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

Ales Hemsky - Concussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-19-2011, 11:52 AM
  #101
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,518
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
Maybe, maybe not.

Do we want a player that we dont know how many games they will be playing from year to year?

Are we going to sign this player to another deal?

If so, how much for and how long?

If not, then he walks at the end of next year and we get nothing at all.

It is that grim.

Should have traded him two summers ago.
Exactly.

I'll reiterate again, having a player on a large contract that has major injury issues is a recipe for disaster. As soon as we can get something for him now, we should take it. If people want to consider that a loss, so be it. It's better than negative value that he would bring on a larger contract.
Would you prefer Hemsky on a 6 million dollar deal in a couple of years and we have to trade away Eberle/PRV for cap space as Hemsky won't have any trade value? What about having to strip our depth for him? Could you imagine gutting a team because Hemsky has a big contract and still missing a lot of games!

ponokanocker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 11:53 AM
  #102
Wheatking
Registered User
 
Wheatking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneman89 View Post
So let me put this to you.

You have a player that is fun to watch, makes great plays, and pulls you out of your seat at times.
You also have an injury plagued player, with a second concussion now confirmed.
You have a guy making 4 million cap hit for one more year after this one.
He averages 57 points a season the last 5 years (forget about the dumb what if projections, we're talking reality now. 289 points in 5 NHL seasons since the lockout))
If, we choose to keep him and if, he chooses to stay, what do you think the chances are that he signs here for anywhere near the same amount? He probably thinks he's been underpaid, and will not make that mistake again.
In reality, I bet someone with a good team and some cap space, takes a chance, throws something silly at him and he does not sign here for less than 5.5 to 6 million dollars.

Do you wait till next trade deadline or even next summer before July 1, take a chance that the injuries will magically go away, and sign a 57 point average player to a 6 million dollar contract, long term (and no doubt he will be looking for that), and if it's too much, he walks for nothing. Do you think the Oilers will get more for him this trade deadline, or the 2012 trade deadline, just prior to his contract expiration?

Would you sign Hemsky to a 6 million dollar contract long term?
I wouldn't sign Hemsky to 6M and I don't think he'll get that kind of money. Like I said before, I think Havlat is a good comparable. I would give Hemsky 5M.

Hemsky isn't a 57 point player. You say the projections are dumb and then use a very basic average that has been deflated by a season where he missed 60 games. Take away last season and he's averaged 67 points a season. It's amazing how big of a difference one season makes in your argument. The projections aren't dumb. It lets you know what to expect from the player when he's healthy. I'm not saying it's the end all, be all factor in the argument. It's just something to think about. Hemsky can miss 15 games a season and still lead our team in points....and we're better without him?

Wheatking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 11:54 AM
  #103
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 27,457
vCash: 2700
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0ilerman View Post
Listening to Bob Stauffer on the morning show - he seemed to think something was wrong with Hemsky on the last road trip. He didn't necessarily get the concussion last night...it just got bad enough that he had to sit out.
I seen he was rocked in the first, I'm assuming that was the last straw.

joestevens29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 11:55 AM
  #104
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 55,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
TBH, I'd rather have Hemsky play 40 per cent of his games than trade him for a late pick or fringe prospect that won't provide the same value even if they play 82 games.
Yeah we wouldn't want to give Stu a chance to land us an Eberle type talent again.

__________________
Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Bryanbryoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 12:05 PM
  #105
Stoneman89
Registered User
 
Stoneman89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheatking View Post
I wouldn't sign Hemsky to 6M and I don't think he'll get that kind of money. Like I said before, I think Havlat is a good comparable. I would give Hemsky 5M.

