Monday, 11 April 2016

Oilers 2016 Offseason - Some Notes

Two words for Mr. Chiarelli: be patient.

A good many pundits will be calling for big changes to the team, the talk of the summer will be full of,"the Oilers need to trade 'x' for 'y' if they want to improve" or "the Oilers need 'w' and that will cost 'z', trade talk.

Fact is the team has three big changes coming right up:

1. Second full year of TMac coaching (this will be HUGE for Fayne if they keep him)
2. Health
3. McDavid, Draisaitl, Nurse, Talbot and Davidson all starting the 2nd year

With any luck Chiarelli can find a home for Korpikoski and just having the team rid of him and Schultz for the full year will make a difference.

So be patient.  Why should the Oilers be trading away guys like Yakupov when their value is low.

Makes no sense.

Would much rather the roster be shored up with smaller deals and get the value back to where it should be.  Am I a fan of Jason Demers (ufa) - yes, but - I am also a fan of Kevan Miller (ufa).  Miller isn't as good as Demers but Boston doesn't have as much cash with which to keep him and so if a Demers signing falls through there is always Miller.

Sami Vatanen (rfa) has the goods but I am also fond of Damon Severson out of New Jersey.  If a trade is being made maybe a Severson trade won't require the same asset value as Vatanen.

Just saying - barring the ability to make a true block buster for a Subban or a Parayko, there is no value in selling wholesale while buying at retail.  Not worth it at all imo.

Also, beware the expansion draft.  7.3.1 works right now (as McDavid and Nurse are protected), but get a big name RD and all of a sudden you are working overtime to protect your core 4 (Sekera, Klefbom, Davidson and new RD).



Wednesday, 6 January 2016

Kelfbom and Hamonic

(Was feeling lazy so most of this is re-posted from a reply I made on a Jonathan Willis post on Oilers Nation [http://oilersnation.com/2016/1/6/wwydw-oscar-klefbom-and-travis-hamonic- adding the Ference bit here.)
FTR, I would not trade Klefbom for Hamonic.
That said, I do think Schultz could still be a factor in this.
While it would seem like a lot, an offer of Purcell and Schultz for Hamonic (season with a draft pick and/or salary to taste) could be very tempting for Snow.
- Schultz gives him a big minute RH d-man - Purcell gives him another scoring winger on the right side and insurance if Okposo goes down
If Schultz is worth a 2nd round pick and Purcell is worth a 1st (a la Perron) then Snow is getting a 1st and 2nd equivalent for Hamonic - the fact that those picks are already productive NHL players is a huge plus.
Especially for a team with play-off aspirations.
Snow also gets to see Purcell up close if he decides not to make a play for Okposo as a FA and if he does decide to stay with Okposo he isn't tied to Purcell.
This might seem like a lot to pay for Hamonic but Schultz isn't coming back regardless while Purcell is a UFA anyways.
When you need - you need and that is all there is to it.
Contrary to many here my only real complaint about Chiarelli was that he didn't spice up the Hamilton trade pot a bit more. A top-6 of Sekera, Klefbom, Nurse, Davidson, Hamonic and Hamilton would be formidable.
Also, would like to thank LA for showing the way on a Ference trade (if he agreed to waive his no-trade clause).  If I could I would trade Ference for a pick (late) or prospect (middlin') wherein I pay the rest of his salary this year (or as much as I could) and the equivalent of the buy-out amount next year (would go as high as half of next years salary).
Such a trade clears him off the books faster, I save money overall and possibly I am even on the effect on next years cap.  Small price to pay.  In a perfect world that trade is Ference and a 4th for a 3rd (middlin' to late).

Sunday, 27 December 2015

Middlin', With Feeling

Coach Craig MacTavish, as I best remember him as a Coach, did two things I will never forget:

- The first was how he taught me what line matching was all about.  How he kept those undermanned teams afloat all those years when all he had was a 1st line, a 3rd line and 3.5 defensemen was beyond me.

- The second was how, after years of begging management for help and getting told to f&*k off (my interpretation), he basically gave management the middle finger right back and played Moreau 1,000 minutes a night

Classic.

