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

Oilers In Need Of Shakeup? Plus 30 Thoughts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-01-2009, 10:42 PM
  #51
mactforcoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Drayton Valley Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 734
vCash: 500
Fire Quinn.

mactforcoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 10:43 PM
  #52
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Datsun View Post
Over 82 games he would have been on pace for a 25 goal season.

As a scorer he's really not that different.

He's a slower "player", but as a scorer he's still there based on those numbers.
His early season performance was based on a 20% shooting percentage.

The previous three seasons his % was 11, 9 and 7.

I'd wager the wheels would have fallen off his season fairly rapidly even without his illness.

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 10:49 PM
  #53
Dorian2
Positional Bias.
 
Dorian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,839
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
Still can't see what the point of signing him was.

While he easily disposed of, did he bring anything to the party the Oilers needed?
DSF....throughout this thread you have been ranting about the lack of long term vision the Oilers have, yet you are consistently picking apart a 1 year deal that seems to be a band aid solution for the short term. Why are you talking out of both sides of your mouth and seemingly contradicting what you say in one post with a rhetorical response in another post?

I'm confused! Please help me understand your line of thinking

Dorian2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 10:49 PM
  #54
hillbillypriest
Registered User
 
hillbillypriest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: there there
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
IMHO opinion he did neither and, with the Khabibulin signing likely made the team worse in the long term because the odds of Khabibulin playing enough to warrant that contract were exceedingly low.

If Khabibulin outperforms by a significant margin what Roloson could have done on the 2 year contract (for much less money) he was seeking it's a win.
I wanted Anderson because I was already of the opinion that he was starter material. Between Roloson and Khabi, I still like the later better. I'm pretty Roli'd out. He has the occassional phenomenal game, but what I remember mostly is that he would let in early killer goals and end up losing the game with a 950 save percentage on the night. Khabi to me is proven and the risk is that chronic injury becomes the problem. As we discussed earlier today, I think there's an out for that through the Mogilny precedent on the LTIR. I think that's the out on the term that everybody seems to be so in knots about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
To me, Comrie is not neither an asset or a liability. By what margin would he exceed any other player getting his minutes? Somewhat perhaps but he's far from the 30 goal scorer he used to be.
His value as an asset at the trade dealine was likely cemented over the summer when he had zero interest from anyone.
Disagree. Value in the summer and at deadline are totally different things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
And, I guess I don't understand your frustration with those who want the Oilers to think long term and yet gripe about the short term.

I see absolutely no evidence the Oilers are thinking long term at all. None.
You and I differ pretty fundamentally on this. If the Oilers are thinking long term, I don't you should "see evidence" now. You should see a GM putting on a brave face until he does something. I think talking about what Tambellini has or has not done months before the deadline is pointless.

hillbillypriest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 10:52 PM
  #55
RKD
Registered User
 
RKD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sherwood Park, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher View Post
If everyone had been healthy at the start of the season my guess is you would have got your wish (btw, it was my wish too). If you remember, Nilsson was a healthy scratch on opening night. The wheels were probably already in motion (if Pisani had been healthy, my guess is Nilsson wouldn't have even made it to opening night), but then someone got hurt. And then someone else. And so on, and so on. Which brings us to today. At this point, when both the Oilers and the Falcons are struggling to find healthy bodies, there's really no reason to do anything with Nilsson. However, if and when that ever changes I do expect Nilsson to be on the first plane outta here.
The thing is, he's now ready to play and it looks like he won't get that chance. That means that he was already pulling PB duty, and since his injury has been passed by Potulny and others. He's only fallen further down the depth chart. He would actually be of use down in Springfield where they're hurting just as much.

__________________
"How many Twix does that make for you today? Like eight Twix?!"
RKD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 10:53 PM
  #56
mactforcoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Drayton Valley Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 734
vCash: 500
Actually, I don't expect too much change. Katz has shown that he has no interest in sending contracts to the minors, or buying them out ( Nilsson), it's starting to look like Pocklington all over again.

As long as we all flock to Rexall Place like sheep, we will continue to here excuses from Tambo, ridicule and crap from Quinn, and future visions from Lowe and Katz. I really hate to feel this way, but this is becoming the worst year in Oilers history for me, and I suspect a lot of other fans.

Mr. Katz, not that I really think you give a damn, but I am dropping my Oil King tickets next season, and it's going to be very hard to drop $14,000 on Oiler tickets next spring, just to watch more of the same.

