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

Some things MacT could've did to maybe stem the tide

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-04-2004, 09:11 PM
  #26
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
What does that have to do with this? Cloutier and Hedberg both suck, I already know that Dawgbone. Try to stick to the topic at hand. You're reaching.
Gee, I dunno... an alleged Stanley Cup contender vs a team that is just trying to make it. So maybe you should focus on what your GM doesn't do to put you over the top, vs what our gm doesn't do for us to make the playoffs.

Quote:
Sure, they would have moved Garon in the right deal. In fact, Garon was one of the guys rumoured to be on the block for Les Habitants at the deadline.
And what was the right deal Mizral? I'd move Smyth and Hemsky for Heatley (ignoring the legal things) and Kovalchuk in a heartbeat, and both Hemsky and Smyth are guys who will only move in the right deal.


Quote:
Osgood? What made you think he was going anywhere/ Johnson sucks and Kolzig is too expensive. But there have been other options in the last two years.
Those were the goaltenders that were rumoured to be available and who were available over the past two seasons. Which other goaltenders? Which ones would be decent starters?

Quote:
Dawgbone,

Gerber will be 30 in September this year. He's good, but he's not *that* young. Biron was playing like a wild-man down the stretch, and if you ask most Buffalo Sabres fans, Mika Noronen was most definetly on the table, especially with rookie Ryan Miller in the pipeline.
When did I say Gerber was young? I said he was a backup that Anaheim needs. I don't give a crap what Sabre fans think, because they don't make the decisions. Both goaltenders played alot this season, and both took the reigns at various points in the season. Ryan Miller has struggled at the NHL level and until he is ready to be a backup, the Sabres need both guys. Look at how they were used this season, and try and tell me that Noronen was available this season.

Quote:
You also failed to mention all the goalies that have been traded or acquired as free agents in the last while I noticed. Mikka Kiprusoff is just the tip of the iceberg of starting goaltenders acquired in the last two years, Dawgbone.
Ah yes... Kiprusoff. The guy who was 5-14-0 3.25 GAA and .879 sv%. The guy who was given the starting job last year and not only stumbled, but out right fell down 8 flights of stairs. The only person in the NHL who had any belief in Kipprusoff was the guy who lost his job because of him. At least Salo had proven himself as a starter. So let's not use hindsight here.

Quote:
Again, dawgbone, you're thinking with your heart not with your head. If Salo was his best option at the time, why did he move Markkanen who I'm sure you would agree is better than Salo considering the salary. Heck, you might even say that he's better in terms of pure gameplay than Salo. So right there there's one option Lowe had, but he moved Markkanen at the beginning of the year instead.
Markkanen's save % dropped 25 points from the previous year, and his GAA went up 3/4 of a goal per game. He didn't have the best year either that season. So who do you go with as your starter? A guy after a bad season who has proven himself as a starter, or a guy after a bad season who has only been a backup?


Quote:
And as Lowe prooved, he was able to move Salo - mind you he was a UFA. However, what would have been so wrong with buying Salo out two years ago and running Markkanen/Conklin then? Save a bunch of money and get probobly similar goaltending. Or, imagine, moving Philly's 1st for a big improvement at goal and using Markkanen at backup. The Oilers had options. Buying Salo out was just one of them.
Yes he was able to move Salo eventually... to a team who desparately needed a goaltender. There usually isn't many of them around at the beginning of the season.

Buy Salo out two years ago and go with Conks/Markkanen?

Two years ago Conklin was a backup goalie coming off his first year in the AHL and Salo was a part of Oiler history (best GAA and sv% in a season by a starting goalie). I guess if everyone had the powers of hindsight that you do, the world would be a different place.

Quote:
Your last sentence is an assumption, how do you know that, dawgbone?
How?

You just proved it. By saying Salo should have been bought out 2 seasons ago before the start of this proves everything you say is based on hindsight. That's your whole argument. So if Salo gets traded for a bag of pucks and has a great bounceback season, you would say Lowe dropped the ball and screwed up. And don't deny it.

Quote:
Everything you've said to me has come from the standpoint that Lowe can do no wrong, and that smacks of homerism. Everyone is a bit of a homer, but being a homer about a GM is a fruitless excersize. Don't you think it's slightly fair to criticize Lowe's handling of the goaltending considering in the last two years, the Oilers GAA has been near the bottom of the league? And that the Oilers have been spending about $4.5 - 5 million dollars per year on said goaltending?
And yours is coming from the standpoint that Lowe never does anything right... so I guess the answer is somewhere in the middle. If you are only able to criticize using just hindsight, then no, it's not fair. If Lowe knew 100% certain that Salo couldn't bounce back, he would have done somethng. Lowe did what you are supposed to do. Stick by your player and see if they can get through it before dumping them. The last thing you need is to give a guy away and have him have a great comeback season for another team.

Mizral, you should get your facts straight before commenting on anything. Near the bottom of the league in GAA?

2003-2004 - 16th overall
2002-2003 - 19th overall
2001-2002 - 2nd overall

Near the bottom? Try near the middle. That's your problem, you don't bother to check things out before you say anything. Hey, if you aren't going to let trivial things like facts get in the way, your arguments are pretty empty.

Quote:
Lowe deserves at least SOME criticism for that, and if you can't see it - if you truely believe Lowe did everything he could as a GM to improve the goaltending situation, or that nothing else was possible to improve since nothing else was available.. well, I'd just like you to take a look a couple hundred clicks south of you and check out what the GM in Calgary has done. He did what Lowe could not do. And he's taken the Flames to the playoffs because of it.
OKay, so you are telling me Lowe should have traded for a goalie coming off a horrible year, and who had failed miserably at his last attempt as a starting goaltender and who was now the 3rd string goalie on his team.

Did I get that right? I just want to make sure I have an idea about where you are coming from (left field in the wrong ballpark, but whatever). Thanks for coming out now. When you actually figure out a line and stick with it, come on back, we'll have a chat.

You basically wanted Lowe to do what he did, except get Kipper instead of keep Salo. Mystical Mizral and his crystal ball strikes again.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
04-04-2004, 09:38 PM
  #27
Walsher
Registered User
 
Walsher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,339
vCash: 500
What everyone here forgets - or at least Matts is that nobody would have traded anything, let alone just taken Salo's contract the way he has been playing. Why didn't CGY trade Turek all year since they have had Kiprusoff and McLennan playing much better? Because nobody wants a 4 million dollar weak spot. In an ideal world Lowe would probably have liked to trade Salo and bring in a new guy - heck once that opportunity came he jumped on it. But the fact remains Salo's contract made him unmovable untill the deadline. Unfortunately for the Oilers that was too late and Lowe's hands were tied up until then. Bottom line, this team has made huge strides. They are still going to be lacking in key areas (center depth, goaltending, legitimate offensive d-man) but young players matured and all and all a decent season considering where they were and what people were predicting from them at training camp.