Hemsky isn't a 57 point player. You say the projections are dumb and then use a very basic average that has been deflated by a season where he missed 60 games. Take away last season and he's averaged 67 points a season. It's amazing how big of a difference one season makes in your argument. The projections aren't dumb. It lets you know what to expect from the player when he's healthy. I'm not saying it's the end all, be all factor in the argument. It's just something to think about. Hemsky can miss 15 games a season and still lead our team in points....and we're better without him?
So it's okay for you to cherry pick the seasons YOU want for reference? Well I can do the same. Take away his 77 point season and see what you have for an average. And BTW, that 77 point season was 5 years ago.

Yes, it let's you know what to expect from the player when he's healthy. And when is the last time that was?

Hemsky is not going to take 5 million. Not when there are fools like Sather out there ready to dangle more, much more. And not when he feels he's been underpaid and now wants his due. (see Ryan Smith for reference) He's not a 23 year old knowing there's ton more money to be made. This may be his last big contract. And what kind of term do you think he'd expect? What do you think the "hockey playing lifespan" is for a guy like Hemsky, based on what we've seen? Be honest.

Stoneman89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 12:07 PM
  #106
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
So it's a unequivocal no, then, because there's no way he doesn't get a raise. Inflation's a ******.
It doesn't change the notion that anything more and he will be overpaid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
Like, five assets?
Who knows, you seem offended by the notion all together but I think it's a legit avenue to take.

copperandblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 12:15 PM
  #107
ekcut
Golden Ticket Winner
 
ekcut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,017
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to ekcut
The posibility exists that many of Hemsky's (and other Oilers) injuries that always seem to pop up after the team drops from the playoff picture are the same injuries that every player in the league experiences over the course of a season, but the Oilers and Hemsky realize the futility of trying to play through them.

I'm not saying this to sugest tanking, but only to point out that many injuries are possible to play through if there is a reason to. Every player on every playoff team has some sort of naggin injury. Only in the severe cases do players miss games when it counts.
Maybe if we were in a playoff battle Hemsky, Horcoff and Whitney would be fighting through their injuries. But with 3 months of nothing games ahead of us, why not shut down every player who isn't 100%? Those players don't care...they have nothing to prove, it is not a contract year, why not get the surgery done or rest your melon, and fully recover rather then play through it and hope you have enough recovery time in the offseason.
The team sure doesn't care. They have a bonifide excuse for tanking...and no one can even call it tanking because they have a doctors note. Sometimes 1 step back leads to two steps forward.
Maybe the reason Hemsky (and others) has been hurt so much, is because there is ZERO benefit to playing when not 100% for the past few seasons.

As the team get's better, and the man-loss-due-to-injury number decreases....
of course the argument will also be made that as the man-loss-due-to-injury number decreases the team will get better...it's the chicken vs egg debate again.

ekcut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 12:21 PM
  #108
KenLinsemanFanClub
Sorry State
 
KenLinsemanFanClub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Isle of Van
Country: South Africa
Posts: 1,239
vCash: 1513
I was at the games in LA and Anaheim and during the LA game Hemmer was the recipient of an awkward hit up high that stopped him in his tracks. I'm not sure who hit him but it was one of the bigger LA D'men. He looked out of sorts in the Anaheim game and didn't accomplish a thing. I'll bet the concussion came from the hit in the LA game.

And by the way, LA fans were the worst I've ever encountered. Total lack of class.

KenLinsemanFanClub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 12:21 PM
  #109
Wheatking
Registered User
 
Wheatking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneman89 View Post
So it's okay for you to cherry pick the seasons YOU want for reference? Well I can do the same. Take away his 77 point season and see what you have for an average. And BTW, that 77 point season was 5 years ago.

Yes, it let's you know what to expect from the player when he's healthy. And when is the last time that was?