And Mr. Lowe, please don't try to win fans like me over next summer, by chasing another rainbow, we've seen enough circus tricks.

mactforcoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 10:54 PM
  #57
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorian2 View Post
DSF....throughout this thread you have been ranting about the lack of long term vision the Oilers have, yet you are consistently picking apart a 1 year deal that seems to be a band aid solution for the short term. Why are you talking out of both sides of your mouth and seemingly contradicting what you say in one post with a rhetorical response in another post?

I'm confused! Please help me understand your line of thinking
I'm trying as hard as you are to understand what's going on.

If the team has a long term plan and is plugging in cheap vets to hold the fort while the plans unfolds, then Comrie makes a little bit of sense but why a slow, soft, injury prone forward when you could have brought in a player who actually address a short term need. Like a defensive centre who can win a faceoff?

The problem is, the team's other major move over the summer was to sign a 36 year old goaltender to a four year contract at above market value. That speaks to me that there is no long term plan but the "win now" mentality is still in fashion.

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 10:57 PM
  #58
hillbillypriest
Registered User
 
hillbillypriest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: there there
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
That I can buy but Comrie obviously, as you've stated, wasn't Nilsson's replacement.

Having both on the roster is just another example of poor asset management.
How does having both of Comrie and Nilsson on the roster at the same time amount to bad asset management? Nilsson's contract is too high and too long and unfortunately guaranteed per the CBA. That's a bad contract, or charitably, a very bad call on the direction of the cap.

However, I fail to see what Comrie has to do with Nilsson. Nilsson can be waived whenever necessary. In the meantime, he can play hockey when there is roster holes to fill due to injury and if things go real well, you may even get him to play well enough for a stretch to find him some trade value.

hillbillypriest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:01 PM
  #59
Dorian2
Positional Bias.
 
Dorian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,839
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
I'm trying as hard as you are to understand what's going on.

If the team has a long term plan and is plugging in cheap vets to hold the fort while the plans unfolds, then Comrie makes a little bit of sense but why a slow, soft, injury prone forward when you could have brought in a player who actually address a short term need. Like a defensive centre who can win a faceoff?

The problem is, the team's other major move over the summer was to sign a 36 year old goaltender to a four year contract at above market value. That speaks to me that there is no long term plan but the "win now" mentality is still in fashion.
Thanks for clarifying...but my thought on long term ideology differs slightly from yours. Why not sign Khabby to a longer contract so the young goalies (JDD and DD) can grow into their positions, possibly at a faster rate given the Bulin Wall's crumblimg bricks. To me this smacks of seeing 2 - 3 years into the future when the other young guns like Gags, Eberle, Smid, etc break out for real....just my opinion of course

Dorian2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:02 PM
  #60
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillbillypriest View Post
I wanted Anderson because I was already of the opinion that he was starter material. Between Roloson and Khabi, I still like the later better. I'm pretty Roli'd out. He has the occassional phenomenal game, but what I remember mostly is that he would let in early killer goals and end up losing the game with a 950 save percentage on the night. Khabi to me is proven and the risk is that chronic injury becomes the problem. As we discussed earlier today, I think there's an out for that through the Mogilny precedent on the LTIR. I think that's the out on the term that everybody seems to be so in knots about.



Disagree. Value in the summer and at deadline are totally different things.



You and I differ pretty fundamentally on this. If the Oilers are thinking long term, I don't you should "see evidence" now. You should see a GM putting on a brave face until he does something. I think talking about what Tambellini has or has not done months before the deadline is pointless.
Well, I guess I'm from Missouri on this one.

If the Oilers were thinking long term, I think we should have seen evidence of it last summer which produced a 4 year contract for an aging goalie who couldn't possibly perform to his contract and a player whose skillset is duplicated all over the roster.

Tambellini keeps saying he thinks he has the horses to win just like Lowe and MacT did in previous seasons.

I think he actually believes it.

Fortunately, I'm just as convinced Quinn doesn't.

I'm reminded of an ancient Chinese curse.

The hockey might be dreadful but the drama quotient is rising rapidly.

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:06 PM
  #61
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillbillypriest View Post
How does having both of Comrie and Nilsson on the roster at the same time amount to bad asset management? Nilsson's contract is too high and too long and unfortunately guaranteed per the CBA. That's a bad contract, or charitably, a very bad call on the direction of the cap.

