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

The Root For Missing The Play-offs By A Sizeable Margin And Become Sellers Thread...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-20-2007, 12:17 PM
  #26
jadeddog
Registered User
 
jadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 11,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilbleeder View Post
Three gaps, thats all, all but the #1 D-man can be filled quite easily, i honestly believe tanking wont help one bit, neither in the present or the future... significantly that is..
while i agree that this team is only about 3 players (and some maturity) away from being a pretty good team.... getting rid of sykora for a 2nd rounder doesnt change this fact one little bit.... nor does finishing this season on a low and grabbing the 7th or 8th overall pick

take a look at that #3 overall list i made.... if we manage to drop in the standings, and pull off a trade for the #3 overall pick, our team *is* much better now and especially in the long run.... but to have any shot at making such a trade, we'll need at least one pretty high pick to trade, and a 12-14th overall certainly wont get it done..... but a 6-8th overall just might (of course with anaheims pick thrown in as well).... im willing to tank the rest of the season (because its tanked already if we're honest with ourselves) if it gives us a shot at gaborik, jokinen, stuart, h. sedin, horton or barker

jadeddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 12:27 PM
  #27
misfit
Moderator
 
misfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of...everything
Posts: 15,634
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilbleeder View Post
But this years draft is a crap shoot for Top 3 players. Supposedly there is no sure-fire Top pairing D-man, and deep with alot of lesser guys, but still capable guys.
IMO, the draft isn't about filling holes in your team, it's about getting the best possible players with the picks you have, and the best opportunity you have to get the best player, is to have the highest possible draft picks. If there isn't a sure-fire top pairing Dman, then take a forward. It doesn't matter to me what position the guy plays, as long as he's better than everyone else left on the board. I've always thought trading down was stupid, as it goes against what the draft should be used for. If we can get into the top 5, I'd gladly trade both of our 1st rounders, and more.

misfit is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 12:38 PM
  #28
jadeddog
Registered User
 
jadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 11,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misfit View Post
IMO, the draft isn't about filling holes in your team, it's about getting the best possible players with the picks you have, and the best opportunity you have to get the best player, is to have the highest possible draft picks. If there isn't a sure-fire top pairing Dman, then take a forward. It doesn't matter to me what position the guy plays, as long as he's better than everyone else left on the board. I've always thought trading down was stupid, as it goes against what the draft should be used for. If we can get into the top 5, I'd gladly trade both of our 1st rounders, and more.
agree completely.... although i would really push for top3, as the difference between 3rd and 5th or even 4th is quite noticeable (which surprised me)

jadeddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 12:46 PM
  #29
misfit
Moderator
 
misfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of...everything
Posts: 15,634
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadeddog View Post
agree completely.... although i would really push for top3, as the difference between 3rd and 5th or even 4th is quite noticeable (which surprised me)
Obviously top 3 would be better, but my point is just that we should try to get as high up as possible. We might not even get into the top 5 with our 2 1sts, so I figured I was already being overly optomistic with top 5.

I can't think of many teams trading that far down if they've got the #3 pick. To go from 3 to 6 or 7 is one thing, but to go from 3 to 14 and 26 is another altogether.

misfit is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 12:49 PM
  #30
jadeddog
Registered User
 
jadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 11,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misfit View Post
Obviously top 3 would be better, but my point is just that we should try to get as high up as possible. We might not even get into the top 5 with our 2 1sts, so I figured I was already being overly optomistic with top 5.

I can't think of many teams trading that far down if they've got the #3 pick. To go from 3 to 6 or 7 is one thing, but to go from 3 to 14 and 26 is another altogether.
exactly.... there is no way in hell that we can snag a #3 pick if we finish with the 12th and 25th overall picks.... but if we drop to the 8th overall, then 8th + 25th might just do it for some teams (possibly with our 2nd rounder thrown in as well to sweeten the deal).... personally id rather see us get down to the 6th or 5th overall, but that isnt likely to happen

jadeddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 01:17 PM
  #31
Oilbleeder
Moderator
RattsSSV on the avy
 
