticket prices. The sole goal should be icing the best team so that you're best positioned to win. If that angers the fans, then you bear the brunt for a while, confident that in your belief that you're doing the right things and that it will show in the end. There's a great part of the Moneyball movie where fans are calling for Billy Bean's head, and he just does what he can to drown it out while waiting to be proven right.

I'm concerned sometimes that the Oilers look as much at the fans as their opposition as they do the other 29 teams. Certainly, the level of disclosure over the past few years has been obscene and damaging to the team. It's been better under Chiarelli, but you get the feeling that the Oilers felt they needed to open up around the Hall deal, so I wonder if that even affected the timing.


I would be hard-pressed to believe that there isn't a team in the league that does not, on some level, use the press in this way. I'm glad that Chia seems to use the press far less than his predecessors, and I have no problems with him softening the fanbase re: the Hall trade. The overwhelming majority of fans operate under emotion, not reason. Chia new he would get roasted by those too quick to rush to judgement -- despite the fact the trade is no where near as lopsided as it seems -- so he softened them up because $$$ (ticket sales, merch, etc.). I don't think he, personally, cares what the fans think of him -- or that he is in fear of his job -- and I am inclined to believe his use of the presses was more-so for financial reasons (a happy fan is a paying fan, especially with the new rink).


The extra amount of money the can be made off the fans through softening up via media manipulation must pale in comparison to the amount of money the could potentially be made off a run of 5 consecutive years in the playoffs.



Oh, absolutely. But that doesn't help this year.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674903 is a reply to message #674902 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 14:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
CrusaderPi  is currently offline CrusaderPi
Messages: 7803
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

ziltoid wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:27

CrusaderPi wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:23

ziltoid wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:16

Adam wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 13:31

Had a thought today over lunch. I've been wondering about the timing of this deal - why would you do this when Lucic is still meeting with other teams and there's a possibility he doesn't sign with you? After all, there was little buzz around Larsson, and Taylor Hall is a stupendous return for New Jersey. They almost certainly would have still done that deal in a few days time.

My first thought was that it was just panic. They fooled themselves in to thinking July 1 was a real deadline for them on this deal, because it was a real deadline with Montreal as Subban's no-trade was going to kick in. That may be the case.

But then I thought about the way the Oilers handled this trade in relation to the fanbase. There were leaks to Curtis Stock and Gene Principe the day before the trade happened, saying that Lucic-to-Edmonton was as good as done. With Larsson, Stauffer had clearly been let in to the loop a couple days early. Rishaug had suddenly started saying emphatically how important it was that the Oilers lose a trade to get a RH shot defenceman. Rishaug got the scoop when the deal was done, and then continued to fight the good fight, saying this was a good and necessary deal for the Oilers. Chiarelli did as many press availabilities in the days following the trade as he had done in the whole season preceding it, showing up on radio shows to talk about how the Devils got the best player, but they're still happy with the deal.

So maybe the real reason they rushed this trade is so that they were able to get the bad news in first - in hopes that signing Lucic revived everyone's spirits? If that is what happened, it's a ridiculous risk to take just so that you get a few less volumes of hate mail but it's consistent with my belief that the Oilers are more concerned about what the fans think than about making sure they're doing the right things for the franchise. It becomes a problem, because I don't think management should consider the fans when making any moves that don't involve ticket prices. The sole goal should be icing the best team so that you're best positioned to win. If that angers the fans, then you bear the brunt for a while, confident that in your belief that you're doing the right things and that it will show in the end. There's a great part of the Moneyball movie where fans are calling for Billy Bean's head, and he just does what he can to drown it out while waiting to be proven right.

I'm concerned sometimes that the Oilers look as much at the fans as their opposition as they do the other 29 teams. Certainly, the level of disclosure over the past few years has been obscene and damaging to the team. It's been better under Chiarelli, but you get the feeling that the Oilers felt they needed to open up around the Hall deal, so I wonder if that even affected the timing.


I would be hard-pressed to believe that there isn't a team in the league that does not, on some level, use the press in this way. I'm glad that Chia seems to use the press far less than his predecessors, and I have no problems with him softening the fanbase re: the Hall trade. The overwhelming majority of fans operate under emotion, not reason. Chia new he would get roasted by those too quick to rush to judgement -- despite the fact the trade is no where near as lopsided as it seems -- so he softened them up because $$$ (ticket sales, merch, etc.). I don't think he, personally, cares what the fans think of him -- or that he is in fear of his job -- and I am inclined to believe his use of the presses was more-so for financial reasons (a happy fan is a paying fan, especially with the new rink).


The extra amount of money the can be made off the fans through softening up via media manipulation must pale in comparison to the amount of money the could potentially be made off a run of 5 consecutive years in the playoffs.