Hemsky is not going to take 5 million. Not when there are fools like Sather out there ready to dangle more, much more. And not when he feels he's been underpaid and now wants his due. (see Ryan Smith for reference) He's not a 23 year old knowing there's ton more money to be made. This may be his last big contract. And what kind of term do you think he'd expect? What do you think the "hockey playing lifespan" is for a guy like Hemsky, based on what we've seen? Be honest.
There is a difference between cherry picking seasons and just using a bit of common sense when making an argument. Since the lockout he's missed 1, 18, 8, 10 and 60. One of these seasons is not like the other. Missing 10-20 games a season is a lot but they don't compare to missing 60 games and when you're playing with averages it's not crazy to exclude the extreme exception.

...and if Hemsky wants 6M a season then he won't be an Oiler. My argument is that we're better with Hemsky than without him and we should hope he's only asking for about 5.0M because we're not replacing him in a trade or on the open market.

Wheatking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 12:21 PM
  #110
ponokanocker
Registered User
 
ponokanocker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,518
vCash: 500
Excellent point eckut. Not every injury these players have had would have kept them out of the lineup if we were a playoff team.

That being said, Hemsky's injuries lately have not been minor ones.

ponokanocker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 12:39 PM
  #111
Little Fury
Registered User
 
Little Fury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
Yeah we wouldn't want to give Stu a chance to land us an Eberle type talent again.
Yeah because much like sucking for high picks is a sure path to the Cup, trading away assets for pennies on the dollar is sure to land you a sleeper pick in the late first round.

It's in Revalations, people!

Little Fury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 12:41 PM
  #112
Little Fury
Registered User
 
Little Fury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
It doesn't change the notion that anything more and he will be overpaid.
That's straight up b.s.

Quote:
Who knows, you seem offended by the notion all together but I think it's a legit avenue to take.
Sure it's legit. I just don't think it's one that ever works out for the team who gives up the best player. Quantity=/quality.

Little Fury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 12:50 PM
  #113
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
That's straight up b.s.
What is the money and term that you picture Hemsky looking for to stay?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
Sure it's legit. I just don't think it's one that ever works out for the team who gives up the best player. Quantity=/quality.
Actually I just wasn't biting on your 5 for 1 snipe. It shouldn't be a quantity for quality deal but it can be what Oiler fans would likely percieve as Hemsky for less than fair value and still work out as a net gain for the team.

Be it Hemsky or Penner or Horcoff or whichever so called vet that a certain demographic of Oilers fans tend to gravitate to, the truth is that none of these guys would rank anywhere near as important on a contender as they get ranked on the Oilers on their rebuild quest.

Would tehy be useable, yes. I would even say they could be significant pieces but they also get credit for being better than they are because they are the only show in town. That should be changing, and signing any of these guys to a long term contract - particularily at a significant dollar value - would be a mistake.

copperandblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 01:10 PM
  #114
Little Fury
Registered User
 
Little Fury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
What is the money and term that you picture Hemsky looking for to stay?
I 'd be down with soemthing in the neighbourhood of a four or five year deal with a cap hit in the $5M range.

Quote:
Actually I just wasn't biting on your 5 for 1 snipe. It shouldn't be a quantity for quality deal but it can be what Oiler fans would likely percieve as Hemsky for less than fair value and still work out as a net gain for the team.
Sure if they are able to address an area of need on the team. I'd be fine with a trade for a Brayden Schenn type prospect or a top end two-way forward like a Talbot or Plekanec. I just don't think that's how it would go down.

Quote:
Be it Hemsky or Penner or Horcoff or whichever so called vet that a certain demographic of Oilers fans tend to gravitate to, the truth is that none of these guys would rank anywhere near as important on a contender as they get ranked on the Oilers on their rebuild quest.

Would tehy be useable, yes. I would even say they could be significant pieces but they also get credit for being better than they are because they are the only show in town. That should be changing, and signing any of these guys to a long term contract - particularily at a significant dollar value - would be a mistake.
I think that's a bit fatuous. Obviously Hemsky or Penner wouldn't be as important on the Penguins or Red Wings or canucks. However I strongly disagree with you that they are overvalued because there's noone better. The folks you're talking about value these players because the evidence shows them to be valuable. Period. If anything, these players are undervalued by a large percentage of Oilers fans for very specious reasons: Horcoff always whiffs, Penner's fat and lazy, Hemsky's soft blah blah blah.