Walsher is offline  
Old
04-04-2004, 09:46 PM
  #28
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Narnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,966
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walsher
What everyone here forgets - or at least Matts is that nobody would have traded anything, let alone just taken Salo's contract the way he has been playing. Why didn't CGY trade Turek all year since they have had Kiprusoff and McLennan playing much better? Because nobody wants a 4 million dollar weak spot. In an ideal world Lowe would probably have liked to trade Salo and bring in a new guy - heck once that opportunity came he jumped on it. But the fact remains Salo's contract made him unmovable untill the deadline. Unfortunately for the Oilers that was too late and Lowe's hands were tied up until then. Bottom line, this team has made huge strides. They are still going to be lacking in key areas (center depth, goaltending, legitimate offensive d-man) but young players matured and all and all a decent season considering where they were and what people were predicting from them at training camp.
I was listening to the pre-game show out here on the west coast and they had Brownlee as a guest. Brownlee mentioned that Lowe wanted to trade Salo at around the time of the Atlanta game but Conklin got injured. They couldn't trade Salo because of Conklin's injury. BTW, Brownlee thinks Conklin broke his hand in the fight. I think I've also heard that the Oilers had been trying to trade Salo all season. One rumour I heard is that they tried trading Salo at the time Jussi was traded.

__________________
"He just ate up Robyn Regehr for dinner, a spectacular play by Hemsky, and Robyn Regehr has got doo doo all over his face" - Rod Phillips call on Hemsky's goal vs the Flames
Narnia is offline  
Old
04-04-2004, 09:49 PM
  #29
Walsher
Registered User
 
Walsher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemsky83
I was listening to the pre-game show out here on the west coast and they had Brownlee as a guest. Brownlee mentioned that Lowe wanted to trade Salo at around the time of the Atlanta game but Conklin got injured. They couldn't trade Salo because of Conklin's injury. BTW, Brownlee thinks Conklin broke his hand in the fight. I think I've also heard that the Oilers had been trying to trade Salo all season. One rumour I heard is that they tried trading Salo at the time Jussi was traded.
Oh I don't diagree that they were likely trying to deal him - but nobody in their right mind takes a guy at 3.9 mill that has serious mental issues and can no longer be a sufficient starter. Lowe could try all he wants, but until it became reasonable (trade deadline less than 1 million left on the contract) nobody was going to bite. Therefor jumping on Lowe for this situation is quite unrealistic.

Walsher is offline  
Old
04-04-2004, 10:01 PM
  #30
Matts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,911
vCash: 500
Well

they could've just brought in someone else and yeah you have three goalies for awhile like Cgy did but then you make a move to remedy that

Matts is offline  
Old
04-04-2004, 10:32 PM
  #31
edmontonoilers89
Registered User
 
edmontonoilers89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,258
vCash: 500
It's posts like Mizral vs. Dawgbone that make this site great. Keep debating guys!

Personally speaking, I agree with everything dawgbone has said. If you use hindsight, you can make any GM look ********. Philadelphia getting Lindros was supposed to lead them to the Cup and he was supposed to be the next great player. Which he was at the time. What Clarke didn't know was that Forsberg would end up being better. You can never use hindsight.

Lowe knew Salo had a bad year, and after he traded him he stated many times how the goaltending was not up to par. But he decided to keep him last year because he knew he was a veteran and could bounce back. Trading him away and seeing him pull a Giguere or Kiprussof, he would have been blasted beyond belief by people asking him why he traded him, and saying maybe he would have a rebound year. This year, he didn't. So he dealt him away. It's as simple as that. Conklin was still a project 2 years ago anyway, let alone ready for NHL work.

edmontonoilers89 is offline  
Old
04-04-2004, 10:38 PM
  #32
Matts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,911
vCash: 500
With Salo's attitude and work ethic

there was zero reason to think he could "pull a Gigure or Kiprsusoff" type of season.

Matts is offline  
Old
04-04-2004, 10:43 PM
  #33
Lowetide
Registered User
 
Lowetide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmontonoilers89
It's posts like Mizral vs. Dawgbone that make this site great. Keep debating guys!

Personally speaking, I agree with everything dawgbone has said. If you use hindsight, you can make any GM look ********. Philadelphia getting Lindros was supposed to lead them to the Cup and he was supposed to be the next great player. Which he was at the time. What Clarke didn't know was that Forsberg would end up being better. You can never use hindsight.

Lowe knew Salo had a bad year, and after he traded him he stated many times how the goaltending was not up to par. But he decided to keep him last year because he knew he was a veteran and could bounce back. Trading him away and seeing him pull a Giguere or Kiprussof, he would have been blasted beyond belief by people asking him why he traded him, and saying maybe he would have a rebound year. This year, he didn't. So he dealt him away. It's as simple as that. Conklin was still a project 2 years ago anyway, let alone ready for NHL work.
I think Russ Farwell made that trade, but your point is well taken. imo, its reasonable to be critical of Lowe this season for not dealing with the center situation more swiftly (he signed Oates, but Marchant and Comrie were gone, Reasoner and then York were hurt, and Oates wasn't helping) and staying with Tommy too deep into the season. At some point, even if the guy has been solid in the past, you can't lose the season because of him.

Not to forget the good things (Torres, signing Ulanov, the Nedved deal), but it was certainly not a stellar season for Lowe, and that's not hindsight that's fact.

Lowetide is offline  
Old
04-04-2004, 10:51 PM
  #34
Matts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,911
vCash: 500
Well

Quote:
Originally Posted by lowetide
I think Russ Farwell made that trade, but your point is well taken. imo, its reasonable to be critical of Lowe this season for not dealing with the center situation more swiftly (he signed Oates, but Marchant and Comrie were gone, Reasoner and then York were hurt, and Oates wasn't helping) and staying with Tommy too deep into the season. At some point, even if the guy has been solid in the past, you can't lose the season because of him.

Not to forget the good things (Torres, signing Ulanov, the Nedved deal), but it was certainly not a stellar season for Lowe, and that's not hindsight that's fact.
we'll see in the next couple of days if Lowe admits that of if he's just too busy recruiting for the WHC.

I'm not fighting it, mind you, so it's hard not to be bitter today seeing the Flames able to jump into 6th and draw the Canucks. I mean I'm not gonna slam the Oilers for losing two of their last three, 16-5-4-4 was a great run.

Just too much damage done beforehand and Lowe had a big part in it by keeping Tommy around

Matts is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 02:38 PM
  #35
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matts
we'll see in the next couple of days if Lowe admits that of if he's just too busy recruiting for the WHC.

I'm not fighting it, mind you, so it's hard not to be bitter today seeing the Flames able to jump into 6th and draw the Canucks. I mean I'm not gonna slam the Oilers for losing two of their last three, 16-5-4-4 was a great run.

Just too much damage done beforehand and Lowe had a big part in it by keeping Tommy around
Agreed matts. It's a bitter pill to swallow but I've liked what Lowe has done with this team. He's had the balls to make some huge trades that would make other GM's tremble (Niiniimaa, Hamrlik, Carter, Weight, Guerin, Comrie) and brought in some young talent that few could have predicted would have done so well (Bergeron - signing, Torres, Dvorak, Cross, Brewer, Staios - signing, Nedved).