After tonight I am getting the same feeling from McLellan in regards to Schultz.  No way Schultz should be playing those minutes - at least not without a babysitter of the calibre of a Jason Smith.  And yet he is.

And he is getting exposed in every way.

Which means someone is learning something.  Maybe it is Schultz himself - how far he has to go to be a top-pair guy.  Maybe it is management, who are being shown that Schultz is not a highly skilled puck-moving defenseman or a guy who can anchor a d-pairing or a guy who can man a #1 powerplay unit.  Or maybe McLellan is simply telling management exactly what he thinks of being saddled with guy who needs perfect playing conditions to play to his potential.

With feeling.

In terms of Schultz himself, my read, is that he is a decent $2-to-2.8 million a year #4 d-man who can play #2 pp minutes (as long as the other guy has a decent point shot) and can get you places as long as he has a baby-sitter holding the fort.  Schultz NEEDS a lot for him to be effective.  He would have been a great add to a veteran team.

Friday, 25 December 2015

On the Eve

11:55 here. Long time no post.

 Just wanted to say that the Oilers should stay patient.

 Drop the dead weight - sure. Understood. But Nuge stays.

 Not every GM will be a dumb-ass like Sweeney. Eventually the d-man you want will pop free and you will get him then.

 Triple middle threats are rare and precious. Don't screw that up.

Oddly enough however, were he to consent, I would consider Sekera for Hamonic.

Just the way I think about these things.

Tuesday, 6 July 2010

Using the Cap and Budget to Advantage


(IF he had ended up on the westcoast... marketing doesn't get any easier than that)

The NYI are, supposedly, in the hunt for Kovalchuk. They also, factually, have to meet the Cap floor of (59.4 - 16.0 =) $43.4 million.

Current team salary stands at ~ $36 million and when role players are factored in that number should settle in at ~ $39 million. That leaves some $4.4 million to make up.

Why are they after Kovalchuk again?

Edmonton desperately wants to dump Souray ($5.4m Cap / $4.5m Sal), Chicago wants to dump Huet ($5.6m Cap / $5.6m Sal), Anaheim would love to dump Blake ($4.0m Cap / $3.0m Sal), etc.

The Isles are desperately in need of young, cheap, high-end talent. Kovalchuk ain't that. 1st round draft picks tend to be.

If I were Garth Snow I am spending a great deal of time talking to Anaheim and letting them know that Blake is a guy they can send my way at the cost of a draft pick(s) upgrade. Something like this:

Blake, ANA 1st round pick 2011 and ANA 4th round pick 2012
.. OR (Anaheim's choice prior to 2011 draft)..
Blake, ANA 2nd round pick 2011 and ANA 1st round pick 2012
FOR
NYI 3rd round pick 2011, NYI 5th round pick 2011

Anaheim dumps the Blake contract - allowing them to use the money for Ryan - has protection in case they fall apart in 2010/11 and the option to dump their pick in 2011 regardless (being a weaker draft class).

Islanders get a guy who won't help them much regardless - thereby not affecting their own draft pick standings - get much closer to the Cap floor (relatively painlessly) and stock up on higher quality draft picks.

The Isles don't have any, real, short-cut options on their rebuild. Using the Kovalchuk money to snag good picks and prospects from teams that need to dump salary is the best option. Full stop.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Tuesday, 29 June 2010

NHL Entry Draft (2010) - Burnin' Nash Bridges



Before I finish up my full 1st round draft review I wanted to remark on the Nash trade.

------

2003

Oilers trade the #17 (Parise) to New Jersey for the #22 (Pouliot) and the #68 (JF Jaques)

In one of the deepest drafts in recent memory the Oilers drop 5 spots in exchange for a pick at the very end (another 46 spots later) of the 2nd round.

2007

Oilers trade the #30 and #36 to Phoenix for the #21 (where they take Riley Nash)

In an average draft year (2007 had good front-end and petered out after that) the Oilers move up 9 spots in the draft in exchange for an early 2nd rounder.

