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

Kevin Lowe

View Poll Results: Is Kevin Lowe overrated as a GM?
Yes 20 18.18%
No 90 81.82%
Voters: 110. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-03-2004, 10:55 PM
  #101
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,211
vCash: 500
quote by mizral

As a GM, you have to learn to project how a player is going to play. Lowe didn't judge as well as others in Salo. There were a great many Salo detractors back then, too, you know.

There were a lot of detractors about a guy who was at the all-star game the year before? ? ? ?

FYI, the year after Lowe signed Tommy to the deal, the oilers had the 2nd best gaa in the league (despite being one of the youngest and the lowest salary teams in the nhl). Are you saying that Lowe should have had the foresight to project 2 years down the road?



Jay, quit while you still have some credibility.

edit : salo was the team MVP the 2 years after Lowe signed him to the 3 year contract. That is what I would call foresight.


Last edited by Mr Sakich: 08-03-2004 at 11:02 PM.
Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 10:57 PM
  #102
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
I wasn't wrong at all. Just because a couple of you seem to think you only make picks in the first round and seem to ignore all the other picks isn't my fault. I for darn sure meant more than just the one pick. Lowe has stocked up on high seconds it seems every year or every other year.
I didn't necessarily ignore them. Merely that you get a better opportunity at drafting an NHL player in the first round than in the subsequent ones. You seem to be making the assumption that a second rounder has equal probability of panning out than a mid first rounder. I would think that you would be wrong in that assumption.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
I would say that's true, however I would rather have a low 1st round pick and three 2nd round picks, two very very high, than a #9 overall pick or what have you.
So... given that assumption. Everything equal. You'd take a low 1st rounder and 3 2nd rounders... than the #9 overall and 3 mid second rounders?

Corey Perry
Loui Eriksson
Vojtek Polak
Konstantin Glazachev

Dion Phaneuf
Tim Ramholt
Petr Vrana
Patrick O'Sullivan

There we go. 1st package with #28 overall Corey Perry and 3 high second rounders VERSUS #9 overall Dion Phaneuf and 3 mid-second rounders? I don't think we need to make a poll.

momentai is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 10:58 PM
  #103
se7en*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Thompson
Great international experience, time as a backup in the NHL, has yet to solidify his game, has had poor outings in big games.
You mean the Calder Cup Game 7 and the crushing 5-2 loss to the Canucks?

Those are TWO games.

Is it right to label Conklin a 'big-game choker' because of two poor games? I can think of other goalies that let in some real STINKERS yet I don't see you labeling them as write-offs.


Quote:
Holik was a top checker and one of the biggest playoff difference makers in the NHL when he signed. Yashin was one of the top centremen in the league when he signed. Sorry, that arguement doesn't wash for me. As a GM, you have to learn to project how a player is going to play. Lowe didn't judge as well as others in Salo.
Holik and Yashin didn't let Belarus score off their helmets subsequently ruining their careers to the point of retirement did they?

Who are these 'others' exactly? Remember, this is before the Belarus-meltdown - which essentially is why Salo is retired and you'd have to be a fool to find some other strange, invisible, made-up reason why you think he would have sucked as much as he did if that fluke goal didn't happen.

Quote:
There were a great many Salo detractors back then, too, you know.
Like?

Quote:
Waste a lot of breath for nothing. There are 9 picks usually in an NHL draft, not one.
You said Lowe had more higher draft picks then Sather, and by higher picks you meant first-round which was self-evident then tried to backtrack and say you meant all draftees as if a ninth-round pick has an equal chance in this league as a first-round pick.


Last edited by se7en*: 08-03-2004 at 11:03 PM.
se7en* is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 10:59 PM
  #104
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by momentai
So... given that assumption. Everything equal. You'd take a low 1st rounder and 3 2nd rounders... than the #9 overall and 3 mid second rounders?