Let me put it this way: which is the real Oil? What if the Oilers take their 16-5-4-4 streak and continue with ridiculously high level of play for the entire season next year? Maybe not as hot as 16-5-4-4 but say 37-22-11-11 which would be 96 pts. Impossible you say? Maybe not, was it just two years ago (or 3): Mizral would know, when Brian Burke of the Canucks was in the same position - half way into the season, out of playoffs. He came to the dressing room and told the guys that he believed in them and if they won, he wouldn't trade anybody. The Canucks responded and have turned their team fortunes around ever since.

Its not the end of the story guys, merely the beginning. A lot of bright spots for the future.


Last edited by Master Lok: 04-05-2004 at 02:52 PM.
Master Lok is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 02:46 PM
  #36
Matts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,911
vCash: 500
Yeah I thought of the Dys too

I mean we're noth referencing a 29 game segment sample which is pretty sizeable in anyone's opinion. Plus I don't have any idea of how tough our competition was during that time but I think it was formidable.

So yeah I thought about the Dys of '02 as well becasue they got it together that season just after christmas and they've been a great regular season team ever since.

But in keeping with that Van theme, if Clouts craps teh bed again this second season Burke will take the heat for his choice of netminders. And no matter how much I like some of what Lowe has done, he was an idiot when it came to how he handled our goaltending.

I look forward to a Jussi/Ty tandem next year because I think they can push one another enough to certainly get us in the playoffs.

But right now on the Monday before the wed the playoffs start as I'm surfing the Can papers and websites and looking at the playoff sked, it's hard to swallow the way Lowe let this team wallow for so long with Tommy in net.

We finished with just 36 wins and 89 points and out of the playoffs for the second time in three years.

And that's the bottom line.

Matts is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 03:14 PM
  #37
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,719
vCash: 500
For what it's worth, on Friday they had Scott Howson on the radio for an interview and he said that last summer they did wrestle with the idea of moving Salo and keeping Markanen.

He said that although everyone in the org was impressed with Conklins performance last year in the Bulldog's playoff run, they were unsure with how it would translate to the NHL.

I got the impression that the plan was to see exactly what Conklin would bring to the table so they could possibly see if they can fill the spot from within the org. and from my seat I think it was a good move.

If you look at a guy like Noronen (since his name was thrown out earlier) then Conklin matches up quite well and yet the team didn't have to give up an asset to get him.

One playoff round or no playoff rounds aside, this season was a success and sets the Oilers up very nicely for next season... whenever that is.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 06:42 PM
  #38
Matts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,911
vCash: 500
It most certainly wasn't

a success on the ice.

Next year? Yeah I'm optimistic too now that Lowe ridded this team of it's biggest problem. I'm sure that Jussi and Ty will have bad games next year as well but I'll bet their numbers won't be as bad as Tommy's the last season and I'm sure they won't eat up as much of the payroll.

But Lowe waited too long and it cost the Oilers.

Matts is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 07:35 PM
  #39
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Gee, I dunno... an alleged Stanley Cup contender vs a team that is just trying to make it. So maybe you should focus on what your GM doesn't do to put you over the top, vs what our gm doesn't do for us to make the playoffs.
My GM? See, Dawgbone, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Brian Burke isn't MY GM. He's the Canucks GM. Just like Lowe isn't YOUR GM. Just because Lowe used to play for the Oilers (and was a great, great player to boot) does not mean that he deserves extra mulligans as a GM. You've got an emotional bond towards Lowe that makes you unbiased in this discussion.

And for the record, I don't hate Lowe. I have given him credit on several things he's done this year. In fact, I've said probobly as much good as I have bad about Lowe this year. It just seems folks don't either read the good, or remember it.

Quote:
And what was the right deal Mizral? I'd move Smyth and Hemsky for Heatley (ignoring the legal things) and Kovalchuk in a heartbeat, and both Hemsky and Smyth are guys who will only move in the right deal.
How about moving Mike Comrie for Mathieu Garon? Heck, you could probobly have gotten other assets from that potential swap to boot.

Quote:
Those were the goaltenders that were rumoured to be available and who were available over the past two seasons. Which other goaltenders? Which ones would be decent starters?
Just off the top of my head, the last goaltenders that moved since the 2003 free agency started was:

Hackett, Potvin, Shields, Storr, Hurme, Markkanen, Hedberg, Cechmanek, and Kipprusoff. This is just the last year, not including who will be moved in the near future (Ahonen and Fernandez are good bets), not to mention the guys who moved last year during the season or the in the 2002 off-season. I also left off Hasek since that was an impossibility. Those are all not great goaltenders. Those other teams prooved that goaltenders were available. Scoff at the talent level there all you want, but Salo is certainly not the best of that group.

Now, if you want to go even deeper, Manny Fernandez was reportedly being aggresivly shopped and Ari Ahonen may have to be traded due to waiver eligability and the Devils not needing him. Olaf Kolzig nearly went, Gerber was being persued by the Leafs, Boucher and Bierk were being shopped earlier this year, Tugnutt was on waivers at one point I believe, CuJo has been shopped ad nauseum with the Wings talking about eating salary on that deal. Mika Noronen or Martin Biron were reported numerous times all year to be on the block too.

How many of those are starters? Tough to say. Mikka Kipprusoff wasn't a starter in Sharkland, but now he is wouldn't you say? Sometimes you have to take a chance. Lowe did not. I notice that many were calling the Nedved deal an acceptable risk since the Oilers needed a #1 centre, yet here you are telling me that it wouldn't have been possible for Lowe to go after a #1 goaltender? You still believe that after all this is said?

Quote:
When did I say Gerber was young? I said he was a backup that Anaheim needs. I don't give a crap what Sabre fans think, because they don't make the decisions. Both goaltenders played alot this season, and both took the reigns at various points in the season. Ryan Miller has struggled at the NHL level and until he is ready to be a backup, the Sabres need both guys. Look at how they were used this season, and try and tell me that Noronen was available this season.
Misread you on the Gerber thing, but Bryzgalov is coming along in Duckland. They were shopping him at the deadline and that's a fact. He was MOST CERTAINLY on the table. You are wrong here, Dawgbone.

Noronen played 35 games according to TSN, but many of those were in relief roles. He was 6 games under .500, compared to Biron being well over .500. They sure needed him. Miller struggled, but he could have still played 2 games down the stretch to compensate for Noronen being traded - then again, they rode Biron hard down the stretch, I'm not sure if Noronen played much at all after the deadline. So yes, Noronen certainly was not needed after the deadline, and he certainly did not have a good season. The Sabres didn't need him.

Quote:
Ah yes... Kiprusoff. The guy who was 5-14-0 3.25 GAA and .879 sv%. The guy who was given the starting job last year and not only stumbled, but out right fell down 8 flights of stairs. The only person in the NHL who had any belief in Kipprusoff was the guy who lost his job because of him. At least Salo had proven himself as a starter. So let's not use hindsight here.
The only person who knew about Martin Brodeur was QMJHL coaches. I guess the Devils don't deserve any credit for him either.