Oilbleeder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oil Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadeddog View Post
while i agree that this team is only about 3 players (and some maturity) away from being a pretty good team.... getting rid of sykora for a 2nd rounder doesnt change this fact one little bit.... nor does finishing this season on a low and grabbing the 7th or 8th overall pick

take a look at that #3 overall list i made.... if we manage to drop in the standings, and pull off a trade for the #3 overall pick, our team *is* much better now and especially in the long run.... but to have any shot at making such a trade, we'll need at least one pretty high pick to trade, and a 12-14th overall certainly wont get it done..... but a 6-8th overall just might (of course with anaheims pick thrown in as well).... im willing to tank the rest of the season (because its tanked already if we're honest with ourselves) if it gives us a shot at gaborik, jokinen, stuart, h. sedin, horton or barker
Well im not gonna argue that point because you are undoubtably correct, a top 3 pick could set up us for the future, but take a look at this:

http://hockeysfuture.com/articles/9446

up till #24, all the players have something to offer, and big time, #24, Akim Aliu himself is a physical type of player, this is one deep draft, and yes, the talent drops off after the top 10 a bit, but not by much or significantly like last year. Add to the fact that, last year after we went to the cup final, we ended up with the #17 pick (i think), so trying to get a top 8 pick is going to be ridiculosuly hard, top 3....may be, but to me, the top 2 picks are cemented: Philly and CBJ. the third i dont think we can suck enough to outsuck teams like Pheonix or St. louis.

Also i do believe the playoff experience would better our team for the future. Look at what it did to Greene at the start of this year. This year our team is more young than before, imagine how important it would be to players like: MAP, Lupul, Torres, Greene, Smid (if he with the team), Gilbert (see Smid), Hemsky, Stoll (unless he is selved which i wouldn't mind), and Stortini. It also allows us to get playoff revenue, which is important, it may allow us to throw big bucks at a #1 d-man in the offseason quite comfortably (moreso than now), it would make it easier to open up a farm team and develop other areas of our organisation.

Interesting Scenario: Supposedly today Souray may be traded, if so, it would make Habs sellers for sure, if that happened, Lowe will probably make a pitch for one A.Markov, imagine if we had him for the playoff run, and tried to sign him in the offseason. Add to that, the mentorship he could give to players like Gilbert and Smid maybe?? I think making the playoffs are more important to this team than tanking...

....or are all my idea crap and im out to lunch?? lol JMO..

Oilbleeder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 02:20 PM
  #32
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 6,806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
I have a feeling that this will bring some flack, but hear me out. I am an Oilers fan through and though. I have been here through the bad times and well one really good time last year. That said, I am tired of mediocrity and IMO the best way for us to get back on track to becomming a contender is to blow up this season and cash in what-ever assets that we have that will not be of much use to us in 3 seasons from now. Un-less we get EXTREMELY lucky with UFA's or in some trades, IMO we will not be contenders for at least this year and next. I hope that Lowe gets us the most talented players possible and then re-tools this team with a few new vets to compliment the Horcoff, Moreau, Pisani, and hopefully Smyth type of vets. I really would rather see this year go up in smoke than to see the mediocrity continue for another 4-5 seasons. Anyone else feel this way??? Or does everyone want to take a water pistol to a gun fight this year???
The problem is - how to avoid mediocrity? I think all Oiler fans would love their team to be a powerhouse - and right now - we're merely "average". I'm not sure the answer is simple or easy. The biggest problem in trading away assets for a rebuild 2-3 years away is one of risk. How risky is it? What if I told you that there was a 10% chance of being a contender in 2-3 years, a 40% chance of staying the same and a 50% chance of being much worse, as all the players you traded for failed to pan out. is that worth the risk? Not imo.

The big question is how to become a powerhouse. In today's NHL with the salary cap in place - the old model of carefully buying free agents to fit in with some solidly drafted players ala Detroit, Dalas, NJ and Colorado no longer works. You can't have salaries of $80 million. So who are the powerhouses no and how can we emulate them?

Pittsburgh. Nashville. New Jersey. Buffalo. Ottawa. I'm defining a "powerhouse" team as a team who gets into the playoffs regularly and can contend. Pittsburgh doesn't have that history, but they certainly have a very bright future. Anaheim and San Jose doesn't have the history yet. Each of the five teams were built through the draft not free agents. Pittsburgh had the advantage of top 5 drafting so they're really an exception. But Nashville, NJ, Buff, had years of solid drafting, development, slow but solid. Ottawa had a fantastic trade that panned into Spezza and Chara to help accelerate its program.