Corey Perry
Loui Eriksson
Vojtek Polak
Konstantin Glazachev

Dion Phaneuf
Tim Ramholt
Petr Vrana
Patrick O'Sullivan

There we go. 1st package with #28 overall Corey Perry and 3 high second rounders VERSUS #9 overall Dion Phaneuf and 3 mid-second rounders? I don't think we need to make a poll.
'Given that assumption'

Pretty interesting assumption. You assume wrong, Momentai.

To compare, I would rather have a low 1st (say, #23) and 3 high 2nds than a #9 + a medium 2nd.

Mizral is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 11:01 PM
  #105
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Thompson
'Given that assumption'

Pretty interesting assumption. You assume wrong, Momentai.

To compare, I would rather have a low 1st (say, #23) and 3 high 2nds than a #9 + a medium 2nd.
Um... alright. And in your assumption how would you garner those 3 high second rounders precisely? Just out of thin air? There has to be some semblance of realistic entanglement or I could easily say...

#20 overall + 6 second rounders > #6 overall

Sorry. That doesn't fly.

momentai is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 11:09 PM
  #106
Sethis
Registered User
 
Sethis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemsky83
Lowe didn't take over as GM until 2000. 1999 was Slats last draft with the Oilers.
My bad, apologies

make that 74/23 over 6 years for Sather and 58/15 over 4 for Lowe, still not exactly enough to back up Mizral's point.

AAAAAAnd just for fun - I'm not Hootchie Cotchie but I feel like arguing his points

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Thompson
Pre-package that and send it to last year. I heard this one a lot back then. Matts was I believe the only one here aside from myself who questioned Salo. You're right though, we don't know what we're talking about.


OK, I concede - you called that Salo would have a crappy year, I was sceptical my self, there were little other options and as Lowe stood by the thought Salo could bounce back, the year for goaltending went to **** up until the 4 million dollar man was traded.

Did you read my post? Any guy could be a starter someday. I'm sure that's the line that Yotes management fed their fans last year with Boucher, and will next year as well. Conklin is a good example of where someone being an Oiler makes a player that much better on this board. What seperates Conklin from, say, Reinhart Divis? More games played in the NHL, but all in all similar players. Great international experience, time as a backup in the NHL, has yet to solidify his game, has had poor outings in big games.

And has had great outings in big games too, to me Conklin has shown himself to be a capable goalie and I have great expectations for him next year as a starter, I expect him to be about what Jeff Hackett was before his retirement which IMO isn't bad at all, like he said all goalies have to back-ups before they become starters, and Conks has done more than everything asked of him and I seem to remember our best portion of the year coming when Conkkanen were between the pipes, weren't we a top 5 team in the NHL over that time too? (anyone? anyone?)

I am not saying Conklin is going to for sure be a flop, all I'm saying is that there are not many keepers in his situations that suddenly turn starter at 28 years old. It could happen, but all I'm saying is there is a lot of uncertainty, just like last year.

K, it could happen, it could not happen, I agree for Gods sake, all I'm saying is looking around at what other options there is around the league, I'm happy with Lowe sitting tight

Yeah, sure, last year. Unfortunatly the Preds have been getting a lot better, the Blues underacheived (though I think they are going to continue in that direction next year). Have the Oilers improved from this time in March? I personally don't think so.

From this time in March? Sure they have they've acquired Jussi Markkanen and Petr Nedved who may very well re-sign. Compared to Lalime and Bacashahua for St. Louis, and Sullivan for Nashville, I wouldn't really call that horrible. Besides - on a young team like ours we're more countingon further dvelopment than calling for KL to go out and get any body but that top line Center and re-signing our free agents, and by all indications he's made these his top 2 priorites

Holik was a top checker and one of the biggest playoff difference makers in the NHL when he signed. Yashin was one of the top centremen in the league when he signed. Sorry, that arguement doesn't wash for me. As a GM, you have to learn to project how a player is going to play. Lowe didn't judge as well as others in Salo. There were a great many Salo detractors back then, too, you know.

How are you supposed to guess that a goalie is going to start to decline around 30, when most goalies begin to hit their peak, Lowe isn't exactly a mind reader and people around the league were going nuts that Lowe signed Salo for so cheap at the time

Miracle, eh? Boy, what do you think GM's do, just guess all day?