Let me put it another way: the Oilers aren't exactly overflowing with NHL talent at the moment. Even if the Holy Trinity steps up and starts driving results, that doesn't mean your other vets are instantly expendable. It's depth. And if you can keep these guys around for a spell, you do it.

Little Fury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 01:23 PM
  #115
Replacement
Now 11.5% more Zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
What is the money and term that you picture Hemsky looking for to stay?



Actually I just wasn't biting on your 5 for 1 snipe. It shouldn't be a quantity for quality deal but it can be what Oiler fans would likely percieve as Hemsky for less than fair value and still work out as a net gain for the team.

Be it Hemsky or Penner or Horcoff or whichever so called vet that a certain demographic of Oilers fans tend to gravitate to, the truth is that none of these guys would rank anywhere near as important on a contender as they get ranked on the Oilers on their rebuild quest.

Would tehy be useable, yes. I would even say they could be significant pieces but they also get credit for being better than they are because they are the only show in town. That should be changing, and signing any of these guys to a long term contract - particularily at a significant dollar value - would be a mistake.
This seldom gets looked at but Hemsky is a sub ppg player getting more PP minutes than he would get on a competitive side and on a PP that predominately features him as the QB, who gets a lot of his pts on the PP.

This is a middling EV performer who also doesn't score many goals, and now has a concussion history and chronic other injuries. Who refuses to play the game safe and watch out for himself.

This is not someone you continue to rely on and offer a big contract so that you end up cutting bait on somebody else.

Replacement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 01:25 PM
  #116
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
I 'd be down with soemthing in the neighbourhood of a four or five year deal with a cap hit in the $5M range.
You don't think it's too much - both money and term - for what would be a 60 game 2nd line player (on a contender)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
Sure if they are able to address an area of need on the team. I'd be fine with a trade for a Brayden Schenn type prospect or a top end two-way forward like a Talbot or Plekanec. I just don't think that's how it would go down.
At the very least you have to persue it though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
I think that's a bit fatuous. Obviously Hemsky or Penner wouldn't be as important on the Penguins or Red Wings or canucks.
Is there a contender out there that would play any of those guys as high up the line up as the Oilers do? Or better yet chase any of them into free agency with the type of offer you suggest above?

Hemsky, for example, getting 5 mil for 5 years from a team doesn't mean that he is worth it if that team also spends the next 5 years in the bottom half of the standings. It just means he was able to cash in.

For example Havlat was being thrown around as a good comparable. How has it worked out for Minny?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
However I strongly disagree with you that they are overvalued because there's noone better.
The folks you're talking about value these players because the evidence shows them to be valuable. Period.
Correction;

The folks you're talking about value these players because the evidence shows them to be valuable on this team.

Here is the rub though, this team isn't good enough, so can they demonstrate that they would be as valuable on a good team?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
Let me put it another way: the Oilers aren't exactly overflowing with NHL talent at the moment. Even if the Holy Trinity steps up and starts driving results, that doesn't mean your other vets are instantly expendable. It's depth. And if you can keep these guys around for a spell, you do it.
Nope and this GM doesn't seem to value NHL talent either so it's a problem. But if you are talkinga bout where this team needs to get to or should be striving to get to then you also need to expand NHL talent to the right kind of NHL talent.

Hell in the other threads you are arguing the same point when you talk about the lack of a foundation on this team. The only difference is that I have expended tehproblem to a player or two that you have a soft spot for.

copperandblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 01:48 PM
  #117
Little Fury
Registered User
 
Little Fury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
You don't think it's too much - both money and term - for what would be a 60 game 2nd line player (on a contender)?
It's perhaps a bit steep, but it's how you divide the pie. With the cap projected to rise again, I don't see the issue.