However, I fail to see what Comrie has to do with Nilsson. Nilsson can be waived whenever necessary. In the meantime, he can play hockey when there is roster holes to fill due to injury and if things go real well, you may even get him to play well enough for a stretch to find him some trade value.
Well, in its simplest terms, could the cap space and salary devoted to either player be utilized on a player who actually addresses a team need?

If you have 6 small, semi skilled, defensively suspect forwards already on the roster, is adding another one really a great idea?

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:07 PM
  #62
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorian2 View Post
Thanks for clarifying...but my thought on long term ideology differs slightly from yours. Why not sign Khabby to a longer contract so the young goalies (JDD and DD) can grow into their positions, possibly at a faster rate given the Bulin Wall's crumblimg bricks. To me this smacks of seeing 2 - 3 years into the future when the other young guns like Gags, Eberle, Smid, etc break out for real....just my opinion of course
I'd have been fine with Khabibulin for 2 years. If JDD and/or Dubnyk haven't won the job by then, they never will.

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:16 PM
  #63
Dorian2
Positional Bias.
 
Dorian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,839
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
I'd have been fine with Khabibulin for 2 years. If JDD and/or Dubnyk haven't won the job by then, they never will.
Damn..check or checkmate? Why must you make sense at the worst possible moment DSF? WHY!!

Dorian2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:16 PM
  #64
okgooil
HFBoards Sponsor
 
okgooil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 12,144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerebral View Post
One thing to keep in mind is that "rebuilding" a team doesn't always lead to success down the road. I can think of a number of teams who have been in a perpetual rebuild for almost the last decade who haven't gone anywhere yet.
Easy now, you are making a little to much sense.


As much as people want a huge change, there won't be a massive one. The oilers will do nothing, (perhaps I minor move) untill the deadline, if they are out of it they will look at shipping of some assets.


I know every one wants a huge shake up now, but it won't happen.

okgooil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:18 PM
  #65
Asher
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Ryan- View Post
The thing is, he's now ready to play and it looks like he won't get that chance. That means that he was already pulling PB duty, and since his injury has been passed by Potulny and others. He's only fallen further down the depth chart. He would actually be of use down in Springfield where they're hurting just as much.
But even as a HS, Nilsson still serves a purpose. If there's someone in Springfield that would make more sense to bring up, like Reddox, then I'm sure that option has been discussed. Maybe they're worried Nilsson wouldn't clear waivers, in which you wouldn't even have him available for Springfield. They're not going to expose anyone to waivers unless it becomes absolutely necessary. Hell, they waited until the very last day before putting Schremp on waivers, even though I'm sure they knew he was going to get cut long before then.

And speaking of Schremp, I bet he'd still be here too if the injuries had mounted a bit sooner. He got caught in the numbers game while Nilsson got a break from the injuries that kept a roster spot open for him. As we all know, however, that opening never closed and instead just kept getting bigger until we're now at the point where exposing Nilsson to waivers without first bringing in someone else would be a mistake. It could still happen. If they get another player off waivers in the coming weeks or sign a free agent it could come at Nilsson's expense. Otherwise, I assume Nilsson will be here for the rest of the year.

Asher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:18 PM
  #66
okgooil
HFBoards Sponsor
 
okgooil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 12,144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
Well, in its simplest terms, could the cap space and salary devoted to either player be utilized on a player who actually addresses a team need?

If you have 6 small, semi skilled, defensively suspect forwards already on the roster, is adding another one really a great idea?
All I know is the oilers were 6-2 and he looked like he would get 30 goals, then he got sick, and sicker, and really hasn't played a healthy game since.

So. It seemed it did makes sense when he has actually played.

okgooil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:19 PM
  #67
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by okgooil View Post
Easy now, you are making a little to much sense.


As much as people want a huge change, there won't be a massive one. The oilers will do nothing, (perhaps I minor move) untill the deadline, if they are out of it they will look at shipping of some assets.


I know every one wants a huge shake up now, but it won't happen.
They're already out of it.

But, I agree there is no hurry to gut the team.

They'll get a better return on their assets at the trade deadline.