This one I'll give ya, Sutter did his homework and got the pay off

Waste a lot of breath for nothing. There are 9 picks usually in an NHL draft, not one.

Come on Mizral, I did this for you ona post directly above.


Last edited by Sethis: 08-03-2004 at 11:19 PM.
Sethis is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 11:26 PM
  #107
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootchie Cootchie
You mean the Calder Cup Game 7 and the crushing 5-2 loss to the Canucks?

Those are TWO games.

Is it right to label Conklin a 'big-game choker' because of two poor games? I can think of other goalies that let in some real STINKERS yet I don't see you labeling them as write-offs.
How about versus the Preds? He was pulled in that one too.

Now you have THREE games. Want more, might be tougher to find since he has only played, what, 40 games or so?

Quote:
Holik and Yashin didn't let Belarus score off their helmets subsequently ruining their careers to the point of retirement did they?

Who are these 'others' exactly? Remember, this is before the Belarus-meltdown - which essentially is why Salo is retired and you'd have to be a fool to find some other strange, invisible, made-up reason why you think he would have sucked as much as he did if that fluke goal didn't happen.
Matts has been on Salo's case for years now - even before Belarus. Nobody listened to him I noticed.

Quote:
You said Lowe had more higher draft picks then Sather, and by higher picks you meant first-round which was self-evident - and I proved that wacky theory completely and utterly wrong.

Don't backtrack.
Thanks for telling me what I mean. I didn't mean that at all. In fact, when I was making the arguement, I had hockeydb.com on the Oilers draft page, and I saw 6 2nd round picks in 2000 - 2002 compared to 3 2nd rounders in 1997 - 1999. Looking at the last 5 years of Slats and the first 5 years of Lowe, Lowe has 10+ more draft picks than Slats had. That's a lot of picks, and a lot of these picks seem to be significantly higher, especially in the 3rd and 4th rounders where there seem to be a lot more of, and seem to be a lot higher. I do not have the numbers in front of me, since the issue isn't a huge one to me anyways. Either way, Lowe has traded away a lot of players to pick up these picks, so it stands to reason that yes, of course he'd have a better prospect pool if he trades guys like Comrie for essentially prospects.

Mizral is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 11:29 PM
  #108
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,608
vCash: 500
Great Thread, best discussion of the summer by far.

In my opinion Kevin Lowe has two weaknesses that hurt him as GM.

The first weakness is his sense of timing, as has been mentioned in LTís post, Kevin Lowe has proven to be slow in addressing weaknesses in the club. It isnít just the center problem from last year, it has been in both playoff-missed years that K-Lowe has taken late action. For some reason Lowe likes to trade in and around the trade deadline, while that time of year often presents a good market for trading, its generally the time for playoff bound teams to improve their club. To make a trade at the deadline or in the week leading up to the deadline to help a club make the playoffs is bad strategy. Why in 2002, with the club playing mediocre does he wait until the deadline to pick up York? Why wait so long to pick up Nedved?

Yes he acquired Oates and yes maybe York and Nedved werenít available in January but thatís not the point. Sometimes you have to make a trade just for the point of making a trade. Shake the club up, bring in a little buzz, whatever do something. It doesnít even have to be a substantial move, the point is in an 82 game season why does K-Lowe wait until game 70 to make adjustments. Evaluate your team and make necessary moves in January. Why did we have to go through a whole year of Salo letting in bad goal after bad goal? Everybody knew he was done, as soon as Salo was traded it was like a black cloud left the city.

He seems to piss me off every year by making decisions on the roster pre opening day. He moves Grier and decides we like Cleary more, he move Jussi and decides Conklin is the man in goal and this year he moves Chimera to make room for Rita. Why not let camp decide these battles, why not let the first 25 games go by when you know weíll have injuries and youíll get a chance to audition Rita again.