Quote:
Is there a contender out there that would play any of those guys as high up the line up as the Oilers do? Or better yet chase any of them into free agency with the type of offer you suggest above?
I'm not sure what your point is. The Oilers don't have a Crosby/Malkin, Kane/Toews, Ovechkin/Semin type talent at the top of the order. Getting rid of Hemsky and Penner won't make those players appear and paying them market value won't be what keeps those players from emerging.

Quote:
Hemsky, for example, getting 5 mil for 5 years from a team doesn't mean that he is worth it if that team also spends the next 5 years in the bottom half of the standings. It just means he was able to cash in.

For example Havlat was being thrown around as a good comparable. How has it worked out for Minny?
You mean have they won a Cup? Obviously not, but it hasn't been a disaster or anything.

Quote:
Correction;

The folks you're talking about value these players because the evidence shows them to be valuable on this team.

Here is the rub though, this team isn't good enough, so can they demonstrate that they would be as valuable on a good team?
I'm still puzzled by this. The Oilers aren't a good team. The Oilers aren't going to be a good team in the near future, especially if they trade off guys like Hemsky and Penner. All you're doing is xcycling in new guys to take their place and hope they perform as good or better.

Quote:
Nope and this GM doesn't seem to value NHL talent either so it's a problem. But if you are talkinga bout where this team needs to get to or should be striving to get to then you also need to expand NHL talent to the right kind of NHL talent.

Hell in the other threads you are arguing the same point when you talk about the lack of a foundation on this team. The only difference is that I have expended tehproblem to a player or two that you have a soft spot for
I'm not sure I'm seeing why you think they are a problem. I'll concede Hemsky's injury risk, but why Penner?

Little Fury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 02:25 PM
  #118
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
It's perhaps a bit steep, but it's how you divide the pie. With the cap projected to rise again, I don't see the issue.
Then we simply disagree.

I look at Horcoff's contract and see an example of what can happen if you expect the cap to keep going up.

I also think back to all the arguments about needing value contracts to win a cup and recognize that although those arguments were had in the context of first year contracts it doesn't mean you can ignore the need for value on the roster overall wether it's rookie or UFA contracts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
I'm not sure what your point is. The Oilers don't have a Crosby/Malkin, Kane/Toews, Ovechkin/Semin type talent at the top of the order. Getting rid of Hemsky and Penner won't make those players appear and paying them market value won't be what keeps those players from emerging.
My point is that this team is supposed to be building to be a contender, I am wondering how these guys would fit into the team when they reach that point.

I ask that because I don't see a legit contender out there that would use either of those two guys as key pieces to the puzzle and it leaves me wondering if it's possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
You mean have they won a Cup? Obviously not, but it hasn't been a disaster or anything.
It wasn't long ago that the Oilers were stuck in mediocrity as well and for alot of people it was deamed a disaster.

At any rate, yesterday is yesterday and I don't think people have bought into the patience asked for on the expectation of being Minnesota good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
I'm still puzzled by this. The Oilers aren't a good team. The Oilers aren't going to be a good team in the near future, especially if they trade off guys like Hemsky and Penner. All you're doing is xcycling in new guys to take their place and hope they perform as good or better.
I don't know what there is to be puzzled by, I am saying these guys look better than they are because of the situation they are playing in and that for my expectations for the team moving ahead, they aren't good enough for the roles they are playing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Fury View Post
I'm not sure I'm seeing why you think they are a problem. I'll concede Hemsky's injury risk, but why Penner?
I already said that these guys are way down the list of what is currently wrong with this team. However a decision will have to be made on these guys next year and depending on what is done they could be a problem.

