HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Should Tambellini be fired?

View Poll Results: Should Tambo be let go
Yes 118 54.38%
No 28 12.90%
Not sure 9 4.15%
give him another year or two 62 28.57%
Voters: 217. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-23-2012, 12:27 PM
  #301
misfit
Moderator
 
misfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of...everything
Posts: 15,625
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
It wasn't part of the rebuild, however it has been said that Tambo wasn't the one chasing after this deal. Ultimately it helped our rebuild, but that was not considered at the time that he was signed because they were trying to be competitive at that point.
That's convenient. Maybe it wasn't his decision to rebuild either. Maybe he hasn't been behind any moves yet.

Quote:
We shaved some salary and got younger, prior to Whitney's injury I felt that we won this trade. Let's also not forget that Lubo wanted out.
What's the point of getting younger when both players are gone at the same time? Lubo may have wanted out, but being forced into making a bad trade doesn't make it a good trade either. Ignore Whitney's trade all you want, but he was still on pace to put up fewer points than Visnovsky (who led all defensemen in scoring) actually did that year. Visnovsky has lead Whitney in every way each year since the trade, but you're trying to call it a win?

Quote:
The team wasn't rebuilding via the draft at that point, rebuilding/deadline sellers don't trade away picks for rentals. Don't you see a difference between that trade deadline and the next? I agree that we lost this trade, however O'Sullivan was pretty highly touted at the time and he fell off the map for whatever reason(s).
Obviously you didn't get my point. I know they weren't rebuilding at that time. That was my entire point. He has failed in pretty mcuh every attempt to make the team better so far. Yet this is the guy we should be comfortable with going forward?

Quote:
IMO this was part PR and part Katz being a friend of the Comrie's IIRC.
Sure, I can get behind that. I only included it because I wanted to get all the "non-rebuild" driven moves.

Quote:
We had to fill in some bodies and instead of rushing other players this was what Tambo decided to do to add some depth. A 6th isn't much for a roster player.
I agree. I'll trade 6th round picks for NHL players all day, even if they are 13th forward/7th defensemen types. The point is we weren't rebuilding, and Fraser was his solution to one of the team's biggest holes at the time.

Quote:
Again instead of rushing a guy like Petry he brought in a scrub like Foster, not sure what the problem is?
The problem is he was brought in to play in the top 4. He made no other moves to improve a dismal defense that year. Like all the other moves I brought up IT WAS MADE WITH THE INTENTION OF IMPROVING THE TEAM and fell well short.

Quote:
Not a tanking move for sure, however we'll see if Eager's issues were coach and health related next season, if not his stay here might not be long.
I did't really have a problem with the move at the time, but unlike a lot of other people around here, I didn't expect him to have much of an impact to begin with because improving the 4th line isn't going to get you far.

Quote:
We instantly got tougher and harder to play against, a clear win IMO.
We replaced the worst defenseman in the lineup with a 6/7 defenseman, and how did that help us? Still drafting 1st overall I see. Like I said, he may play a different style, but it's not easy to see how it improved the team.

Quote:
Low risk potentially high reward type of a move, it didn't work out but we aren't obligated to sign him so who cares?
It was only low risk in terms of dollars, but it would only have been a low risk signing if he had actually improved the defense in other ways before signing him. As it stands, Barker was his solution to fixing what was the worst defense in the league. In fact, he brought in one 6/7 defenseman through trade (Sutton), signed a 6/7 defenseman who's previous team paid him not to play for them (Barker) and an AHL defenseman (Potter). Those were the moves he made in an attempt to fix (or at the very least, improve) our defense last year. How would you say he did?

And what are we basing the potential of that signing to provide a high reward? The fact that he was a top 3 pick 8 years ago? Putting down a thousand dollars on a 200/1 horse has potential for high reward too, but that doesn't mean it's likely. If you've got the money and can afford to lose it, then making that bet is ok, but if that $1,000 is all you have to feed your kids and put a roof over your head, it's stupid and reckless. Blind hopefull optimism is one thing if you're a fan. As a GM it's nowhere near good enough.

Quote:
You can't just revamp your whole roster and be a contender in 1 offseason, IMO the Eager and Belanger moves were the first moves towards turning the team around.
Belanger, sure. That move was a good one and 4 years overdue. Eager's signing was rather inconsequential. Even if he brings all the things everyone expected going forward, I don't see it changing our fortunes.