And then in a year where we are in the playoffs and rolling along (2003) Kevin pulls two unexpected deals. Trading Carter and Janne at the deadline that year still ranks with me as bad moves. What purpose did they serve? If we had to move those two players why not wait until after the playoffs and trade them at the strongest draft in 12 years? We did get decent return for Anson and Janne but I will argue that this club has never been the same since the day of those trades, which leads me to my next point.

Kevin Lowe does not understand the necessary ingredients that make a championship team. Right now we have a team flowing with forward depth, when the Oil get into a game where its 5 on 5 with 4 lines rolling we do very well. But in building a grittier, harder working (and this is the hardest working team Iíve ever seen wear Oiler silks), defensive orientated team with four good but not great lines, K-Lowe and Mac T have built a team of wellÖK-Lowe and Mac T players. The problem is we are weak in every other area and we are weak quite often because of trades by K-Lowe.

Grier, Marchant and Murray gone our penalty killing sucks

Carter our floating PP sniper moved along with Janneís puck moving and our PP sucks.

And yes most importantly K-Lowe has not addressed the weakness at goal. Saloís haul started too leak a while ago. Kevin Loweís most important duty over the past two years and even now should have been to address the goaltending situation. Heís done a good job drafting goalies but realistically we are 3-5 years away from either DD or JDD making an impact. Right now our goaltending tandem is good enough to not lose us too many games but its also not good enough to win us many games either. Anyone who tells me they thought Conklinís game was anything more than serviceable last year didnít pay much attention to the games.

HotToddy is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 11:35 PM
  #109
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by momentai
Um... alright. And in your assumption how would you garner those 3 high second rounders precisely? Just out of thin air? There has to be some semblance of realistic entanglement or I could easily say...

#20 overall + 6 second rounders > #6 overall

Sorry. That doesn't fly.
Momentai,

I really like arguing with you, but you need to stop putting words into my mouth. I never said that, you did. Don't think I said it. I could fire back with a response like,

'Yeah, Momentai, but if you say that, that must mean you think 2nd rounders are worthless. Does anyone else think that 2nd rounders are worthless?'

What the hell does how they get them have to matter? In Lowe's case, he traded away a bunch of players for them. In Lowe's case, he moved Hecht whom he got for Doug Weight amongst other players in 2002 for a couple of high 2nds. Not a bad trade I guess, worked out for both teams, but the point is, he was trading roster players for future assets and I think it's come back to bite him in the butt when the oilers missed the post-season.

Mizral is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 11:37 PM
  #110
Sethis
Registered User
 
Sethis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,402
vCash: 500
Here, I'll crunch the numbers:

Picks in tenure/Years in Tenure
Top 6o Picks in tenure/Years in Tenure

Lowe:
58/4 - 14.5
15/4 - 3.75

Sather:
74/6 - 12.34
23/6 - 3.83

So there you have it, your Lowe has more picks (in the first 2 rounds) statement is unfounded.

Sure Lowe has more picks overall, but as you implied and others have touched upon, beyond the second round its more indicative of the scouting staff's talents than anything, and your argument was mainly based upon the top 2 rounds, as you said.

Sethis is offline  
Old
08-03-2004, 11:52 PM
  #111
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sethis
Here, I'll crunch the numbers:

Picks in tenure/Years in Tenure
Top 6o Picks in tenure/Years in Tenure

Lowe:
58/4 - 14.5
15/4 - 3.75

Sather:
74/6 - 12.34
23/6 - 3.83

So there you have it, your Lowe has more picks (in the first 2 rounds) statement is unfounded.

Sure Lowe has more picks overall, but as you implied and others have touched upon, beyond the second round its more indicative of the scouting staff's talents than anything, and your argument was mainly based upon the top 2 rounds, as you said.
Okay we're splitting hairs a bit, but I wasn't really looking 6 years back when I made that post, 1997 - 1999 in particular. I have no problem saying I was wrong however, if Slats had higher picks on average (more than 2 rounds though, yeesh. There are 9 rounds! In particular, I was noticing all the 50 - 100 picks seemed to be in Lowe's favour).