Oh, absolutely. But that doesn't help this year.


Probably won't help next year either....



Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674905 is a reply to message #674898 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 15:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 7176
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

ziltoid wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:16


I would be hard-pressed to believe that there isn't a team in the league that does not, on some level, use the press in this way. I'm glad that Chia seems to use the press far less than his predecessors, and I have no problems with him softening the fanbase re: the Hall trade. The overwhelming majority of fans operate under emotion, not reason. Chia new he would get roasted by those too quick to rush to judgement -- despite the fact the trade is no where near as lopsided as it seems -- so he softened them up because $$$ (ticket sales, merch, etc.). I don't think he, personally, cares what the fans think of him -- or that he is in fear of his job -- and I am inclined to believe his use of the presses was more-so for financial reasons (a happy fan is a paying fan, especially with the new rink).



The team has Connor McDavid and the lure of a new building. They're having more trouble than usual selling all the season tickets, but that's more economy-related than anything.

I think that the Oilers management as a whole believes that they must appease the fans and keep the masses from revolt, because there was such palpable discontent just 15 months ago that it threatened everyone's job and they had to get lucky with the McDavid lottery and add another body to the team just so that they could quell the masses.

I don't think that the best teams use the press much to soften the fanbase on decisions, and as Gregor pointed out, there's some poison in the way the Oilers often do it - they'll leak out suggestions that a player isn't what they want him to be, leaving it to the imagination of the audience what their character flaw might be and without ever owning up to the quote. I don't think there's any question that that's not good for team culture.



"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
#FireBobbyNicks

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674900 is a reply to message #674895 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 14:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
K.McC#24  is currently offline K.McC#24
Messages: 2834
Registered: March 2004
Location: ALBERTA

2 Cups

Adam wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 13:31

Had a thought today over lunch. I've been wondering about the timing of this deal - why would you do this when Lucic is still meeting with other teams and there's a possibility he doesn't sign with you? After all, there was little buzz around Larsson, and Taylor Hall is a stupendous return for New Jersey. They almost certainly would have still done that deal in a few days time.

My first thought was that it was just panic. They fooled themselves in to thinking July 1 was a real deadline for them on this deal, because it was a real deadline with Montreal as Subban's no-trade was going to kick in. That may be the case.

But then I thought about the way the Oilers handled this trade in relation to the fanbase. There were leaks to Curtis Stock and Gene Principe the day before the trade happened, saying that Lucic-to-Edmonton was as good as done. With Larsson, Stauffer had clearly been let in to the loop a couple days early. Rishaug had suddenly started saying emphatically how important it was that the Oilers lose a trade to get a RH shot defenceman. Rishaug got the scoop when the deal was done, and then continued to fight the good fight, saying this was a good and necessary deal for the Oilers. Chiarelli did as many press availabilities in the days following the trade as he had done in the whole season preceding it, showing up on radio shows to talk about how the Devils got the best player, but they're still happy with the deal.

So maybe the real reason they rushed this trade is so that they were able to get the bad news in first - in hopes that signing Lucic revived everyone's spirits? If that is what happened, it's a ridiculous risk to take just so that you get a few less volumes of hate mail but it's consistent with my belief that the Oilers are more concerned about what the fans think than about making sure they're doing the right things for the franchise. It becomes a problem, because I don't think management should consider the fans when making any moves that don't involve ticket prices. The sole goal should be icing the best team so that you're best positioned to win. If that angers the fans, then you bear the brunt for a while, confident that in your belief that you're doing the right things and that it will show in the end. There's a great part of the Moneyball movie where fans are calling for Billy Bean's head, and he just does what he can to drown it out while waiting to be proven right.

I'm concerned sometimes that the Oilers look as much at the fans as their opposition as they do the other 29 teams. Certainly, the level of disclosure over the past few years has been obscene and damaging to the team. It's been better under Chiarelli, but you get the feeling that the Oilers felt they needed to open up around the Hall deal, so I wonder if that even affected the timing.


Oh, I have no doubt this franchise goes to great lengths to control the message. When the product fails year after year, though, people tend to focus on the organization and the manipulation. The goodwill capital that the organization once banked is now on overdraft, stuff that used to be let slide as long as the product was half-decent just ain't going to cut it anymore.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674901 is a reply to message #674895 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 14:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Steve  is currently offline Steve
Messages: 113
Registered: October 2006
Location: Ottawa

No Cups

Adam wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 12:31

Had a thought today over lunch. I've been wondering about the timing of this deal - why would you do this when Lucic is still meeting with other teams and there's a possibility he doesn't sign with you? After all, there was little buzz around Larsson, and Taylor Hall is a stupendous return for New Jersey. They almost certainly would have still done that deal in a few days time.