Quote:
IMO he was all but forced to take on Smyth's Albatross of a deal, I'm hopeful that they cut ties with him this offseason.
I have to admit, I'm really having a hard time following what you're point is here. Smyth is a usefull player. He was the team's 5th leading scorer and one of the top PK options. Bringing him in was a good move, not a bad one. The fact that he was basically forced into it doesn't help his case that he's capable of bringing in good players to improve the team.

But for the record, what exactly did Smyth's albatross of a contract prevent us from doing? Giving Barker $5M?

Quote:
I liked this move, we got a guy that fits a need for the club, a guy that can play both sides, and a guy that can be a great mentor to our young D coming up through the ranks.
Agreed. We got a really good player. The problem is we gave up one who was just as good (better, actually). Before the trade Gilbert was our best defenseman this year (it was 50/50 around here between him and Smid before, but now that Gilbert's gone I'd say it's 90/10 Smid). Nobody is saying that about Schultz. Either way, the jury is still out.

Quote:
You never mentioned guys like Strudwick, Vandermeer, etc. Some guys were added to lead the tank, no doubt in my mind.
Then why fire 3 coaches in 4 years? If the goal was to tank, I'd say they almost overachieved. Maybe they should have been given extensions instead.

Quote:
There are some really poor moves but with the possible exception of the Whitney and Eager moves, none of them were made since the rebuild got under way. That said we can't afford many Patrick O'Sullivan's as trade returns from here on out.
That's my entire point. When he's tried to do something other than aquire draft picks and get rid of contracts (y'know...actually IMPROVE the team), he's failed at seemingly every turn. So why are we so confident that he's the guy to do it now? And why should he be given the benefit of the doubt? Actually, I'm more than willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but that's just it. There's no doubt in my mind

__________________
If you are offended by this post, it's probably because you're ugly.

Last edited by misfit: 05-23-2012 at 06:17 PM. Reason: spelling
misfit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 09:48 PM
  #302
guymez
The Seldom Seen Kid
 
guymez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,444
vCash: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by CupofOil View Post
I don't know if Tambo is "The Man" to take the team to the next level but i don't think that he is "The Goat" either. He inherited a complete mess, not only was the cupboard on the big club pretty bare but the organization didn't even have a steady farm team when he took over and now the farm team is flourishing, the Oilers roster looks a lot better than it has in years and the prospect pool is stacked.
This isn't about whether Tambo is the man or the goat. This is about tangible evidence which illustrates that Tambo has and is improving this team.
Aside from the obvious draft picks...what part of the Oilers roster has Tambo improved? How many years/attempts has he had to facilitate these improvements?


Quote:
The mandate from ownership in the Hall draft year was no more quick fixes and to build from within and to be patient, a 4-6 year rebuild so it was expected that the team was going to be really bad for at least the first couple of seasons, we all knew this going in.

This has become the fallback excuse for Tambo and all his supporters. Meanwhile there is little to no evidence to support the contention that...a) Tambo is able to identify the weaknesses on the team and...b) Tambo has the ability and skill to improve the team using the assets he does have.


Quote:
I think that the team took a decent step forward last season, they finished 29th but they were close to overtaking several teams above them before the top pairing (Smid and Petry) went down with injury which is a good improvement from being in last place by quite a margin the previous 2 seasons.
They also had some games where they were brilliant against some top notch teams which also couldn't be said the previous 2 seasons.
I expect that they will take an even bigger jump in the standings next season with the hopeful drafting of Yakupov, more experienced youngsters, any production from the vets (which would be an improvement on last season) and the hopeful addition of a top 4 Dman.
The team had no where to go but up...the modest improvement they did have was in large part to do with the coaching and a systems change on special teams. A rebuild does not happen by the draft alone...it requires a GM that has the where with all to identify short comings and take measures to resolve them.

So far Tambo can't even make a long term decision on the teams coach much less identify and resolve weaknesses.

The team is rudderless banking on the rewards that failure brings to carry the team to elite status.

Its an illusion.

guymez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 10:17 PM
  #303
Giant Moo
Registered User
 
Giant Moo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guymez View Post
So far Tambo can't even make a long term decision on the teams coach much less identify and resolve weaknesses.

The team is rudderless banking on the rewards that failure brings to carry the team to elite status.

Its an illusion.
Well said. Tambellini is a textbook definition of an empty suit.

Giant Moo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 11:34 PM
  #304
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
The Oilers Best
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 51,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misfit View Post
That's convenient. Maybe it wasn't his decision to rebuild either. Maybe he hasn't been behind any moves yet.
If you can't see the difference in the team's approach between the year that we signed Khabi and the next season then there's no need for me to continue this debate because you clearly don't see what I see and vice versa.

