Comparing a #6 pick in his 5th season to a 2nd round pick in his rookie season. It is shocking that Gagner is doing better considering his ice time, linemates and PP time. We'll see if Lander is on pace for 50 points in his 5th season. All I said is that I think he has the potential to hit 40 points in his career, but if you want to disagree based on how he has performed in his rookie season with 4th line minutes, zero PP time, and linemates of Hordichuck and Petrell then you can keep on.
Lander will be 25 in his 5th season. sounds fair. Not that it matters. Lander will never hit 40pts in Edmonton.
You stated: Paajarvi and Lander will both easily be 40 point players therefore they will be offensive players as well as great defensively.
Doesn't "easily" suggest something other than that they will barely scratch the 40pt total?
You didn't say potential, you said "easily" but keep packpedaling from a ridiculous supposition.
I guess I forgot to use. Before his little run here, Gagner was being treated really unfairly imo.
What I wrote was an attempt to sum up the prevailing thought process on here as far as I can tell. Like the ideas to trade Gagner for McNeill or Hemsky for picks that are regularly promoted. I agree, it does not make sense to me either. Overvaluing 'potential' is a big problem.
Give it a few years and I would not be surprised if at least one of Hall, RNH or Eberle become too 'old and stale' to many fans looking for a 'younger model' with 'real potential'.
Sorry, I entirely mistook your take. Looks like we agree.
Ya but what irratates me is Gagner hit those numbers from the beggining and never looked back. And all his haters use the exact opposite philosphy for Lander And Prv . It baffles me really.
The thing is that for young players people want to see improvement, IMO the improvements from Gagner's rookie year until this year were few and far between and his confidence actually went south. Look at Paajarvi, pretty strong rookie year and then he has regressed, that is not what you want to see. That said if he comes back strong later this year or next year then things will look better for him going forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement
Lander has 5 freaking points. He makes JFJ look offensively gifted at this level.
That sounds like someone that reads stats and doesn't watch games take and I know that isn't you. Lander might never be anything special offensively but he's got a lot of things going for him IMO.
__________________ Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Ya but what irratates me is Gagner hit those numbers from the beggining and never looked back. And all his haters use the exact opposite philosphy for Lander And Prv . It baffles me really.
It should baffle you. Because its a double standard being applied.
The thing is that for young players people want to see improvement, IMO the improvements from Gagner's rookie year until this year were few and far between and his confidence actually went south. Look at Paajarvi, pretty strong rookie year and then he has regressed, that is not what you want to see. That said if he comes back strong later this year or next year then things will look better for him going forward.
Theres a very big difference, huge, between a player showing dramatic regression and one that has been at the worst consistent, and maintaining a higher level of production ALWAYS than the player that regressed. Remember as well the age comparison doesn't matter. Gagner was packing multiple +40pt seasons at the age of either Lander or Paajarvi.
Quote:
That sounds like someone that reads stats and doesn't watch games take and I know that isn't you. Lander might never be anything special offensively but he's got a lot of things going for him IMO.
I don't mind Lander, don't get me wrong. I could see him developing into a good role player here as he's being fitted. I'd keep him. But I simply don't see the 40pts ever happening. Really Petrell's shown me more offensively than Lander.
Theres a very big difference, huge, between a player showing dramatic regression and one that has been at the worst consistent, and maintaining a higher level of production ALWAYS than the player that regressed. Remember as well the age comparison doesn't matter. Gagner was packing multiple +40pt seasons at the age of either Lander or Paajarvi.
But really was Gagner all that consistent? He took a hit in his sophomore year, not nearly the nose dive that we've seen from Paajarvi mind you. If Paajarvi rebounds next year and has a superior year to his rookie year do we hold it against him just because a guy like Gagner showed minimal improvement but showed more "consistency"?
Quote:
I don't mind Lander, don't get me wrong. I could see him developing into a good role player here as he's being fitted. I'd keep him. But I simply don't see the 40pts ever happening. Really Petrell's shown me more offensively than Lander.
Players mature at different rates, IMO you are really underselling Lander's offensive abilities. Not that he's some superstar in the making, however I wouldn't write him off as a 40 point guy, stranger things have happened. As for you saying that Petrell has shown you more offensively, I would have to again disagree with that assessment.
Sorry, I entirely mistook your take. Looks like we agree.
No worries
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil
The thing is that for young players people want to see improvement, IMO the improvements from Gagner's rookie year until this year were few and far between and his confidence actually went south. Look at Paajarvi, pretty strong rookie year and then he has regressed, that is not what you want to see. That said if he comes back strong later this year or next year then things will look better for him going forward.
Ideally, I agree with you. But development is usually not linear, rather full of ups and downs. And as you mention, confidence is crucial and entering the league playing on such a bad team like Gagner has can be real challenge. I would also argue that Gagner has been subtly improving, as he has maintained his offensive production while taking on increased responsibility over the years.
I still believe Paajarvi, and indeed the '3rd' line, was mismanaged by Renney for much of this season, which contributed to his struggles imo. That said, Paajarvi's season is still a disappointment any way you slice it. He fell of a cliff. I think there were valid concerns about his offensive ability, especially his finishing ability, and he is not doing much to quiet those concerns to date. Patience is important, but so is realizing what a player likely is before everyone else finds out and making a shrewd move....I am not quite sure yet regarding Paajarvi, but would be curious what other teams think of him at this stage.
Quote:
That sounds like someone that reads stats and doesn't watch games take and I know that isn't you. Lander might never be anything special offensively but he's got a lot of things going for him IMO.