My first thought was that it was just panic. They fooled themselves in to thinking July 1 was a real deadline for them on this deal, because it was a real deadline with Montreal as Subban's no-trade was going to kick in. That may be the case.

But then I thought about the way the Oilers handled this trade in relation to the fanbase. There were leaks to Curtis Stock and Gene Principe the day before the trade happened, saying that Lucic-to-Edmonton was as good as done. With Larsson, Stauffer had clearly been let in to the loop a couple days early. Rishaug had suddenly started saying emphatically how important it was that the Oilers lose a trade to get a RH shot defenceman. Rishaug got the scoop when the deal was done, and then continued to fight the good fight, saying this was a good and necessary deal for the Oilers. Chiarelli did as many press availabilities in the days following the trade as he had done in the whole season preceding it, showing up on radio shows to talk about how the Devils got the best player, but they're still happy with the deal.

So maybe the real reason they rushed this trade is so that they were able to get the bad news in first - in hopes that signing Lucic revived everyone's spirits? If that is what happened, it's a ridiculous risk to take just so that you get a few less volumes of hate mail but it's consistent with my belief that the Oilers are more concerned about what the fans think than about making sure they're doing the right things for the franchise. It becomes a problem, because I don't think management should consider the fans when making any moves that don't involve ticket prices. The sole goal should be icing the best team so that you're best positioned to win. If that angers the fans, then you bear the brunt for a while, confident that in your belief that you're doing the right things and that it will show in the end. There's a great part of the Moneyball movie where fans are calling for Billy Bean's head, and he just does what he can to drown it out while waiting to be proven right.

I'm concerned sometimes that the Oilers look as much at the fans as their opposition as they do the other 29 teams. Certainly, the level of disclosure over the past few years has been obscene and damaging to the team. It's been better under Chiarelli, but you get the feeling that the Oilers felt they needed to open up around the Hall deal, so I wonder if that even affected the timing.


I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Oilers have a PR team helping them frame the opinion of the fans. Actually, I would be surprised if they didn't. Can you blame them? It's good business.

I'm not sure why you're so concerned about it. Chiarelli most certainly did not make this deal to appease the fans. He knew there was going to be a backlash, but did it anyway because he thinks it will help the team win. The fan opinion had ZERO impact on this deal going through.

The PR spin came after the decision was made, I'm sure of it. Again, just good business to do so. It might be annoying, but it's not worth getting worked up over.

Lucic sounded pumped after he signed. He probably gave Chiarelli his word that he would sign July 1. Chiarelli obviously had trust in him (well founded as it turns out).



"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us."

- Calvin

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674904 is a reply to message #674901 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 15:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 7176
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

Steve wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:27

Adam wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 12:31

Had a thought today over lunch. I've been wondering about the timing of this deal - why would you do this when Lucic is still meeting with other teams and there's a possibility he doesn't sign with you? After all, there was little buzz around Larsson, and Taylor Hall is a stupendous return for New Jersey. They almost certainly would have still done that deal in a few days time.

My first thought was that it was just panic. They fooled themselves in to thinking July 1 was a real deadline for them on this deal, because it was a real deadline with Montreal as Subban's no-trade was going to kick in. That may be the case.

But then I thought about the way the Oilers handled this trade in relation to the fanbase. There were leaks to Curtis Stock and Gene Principe the day before the trade happened, saying that Lucic-to-Edmonton was as good as done. With Larsson, Stauffer had clearly been let in to the loop a couple days early. Rishaug had suddenly started saying emphatically how important it was that the Oilers lose a trade to get a RH shot defenceman. Rishaug got the scoop when the deal was done, and then continued to fight the good fight, saying this was a good and necessary deal for the Oilers. Chiarelli did as many press availabilities in the days following the trade as he had done in the whole season preceding it, showing up on radio shows to talk about how the Devils got the best player, but they're still happy with the deal.

So maybe the real reason they rushed this trade is so that they were able to get the bad news in first - in hopes that signing Lucic revived everyone's spirits? If that is what happened, it's a ridiculous risk to take just so that you get a few less volumes of hate mail but it's consistent with my belief that the Oilers are more concerned about what the fans think than about making sure they're doing the right things for the franchise. It becomes a problem, because I don't think management should consider the fans when making any moves that don't involve ticket prices. The sole goal should be icing the best team so that you're best positioned to win. If that angers the fans, then you bear the brunt for a while, confident that in your belief that you're doing the right things and that it will show in the end. There's a great part of the Moneyball movie where fans are calling for Billy Bean's head, and he just does what he can to drown it out while waiting to be proven right.