Notice that with the exception of Pittsburgh, the other four, were not built by selling off their players in a rebuild. Rangers, Washington, Boston, St. Louis, Pittsburgh were all teams who sold players in recent memory and none of them are what I consider powerhouses. Washington really tanked it for one season and picked up Ovechkin - but let's be honest - its not that deep a team. In a lot of ways, they're quite comparable to the Oilers, one star(ovechkin/hemsky), a bunch of gritty players and balanced forwards ,a solid vet goaltender and an unspectacular defense.

Pittsburgh really tanked it for a number of years to get the top 5 picks, but wow, that's a big cost to pay. To the extent that Pittsburgh is on the verge of losing its team - is that the cost of tanking?

Chicago has tanked for a number of years and they really haven't improved that much.

My point is this - selling off your team does NOT guarantee an improvement. Solid drafting combined with solid development seems to be the way to go.

Master Lok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 02:32 PM
  #33
jadeddog
Registered User
 
jadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 11,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilbleeder View Post
....or are all my idea crap and im out to lunch?? lol JMO..
haha, no they are definitely not "crap ideas"... in fact, i agree with you that a playoff run would be miles and miles better for our young players.... i will take a playoff run over a #6-7 draft pick every single year.... but unfortunately the oilers are NOT making the playoffs this year, its just not freaking happening.... to say we have a 5% chance of making the dance would be very generous... so since we cant have what we'd like to have (a playoff run) then i want the next best thing, which is a high draft pick

jadeddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 02:34 PM
  #34
PuckNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadeddog View Post
haha, no they are definitely not "crap ideas"... in fact, i agree with you that a playoff run would be miles and miles better for our young players.... i will take a playoff run over a #6-7 draft pick every single year.... but unfortunately the oilers are NOT making the playoffs this year, its just not freaking happening.... to say we have a 5% chance of making the dance would be very generous... so since we cant have what we'd like to have (a playoff run) then i want the next best thing, which is a high draft pick
Someone on hte Canucks board worked out % chance of teams making the playoffs from this point and had the Oilers at 16%.

PuckNut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 02:36 PM
  #35
Colorado Avalanche
Registered User
 
Colorado Avalanche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lieto
Country: Finland
Posts: 16,420
vCash: 500
So who's going to challenge Vancouver and others, if not Edmonton?

Colorado Avalanche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 02:57 PM
  #36
misfit
Moderator
 
misfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of...everything
Posts: 15,634
vCash: 50
being a bad team for a number of years isn't a ticket out of mediocrity. Look at teams like Chicago (currently in the 9th year of their rebuilding process), Phoenix, and Columbus. They've been terrible teams for a very long time, and only one of them looks like they're finally making their way out of the basement (Chicago), but probably not this year.

misfit is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 03:14 PM
  #37
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,868
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mowzie View Post
No need to pound my comment so many times, once is more than enough my friend. I didn't know my posts needed to be approved by the board members, NASA, CSA, The United Nations and Sony. I'll be sure to re-read the rules on posting later on.
There's no rules, so I'll forgive you. Wasn't trying to personally attack you or stop you from thinking out loud. I simply was thinking out loud about your thoughts which were thought out loud. Mowzie you've been around here for while and 99% of what you postis sensible. No insult intended.

Quote:
It was a hypothetical, so I'll re-word it for you...

Trade away an aging goalie who has a relatively high salary considering my post, and not being contenders. In return try to get a younger goalie who is a little bit cheaper and a little bit younger so that he can grow with the core of the team, and allow for a little more cap space so that we can have some extra money to spend in other areas of need.
Quite sure you'll find that the organization is planning on one of JDD or DD panning out. Juice will be out, which ever youngster earns it the most will back up.

Quote:
I didn't propose the damned thing, this is a message board, thinking out loud is far from blasphemy.
As said, I was only thinking out loud about what you thought out loud.

Quote:
Also take into account that I admitted to not doing the research, so when I posted, it was on the grounds that Roloson was making 4.5m and Biron ideally and optomistically could be had for 3 - 3.5 m, and would have been younger and cheaper.
no hard feelings man.