Still doesn't change the fact that Lowe has had way more picks though. I just counted, Slats had 47 from 1995 - 1999, Lowe had 59 from 2000 - 2004.

Mizral is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 12:23 AM
  #112
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 HotToddy
Great Thread, best discussion of the summer by far.

In my opinion Kevin Lowe has two weaknesses that hurt him as GM.

The first weakness is his sense of timing, as has been mentioned in LTís post, Kevin Lowe has proven to be slow in addressing weaknesses in the club. It isnít just the center problem from last year, it has been in both playoff-missed years that K-Lowe has taken late action. For some reason Lowe likes to trade in and around the trade deadline, while that time of year often presents a good market for trading, its generally the time for playoff bound teams to improve their club. To make a trade at the deadline or in the week leading up to the deadline to help a club make the playoffs is bad strategy. Why in 2002, with the club playing mediocre does he wait until the deadline to pick up York? Why wait so long to pick up Nedved?
This is an interesting argument.

Would the Nedved move have been good if he made it in December and it cost the Oilers Pouliot?

Sometimes you need to make deals for the future at the right time in order to get maximum return on the players you are giving up.

I'd rather have gotten York for Poti and Murray at the 70 game mark than Stu Barnes for Poti at the 40 game mark, or Jan Hlavac at the 50 game mark.

Quote:
Yes he acquired Oates and yes maybe York and Nedved werenít available in January but thatís not the point. Sometimes you have to make a trade just for the point of making a trade. Shake the club up, bring in a little buzz, whatever do something. It doesnít even have to be a substantial move, the point is in an 82 game season why does K-Lowe wait until game 70 to make adjustments. Evaluate your team and make necessary moves in January. Why did we have to go through a whole year of Salo letting in bad goal after bad goal? Everybody knew he was done, as soon as Salo was traded it was like a black cloud left the city.
And other times you need to make the right decision for the future of the team. Is there any evidence that making a marginal trade for bit players helps? Or is it just a useless cosmetic effect that makes the fans happy because something was done, and it doesn't really matter if anything tangible happens because of it, because hey, the GM did something.

Funny you should bring up Salo... I guess everyone forgets when Conklin broke his hand, Salo went 5-3-2 and got the team started on the winning streak, or that he raised his sv% nearly 30 points from Christmas time on. Too bad we didn't dump Salo for Gilbert and go with Big Valley and Moss when Conks was hurt. The Black cloud might have lifted, but people refused to acknowledge that from Christmas up until his last couple of games, he went 13-10-3 and lowered his GAA almost 3/4 of a goal per game and raised his sv% almost 30 points.

It's funny how people look at his sv% and say oh, it's under .900, he's terrible, when for the most part he put up numbers significantly better than that for most of the season.

Quote:
He seems to piss me off every year by making decisions on the roster pre opening day. He moves Grier and decides we like Cleary more, he move Jussi and decides Conklin is the man in goal and this year he moves Chimera to make room for Rita. Why not let camp decide these battles, why not let the first 25 games go by when you know weíll have injuries and youíll get a chance to audition Rita again.
Do you think Chimera would have allowed the Oilers to move up 18 spots in the draft and add an additional 4th round pick at training camp? The Oilers weren't going to have enough space on the Roster to allow everyone to play 25 games, so unless you were going to send one guy down and risk losing him on waivers, the Oilers needed to make some kind of move to let Rita have a shot at the NHL.

No one is going to make a trade with you if you have to put a guy on waivers. Trying to trade Jussi at training camp probably would have resulted in him not getting dealt and instead ending up on waivers. Same with Chimera this season... you weren't going to get much more than a 4th round pick for him if you tried to trade him during training camp.