This is just my point. Sutter took a chance on Kipprusoff and made off like a BANDIT. Lowe has yet to take that chance since the first Salo trade. Which I'm sure you have no problem saying it was a good trade, since Salo played well afterwards right? Other GM's couldn't do that though. Nope. Impossible.

Quote:
Markkanen's save % dropped 25 points from the previous year, and his GAA went up 3/4 of a goal per game. He didn't have the best year either that season. So who do you go with as your starter? A guy after a bad season who has proven himself as a starter, or a guy after a bad season who has only been a backup?
Getting Markkanen was not a bad idea, in fact, I was on record for saying it was my favorite acquisition of the year outside of Igor Ulanov. However, is Markkanen a starter? Nope. Does Lowe think he's a starter? Doubtfully, he already dealt him once. Lowe thinks Conklin is better than Markkanen, that I have little doubt in my mind. You or I might think differently, but as you said above regarding Buffalo, we're just fans

Quote:
Yes he was able to move Salo eventually... to a team who desparately needed a goaltender. There usually isn't many of them around at the beginning of the season.

Buy Salo out two years ago and go with Conks/Markkanen?

Two years ago Conklin was a backup goalie coming off his first year in the AHL and Salo was a part of Oiler history (best GAA and sv% in a season by a starting goalie). I guess if everyone had the powers of hindsight that you do, the world would be a different place.
What makes you think Conklin is no longer a backup goaltender? Salo is Oilers history so he deserves to be kept? Hindsight be damned Dawgbone, Salo was crap last year not just this year. Everybody knows it. Truely, if you're sitting here telling me that Kevin Lowe going with Tommy Salo two years in a row was for the best interests of the team, you're out of your mind. Kevin Lowe made a mistake with Salo, and he finally fessed up to it by trading him.

Quote:
How?

You just proved it. By saying Salo should have been bought out 2 seasons ago before the start of this proves everything you say is based on hindsight. That's your whole argument. So if Salo gets traded for a bag of pucks and has a great bounceback season, you would say Lowe dropped the ball and screwed up. And don't deny it.
Sure, I don't deny it.

If Archie Irbe comes back next season and wins the Vezina trophy, I guess we can start saying Jim Rutherford is an idiot (if he isn't already) because he let go the best goalie in the NHL for nothing, right?

Another useless arguement, dawgbone. IF Salo comes back. How about we play in the real world, not in the IF's or BUT's world. Salo wasn't going to come back. He isn't going to. I doubt any team signs him. Irbe isn't going to win a Vezina. And Salo isn't coming back. Period.

Quote:
And yours is coming from the standpoint that Lowe never does anything right... so I guess the answer is somewhere in the middle. If you are only able to criticize using just hindsight, then no, it's not fair. If Lowe knew 100% certain that Salo couldn't bounce back, he would have done somethng. Lowe did what you are supposed to do. Stick by your player and see if they can get through it before dumping them. The last thing you need is to give a guy away and have him have a great comeback season for another team.
EVERYONE WHO KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT GOALTENDING KNEW SALO WASN'T COMING BACK . I should mention that when I say 'come back', I mean start playing strong, not just average. I had Salo pegged to come into 2003-04 and play better than 2002-03, but not a lot better. Matts has been railing on Salo for YEARS. He's been proven right time and time again, yet people around here still slag him for just that - being right year after year about Salo. Maybe, just maybe, Matts admitted something that you haven't been able to for so long? Maybe, just maybe, Matts doesn't think of Kevin Lowe as 'his GM' as you do, but as 'The Oilers GM'. Matts detaches the team from himself. Which makes him a great poster, because he's got a great fairly-unbiased look at the team, even though he can cheer them on. It's those who cannot detatch who come off as .. well, as the board calls them .. homers. Railing of Kevin Lowe and Tommy Salo does not make anyone less of an Oiler fan. You can get on players' and coaches' cases and still like the team. I notice people had a lot easier time when it came to detaching Dan Cleary and Glen Sather near the end. Why? Because they deserved it. But it took a long, long time for folks to come around on both of them. And I suspect if Lowe cannot solve the goaltending situation, even you Dawgbone will eventually realize that something must be done. That said, I think Lowe will come around, as I do think he's an adaquate GM - I just don't think he's the second coming per se.

Quote:
Mizral, you should get your facts straight before commenting on anything. Near the bottom of the league in GAA?

2003-2004 - 16th overall
2002-2003 - 19th overall
2001-2002 - 2nd overall

Near the bottom? Try near the middle. That's your problem, you don't bother to check things out before you say anything. Hey, if you aren't going to let trivial things like facts get in the way, your arguments are pretty empty.
EDIT: Looks like we got our wires crossed, or I should have clarified things further. I meant Salo's GAA, or the team GAA when Salo was in net (whichever way you want to go). Regardless of that little confusion, it's just minor scemantics anyways.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/statis...4&seasontype=2

This list has everyone above him playing a minimum of I believe 28 games, and has him at #34 overall. Salo played 49 games this year.

Quote:
OKay, so you are telling me Lowe should have traded for a goalie coming off a horrible year, and who had failed miserably at his last attempt as a starting goaltender and who was now the 3rd string goalie on his team.

Did I get that right? I just want to make sure I have an idea about where you are coming from (left field in the wrong ballpark, but whatever). Thanks for coming out now. When you actually figure out a line and stick with it, come on back, we'll have a chat.

You basically wanted Lowe to do what he did, except get Kipper instead of keep Salo. Mystical Mizral and his crystal ball strikes again.
Just looking through that link I posted up, I thought I'd go through a little list with you:

Kiprusoff, Roloson, Esche, Grahame, Cloutier, Lalime, Weekes, and Fernandez. All these goalies have a couple things in common. All of them had higher GAA's than Tommy Salo for one. All of them sans Grahame, and Fernandez are starters for their teams. And one other thing. Here's the clincher, Dawgbone, here's the part I want you truely to chew on:

All of these goaltenders were acquired when they were unknown quanities when they were acquired, or if known, considered to be not very good. Now, they are all either have made names for themselves, or are doing so now. But the point is this, Dawgbone, these other teams decided to take up the .. how did you put it again.. "a goalie coming off a horrible year, and who had failed miserably at his last attempt as a starting goaltender and who was now the 3rd string goalie on his team."

Looks like other Sutter isn't the only one all of a sudden...

By the way, if that list doesn't dissuade you, I can always find more out there. I can think of a couple more off the top of my head.. Thibault and Denis come to mind ... but it might take a little longer to get a big 'ol list together again.


Last edited by Mizral: 04-05-2004 at 09:32 PM.
Mizral is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 08:06 PM
  #40
edmontonoilers89
Registered User
 
edmontonoilers89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,258
vCash: 500
This is a good debate. But the way you are saying that Kiprussoff wasn't a starter in Sharkland but now is in Calgary is because Sutter gave him a chance to relieve Turek and he ran with it.