Penner, he is the poster child for what is wrong with this team. Hemsky, with the right contract I am ok with moving forward - as I said - but Penner wouldn't even be up for debate if I was making the call.

copperandblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 02:30 PM
  #119
McOkMcgoMcoil
Registered User
 
McOkMcgoMcoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 13,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ekcut View Post
The posibility exists that many of Hemsky's (and other Oilers) injuries that always seem to pop up after the team drops from the playoff picture are the same injuries that every player in the league experiences over the course of a season, but the Oilers and Hemsky realize the futility of trying to play through them.

I'm not saying this to sugest tanking, but only to point out that many injuries are possible to play through if there is a reason to. Every player on every playoff team has some sort of naggin injury. Only in the severe cases do players miss games when it counts.
Maybe if we were in a playoff battle Hemsky, Horcoff and Whitney would be fighting through their injuries. But with 3 months of nothing games ahead of us, why not shut down every player who isn't 100%? Those players don't care...they have nothing to prove, it is not a contract year, why not get the surgery done or rest your melon, and fully recover rather then play through it and hope you have enough recovery time in the offseason.
The team sure doesn't care. They have a bonifide excuse for tanking...and no one can even call it tanking because they have a doctors note. Sometimes 1 step back leads to two steps forward.
Maybe the reason Hemsky (and others) has been hurt so much, is because there is ZERO benefit to playing when not 100% for the past few seasons.

As the team get's better, and the man-loss-due-to-injury number decreases....
of course the argument will also be made that as the man-loss-due-to-injury number decreases the team will get better...it's the chicken vs egg debate again.
I think there is truth to this for sure. I mean horc seems in no rush to get back and I think Whitney could have come back this year and had surgery in the off season. I just hope this is the case with Hemmer. Not that he will be injury prone forever.

It is a interesting hypothesis really. Injuries are correlated to a losing team, but it is it because the injuries cause the losing, or the losing that causes the injuries (or over statement of them). A bit of both I would think.

McOkMcgoMcoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 02:32 PM
  #120
Jamin
Registered User
 
Jamin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
And if you factor in salary of a .9 PPG player, the roster spot he occupies, his lack of contribution to things like PK and frankly PP, his lack of leadership, the constant search in finding someone that can play with him and so on I think it's up for debate.

Look I am not a Hemsky hater by any stretch but I do think his puck skill tends to blind fans a bit in terms of what he actually does for the team.
sometimes i hate oiler fans, now he isnt just injury prone he is useless doesnt contribute anything and is a bad leader

guess thats why he leads this team in points and has an a, ill take hemsky for 60 games a year over ruining eberle so next season he can get the gagner treatment of why he isnt putting up 60 points

Jamin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 02:33 PM
  #121
McOkMcgoMcoil
Registered User
 
McOkMcgoMcoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 13,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneman89 View Post
So it's okay for you to cherry pick the seasons YOU want for reference? Well I can do the same. Take away his 77 point season and see what you have for an average. And BTW, that 77 point season was 5 years ago.

Yes, it let's you know what to expect from the player when he's healthy. And when is the last time that was?

Hemsky is not going to take 5 million. Not when there are fools like Sather out there ready to dangle more, much more. And not when he feels he's been underpaid and now wants his due. (see Ryan Smith for reference) He's not a 23 year old knowing there's ton more money to be made. This may be his last big contract. And what kind of term do you think he'd expect? What do you think the "hockey playing lifespan" is for a guy like Hemsky, based on what we've seen? Be honest.
Hemsky is a PPG player. He also averages losing 20 games a year. It is stupid to declare much else. Saying he is a 57 point player is pretty silly really. HE is a PPG player with a high probability of Injury.

The ppg stat makes perfect sense just how he used it. I lets you know what to expect when Healthy.

McOkMcgoMcoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 02:34 PM
  #122
Jamin
Registered User
 
Jamin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneman89 View Post
So let me put this to you.