Quote:
And then in a year where we are in the playoffs and rolling along (2003) Kevin pulls two unexpected deals. Trading Carter and Janne at the deadline that year still ranks with me as bad moves. What purpose did they serve? If we had to move those two players why not wait until after the playoffs and trade them at the strongest draft in 12 years? We did get decent return for Anson and Janne but I will argue that this club has never been the same since the day of those trades, which leads me to my next point.
Sometimes you need to get the guys you want when they are available. If guys like Dvorak and Torres were targetted by Lowe and his scouts, then get them when you can. No one knows what the thought process was during those trades, but I will tell you this... we were a better team with Dvorak than we were with Carter, and had Dvorak remained healthy, the Oilers would have beat the Stars. It's not always about unloading high priced guys for draft picks. Sometimes you target guys that you like, and you go and get them when you can, especially when they are at the price you like.

Quote:
Kevin Lowe does not understand the necessary ingredients that make a championship team. Right now we have a team flowing with forward depth, when the Oil get into a game where its 5 on 5 with 4 lines rolling we do very well. But in building a grittier, harder working (and this is the hardest working team Iíve ever seen wear Oiler silks), defensive orientated team with four good but not great lines, K-Lowe and Mac T have built a team of wellÖK-Lowe and Mac T players. The problem is we are weak in every other area and we are weak quite often because of trades by K-Lowe.
You'd think it was 2007 and the Oilers were trying to find their identity. How on earth could you possibly know that Lowe doesn't understand the necessary ingredients that make a championship team? I mean, he only played on 6 Stanley Cup championship teams, and was only a key member of the 2002 gold medal team's executive. I don't think Kevin Lowe has stopped and said "Okay, I'm done... here's my team that is going to win me the cup!". I think Lowe is far from finished, and he's said that several times.

Quote:
Grier, Marchant and Murray gone our penalty killing sucks

Carter our floating PP sniper moved along with Janneís puck moving and our PP sucks.
Neither was particularily good when those guys were there either. The big difference being that the Oilers had a brutal stretch on the PK where nothing went right... but for most of the year the Oilers PK put up better numbers than it did in the history of the franchise.

The PP was weak, but once again, I don't think this is the team that Lowe plans on making a cup run with. I have no doubt that there are still lots of moves he wants to make, and that there are a lot of holes that will either be filled by up and coming players, or will be addressed when the time and the price is right.

Quote:
And yes most importantly K-Lowe has not addressed the weakness at goal. Saloís haul started too leak a while ago. Kevin Loweís most important duty over the past two years and even now should have been to address the goaltending situation. Heís done a good job drafting goalies but realistically we are 3-5 years away from either DD or JDD making an impact. Right now our goaltending tandem is good enough to not lose us too many games but its also not good enough to win us many games either. Anyone who tells me they thought Conklinís game was anything more than serviceable last year didnít pay much attention to the games.
Maybe the team Kevin Lowe is building is 3-5 years away from making an impact as well? The problem is, there are a lot of decent goaltenders, but these decent goaltenders aren't going to solve the problems and make the Oilers contenders. Weekes is a decent goaltender, but he isn't going to take the team much farther than Conklin/Markkanen. The Oilers need a true impact goaltender, and they aren't cheap. It'll cost a lot to acquire one, and it'll cost a lot to keep him... unless the CBA changes, which I think is the big point here.

With the way the CBA is, it didn't make sense to try and fill all the holes now because the glaring holes are a legit top line centre, a scoring winger, an offensive defenceman and a top notch goaltender... that runs in the neighbourhood on roughly $25mil just for those 4 players.

Now a decent CBA, will see the price for that core drop a tonne (hopefully to around $14mil), which will allow the Oilers to go in and fill those holes if guys like Schremp or JDD don't pan out.

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 12:26 AM
  #113
momentai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Thompson
Momentai,

I really like arguing with you, but you need to stop putting words into my mouth. I never said that, you did. Don't think I said it. I could fire back with a response like,

'Yeah, Momentai, but if you say that, that must mean you think 2nd rounders are worthless. Does anyone else think that 2nd rounders are worthless?'