Quote:
What's the point of getting younger when both players are gone at the same time? Lubo may have wanted out, but being forced into making a bad trade doesn't make it a good trade either. Ignore Whitney's trade all you want, but he was still on pace to put up fewer points than Visnovsky (who led all defensemen in scoring) actually did that year. Visnovsky has lead Whitney in every way each year since the trade, but you're trying to call it a win?
Lubo wanted out years ago, Whitney has stayed, how do you figure that they'd leave at the same time? Did you want to keep Lubo tied up in your basement to keep him here? I said that we COULD win the trade IF Whitney returns to form and stays on, I didn't say that we have won it, go back and read what I said.

Quote:
Obviously you didn't get my point. I know they weren't rebuilding at that time. That was my entire point. He has failed in pretty mcuh every attempt to make the team better so far. Yet this is the guy we should be comfortable with going forward?
Answer me this, if you were an UFA would you have wanted to come here at that point? If you had a NTC? Overpaid scrubs, mediocre to the core, Horcoff leading the charge recruiting players Yes he made some bad moves, I have mentioned those trades, we can't afford more of those, the good thing is that perception of our team is getting better, it's a good start. Not to mention we have some trading chips that aren't overpaid or crap.

Quote:
Sure, I can get behind that. I only included it because I wanted to get all the "non-rebuild" driven moves.
Fair enough.

Quote:
I agree. I'll trade 6th round picks for NHL players all day, even if they are 13th forward/7th defensemen types. The point is we weren't rebuilding, and Fraser was his solution to one of the team's biggest holes at the time.
Excuse me? We weren't rebuilding 2 seasons ago? According to who? Whoever has that opinion obviously wasn't paying attention at that point in time. Surely you can't believe that Tambellini who has held a NHL management job for many years is dense enough to think that Colin Fraser was a long term fix towards making this team a contender.

Quote:
The problem is he was brought in to play in the top 4. He made no other moves to improve a dismal defense that year. Like all the other moves I brought up IT WAS MADE WITH THE INTENTION OF IMPROVING THE TEAM and fell well short.
It was made to have short term roster filler to acquire another high pick, it boggles my mind that you believe otherwise. Do you honestly think that after the '09-10 deadline that EVERY move that we made sans the Penner trade was to make our team a winner in the interim? If so no wonder you're so pissed, that said again short term roster filler to help acquire another high pick or two is what guys like Foster, Fraser, Strudwick, etc. were.

Quote:
I did't really have a problem with the move at the time, but unlike a lot of other people around here, I didn't expect him to have much of an impact to begin with because improving the 4th line isn't going to get you far.
His impact needed to be in the trenches, hitting, keeping other teams honest, and fighting when the occasion called for it. I'd give him a 5 on a scale of 1-10, guy needs to be much better in his role.

Quote:
We replaced the worst defenseman in the lineup with a 6/7 defenseman, and how did that help us? Still drafting 1st overall I see. Like I said, he may play a different style, but it's not easy to see how it improved the team.
Well we got bigger, tougher, and better with Sutton over Foster. We also signed him on for another year after seeing all that we needed to see of Foster after 1 season. It was a clear cut improvement, so if you are going to harp on the losses then be fair and give credit on the clear wins and this was one of them as small as it may be in your eyes.

Quote:
It was only low risk in terms of dollars, but it would only have been a low risk signing if he had actually improved the defense in other ways before signing him. As it stands, Barker was his solution to fixing what was the worst defense in the league. In fact, he brought in one 6/7 defenseman through trade (Sutton), signed a 6/7 defenseman who's previous team paid him not to play for them (Barker) and an AHL defenseman (Potter). Those were the moves he made in an attempt to fix (or at the very least, improve) our defense last year. How would you say he did?
Foster was garbage, Vandermeer was hit and miss, Potter IMO was a farm team signing that did more than that so it was a good signing. Sutton was a solid addition, Barker was garbage. Again looking at what management did we weren't trying to be a playoff team last year, we kept spots open for guys like Peckham and Petry to get some ice. Peckham regressed which was unfortunate, Petry did very well. I expect to see a better defensive group to start next season when we are actually looking to leave the early part of the rebuild behind.