I'm concerned sometimes that the Oilers look as much at the fans as their opposition as they do the other 29 teams. Certainly, the level of disclosure over the past few years has been obscene and damaging to the team. It's been better under Chiarelli, but you get the feeling that the Oilers felt they needed to open up around the Hall deal, so I wonder if that even affected the timing.


I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Oilers have a PR team helping them frame the opinion of the fans. Actually, I would be surprised if they didn't. Can you blame them? It's good business.

I'm not sure why you're so concerned about it. Chiarelli most certainly did not make this deal to appease the fans. He knew there was going to be a backlash, but did it anyway because he thinks it will help the team win. The fan opinion had ZERO impact on this deal going through.

The PR spin came after the decision was made, I'm sure of it. Again, just good business to do so. It might be annoying, but it's not worth getting worked up over.

Lucic sounded pumped after he signed. He probably gave Chiarelli his word that he would sign July 1. Chiarelli obviously had trust in him (well founded as it turns out).



See, I don't think that the spin started afterwards. I think they approached Stauffer and Rishaug ahead of the deal being made and told them to work towards softening people up even before it happened. For Rishaug, he got to break the news of the deal. For Stauffer? Well, he's on the payroll.

I don't think it is a coincidence now that two reporters had it leaked to them the day before the trade that the Oilers believed Lucic was basically locked up. He's signed, said Stock, and Principe reported 100 or 95% sure he's an Oiler.

And where I get concerned is if they were so concerned about the way this rolls out that they timed the trade ahead of July 1. My theory is that they wanted to have the bad news out of the way first. This way they get Lucic a couple days later and people can talk about that, rather than having the air come out of that balloon after they celebrate signing Lucic.

If they did that, it's a stupid risk, because there was no guarantee Lucic would stick to whatever commitment he gave on Tuesday and sign with the Oilers on Friday.



"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
#FireBobbyNicks

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674911 is a reply to message #674904 ]
Fri, 08 July 2016 19:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Team Dean  is currently offline Team Dean
Messages: 22
Registered: April 2010
Location: Central Alberta

No Cups

I completely agree with you Adam. Media control. Yes, that is disturbing.

The thing that is just more disturbing to me is that we are selling off our high end players to be mediocre and finish 8th place again, which was the reason we started this painful rebuild in the first place.

We were so tired of being mediocre and finishing 8th because we had no elite players to win the cup with.
So the only way to get elite players was to finish 30th for several years, get the elite players and then pull back up by grabbing some solid vets to surround them with. Which, with a good GM that could assess dmen, could have happened organically.

Alas, MacT sold off his good dmen and kept the bad ones because he has no brains.

So now we sell off our elite players for mediocre ones, so that we can be a mediocre team again.

Look at NYI. They got very good dmen organically, without trading Tavares for them. We traded our Tavares for what they got for draft picks.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674916 is a reply to message #674911 ]
Sat, 09 July 2016 01:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
inverno76  is currently offline inverno76
Messages: 2343
Registered: September 2005
Location: Prince Albert, Saskatchew...

2 Cups

I think they believe that we have enough high end talent to make a run as long as we acquire another dman.

Using Chicago's formula of Toews, Keith, Kane, Seabrook I think the Oil believe they have a young improving hatter of McDavid, Larsson, Lucic and either Klefbom or Nurse. Plus the complementary pieces in Eberle, Draisaitl and Nugent-Hopkins.

I'm not trying to claim we are equals, but I think the Oil brass see comparables to a young Hawks team. Keith was a mess early in his career and Hawks fans hated him to the point that they wanted him traded out. McDavid is by far the best player prospect of either team. The rest of our young guys project to be top end players you can build around. Even without Hall and likely another 6 Mil kid we have a strong nucleus.

We are far from the mediocre teams of the past two decades. The foundation has never been better. I hope I get proven right. I still see the rainbow through the hurricane.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674917 is a reply to message #674911 ]
Sat, 09 July 2016 02:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Skookum Jim  is currently offline Skookum Jim
Messages: 4419
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

4 Cups

Team Dean wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 18:56

I completely agree with you Adam. Media control. Yes, that is disturbing.

The thing that is just more disturbing to me is that we are selling off our high end players to be mediocre and finish 8th place again, which was the reason we started this painful rebuild in the first place.

We were so tired of being mediocre and finishing 8th because we had no elite players to win the cup with.
So the only way to get elite players was to finish 30th for several years, get the elite players and then pull back up by grabbing some solid vets to surround them with. Which, with a good GM that could assess dmen, could have happened organically.

Alas, MacT sold off his good dmen and kept the bad ones because he has no brains.

So now we sell off our elite players for mediocre ones, so that we can be a mediocre team again.

