Speculation: Re-alignment

[HBSauce]

Originally Posted by Herschel

While there is a good chance that a few of those D prospect become NHL level Dmen I am not sure any are solid bets on becoming 1/2 on the blueline.

I am not too sure how you rank management of a team that has been at the bottom of the league for so long, even if they rise how much of that is about lottery picks?

How many teams have No.1 or No. 2 D men in their system though? They are very hard to come by and honestly with the Oilers picking so high you have to take the best player available eventhough you're weak on D. The most likely No.1/2's go top 5-15 in the draft, leaving usually good D men to pick up but they usually play either the No.3 or No.4 role barring exceptions (Shea Weber, 2nd Round 2003 comes to mind immediately, or Keith) . The only way I think the oilers could've picked up some higher blue chip D prospects (No. 1/2 potential) would have been package their 2nd or 3rd round picks to move up.

I agree that their management isn't great, I'm arguing it's better than the 90's regime though (which is sad). I believe they won't be Chicago or Pittsburgh since they haven't drafted a Toews+Kane or a Crosby+Malkin (Ebs, Hall, Yak, and RNH are good but I think a cut under Chi/Pitt's stable) and Kevin Lowe and other Oiler Brass is still there, bad mojo IMO.

[HBSauce]

Originally Posted by SJeasy

MacT was worse than the Todd because he fell into non-creativity. He also had issues as a motivator with his old school style which doesn't work well with players who are getting their wealth early. The days of fire breathers are almost done. The Todd doesn't shoot himself in the foot on the motivational side and he is at least somewhat creative. His record with the PP prior to this year is outstanding. It isn't just having a high number on PP, it is taking a good PP and achieving even better numbers. It is differential, not the raw number.

In terms of drafting, I will give you one Oiler success who stands out because he is the exception, Petry. I am looking for guys drafted past round one who can aspire to more than last pairing or lower line minutes. Guys who, if traded, can garner more than 200 games elsewhere. Not guys who fall out of the NHL scene as soon as they leave the Oilers. All teams will have prospects show up for half seasons or more when injuries or personnel shortages dictate it. The Oilers later rounds are absolutely pathetic.

The bolded to me applies to Todd's coaching: Players coast and seem unmotivated, have same 5 on 5 formulaic offence of dump and grind, and he couldn't adapt to St. Louis team that beat us 8 out of 9 times last season. MacT was able to adapt to the opponents (Detroit,even the Sharks) during that 2006 playoff run more so than Todd has ever shown me in the playoffs or within a game.

As for current late round success stories, yes I agree with you there hasn't been many vs. some of the gems the Sharks dig up, but their recent picks (Gernat, 5th Round;Musil, 2nd Round; Marincin, 2nd Round) over the last two years have potential of being useful NHL D men. Can their drafting be better? Hell yes, but I believe it's been better since Kevin Prendergast was fired in 2010 and Stu MacGregor took over.

If you want to talk more on this PM me, but I should get back on topic.

Realignment, yay playoff rivalries!

[Trojan35]

Am I the only one who thinks they should make playoffs like the All-Star draft? How awesome would it be if the #1 seed got to choose their opponent?

The rivalries and bulletin board material would pick up pretty quick. Plus, you'd avoid the issue of the #1 seed (say, chicago) getting shafted with playing the weakest seed in another time-zone (say, Anaheim). If they don't want to travel, they can choose to play someone closer but possibly a better team.

Oh man, this would be awesome. Seeds should be able to choose their opponents. Can you imagine if the Hawks chose Vancouver just because? That would be awesome. Now I'm sad because I got excited and I know this will never happen.

[Kitten Mittons]

I'm really struggling to understand how the playoffs work in this proposal. Can someone come up with a hypothetical playoff scenario from round 1 to SC finals?

[AnderFunk]

Originally Posted by Kitten Mittons

I'm really struggling to understand how the playoffs work in this proposal. Can someone come up with a hypothetical playoff scenario from round 1 to SC finals?

4 divisions in 2 conferences
First two rounds of playoffs take place against teams from your division (exception: wildcard crossovers)
3rd round between division winners
4th round between conference winners
Top 3 teams in division make playoffs
2 wild cards per conference

Example standings:

Pacific
*Sharks - 120 Points (top 3 - plays Pacific Wildcard)
*Canucks - 110 Points (top 3 - plays 3rd in division)
*Coyotes - 100 Points (top 3 - plays 2nd in division)
Kings - 60 Points
Ducks - 50 Points
Oliers - 50 points
Flames - 50 Points

Mid-West
*Blackhawks - 115 Points (top 3 - plays Mid-West Wildcard)
*Blues - 105 Points (top 3 - plays 2nd in division)
*Avalanche - 95 Points (top 3 - plays 2nd in division)
*Wild - 90 Points (Mid-West Wildcard - finished higher than Jets so play lesser Blackhawks)
*Jets - 85 Points (Pacific Wildcard - finished lower than Wild so play greater Sharks - cross over because they finished higher than all other Pacific teams not in top 3)
Stars - 50 Points
Predators - 50 Points

Round 1

Pacific Semis
*Sharks (1) vs. Jets (P W)
Canucks (2) vs. *Coyotes (3)

Mid-West Semis
Blackhawks (1) vs. *Wild (MW W)
*Blues (2) vs. Avalanche (3)

Round 2

Pacific Final
*Sharks (1) vs. Coyotes (3)

Mid-West Final
*Blues (2) vs. Wild (MW W)

Round 3
West Final
Sharks (P1) vs. Blues (MW2)

The winner of round 3 (west winner) plays the east winner in the Stanly Cup final.

[Kitten Mittons]

You're the best. Got it.