Quote:
And what are we basing the potential of that signing to provide a high reward? The fact that he was a top 3 pick 8 years ago? Putting down a thousand dollars on a 200/1 horse has potential for high reward too, but that doesn't mean it's likely. If you've got the money and can afford to lose it, then making that bet is ok, but if that $1,000 is all you have to feed your kids and put a roof over your head, it's stupid and reckless. Blind hopefull optimism is one thing if you're a fan. As a GM it's nowhere near good enough.
Last that I checked Katz doesn't have to worry about his kids meals. It didn't work, oh well, we weren't a playoff team with him even if he did work. Again we were looking for a high pick, we got it, crisis averted.

Quote:
Belanger, sure. That move was a good one and 4 years overdue. Eager's signing was rather inconsequential. Even if he brings all the things everyone expected going forward, I don't see it changing our fortunes.
If both pan out they will be good troopers for us when we take the next step, that IMO is a good thing.

Quote:
I have to admit, I'm really having a hard time following what you're point is here. Smyth is a usefull player. He was the team's 5th leading scorer and one of the top PK options. Bringing him in was a good move, not a bad one. The fact that he was basically forced into it doesn't help his case that he's capable of bringing in good players to improve the team.
Smyth WAS a useful player for 1/3 of the season. Bringing him back it sure seems like his sense of entitlement mirrors that of our captain, a definite bad thing. Also we have enough streaky players here, we need some consistency from our vets.

Quote:
But for the record, what exactly did Smyth's albatross of a contract prevent us from doing? Giving Barker $5M?
Well you seemed worried about Tambo's bet above on Barker, meanwhile you're fine paying Smyth like a 40+ goal scorer? A little consistency would be nice.

Quote:
Agreed. We got a really good player. The problem is we gave up one who was just as good (better, actually). Before the trade Gilbert was our best defenseman this year (it was 50/50 around here between him and Smid before, but now that Gilbert's gone I'd say it's 90/10 Smid). Nobody is saying that about Schultz. Either way, the jury is still out.
Gilbert was not a better player, nor was he our best D leading up to his trade, at best he was our 3rd best D at that point. Schultz fits a specific role, is more versatile, and has more experience, a clear win for Tambellini IMO.

Quote:
Then why fire 3 coaches in 4 years? If the goal was to tank, I'd say they almost overachieved. Maybe they should have been given extensions instead.
MacT should be obvious, the team had higher expectations on them back then and some players seemed more than ready for a new coach. Quinn was deemed to be the wrong fit for the rebuild and was punted upstairs. Renney has served his purpose for phase 1 of the rebuild and the kids need a new voice for phase 2.

Quote:
That's my entire point. When he's tried to do something other than aquire draft picks and get rid of contracts (y'know...actually IMPROVE the team), he's failed at seemingly every turn. So why are we so confident that he's the guy to do it now? And why should he be given the benefit of the doubt? Actually, I'm more than willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but that's just it. There's no doubt in my mind
When have I said that I'm so confident? I said that I'm 50/50, if you call that so very confident then our definitions of that phrase are polar opposites. I'm willing to give him this year to see if he's capable, if he shows that he isn't he's toast. Now since you are sure that he isn't the guy, who is your #1 candidate to take his spot?

__________________
Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Bryanbryoil is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2012, 07:42 PM
  #305
Nowthisishockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Oil Town
Country: Canada
Posts: 13
vCash: 500
I think you need to flush Lowe, Tambo and even the idea of bringing Sutter here. Management needs a true rebuild, although, that seems more of a pipe dream right now and more like next years reality if we don't see some post season success. I woulda kept Renney over the tambourine man, but looking in from the outside, we don't know if he lost the room or not. I just thought Renney was a class act on his way out, considering his exit interviews. The tambourine man just comes off as a laughing clown in his, hard to believe he's a master sports tactician or manager with that projected attitude. But like I said, that's from the outside looking in.

Nowthisishockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2012, 07:44 PM
  #306
Psycho Dad
Oil Kings
 
Psycho Dad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sherwood Park
Posts: 10,650
vCash: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowthisishockey View Post
I think you need to flush Lowe, Tambo and even the idea of bringing Sutter here. Management needs a true rebuild, although, that seems more of a pipe dream right now and more like next years reality if we don't see some post season success. I woulda kept Renney over the tambourine man, but looking in from the outside, we don't know if he lost the room or not. I just thought Renney was a class act on his way out, considering his exit interviews. The tambourine man just comes off as a laughing clown in his, hard to believe he's a master sports tactician or manager with that projected attitude. But like I said, that's from the outside looking in.
You should definitely post more often.

Psycho Dad is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:50 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.