Look at NYI. They got very good dmen organically, without trading Tavares for them. We traded our Tavares for what they got for draft picks.


Bingo.



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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674940 is a reply to message #674904 ]
Mon, 11 July 2016 06:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Steve  is currently offline Steve
Messages: 113
Registered: October 2006
Location: Ottawa

No Cups

Adam wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:22

Steve wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 14:27

Adam wrote on Fri, 08 July 2016 12:31

Had a thought today over lunch. I've been wondering about the timing of this deal - why would you do this when Lucic is still meeting with other teams and there's a possibility he doesn't sign with you? After all, there was little buzz around Larsson, and Taylor Hall is a stupendous return for New Jersey. They almost certainly would have still done that deal in a few days time.

My first thought was that it was just panic. They fooled themselves in to thinking July 1 was a real deadline for them on this deal, because it was a real deadline with Montreal as Subban's no-trade was going to kick in. That may be the case.

But then I thought about the way the Oilers handled this trade in relation to the fanbase. There were leaks to Curtis Stock and Gene Principe the day before the trade happened, saying that Lucic-to-Edmonton was as good as done. With Larsson, Stauffer had clearly been let in to the loop a couple days early. Rishaug had suddenly started saying emphatically how important it was that the Oilers lose a trade to get a RH shot defenceman. Rishaug got the scoop when the deal was done, and then continued to fight the good fight, saying this was a good and necessary deal for the Oilers. Chiarelli did as many press availabilities in the days following the trade as he had done in the whole season preceding it, showing up on radio shows to talk about how the Devils got the best player, but they're still happy with the deal.

So maybe the real reason they rushed this trade is so that they were able to get the bad news in first - in hopes that signing Lucic revived everyone's spirits? If that is what happened, it's a ridiculous risk to take just so that you get a few less volumes of hate mail but it's consistent with my belief that the Oilers are more concerned about what the fans think than about making sure they're doing the right things for the franchise. It becomes a problem, because I don't think management should consider the fans when making any moves that don't involve ticket prices. The sole goal should be icing the best team so that you're best positioned to win. If that angers the fans, then you bear the brunt for a while, confident that in your belief that you're doing the right things and that it will show in the end. There's a great part of the Moneyball movie where fans are calling for Billy Bean's head, and he just does what he can to drown it out while waiting to be proven right.

I'm concerned sometimes that the Oilers look as much at the fans as their opposition as they do the other 29 teams. Certainly, the level of disclosure over the past few years has been obscene and damaging to the team. It's been better under Chiarelli, but you get the feeling that the Oilers felt they needed to open up around the Hall deal, so I wonder if that even affected the timing.


I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Oilers have a PR team helping them frame the opinion of the fans. Actually, I would be surprised if they didn't. Can you blame them? It's good business.

I'm not sure why you're so concerned about it. Chiarelli most certainly did not make this deal to appease the fans. He knew there was going to be a backlash, but did it anyway because he thinks it will help the team win. The fan opinion had ZERO impact on this deal going through.

The PR spin came after the decision was made, I'm sure of it. Again, just good business to do so. It might be annoying, but it's not worth getting worked up over.

Lucic sounded pumped after he signed. He probably gave Chiarelli his word that he would sign July 1. Chiarelli obviously had trust in him (well founded as it turns out).



See, I don't think that the spin started afterwards. I think they approached Stauffer and Rishaug ahead of the deal being made and told them to work towards softening people up even before it happened. For Rishaug, he got to break the news of the deal. For Stauffer? Well, he's on the payroll.

I don't think it is a coincidence now that two reporters had it leaked to them the day before the trade that the Oilers believed Lucic was basically locked up. He's signed, said Stock, and Principe reported 100 or 95% sure he's an Oiler.

And where I get concerned is if they were so concerned about the way this rolls out that they timed the trade ahead of July 1. My theory is that they wanted to have the bad news out of the way first. This way they get Lucic a couple days later and people can talk about that, rather than having the air come out of that balloon after they celebrate signing Lucic.

If they did that, it's a stupid risk, because there was no guarantee Lucic would stick to whatever commitment he gave on Tuesday and sign with the Oilers on Friday.


We're actually thinking along the same lines. Note that I said the PR spin came after the decision was made, which I think was made before the trade/deal officially came down. Everything happened exactly as they planned it, which I take as a good sign.

PR is good business. The Oilers have shown to be good at that aspect of the business, if not actually putting a good hockey team on the ice.

If only the GM's were as good as the PR guy, we would have probably dug out of this hole much earlier.

[Updated on: Mon, 11 July 2016 06:40]


"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us."