So how do you know that Conklin or Markannen cannot? Even Kiprussoff wouldn't be able to save the Rangers, so pointing at Markannen's stats there, while meaningful, do not show everything. When Markannen and Conklin were given the role of 1 and 1a when Salo was gone, they certainly delivered..or came close to it anyway.

And I think what dawgbone meant about those stats for GAA was team stats, not individual goaltenders.

edmontonoilers89 is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 09:30 PM
  #41
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmontonoilers89
This is a good debate. But the way you are saying that Kiprussoff wasn't a starter in Sharkland but now is in Calgary is because Sutter gave him a chance to relieve Turek and he ran with it.

So how do you know that Conklin or Markannen cannot? Even Kiprussoff wouldn't be able to save the Rangers, so pointing at Markannen's stats there, while meaningful, do not show everything. When Markannen and Conklin were given the role of 1 and 1a when Salo was gone, they certainly delivered..or came close to it anyway.

And I think what dawgbone meant about those stats for GAA was team stats, not individual goaltenders.
I guess nobody can say for sure they cannot. Maybe Lowe thinks they can.

However, being a #1 goaltender like Turek was a #1 goalie last year, and being a real good #1 goaltender are two different things. Judging players is tough, and goalies even tougher, but so far, signs have pointed to both goaltenders being so-so performers. At their ages, they should be entering their primes of their careers. Maybe one is a late bloomer, and if that's the case, that's great. However, if they are not good enough to be a good #1 goaltender in this league (and so far their play has told us they either cannot or aren't quite ready for it yet), then Lowe may need to pick another guy up.

I suppose Lowe could wait until training camp of a month into a season, but personally I'd rather see him just get a proven guy who you KNOW will do the job, not two guys who you think maybe could do it.

As for the GAA's, I see, just a misunderstanding. I'll make sure to edit my above post so Dawgbone doesn't get on my case even further about it

Mizral is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 09:50 PM
  #42
Cerebral
Registered User
 
Cerebral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,866
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
I guess nobody can say for sure they cannot. Maybe Lowe thinks they can.

However, being a #1 goaltender like Turek was a #1 goalie last year, and being a real good #1 goaltender are two different things. Judging players is tough, and goalies even tougher, but so far, signs have pointed to both goaltenders being so-so performers. At their ages, they should be entering their primes of their careers. Maybe one is a late bloomer, and if that's the case, that's great. However, if they are not good enough to be a good #1 goaltender in this league (and so far their play has told us they either cannot or aren't quite ready for it yet), then Lowe may need to pick another guy up.

I suppose Lowe could wait until training camp of a month into a season, but personally I'd rather see him just get a proven guy who you KNOW will do the job, not two guys who you think maybe could do it.

As for the GAA's, I see, just a misunderstanding. I'll make sure to edit my above post so Dawgbone doesn't get on my case even further about it
I don't understand how picking up Gerber would be any different than going with Markkanen/Conklin next year. All three are relatively old and none of them have proven capable of being a number one goaltender. All three have shown flashes of ability but none have been able to lock down a number one position on a team thus far. Why is it more of a risk to ride Markkanen/Conklin than to go out and move assets for Gerber?

Cerebral is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 10:22 PM
  #43
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
My GM? See, Dawgbone, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Brian Burke isn't MY GM. He's the Canucks GM. Just like Lowe isn't YOUR GM. Just because Lowe used to play for the Oilers (and was a great, great player to boot) does not mean that he deserves extra mulligans as a GM. You've got an emotional bond towards Lowe that makes you unbiased in this discussion.

And for the record, I don't hate Lowe. I have given him credit on several things he's done this year. In fact, I've said probobly as much good as I have bad about Lowe this year. It just seems folks don't either read the good, or remember it.
See, I knew you would jump all over that one. I didn't think I would have to idiot proof the post, but you proved me wrong there. Thanks Miz. My, our, your... do you not hear fans talk about their team like that. "We need a win". Well I'm not playing on the team, but you get the gist of that don't you?

Congrats that Lowe has had the honour of a your approval over a couple of issues. You've spent more time complaining about Salo, Comrie and Nedved than all of the positives put together, so where does that leave you?

Quote:
How about moving Mike Comrie for Mathieu Garon? Heck, you could probobly have gotten other assets from that potential swap to boot.
And how do you know Edmonton didn't try that? Everything you talk about is based on hypothetical B.S. that you come up with off the top of your head. I mean, why didn't Lowe get Sakic, Forsberg and Hejduk for Comrie and two 8th round picks?

Quote:
Just off the top of my head, the last goaltenders that moved since the 2003 free agency started was:

Hackett, Potvin, Shields, Storr, Hurme, Markkanen, Hedberg, Cechmanek, and Kipprusoff. This is just the last year, not including who will be moved in the near future (Ahonen and Fernandez are good bets), not to mention the guys who moved last year during the season or the in the 2002 off-season. I also left off Hasek since that was an impossibility. Those are all not great goaltenders. Those other teams prooved that goaltenders were available. Scoff at the talent level there all you want, but Salo is certainly not the best of that group.
Ah yes. Seing as you get to use hind sight all the time, my turn.

Hackett - Had to retire. That would have been a fantastic pickup. Cost $3mil in salary plus at least $2mil to buy out Salo. So that is $5mil for half a season and for goaltending that would have been marginally better. Ask Philly fans how they liked the goals Hackett gave up from centre.

Potvin - Cheaper alternative to Hackett, but are his 2.5 gaa and .902 sv% much better than Salo's 2.58 and .897 sv%? Or what about his 2.66 gaa and .894 sv% from the season before?

Shields - backup, couldn't hack it as a starter. He was over .500 twice in his career, one was where he played 16 games, the other 3.

Storr - Won't even go there. His dad coached my team one year and he's a great guy, but isn't a starter on anyone's team.

Hurme - 29 year old backup.

Hedberg - Was hurt for a good part of the season, put up numbers similar to Salo, would have cost the Oilers a 2nd round pick.

Cechmanek - He's about the only goalie in the list who would have been any kind of realistic upgrade on Salo.

Kipprusoff - already commented on him.

So basically, only 2 goalies on that list would have been better than Salo this season. One of them was coming off a horrible season, the other was Cechmanek. Instead of wasting my time and naming every goaltender that was moved. How about goaltenders that would have been a significant enough upgrade on Salo that it would have warranted both getting them and buying out Salo (as well as what ever compensation was required if a trade was needed).

Quote:
Now, if you want to go even deeper, Manny Fernandez was reportedly being aggresivly shopped and Ari Ahonen may have to be traded due to waiver eligability and the Devils not needing him. Olaf Kolzig nearly went, Gerber was being persued by the Leafs, Boucher and Bierk were being shopped earlier this year, Tugnutt was on waivers at one point I believe, CuJo has been shopped ad nauseum with the Wings talking about eating salary on that deal. Mika Noronen or Martin Biron were reported numerous times all year to be on the block too.
Reportedly this, reportedly that. If you don't have a link, it's coming out of your rear end for all I know. Reportedly means nothing, other than someone having a little too much free time, and not enough to do. Fernandez is one thing, but what has Ahonene ever accomplished that warrants being handed an NHL starting job?