2010

St. Louis trades the 2009 #17 overall pick (David Rundblad) to Ottawa for the 2010 #16 overall pick (Vladimir Tarasenko); in the next round Edmonton trades the 2007 #21 overall pick (Riley Nash) to Carolina for the 2010 #46 overall pick (Martin Marincin)

As much as I know some bloggers don't like Nash (lookin' at Ben) I find it hard to believe that he was worth THAT MUCH less than Rundblad.

------

While it looks like the Oilers team management has finally learned how to draft properly (more or less consistently) it does not appear true that the Oilers team management has learned a thing about how to:

a. value, as assets, their players and prospects;
b. maximize said player/prospect values; and
c. trade said players/prospects when value is high

Yay! for us.

------

Have a great evening everyone.

Monday, 21 June 2010

NHL Entry Draft (2010) - Rockin' the BMc



A new item I am adding to the draft preview/review - how the aggregated list matches up against the best there is this time of year: Bob McKenzie.

His list is found at TSN and it comprises information gleaned from, primarily I believe, team scouts. Since the aggregated list is comprised of information gleaned from, primarily, non-team scouts I figured this would be an interesting exercise.

Note that the aggregated list is only takes into account the top-15 listings, so the number of players aggregated from those lists - 'in total' - in any given draft year can vary. For 2010 the number is 22.

So I will only look at McKenzie's top-22.

Rank

Number of slots it would take to get a player to have a matching rank on both lists; i.e. Gudbranson is ranked 2 slots earlier on McKenzie's list as opposed to where he ranks on the aggregated list.

Group

Per my original post I grouped the players by their aggregated point scores, acknowledging that in that bracket they were almost interchangable. I then replicated copied the process I used above (per Rank).


The Comparison

Aggregated .... Bob McKenzie .. Rank .. Group

Hall .......... Hall ............ 0 ..... 0
Seguin ........ Seguin .......... 0 ..... 0
-
Fowler ........ Gudbranson ...... 2 ..... 0
Gormley ....... Gormley ......... 0 ..... 0
Gudbranson .... Fowler .......... 2 ..... 0
-
Granlund ...... Johansen ........ 4 ..... 0
Connolly ...... Niederreiter .... 2 ..... 0
Tarasenko ..... Connolly ........ 1 ..... 0
Niederreiter .. Campbell ........ 2 ..... 1
Johansen ...... Skinner ......... 2 ..... 0
-
Campbell ...... Forbort ......... 3 ..... 0
Skinner ....... Burmistrov ...... 1 ..... 0
Burmistrov .... Granlund ........ 7 ..... 1
Forbort ....... Watson .......... 4 ..... 1
-
Kuznetsov ..... McIlrath ........ 7 ..... 0
Bjugstad ...... Tarasenko ....... 8 ..... 2
Pysyk ......... Etem ............ 2 ..... 0
Watson ........ Bennett ......... z ..... z
Etem .......... Bjugstad ........ 3 ..... 0
Merrill ....... Pysyk ........... 3 ..... 0
Faulk ......... Sheahan ......... z ..... z
McIlrath ...... Merrill ......... 2 ..... 1


Notable drops by Rank:

-- Tarasenko (8 spots)
-- Granlund (7 spots)
-- McIlrath (7 spots)

I think we see where the 'Russian' factor impacts Tarasenko, the 'Size' factor impacts Granlund and the 'Toughness/Size' factor impacts McIlrath. Except at the very high end I consider 4 spots or less to be irrelevant.

Notable drops by Group:

-- Tarasenko (2 spots)

Tough being a Russkie nowadays. He drops two full brackets on McKenzie's list. Should be noted that Bennett and Sheahan don't show on the aggregated lists while Faulk and Kuznetsov don't show on McKenzie's.


Some Thoughts

Pretty damn close imo. Props to the independent scouts... and the aggregation process I guess :-)... group think maybe?

Quick note - the 'Rule of Thumb' I use explains away more than a few of these discrepancies (almost everything top-15 oddly enough).

All things being equal... remember that McKenzie is talking to 'team' scouts. His list should always be better (I know I think it is) but, as with anything, don't be surprised if sometimes the aggregated list gets it right.

After all, teams are, generally, run by strong independent minded thinkers aren't they? Right?

------

Have a great evening everyone.