- Calvin

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674956 is a reply to message #673755 ]
Mon, 11 July 2016 15:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Kr55 is currently online Kr55
Messages: 10777
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

6 Cups

wow, the oilers have a pretty pitiful history of right handed D :)

http://oilersnation.com/2016/7/10/bloody-well-right

Quote:

OILERS RH D WHO HAVE PLAYED 200 OR MORE GAMES WITH EDMONTON

Lee Fogolin 586gp, 36-125-161
Steve Staios 573gp, 35-111-146
Jason Smith 542gp, 31-82-113
Tom Gilbert 384gp, 33-125-158
Boris Mironov 320gp, 42-118-160
Jeff Petry 295gp, 17-57-74
Jeff Beukeboom 284gp, 12-57-69
Justin Schultz 248gp, 28-73-101
RIsto Siltanen 206gp, 38-113-151
Marty McSorley 206gp, 24-36-60


Offensive minded ones at least.

[Updated on: Mon, 11 July 2016 16:11]


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

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

5 x $5,000,000

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674958 is a reply to message #674956 ]
Mon, 11 July 2016 17:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
benv  is currently offline benv
Messages: 602
Registered: May 2006
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 11 July 2016 15:58

wow, the oilers have a pretty pitiful history of right handed D :)

http://oilersnation.com/2016/7/10/bloody-well-right

Quote:

OILERS RH D WHO HAVE PLAYED 200 OR MORE GAMES WITH EDMONTON

Lee Fogolin 586gp, 36-125-161
Steve Staios 573gp, 35-111-146
Jason Smith 542gp, 31-82-113
Tom Gilbert 384gp, 33-125-158
Boris Mironov 320gp, 42-118-160
Jeff Petry 295gp, 17-57-74
Jeff Beukeboom 284gp, 12-57-69
Justin Schultz 248gp, 28-73-101
RIsto Siltanen 206gp, 38-113-151
Marty McSorley 206gp, 24-36-60


Offensive minded ones at least.


Interesting. For comparative purposes, here is the corresponding list of LHD:

Kevin Lowe 1037gp, 74-309-383
Charlie Huddy 694gp, 81-287-368
Paul Coffey 532gp, 209-460-669
Craig Muni 493gp, 24-87-111
Ladislav Smid 474gp, 11-54-65
Randy Gregg 453gp, 40-148-188
Luke Richardson 436gp, 13-65-78
Janne Niinimaa 399gp, 34-154-188
Steve Smith 385gp 46-172-218
Eric Brewer 315gp, 29-71-100
Geoff Smith 306gp, 11-56-67
Tom Poti 285gp, 27-78-105
Sean Brown 269gp, 12-23-35
Don Jackson 262gp, 15-45-60
Dave Manson 219gp, 33-75-108
Bryan Marchment 216gp, 7-37-44
Scott Ferguson 201gp, 7-13-20

No shortage of anemic offensive ability there either but a much greater proportion of pretty good point scorers.

I never realized historically that the ratio of left to right shooters in the NHL was about 2:1. I knew there were more left shooters, but I thought it was closer to even than that. There was never a big deal made of it until recently.

[Updated on: Tue, 12 July 2016 09:37]


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674964 is a reply to message #674958 ]
Tue, 12 July 2016 08:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
OilPeg  is currently offline OilPeg
Messages: 71
Registered: December 2010
Location: Winnipeg

No Cups

benv wrote on Mon, 11 July 2016 18:13

Kr55 wrote on Mon, 11 July 2016 15:58

wow, the oilers have a pretty pitiful history of right handed D :)

http://oilersnation.com/2016/7/10/bloody-well-right

Quote:

OILERS RH D WHO HAVE PLAYED 200 OR MORE GAMES WITH EDMONTON

Lee Fogolin 586gp, 36-125-161
Steve Staios 573gp, 35-111-146
Jason Smith 542gp, 31-82-113
Tom Gilbert 384gp, 33-125-158
Boris Mironov 320gp, 42-118-160
Jeff Petry 295gp, 17-57-74
Jeff Beukeboom 284gp, 12-57-69
Justin Schultz 248gp, 28-73-101
RIsto Siltanen 206gp, 38-113-151
Marty McSorley 206gp, 24-36-60


Offensive minded ones at least.


Interesting. For comparative purposes, here is the corresponding list of LHD:

Kevin Lowe 1037gp, 74-309-383
Charlie Huddy 694gp, 81-287-368
Paul Coffey 532gp, 209-460-669
Craig Muni 493gp, 24-87-111
Ladislav Smid 474gp, 11-54-65
Randy Gregg 453gp, 40-148-188
Luke Richardson 436gp, 13-65-78
Janne Niinimaa 399gp, 34-154-188
Steve Smith 385gp 46-172-218
Eric Brewer 315gp, 29-71-100
Geoff Smith 306gp, 11-56-67
Tom Poti 285gp, 27-78-105
Jeff Beukeboom 284gp, 12-57-69
Sean Brown 269gp, 12-23-35
Don Jackson 262gp, 15-45-60
Dave Manson 219gp, 33-75-108
Bryan Marchment 216gp, 7-37-44
Scott Ferguson 201gp, 7-13-20

No shortage of anemic offensive ability there either but a much greater proportion of pretty good point scorers.