Kolzig nearly went, and Gerber was pursued by the Leafs. Did any go? Maybe because the asking price for Kolzig (along with his salary) was way too high, and maybe Gerber didn't go because he wasn't available.

Boucher? Thanks. Took his 5 shutouts and disappeared. Bierk? Sure, let's trade for an injured goalie that missed 66 games. No wonder he was on the block.

Tugnutt's career is more or less at an end, and once again, is that an upgrade, or even a levelling off with regards to Salo? Nope.

Cujo stopped being available late November, and with all his injury problems this season, even $4mil was too much to pay for him. And guess what? He and Conklin were injured at the exact same time, meaning that during that 11 game stretch, Tyler Moss and Steve Valiquette were the Oilers goaltenders (during which time Salo went 5-3-1 with a 2.52 GAA and .907 sv%). Geez... this hindsight stuff is awesome.

Noronen and Biron reportedly were available here, and there and everywhere... they didn't get dealt meaning they might not be as available as you think.

Quote:
How many of those are starters? Tough to say. Mikka Kipprusoff wasn't a starter in Sharkland, but now he is wouldn't you say? Sometimes you have to take a chance. Lowe did not. I notice that many were calling the Nedved deal an acceptable risk since the Oilers needed a #1 centre, yet here you are telling me that it wouldn't have been possible for Lowe to go after a #1 goaltender? You still believe that after all this is said?
Sometimes you have to take a chance... thanks. Lowe should have just taken a chance on Irbe then, would that have made you happy? It may have been possible for Lowe to acquire a #1 goaltender, but at what cost? Nedved came at virtually no cost. And what you said isn't even worth the dirt in between the keys on your keyboard. According to you, the Oilers should have used Jamie Storr as their starting goalie this year. That pretty much ended this whole conversation.

Quote:
Misread you on the Gerber thing, but Bryzgalov is coming along in Duckland. They were shopping him at the deadline and that's a fact. He was MOST CERTAINLY on the table. You are wrong here, Dawgbone.
And what were they looking for in return? Links, mr. mod, links. If you can't provide one, I expect to see you banned for the required amount of time, just so we can all see that it's nice and fair here.

Quote:
Noronen played 35 games according to TSN, but many of those were in relief roles. He was 6 games under .500, compared to Biron being well over .500. They sure needed him. Miller struggled, but he could have still played 2 games down the stretch to compensate for Noronen being traded - then again, they rode Biron hard down the stretch, I'm not sure if Noronen played much at all after the deadline. So yes, Noronen certainly was not needed after the deadline, and he certainly did not have a good season. The Sabres didn't need him.
You don't even bother to check things out before you talk do you? He made 35 appearances, and 30 of them were starts. 5 out of 35 isn't many. You are right (imagine that, even the sun shines on a dog's ass every now and then), that Noronen didn't start many games down the stretch. And the Sabres may not have needed him down the stretch, but might they not need him next year? He's only 24, and he could very well fit into their plans for the future. Pretty short sighted of you on that aspect. Just because you don't see a need, it doesn't mean that the organization doesn't see a fit.

Quote:
The only person who knew about Martin Brodeur was QMJHL coaches. I guess the Devils don't deserve any credit for him either.
Yeah, it's a good thing the Devils took that flyer on him with their 9th round pick.

Oh wait... he was picked in the first round wasn't he?

Quote:
This is just my point. Sutter took a chance on Kipprusoff and made off like a BANDIT. Lowe has yet to take that chance since the first Salo trade. Which I'm sure you have no problem saying it was a good trade, since Salo played well afterwards right? Other GM's couldn't do that though. Nope. Impossible.
Hmmm... are you really comparing the two deals?

Salo started 58 and 62 games the year before the Oilers traded for him. Kipper hadn't even played 45 in his career. Salo cost Matts Lingren and an 8th round pick. That wasn't a risk. That wasn't a chance.

Quote:
Getting Markkanen was not a bad idea, in fact, I was on record for saying it was my favorite acquisition of the year outside of Igor Ulanov. However, is Markkanen a starter? Nope. Does Lowe think he's a starter? Doubtfully, he already dealt him once. Lowe thinks Conklin is better than Markkanen, that I have little doubt in my mind. You or I might think differently, but as you said above regarding Buffalo, we're just fans
If the Oilers were cup contenders this season, I would be singing a different tune. If Lowe had re-signed Salo at $3.9 mil to comeback this season, I would be singing a different tune. Lowe has a long term plan, and unless he can get a good young starting goalie, it isn't worth giving up assets for. I don't think Lowe thinks either guy is a 60+ game starter.

Quote:
What makes you think Conklin is no longer a backup goaltender? Salo is Oilers history so he deserves to be kept? Hindsight be damned Dawgbone, Salo was crap last year not just this year. Everybody knows it. Truely, if you're sitting here telling me that Kevin Lowe going with Tommy Salo two years in a row was for the best interests of the team, you're out of your mind. Kevin Lowe made a mistake with Salo, and he finally fessed up to it by trading him.
I never said Conklin is no longer a backup goalie. I said 2 years ago he was a backup in the AHL. Where do you come from with this stuff. Where were you at the beginning of last season saying the Oilers should get rid of Salo? Two years ago Kevin Lowe had to go with Salo, and if you don't think that is correct, you should consider taking up shuffle board, because hockey isn't the game for you. Do you bail on every player after a bad season?

Quote:
Sure, I don't deny it.

If Archie Irbe comes back next season and wins the Vezina trophy, I guess we can start saying Jim Rutherford is an idiot (if he isn't already) because he let go the best goalie in the NHL for nothing, right?
No we can't. Once again, that is using hindsight, which no one has. It is completely ignorant and unfair to criticize because of hindsight. Just like if Salo has a bounce-back year next year, Lowe shouldn't be criticized. I mean if a player has a bad year after a pretty good career for your team, you give them the benefit of the doubt once. Salo got that and it didn't work.

[QUOTE]Another useless arguement, dawgbone. IF Salo comes back. How about we play in the real world, not in the IF's or BUT's world. Salo wasn't going to come back. He isn't going to. I doubt any team signs him. Irbe isn't going to win a Vezina. And Salo isn't coming back. Period.

EVERYONE WHO KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT GOALTENDING KNEW SALO WASN'T COMING BACK . I should mention that when I say 'come back', I mean start playing strong, not just average. I had Salo pegged to come into 2003-04 and play better than 2002-03, but not a lot better. Matts has been railing on Salo for YEARS.[QUOTE]

Do you know who else was finished? Ed Belfour, Sean Burke and Grant Fuhr. Belfour has been one of the top goalies in the NHL for the past 2 seasons, despite being left for dead. Sean Burke was an also-ran goaltender who's career was almost dead before he went to Phoenix (where he put up his best numbers). When Fuhr went to St Louis, he had his best years (numbers-wise) and resurrected a hall of fame career from a downward spiral. All 3 of those guys were proclaimed finished by so-called experts and people who knew anything about goaltending.