__________________
http://hfboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=160 - the Unofficial HF Political board
thome_26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 03:38 PM
  #38
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,868
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari Gold View Post
But Bret I think a lot of guys could put up his OFFENSIVE numbers playing with Smyth and Hemsky. Like if we moved Sykora into that spot I would think Sykora would put up the same numbers. And a healthy Stoll will give you everything that Horcoff does.....but I know it's questionable if he'll be healthy. But you would move him if there was an overpayment? I think both Atlanta and Montreal would be willing to overpay for the guy because he's exactly what there teams need, and Montreal might be desperate enough to give us something like Komisarek + for the guy.
Who's Bret?


Sykora probably could come close to matching what Horcoff has been doing offensively the last while. But he wouldn't even approach the physicality, defensive awareness, face off excellene, and leadership that Horcoff presents.

You say that Stoll makes Horcoff redundant. I would say that's lunacy. We spent a decade needing a second line centre. Now we've got two capable guys and we think one makes the other redundant?! I'm as big a fan of Pouliot has there is and I'm totally pumped for Cogs. But let's not be silly here. Unless MAP shows down the stretch he's top six ready, the notion of moving one of Stoll or Horcs without getting a proven replacement, IMO, is nuts.

Show me a list of centres over the this year and last (lets just say Horc continues playing the way he has been for the last 20 games) that have averaged 65 points while playing the kind of all around game Horcoff has. Horcoff was our most valuable forward last year (yes more the Smyth or Hemsky)

But let's say we do consider moving Horcoff. You say 'what if Montreal would offer up Komi +?'

I would say to you, that '+' better be something ****** good, because Komisarek isn't nearly enough to me. If I'm moving Horcoff its in a slam dunk trade like Horcoff + for Lecavalier or Horcoff + Greene for Pitkanen.

thome_26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 03:54 PM
  #39
Red Eyes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 70
vCash: 500
No Hopers?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeComrie'sGhost View Post
I say move the no hopers like Schremp for whatever we can get and take a run.
I would hate to write off a young player without seeing him play in the bigs for a few games. Though Shremp is not playing as well as everyone expected...Look for a big jump next year. It would be nice if we had a farm team..

Red Eyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 04:09 PM
  #40
JonQuixote
Registered User
 
JonQuixote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,200
vCash: 500
This is so ridiculous. The model to follow is Jersey, Detroit, Colorado. Not Tampa or Pittsburgh, the suck for a decade and eventually get lucky with your draft picks.

Draft and develop well as a feeder system for your veteran team. That's the model to follow, not oh-my-god sell everybody and grab all those drool-worthy promisng players. That's the way to succeed long-term and that's true now more than ever in this age of increased free agency.

I understand wanting to be Pittsburgh. They look fantastic and their fans must be overjoyed. But they also got lucky. You throw in the towel and start playing for two, three years down the road...you're not gonna be Pittsburgh. You're gonna be Boston.

There is nothing majorly wrong with this team - it's a Cup contending team. It just lost a major piece and it has a hangover. It needs tuning, not restructuring.

And never, ever, EVER root for your team to lose. Shame. Shame. Squeaking into the playoffs or just missing isn't gonna hurt our future one bit. Other than Smyth, we don't have a whole lot to sell and a couple draft positions in this year's crop isn't gonna mean a whole lot.

JonQuixote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 05:28 PM
  #41
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 6,806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonQuixote View Post
This is so ridiculous. The model to follow is Jersey, Detroit, Colorado. Not Tampa or Pittsburgh, the suck for a decade and eventually get lucky with your draft picks.

Draft and develop well as a feeder system for your veteran team. That's the model to follow, not oh-my-god sell everybody and grab all those drool-worthy promisng players. That's the way to succeed long-term and that's true now more than ever in this age of increased free agency.
Agreed.

I believe we could have drafted Parise and Zajac ... instead of Pouliot, Jacques and Dubnyk. The argument could be made that if we drafted Zajac at #14, Dubnyk *might* be available, as well as Schremp at #25.

While I like Pouliot, it is evident that Parise is currently better than Pouliot and Jacques. How strong would the Oilers look if they had Parise and Zajac instead of these three late blooming prospects?

Hindsight drafting of course, I'm just suggesting that we aren't that far away from being a stronger team.

Master Lok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 05:31 PM
  #42
oil slick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Lok View Post
Agreed.

I believe we could have drafted Parise and Zajac ... instead of Pouliot, Jacques and Dubnyk. The argument could be made that if we drafted Zajac at #14, Dubnyk *might* be available, as well as Schremp at #25.