I never realized historically that the ratio of left to right shooters in the NHL was about 2:1. I knew there were more left shooters, but I thought it was closer to even than that. There was never a big deal made of it until recently.


I love that Jeff Beukeboom is on both lists...that's super impressive.



Skookum Jim wrote on Sat, 02 June 2012 00:29

But he (Belanger)'s as soft as room temp. margarine.

Skookum Jim wrote on Tue, 16 March 2021 18:49

Turris in the BOA will be like an ice cube in the Sahara.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674965 is a reply to message #674964 ]
Tue, 12 July 2016 09:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
benv  is currently offline benv
Messages: 602
Registered: May 2006
Location: Edmonton

No Cups

OilPeg wrote on Tue, 12 July 2016 08:28



I love that Jeff Beukeboom is on both lists...that's super impressive.


Oops! Fixed.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674966 is a reply to message #674965 ]
Tue, 12 July 2016 09:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
CrusaderPi  is currently offline CrusaderPi
Messages: 7803
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100

6 Cups

benv wrote on Tue, 12 July 2016 09:37

OilPeg wrote on Tue, 12 July 2016 08:28



I love that Jeff Beukeboom is on both lists...that's super impressive.


Oops! Fixed.


Why? Beukeboom's 568 game Oilers' career was remarkable, not only for its longevity, but also because he completely reinvented himself EXACTLY halfway through it.



Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674973 is a reply to message #673755 ]
Wed, 13 July 2016 03:45 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Skookum Jim  is currently offline Skookum Jim
Messages: 4419
Registered: March 2006
Location: Burnaby, BC

4 Cups

Another analysis of Larsson. Still looking for the analysis from someone (other than the Oilers) that says this guy is a No.1 NHL defense-man, and not the second coming of Ladi Smid. In fact, as I recall Smid was heralded as a "future" a top pairing D-man as well when they traded away Chris F'ing Pronger. faint
I'm getting sick of the people running/ruining this franchise.

Shero looking like GM of the year.

http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/hockey/nhl/cult-of-hockey/ cult-of-hockey-an-in-depth-look-at-adam-larssons-game-by-gue st-analyst-cory-west
Quote:

I reviewed 13 random games from the 2015/2016 season and I think the results are somewhat interesting. I used games spread throughout the season and looked at some wins, losses and even a blow out of a game. The two most important takeaways from my review of Larsson and the devils are, firstly, Andy Greene is really, really good. As the incomparable Mike Johnson of Sportsnet said, “ I don’t often search out New Jersey Devil games” and I think most fans can say this but really this is a shame because Andy Greene is a gem. Secondly, the Devils play with a defensive zone structure that a handful of Oiler coaches and former coaches only can dream about. Training camp is going to be a shock for Mr. Larsson.

However, if you’re reading a blog post on the Oilers you probably were not shocked by those synopsis of the Devils and you’re probably far more interested in Larsson than his former team but I think those points are worth reconsidering especially in the context of Larsson. So what is Larsson? Well, this is where things get interesting. Chiarelli has mentioned he is not sexy and after 13 games worth of shifts I am not sure that does him justice. I like all defensemen to be able to move the puck at some level. The days are gone of having a pylon out there that rings the puck off the glass and out every time he gets it. Larsson is not a puck mover. I don’t believe anyone can debate this. Much like blogger Mo “WheatNOil’ Sarda has pointed out in the mildly successful Sekera/Fayne pairing, the puck moving on the Greene/Larsson combo is almost entirely on Greene. I anticipate this is because Greene moves the puck very well, and Larsson isn’t great at this.

In fact, I would be willing to bet that Adam Larsson’s now well documented, large percentage of defensive-zone starts is because the Devils simply have better options moving the puck in and around the offensive and neutral zones. Larsson has been said to have a good shot, and perhaps that is the case but he seldom (read never) gets it off in time and I think this really limits him.

I hate seeing defensemen that don’t look up when shooting. If you can tell me how many eyelets are on your skates when after you take a shot then you aren’t going to be on my team for long and Larsson displayed this trait quite a bit late in the season. I actually can’t remember seeing a defenseman shoot the puck into so many bodies. (worse than the "Shin Assasin" Sekera?) Fellow New Jersey d-man Damon Severson is clearly superior at this and I would say John Moore and David Schlemko are also more offensively aware, and this is why Larsson doesn’t see many O-zone faceoffs.