Quote:
He's been proven right time and time again, yet people around here still slag him for just that - being right year after year about Salo. Maybe, just maybe, Matts admitted something that you haven't been able to for so long? Maybe, just maybe, Matts doesn't think of Kevin Lowe as 'his GM' as you do, but as 'The Oilers GM'. Matts detaches the team from himself. Which makes him a great poster, because he's got a great fairly-unbiased look at the team, even though he can cheer them on. It's those who cannot detatch who come off as .. well, as the board calls them .. homers. Railing of Kevin Lowe and Tommy Salo does not make anyone less of an Oiler fan. You can get on players' and coaches' cases and still like the team. I notice people had a lot easier time when it came to detaching Dan Cleary and Glen Sather near the end. Why? Because they deserved it. But it took a long, long time for folks to come around on both of them. And I suspect if Lowe cannot solve the goaltending situation, even you Dawgbone will eventually realize that something must be done. That said, I think Lowe will come around, as I do think he's an adaquate GM - I just don't think he's the second coming per se.
No one slags Matts for being right. Take your cranial cavity out of your anal one. Matts gets slagged because of the fact that he kept saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and (annoying isn't it?), over again. Once again, after idiot proofing my post from an obvious idiot, I didn't mean him as my GM. It's easier to say my our our team as opposed to the Edmonton Oilers all the time. There is also a difference between biased, and hating everything that goes on, which is what most of us see from yourself and Matts. Matts does not like Lowe as GM. He's inferred it on numerous occasions. Really tough to be unbiased (in the positive sense) when you don't like a guy.

Quote:
Sniffing glue, Dawgbone? Try this:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/statis...4&seasontype=2

I don't know how you are counting it to get 16th overall. This list has everyone above him playing a minimum of I believe 28 games, and has him at #34 overall. Salo played 49 games this year.
If you were to actually make up your mind about what you are talking about, we could have a real conversation. You said Don't you think it's slightly fair to criticize Lowe's handling of the goaltending considering in the last two years, the Oilers GAA has been near the bottom of the league?

The Oilers GAA was exactly where I said it was. The Oilers GAA were the exact numbers I said it was. The Oilers GAA wasn't 34th overall (tough when there are only 30 teams). The Oilers GAA isn't based on 28 games, but 82. The Oilers GAA consists of more than just Salo.

So maybe you should get your arguments together before you start glue sniffing comments. You know, actually know what you are talking about before you talk.

Quote:
Just looking through that link I posted up, I thought I'd go through a little list with you:

Kiprusoff, Roloson, Esche, Grahame, Cloutier, Lalime, Weekes, and Fernandez. All these goalies have a couple things in common. All of them had higher GAA's than Tommy Salo for one. All of them sans Grahame, and Fernandez are starters for their teams. And one other thing. Here's the clincher, Dawgbone, here's the part I want you truely to chew on:

All of these goaltenders were acquired when they were unknown quanities when they were acquired, or if known, considered to be not very good. Now, they are all either have made names for themselves, or are doing so now. But the point is this, Dawgbone, these other teams decided to take up the .. how did you put it again.. "a goalie coming off a horrible year, and who had failed miserably at his last attempt as a starting goaltender and who was now the 3rd string goalie on his team."
Well seeing as that Link is pretty meaningless, based on the fact you decided to change what you were talking about. In case you lived in a vaccum, Weekes was never an unknown. He was a very hyped goaltender on both Florida and Long island (at 24 he won most outstanding goalie in the IHL). Heck even Vancouver touted him as their goalie of the future when they first got him in the Bure deal. Manny Fernandez was never an unknown. He won the MVP in the Q. His first full season in the NHL he was a great backup. None of the goalies that you mentioned had a poor season like Kipper the year before they were traded. Not a single one of them.

Quote:
Looks like other Sutter isn't the only one all of a sudden, does he..

By the way, if that list doesn't dissuade you, I can always find more out there. I can think of a couple more off the top of my head.. Thibault and Denis come to mind ... but it might take a little longer to get a big 'ol list together again.
Once again, Most of those goaltenders were highly touted players who bounced around but still had good seasons. That is not Kippursoff. There are only 2 goaltenders that were truely available (in other words, who actually got dealt, not this reported BS that you are holding as gospel). They were Kipper and Cechmanek. The only one who had any faith in Kipper was his old coach.

And maybe it was the Oilers scouts who told Lowe to stay away from Kipper... ever think of that? Is that not a likely scenario? I mean the scouts are who the GM gets most of their info from. And after watching how Kipper played last year, and the fact that he lost his job as a backup, I don't really see how you can fault anyone for not taking a flyer on the guy.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 10:30 PM
  #44
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
I suppose Lowe could wait until training camp of a month into a season, but personally I'd rather see him just get a proven guy who you KNOW will do the job, not two guys who you think maybe could do it.
What a minute... what about taking chances? Where did that go? Come on Miz, make up your mind. Should he take a chance, or go for who he knows?

<--- I feel like this guy, going up and down and up and down and up and down... stick to one argument.

Quote:
As for the GAA's, I see, just a misunderstanding. I'll make sure to edit my above post so Dawgbone doesn't get on my case even further about it
Too late, I was all over that one like a squeegy kid on a benz.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
04-05-2004, 11:40 PM
  #45
Cerebral
Registered User
 
Cerebral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,866
vCash: 500
Very well argued post Dawgbone.. I actually took the time to read through it and you made your points in a very concise fashion. You win the dancing banana award of the day..

Cerebral is offline  
Old
04-06-2004, 09:28 AM
  #46
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,719
vCash: 500
A couple thoughts on the goaltending debate;

The idea of Lowe aquiring Kiprusof is, in my opinion, a non issue. Part of making a deal is timing and the timing was off for Lowe to pursue this particular deal.

If you remove the luxury of hindsight you are left with a situation where your aquiring a goalie that may or may not be an improvement on your current tandem, coupled with the fact that Salo was likely unmovable until the deadline, in addition to being stuck with 3 goalies on the roster.

Do you pay Salo 4 mil a year to play in the minors? Do you waive Conklin and likely lose him? Do you keep 3 goalies on the roster at almost 6 mil?

He simply didn't fit with the question marks he would have been coming in with.

As far as going after Garon or Noronen or some of the other inexperienced guys out there, I am curious as to why people are so quick to dismiss Conklin.

Most of the names mentioned seem to have the same question marks that Conklin has and yet guys are looking to give up a roster player to aquire one of them. There is already a guy that fits their discription in the system and has earned to right to get a look based on what he has done.

It's almost like because the Oilers have been so aweful at drafting and developing goaltendings over the past 20 years that people naturally assume that they need to go outside the system to fill the position.

Even if Conklin never proves to be a stanley cup winner, there is a good chance that he can be an effective in combination with Markanen until Deslauriers (or some one else) is ready.