You have a player that is fun to watch, makes great plays, and pulls you out of your seat at times.
You also have an injury plagued player, with a second concussion now confirmed.
You have a guy making 4 million cap hit for one more year after this one.
He averages 57 points a season the last 5 years (forget about the dumb what if projections, we're talking reality now. 289 points in 5 NHL seasons since the lockout))
If, we choose to keep him and if, he chooses to stay, what do you think the chances are that he signs here for anywhere near the same amount? He probably thinks he's been underpaid, and will not make that mistake again.
In reality, I bet someone with a good team and some cap space, takes a chance, throws something silly at him and he does not sign here for less than 5.5 to 6 million dollars.

Do you wait till next trade deadline or even next summer before July 1, take a chance that the injuries will magically go away, and sign a 57 point average player to a 6 million dollar contract, long term (and no doubt he will be looking for that), and if it's too much, he walks for nothing. Do you think the Oilers will get more for him this trade deadline, or the 2012 trade deadline, just prior to his contract expiration?

Would you sign Hemsky to a 6 million dollar contract long term?
why is your made up scenario more realistic then the other guys?

Would you sign hemsky for 5 million?

Jamin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 02:36 PM
  #123
Jamin
Registered User
 
Jamin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryanbryoil View Post
Yeah we wouldn't want to give Stu a chance to land us an Eberle type talent again.
or a pouliot?

Jamin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 03:05 PM
  #124
Little Fury
Registered User
 
Little Fury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
Then we simply disagree.

I look at Horcoff's contract and see an example of what can happen if you expect the cap to keep going up.
Well, the cap has kept going up...

Quote:
I also think back to all the arguments about needing value contracts to win a cup and recognize that although those arguments were had in the context of first year contracts it doesn't mean you can ignore the need for value on the roster overall wether it's rookie or UFA contracts.
Sure, you need guys who can outplay their contracts, but that doesn't mean you don't pay anyone market value either.

Quote:
My point is that this team is supposed to be building to be a contender, I am wondering how these guys would fit into the team when they reach that point.

I ask that because I don't see a legit contender out there that would use either of those two guys as key pieces to the puzzle and it leaves me wondering if it's possible.
They'd be top six guys for sure. You disagree?

Quote:
It wasn't long ago that the Oilers were stuck in mediocrity as well and for alot of people it was deamed a disaster.

At any rate, yesterday is yesterday and I don't think people have bought into the patience asked for on the expectation of being Minnesota good.
Does Minnesota have any lottery picks in the pipeline? I ask because you seem to be operating under the assumption that Hemsky and Penner will continue to be our best players. I see them eventually dropping down behind Hall and the next wave, or at least continuing to complement them.

Quote:
I don't know what there is to be puzzled by, I am saying these guys look better than they are because of the situation they are playing in and that for my expectations for the team moving ahead, they aren't good enough for the roles they are playing.
I don't think they'll be playing the same roles. They'll be playing lesser roles, but that deons't mean they'd cease to be valuable.

Quote:
I already said that these guys are way down the list of what is currently wrong with this team. However a decision will have to be made on these guys next year and depending on what is done they could be a problem.
Well, obviously. But trading them has its own pitfalls.

Quote:
Penner, he is the poster child for what is wrong with this team. Hemsky, with the right contract I am ok with moving forward - as I said - but Penner wouldn't even be up for debate if I was making the call.
Why's that? IMO he's actually less expendable than Hemsky.

Little Fury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2011, 03:05 PM
  #125
McDeepika
Registered User
 
McDeepika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
This seldom gets looked at but Hemsky is a sub ppg player getting more PP minutes than he would get on a competitive side and on a PP that predominately features him as the QB, who gets a lot of his pts on the PP.

This is a middling EV performer who also doesn't score many goals, and now has a concussion history and chronic other injuries. Who refuses to play the game safe and watch out for himself.

This is not someone you continue to rely on and offer a big contract so that you end up cutting bait on somebody else.
Hemsky has 5 PP points this year. He is absolutley killing it 5 on 5. One of the best performers in the league in terms of non PP production.

McDeepika 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 05:43 AM.

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.