I have been really pulling for Lander from the beginning. Personal favorite to be a key role player down the road. I wonder if he should have been in the AHL this year though. I am sure he is learning a lot playing in the NHL, but would have like to see him become a very good/dominate AHLer before jumping to the NHL. May have helped his offense long-term too perhaps.
The core of the argument was about PRV, and began with comments regarding his game of late in the OKC. Lander and Gagner came up as comparisons and examples, nothing wrong with that imo.
Hey guys...I was just curious as to how Hunter Tremblay has looked thus far this season? He played the past 4 season at the University of New Brunswick (CIS), my alma mater. Any chance he makes it to the NHL at some point?
Hey guys...I was just curious as to how Hunter Tremblay has looked thus far this season? He played the past 4 season at the University of New Brunswick (CIS), my alma mater. Any chance he makes it to the NHL at some point?
I haven't seen him play, but from the reports, I'd say he's been awesome.
The core of the argument was about PRV, and began with comments regarding his game of late in the OKC. Lander and Gagner came up as comparisons and examples, nothing wrong with that imo.
Thanks.
I would even say its preferable to a post that doesn't even talk remotely about the topic and only stops by to comment on others without contributing anything at all to the thread.
Hopefully MPS, and Omark can get something going in OKC and redevelop some chemistry. Hopefully Lander is a 40point guy and I'm glad to be wrong as long as he plays for the Oilers.
I haven't seen him play, but from the reports, I'd say he's been awesome.
It sounds like he's been very consistent.
Just from reading through a few pages here it seems like his name has come up quite abit for doing positive things. He left UNB as their all-time leading scorer but he is also a very good defensive player...it sounds like he plays quite a bit on the PK. Is he getting much/any PP time?
I would even say its preferable to a post that doesn't even talk remotely about the topic and only stops by to comment on others without contributing anything at all to the thread.
Hopefully MPS, and Omark can get something going in OKC and redevelop some chemistry. Hopefully Lander is a 40point guy and I'm glad to be wrong as long as he plays for the Oilers.
I think Lander has a higher ceiling than that and could become a 2nd line center. He has looked great most season and creates good offensive plays with minimal ice time and 4th liners, not to mention he is solid defensively.
I think Lander has a higher ceiling than that and could become a 2nd line center. He has looked great most season and creates good offensive plays with minimal ice time and 4th liners, not to mention he is solid defensively.
In truth I haven't seen this guy play enough hockey. But not many people on this side of the pond have. Nice setup to Eager tonight. That was good. Just haven't noticed him a lot offensively.
That said pretty clear he's taking care of one end of the ice first and not a bad habit to have. Like I said I like Lander and want him on the club.
Hey guys...I was just curious as to how Hunter Tremblay has looked thus far this season? He played the past 4 season at the University of New Brunswick (CIS), my alma mater. Any chance he makes it to the NHL at some point?
He has been a great addition for the Barons. He's reliable defensively and has pretty nice hands, plus he's very strong on his skates. He's been a consistent top 6 guy, gets PP and PK time, scores a bit, plays hard.
As for the NHL, I'm not sure he'll ever be a regular. He's already 26 (I think), so he's reaching towards the upper end of his ceiling chronologically, and he's short of NHL quality in just about every facet of the game outside of his work ethic. He might be a useful callup as a 4th line PK injury-filler type, but that's about it.
Personally I hope the Barons offer him a couple years extension this offseason and he stays with the team. He is a very solid AHLer.
He has been a great addition for the Barons. He's reliable defensively and has pretty nice hands, plus he's very strong on his skates. He's been a consistent top 6 guy, gets PP and PK time, scores a bit, plays hard.
As for the NHL, I'm not sure he'll ever be a regular. He's already 26 (I think), so he's reaching towards the upper end of his ceiling chronologically, and he's short of NHL quality in just about every facet of the game outside of his work ethic. He might be a useful callup as a 4th line PK injury-filler type, but that's about it.
Personally I hope the Barons offer him a couple years extension this offseason and he stays with the team. He is a very solid AHLer.
Tremblay is a guy that I think would surprise some at the NHL level. In OKC he is dubbed as Mr. Consistent by his teammates, and he is a guy that you can plug into any spot in the line-up. He's versatile so he can be used in the bottom 6 as a spark, a shut down guy, or he won't look out of place in the top 6. The guy just doesn't have very many flaws in his game.
It will take more than an AHL deal to keep him around for another couple seasons, IMHO.
Normally a winning team equals good attendance, but the Barons are in the bottom quarter in attendance despite being at the top of the league I cannot imagine that is what the Oilers had in mind when they activated their AHL franchise and put it in OKC.
Normally a winning team equals good attendance, but the Barons are in the bottom quarter in attendance despite being at the top of the league I cannot imagine that is what the Oilers had in mind when they activated their AHL franchise and put it in OKC.
I have a hard time believing this. It's only the 2nd season, and just week and half ago Edmonton Journal said EDM is looking at getting their ECHL team somewhere Close to OKC. I also wouldn't say its been a total failure. They sat out 4,000 avg. Last season, and OKC had 4,100. Edmonton will give it more time than this, so maybe after 4-5 years I could see them exploring elsewhere.
OKC's front office has a lot of issues with how they handle things, but they swear to fans that their structure is built for long term success, not short so they tell us to give it time. Players like playing here, its a great city and Oilers brass has made that known, so if OKC can keep around a 4,000 avg. Over 5 years I doubt this happens, or maybe I just hope it doesn't. Nonetheless have to just wait and see I Guess.
Not that it matters. Lander will never hit 40pts in Edmonton. 