This team was never about just this year.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
04-06-2004, 09:54 AM
  #47
Ironchef Chris Wok*
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Red Sox Nation
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Ironchef Chris Wok*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral

How about moving Mike Comrie for Mathieu Garon? Heck, you could probobly have gotten other assets from that potential swap to boot.
That woudl NEVER happen.

Montreal is gonna trade for another young midget center with a krappy attitude.

Like they don't have enough of those already.

Ironchef Chris Wok* is offline  
Old
04-06-2004, 10:10 AM
  #48
oil slick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,479
vCash: 500
Great argument guys. My contribution will be this regarding the cost element. For those who say that we could not have made a trade because we would have been sadled with too much cost, I think that is a bad attitude.

Get rid of some players with high salaries if needs be (Isbister, Oates), but get the goaltender if you need him. This is not a position on the ice where you can skimp. It is absolutely the most important position, and although it stinks for Calgary that they've got a 4 million dollar backup, their goaltending is well worth the 5.5 million (or whatever it is) that they are spening on it.

Secondly, I agree with dawg to an extent about the quality of goaltenders available. Without knowing Kiprosoff as Sutter did, I don't think I would have traded for him at the time. I think I would have gone for Garon, Biron, or Noronen, but I'm not too sure about others. (I'm excluding Kolzig, and some others that would have cost too much when we needed them).

Thirdly I think the big mistake Lowe made was giving up Markannen to the Rags. I'm with Matts on this one... it was fairly obviouse that Salo was not going to become the consistent backbone of our team at the end of last year... why trade the guy who outplayde Salo in a backup role the year before?

It was a bad situation, but all in all, I think Lowe is at least partially to blame (although don't get me wrong... I think Lowe has done a great job otherwise). He should have seen this one coming, the warning signs were there for a long time, and it cost us the season IMO. I realize that it might not have been easy, but it still needed to be done.

oil slick is offline  
Old
04-06-2004, 10:40 AM
  #49
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil slick
Great argument guys. My contribution will be this regarding the cost element. For those who say that we could not have made a trade because we would have been sadled with too much cost, I think that is a bad attitude.
True, and if this was a year the Oilers were supposed to contend for the Cup, then adding a goaltender at virtually any cost is almost a must. That being said, it isn't just the money, it's what you have to give up in order to get what you need. I'd rather Lowe makes his move for a true #1 in 3 years if it is needed, rather than now, and then possibly again in 3 years.

Quote:
Get rid of some players with high salaries if needs be (Isbister, Oates), but get the goaltender if you need him. This is not a position on the ice where you can skimp. It is absolutely the most important position, and although it stinks for Calgary that they've got a 4 million dollar backup, their goaltending is well worth the 5.5 million (or whatever it is) that they are spening on it.
Getting rid of guys is tough to do. I mean Oates seems to have done a heck of a lot for this team this year (stats aside), and out centre depth wasn't necessarily NHL-quality. Aside from Kipper and Cechmanek, there were no other goaltenders out there who would have made a difference. Picking one guy (Kipper) out of 16 available guys isn't very good odds. The pickings were pretty slim, and if the Oilers spent $6 mil for Potvin, Conklin and Salo, that would have been bordering on tragic.

Quote:
Secondly, I agree with dawg to an extent about the quality of goaltenders available. Without knowing Kiprosoff as Sutter did, I don't think I would have traded for him at the time. I think I would have gone for Garon, Biron, or Noronen, but I'm not too sure about others. (I'm excluding Kolzig, and some others that would have cost too much when we needed them).
Well, unfortunately, Garon would be a great starter in a couple of years, but I don't think he would be able to handle it this year. And I have my doubts about the availability of Biron or Noronen. Both are at least better than most of the backups in the NHL, and if they were available some team would have gotten them. A nice little rule to live by is if they weren't traded they either weren't available, or the price was too high.

Quote:
Thirdly I think the big mistake Lowe made was giving up Markannen to the Rags. I'm with Matts on this one... it was fairly obviouse that Salo was not going to become the consistent backbone of our team at the end of last year... why trade the guy who outplayde Salo in a backup role the year before?
Did he really outplay him? Markkanen's sv% dropped 24 points, his GAA went up 0.76 goals/game. Salo's sv% dropped 14 points and his GAA went up .49 goals/game. Neither guy had a good season by any stretch.

Quote:
It was a bad situation, but all in all, I think Lowe is at least partially to blame (although don't get me wrong... I think Lowe has done a great job otherwise). He should have seen this one coming, the warning signs were there for a long time, and it cost us the season IMO. I realize that it might not have been easy, but it still needed to be done.
I guess it depends on how you look at it. Do you give the guy the benefit of the doubt after a bad season despite having a good career for you? Or do you cut them loose? IMO, you are going to lose out a lot more than you win out if that is the attitude. Lowe gave Salo his shot, and it didn't work. Should Smyth now be cut off? He had a bad season despite showing stretches where he was awesome (much like Salo did last season). I mean the signs can be there for Smyth to. His style of play and injuries could be catching up to him. Does that mean the Oilers should ditch him this summer?

It's a tough call to make.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
04-06-2004, 02:07 PM
  #50
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,068
vCash: 500
Mizral, Matt,

Its with the benefit of hindsight that you say that "its obvious" that Salo was done. Yet for some reason, Pierre Lacroix, a GM that has a reputation for being pretty savvy, was willing to trade away a prospect in order to acquire him as a backup goalie for Colorado. Not so done perhaps?

Also, while it may be "obvious" that Salo was done, I've heard the same thing about other players at the start of the season. A lot of people wrote Ethan Moreau off as a 3rd line winger who just "had" to be traded because of his age, and contract status and also wanting to make room for Rita, or Isbister. Moreau has certainly had an outstanding season, MVP in fact.

The same with Jason Smith. A lot of people wanted him traded at the start of the season because of his impending RFA status, his age, his relatively good trade value and his subpar season last year. But he's come back in a huge way and shown why he's the Oiler captain.

And then there's Brewer. His doubters think he's an overrated, inconsistent defender who will never score the points that they think he should. He's proven to be solid down the stretch run and was the Oilers #1 guy back on the blueline.

We need less hindsight and more foresight. Lowe was right on 3/4 (Brewer, Smith, Moreau). He also brought in Cross, Dvorak, Torres and Isbister at the deadline last year and was again three for four (Isbister being the lone miss so far - mostly due to injuries). He also traded away valuable members - Niinimaa and Carter as well as Pisa for them and strangely enough they are not doing so well this year. (pisa is not in the NHL, Carter has been traded twice and was a disappointment in both LA and NYR and Niiniimaa is slowly rounding back into a top 4 defenseman in NYI after a very slow start). Again, Lowe was 3/3 in trading away assets.

So Lowe's two misses were Isbister (sofar) and Salo. Not too shabby. He works with foresight because he's not a poster who has the advantage of hindsight in his arguments.

Master Lok is offline  
Closed Thread

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 03:53 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.