[Updated on: Wed, 13 July 2016 03:50]


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

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674974 is a reply to message #674973 ]
Wed, 13 July 2016 07:52 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
NZ Oiler Fan  is currently offline NZ Oiler Fan
Messages: 1189
Registered: October 2006
Location: Kensington, PEI

1 Cup

Info on Larsson is out there if you look for it.

Allboutthejersey rated him as their top defenseman last year: http://www.allaboutthejersey.com/2016/4/11/11404006/the-all- about-the-jersey-awards-for-the-2015-16-new-jersey-devils

Can't find the link to the article now but Denis Potvin was on record as saying the Oilers will win that trade after the first two years.

Another random article from allaboutthejersey about him: http://www.allaboutthejersey.com/2016/2/12/10974744/new-top- dog-adam-larsson

A bunch of statistical stuff from Bruce McCurdy: http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/hockey/nhl/cult-of-hockey/ cult-of-hockey-adam-larsson




Send a private message to this user  

 Re: Oilers Trade Hall to Devils for Larsson [message #674977 is a reply to message #674974 ]
Wed, 13 July 2016 08:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
RDOilerfan  is currently offline RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016

3 Cups

It's what I expected but I wish the Edmonton media guys would stop picking this guy apart. He hasn't even put on a practice jersey yet and they are already setting this guy up to fail. It's really pathetic actually.

I'm a huge Hall fan so seeing him go was hard for me. Do I think the Oilers should have gotten more for Hall, yes I do but I am bias. Unless a team makes an absolutely stupid trade, it is REALLY hard getting a good dman these days.

I think the Flames absolutely ROBBED the Bruins last year in the Hamilton trade. It was a completely stupid trade as the Bruins will NEVER get anything close to what Hamilton is for will be. The Oilers apparently offered a better package but the Bruins stupidly turned it down.

For the Suban trade. I like Suban and his skill set but I hate his contract. I love Weber. It took Shea Weber to get Suban. Shea Weber is one of the best dmen in the freaking world. According to the rumors, the Habs wanted Hall, Draisaitl the #4 and maybe a young dman for Suban. I am sorry but I would never do that trade because you would gut your team.

There are rumors out there that the Blues wanted the #4 for Shattenkirk and there is ZERO chance the Oilers could sign him. Is that what peopled the Oilers to do? No chance for me.

To get Seth Jones, a completely unproven, young Dman the Blue Jackets traded Johansen. Johansen is already a really, really good, big, strong, right shot #1 center. That's a lot to pay for a dman who everyone thinks will be really good.

So people need to step back from the ledge and think about all these trades that have happened and the cost to get these guys. Larsson is right now at the very least a real good #3 on pretty much every team in the league who's signed to a really, really good deal. People forget that in today's NHL, a players contract contributes to their value. If Larsson was making mid 5's to 6 mill he wouldn't be worth as much but he makes 4.2 mill. So that increases his value.

In Hall, you have a star player that in 6 years in the league has been on a lousy team. It's not Halls all fault where the Oilers ended up but at the same time like it or not, where the Oilers fell in the standings affected his value. Like it or not, teams will always value guys more who come from winning teams. Guys get paid more based on where they used to play. You don't have to look any further than Andrew Shaw. I like Shaw as a player but his contract number is higher because he played on the Blackhawks. For Hall, his value was hurt by his team. You can blame the management but you have to also blame him and his teammates for not being better than they are. There is no reason the Oilers with the talent they had should have been finishing near the bottom for as long as they were. I don't for a second think they were ever a playoff team but no way in hell they should have been near dead last every single year with the paper talent they had.

The Oilers got a very good dman for Hall. Like it or not, there is ZERO chance the Oilers would have gotten a #1 dman for Hall without adding a lot more. In looking at Dmen who checked all the boxes the Oilers needed, I look at a guy like Faulk. Right shot, big, good skating, PP guy, decent in his own end, capable of playing big mins, legit #2 dman. I don't think there is a chance in hell the Canes trade Faulk for Hall straight up. It would take Hall plus.

So fans and all these negative media guys who are ripping actively trying to destroy Larsson before he gets here can whine and complain about Larsson not being enough for all but they need to come back to reality. To get a guy that checks all the boxes, it would have taken Hall plus the 4th at least and I'm sorry, I'm not doing that trade.

[Updated on: Wed, 13 July 2016 08:43]


Send a private message to this user  

Pages (16): [ «  <  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  >  »]  
Previous Topic:Tkachev ELC Ruled Ineligible
Next Topic:Larsson a Kraken
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