While I like Pouliot, it is evident that Parise is currently better than Pouliot and Jacques. How strong would the Oilers look if they had Parise and Zajac instead of these three late blooming prospects?

Hindsight drafting of course, I'm just suggesting that we aren't that far away from being a stronger team.
Parise would improve the team (although he probably would be playing 3rd line minutes behind Horc and Stoll), but the real missed boat as far as I'm concerned was Dubnyk before Meszaros...

oil slick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 05:40 PM
  #43
JonQuixote
Registered User
 
JonQuixote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil slick View Post
Parise would improve the team (although he probably would be playing 3rd line minutes behind Horc and Stoll), but the real missed boat as far as I'm concerned was Dubnyk before Meszaros...
I'm not quick to write off the selection of Dubnyk yet - we knew that there weren't gonna be any immediate returns there and the organizational need for a goalie in the system was through the roof at the time; he could still be the player we hope he could be. In fact, I'd argue he's right on pace.

But with every pundit in the world screaming for Parise, and the New Jersey Effing Devils showing interest...that probably wasn't the time to trust your own staff against common wisdom.

JonQuixote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 07:28 PM
  #44
Tyrolean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: Austria
Posts: 6,311
vCash: 500
I'd like to get rid of Reasoner Pisani, Petersen, Sykora and other players who just don't score enough. They may be good in other areas, but the lack of offensive firepower is a serious problem.

I think Biron is a definite upgrade over Roloson based on age alone. It remains to be seen if he is a money playoff goalie however. You have to have the guts to make this type of trade for the future and not go half ways.

Tyrolean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 09:17 PM
  #45
JonQuixote
Registered User
 
JonQuixote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrolean View Post
I think Biron is a definite upgrade over Roloson based on age alone.
Absolutely.

It's only when you start to consider other things that Roloson has the edge.

JonQuixote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2007, 09:37 PM
  #46
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
The Oilers Best
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 51,396
vCash: 500
The key here is that you build your team around guys like Hemmer and Stoll add in Smyth, Moreau, Pisani, and Horcoff. This allows you to have a core of solid guys, just that we need new blood to surround these guys. The way that some of you are talking, it's like I'd be packaging Hemmer and Stoll for a 1st round pick. Those 2 you likely cannot replace by UFA. We'd still be at least slightly competitive, then the rest depends on who-ever we get from our trades as well as our current prospect group.

__________________
Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Bryanbryoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2007, 12:26 AM
  #47
Zach and Slater
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Zach and Slater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonQuixote View Post
This is so ridiculous. The model to follow is Jersey, Detroit, Colorado. Not Tampa or Pittsburgh, the suck for a decade and eventually get lucky with your draft picks.

Draft and develop well as a feeder system for your veteran team. That's the model to follow, not oh-my-god sell everybody and grab all those drool-worthy promisng players. That's the way to succeed long-term and that's true now more than ever in this age of increased free agency.

I understand wanting to be Pittsburgh. They look fantastic and their fans must be overjoyed. But they also got lucky. You throw in the towel and start playing for two, three years down the road...you're not gonna be Pittsburgh. You're gonna be Boston.

There is nothing majorly wrong with this team - it's a Cup contending team. It just lost a major piece and it has a hangover. It needs tuning, not restructuring.

And never, ever, EVER root for your team to lose. Shame. Shame. Squeaking into the playoffs or just missing isn't gonna hurt our future one bit. Other than Smyth, we don't have a whole lot to sell and a couple draft positions in this year's crop isn't gonna mean a whole lot.
You know what Jon? The reason why Colorado and Detroit have stuck around is because they got started by being a bottom feeder every year too. Sakic, Sundin, Nolan, Lindros. That was the foundation for there last 10 - 12 years of success. Yes they've done a good job of drafting since then as well, but I don't think they would have been anywhere near the team that they are without that. Detroit was a bottom feeder and got Stevie Y which was the foundation of all there success.....that and taking a chance on all those Europeans(namely Russians)in the late 80's. Again, yes they've drafted well, but also had a strong foundation which came as a result of losing big. I'm not saying we have to lose big, but we need to start getting higher up in drafts when we have the chance because it does make a huge difference. Look at Ottawa, you said Tampa and Pittsburgh, Minnesota/Dallas got Modano in 88. Getting that one player to build around makes such a huge difference and we could have a chance to get one of those guys this season(Kane, Esposito, Cherepanov).