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:20 PM
  #68
okgooil
HFBoards Sponsor
 
okgooil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 12,144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
I'd have been fine with Khabibulin for 2 years. If JDD and/or Dubnyk haven't won the job by then, they never will.
Perhaps the only thing I will ever actually agree with you on, I never liked Bulin for 4 years. To long, to Injury phrone, to old.

okgooil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:22 PM
  #69
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by okgooil View Post
All I know is the oilers were 6-2 and he looked like he would get 30 goals, then he got sick, and sicker, and really hasn't played a healthy game since.

So. It seemed it did makes sense when he has actually played.
Check the post above about an unsustainable 20% shooting percentage.

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:22 PM
  #70
okgooil
HFBoards Sponsor
 
okgooil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 12,144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
They're already out of it.

But, I agree there is no hurry to gut the team.

They'll get a better return on their assets at the trade deadline.
7 points isn't out of it with a month left, let a lone now.

I agree though, if they do something, it won't be untill the deadline.

okgooil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:32 PM
  #71
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by okgooil View Post
7 points isn't out of it with a month left, let a lone now.

I agree though, if they do something, it won't be untill the deadline.
It normally takes 94 points to make the playoffs.

The Oilers would need to get 70 points to get there.

So, if you think they can go 32-17-6 they might squeak in as long as none of the six teams between them and the last playoff spot plays better than they do.

Oh, and most of them have games in hand.

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:32 PM
  #72
hillbillypriest
Registered User
 
hillbillypriest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: there there
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
Well, in its simplest terms, could the cap space and salary devoted to either player be utilized on a player who actually addresses a team need?

If you have 6 small, semi skilled, defensively suspect forwards already on the roster, is adding another one really a great idea?
I think this team knows it's rebuilding and if it had its druthers would rather finish lower than higher this year if it can't make the playoffs. I also think that getting Comrie late in the summer was an opportunistic asset play. The Oilers could not meaningfully solve any big long term problems this summer, so I don't think getting Comrie should be linked with potential short term incremental team improvements like a defensive centre. By definition, any cheap defensive centres like Betts (or like Malhotra turned himself into after pricing himself out of the early summer market) should be around next summer too, or more pertinently, two summers from now when the current cap crisis ends.

I just don't think that Tambellini can be judged very much at all on the basis of either actions or inactions this summer. To me last summer was supposed to be uneventful and the winter was expected to be one when the team would take its lumps. This is the rebuild, and its boring, and by the way, we don't win much when its happening.

hillbillypriest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:36 PM
  #73
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillbillypriest View Post
I think this team knows it's rebuilding and if it had its druthers would rather finish lower than higher this year if it can't make the playoffs. I also think that getting Comrie late in the summer was an opportunistic asset play. The Oilers could not meaningfully solve any big long term problems this summer, so I don't think getting Comrie should be linked with potential short term incremental team improvements like a defensive centre. By definition, any cheap defensive centres like Betts (or like Malhotra turned himself into after pricing himself out of the early summer market) should be around next summer too, or more pertinently, two summers from now when the current cap crisis ends.

I just don't think that Tambellini can be judged very much at all on the basis of either actions or inactions this summer. To me last summer was supposed to be uneventful and the winter was expected to be one when the team would take its lumps. This is the rebuild, and its boring, and by the way, we don't win much when its happening.
So, I'm curious. When do you think the epiphany occurred?

It had to be after the Khabibulin and Heatley pursuits. Was it when Heatley finally said no?

dashingsilverfox* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:36 PM
  #74
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,883
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashingsilverfox View Post
I'm trying as hard as you are to understand what's going on.

If the team has a long term plan and is plugging in cheap vets to hold the fort while the plans unfolds, then Comrie makes a little bit of sense but why a slow, soft, injury prone forward when you could have brought in a player who actually address a short term need. Like a defensive centre who can win a faceoff?
Because it went a long way to show that the Oilers and Comrie have made amends. That fiasco did a lot of damage to the image of the Oilers, something I don't think anyone can defend Lowe on. Other than that, there really wasn't any other major reason.

I tend to believe this management thinks year to year, but this was one move that did help the future of the franchise.

smackdaddy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2009, 11:38 PM
  #75
dashingsilverfox*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Paradise
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Because it went a long way to show that the Oilers and Comrie have made amends. That fiasco did a lot of damage to the image of the Oilers, something I don't think anyone can defend Lowe on. Other than that, there really wasn't any other major reason.

I tend to believe this management thinks year to year, but this was one move that did help the future of the franchise.
Perhaps. But will anyone even think about that a year from now?

dashingsilverfox* 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 02:06 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.