Zach and Slater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2007, 12:55 AM
  #48
JonQuixote
Registered User
 
JonQuixote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari Gold View Post
You know what Jon? The reason why Colorado and Detroit have stuck around is because they got started by being a bottom feeder every year too. Sakic, Sundin, Nolan, Lindros. That was the foundation for there last 10 - 12 years of success. Yes they've done a good job of drafting since then as well, but I don't think they would have been anywhere near the team that they are without that. Detroit was a bottom feeder and got Stevie Y which was the foundation of all there success.....that and taking a chance on all those Europeans(namely Russians)in the late 80's. Again, yes they've drafted well, but also had a strong foundation which came as a result of losing big. I'm not saying we have to lose big, but we need to start getting higher up in drafts when we have the chance because it does make a huge difference. Look at Ottawa, you said Tampa and Pittsburgh, Minnesota/Dallas got Modano in 88. Getting that one player to build around makes such a huge difference and we could have a chance to get one of those guys this season(Kane, Esposito, Cherepanov).
We have one in Hemsky. But while Detroit, Jersey, Dallas stunk in the 80's, they built their core foundation on smart drafting and wise free agency.

Yeah, it's "easier" to rebuild if you don't mind sucking for half a decade. Those guys you want to tank in order to get...what if they were named Yashin or Bonk or Daigle? How much misery did Ottawa have to endure before they finally (kinda) got it right? And what really helped them turn the corner? Smart trades and depth picks - Alfredsson in like the 5th round, Hossa in the middle of the 1st.

And they STILL don't have a Cup, and their window is closing. Then what for them? Back to sucking for another 5-10 years if they lose some guys to free agency and miss the playoffs?

Buffalo - the charge is led by Briere (trade), Drury (trade), Afinogenov (3rd Round), Tallinder (2nd), Campbell (6th), Miller (5th). And yeah, Detroit had Stevie Y as their lynchpin, but let's not forget that he couldn't lead them to glory until he had Fedorov (4th), Lidstrom (3rd), Osgood (3rd), etc. Those 'high' Detroit picks during their tough years? Brent Fedyk? Joe Murphy? Shawn Burr? Yves Racine? And what's keeping them on top these days? Guys like Zetterberg, Datsyuk.

And in the 'new' NHL if the guys you draft aren't complete prodigies, but actually follow some sort of regular developmental curve, you'll have a few seasons before they become players you could have just signed as free agents anyway.

It's a fool's errand to think that a team needs to be a bottom feeder for years before hitting the top. The sun shines on a dog's bum eventually, but do we really want to emulate the legacy of franchises like Hartford/Carolina? Winnipeg/Phoenix? Los Angeles? Sucking indefinitely is no guarantee for success and it's a crappy plan, especially now with liberalized free agency.

The smart franchises are the ones that are most likely to succeed tomorrow. Not the ones that suck today.

JonQuixote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2007, 01:55 AM
  #49
Mowzie
Asst. Dishwasher
 
Mowzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lebanon, Alberta
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 8,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
There's no rules, so I'll forgive you. Wasn't trying to personally attack you or stop you from thinking out loud. I simply was thinking out loud about your thoughts which were thought out loud. Mowzie you've been around here for while and 99% of what you postis sensible. No insult intended.

Quite sure you'll find that the organization is planning on one of JDD or DD panning out. Juice will be out, which ever youngster earns it the most will back up.

As said, I was only thinking out loud about what you thought out loud.

no hard feelings man.
APOLOGY NOT ACCEPTED. WHY DON'T YOU TAKE YOUR FAT, UGLY, JERRY SPRINGER WATCHING, CUT OFF JEAN WEARING...

No hard feelings, you actually give me too much credit, c'mon 99% of what I post is sensible? Are you actually reading them? I'd save 40% is pushing it.

Mowzie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2007, 02:56 AM
  #50
Jesus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 3,936
vCash: 500
The Oilers are currently 22 overall in the NHL. With the way St.Louis has been playing the Oilers could be drafting in the top 8. It would be quite difficult for the Oilers to draft higher then 8th but if the team puts their mind to it there is hope.

Jesus 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 11:25 AM.

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.