What the hell does how they get them have to matter? In Lowe's case, he traded away a bunch of players for them. In Lowe's case, he moved Hecht whom he got for Doug Weight amongst other players in 2002 for a couple of high 2nds. Not a bad trade I guess, worked out for both teams, but the point is, he was trading roster players for future assets and I think it's come back to bite him in the butt when the oilers missed the post-season.
It was you yourself that started it. No need to get so defensive. You yourself stated that in comparison you'd take a low 1st rounder and 2 mid-seconds rather than a high top 10 first and whatever. Your words not mine. How do we get into the situation where you are comparing 4 picks in the top 60 as opposed to the 2. Especially given Sather has had more? Can we at least the ridiculousness in that statement?

And it was you who said that averaging out the picks that Lowe had the higher draft position. Doesn't averaging as a whole inherently make each pick (regardless of round) have the same probability? As I mentioned... you fail to provide the necessary weighting on a first round pick as opposed to a second. And I believe Sather's failures have a lot more to with the former than the latter.

So why does Lowe get the shaft in terms of dealing roster players for draft picks. If I recall correctly, Sather was also victim to this dirty business of trading players for draft picks. Sather had the higher first round picks and did jack squat with them. If Lowe is simply doing well because he has more of them... that really doesn't explain the first round failures that plagued this franchise with Sather at the helm.

You first say that Lowe has had higher picks and more of them. You further clarified that what you meant was really the second round picks he had amassed in his tenure. Now you further clarify that what you meant was actually the 50-100 selections in the draft. It would behoove you to make up your mind.

Given the fact that most of the prospect depth the Oilers have amassed are primarily 1st/2nd rounders and that Sather had the higher draft selection and apparently and more picks in the top 60... how does your point that Kevin Lowe benefitted from more picks (higher as well) work?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
Sure, Lowe has better prospects. He's also picking way higher and way more than Slats used to.

momentai is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 12:29 AM
  #114
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 Jay Thompson
Not a bad trade I guess, worked out for both teams, but the point is, he was trading roster players for future assets and I think it's come back to bite him in the butt when the oilers missed the post-season.
Who cares?

If JDD becomes a #1 goaltender and Stoll developes into a top 2 way player who gives a crap?

Even if all the Oilers do is make it to the 3rd round, it's farther than they ever got with Weight.

Miz, you don't seem to get it... the Playoffs are nice, but what the hell is the point of continually being a 7th or 8th seed like were were in 97 and 98 and win one series and say buh-bye?

I'll put up with missing the playoffs a couple of times if it results in the Oilers having a team that competes with the best and has continual post season success (and I'd venture every Oiler fan will agree).

And until we wait 3-4 years, it's pretty impossible to say if Hecht for two 2nd round picks hurt the team or helped the team.

The team wasn't going to have any future with how the team looked in 1998.

There wasn't a single blue-chip goaltender prospect, absolutely nothing in terms of legitimate nhl talent in the system (top end superstar or 3rd line checker included).

I don't care about winning a round in the 2004 playoffs if it means my chances at a Stanley Cup in 2007 are better for it.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 12:59 AM
  #115
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
This is an interesting argument.

Would the Nedved move have been good if he made it in December and it cost the Oilers Pouliot?

Sometimes you need to make deals for the future at the right time in order to get maximum return on the players you are giving up.

I'd rather have gotten York for Poti and Murray at the 70 game mark than Stu Barnes for Poti at the 40 game mark, or Jan Hlavac at the 50 game mark.



And other times you need to make the right decision for the future of the team. Is there any evidence that making a marginal trade for bit players helps? Or is it just a useless cosmetic effect that makes the fans happy because something was done, and it doesn't really matter if anything tangible happens because of it, because hey, the GM did something.

Funny you should bring up Salo... I guess everyone forgets when Conklin broke his hand, Salo went 5-3-2 and got the team started on the winning streak, or that he raised his sv% nearly 30 points from Christmas time on. Too bad we didn't dump Salo for Gilbert and go with Big Valley and Moss when Conks was hurt. The Black cloud might have lifted, but people refused to acknowledge that from Christmas up until his last couple of games, he went 13-10-3 and lowered his GAA almost 3/4 of a goal per game and raised his sv% almost 30 points.

It's funny how people look at his sv% and say oh, it's under .900, he's terrible, when for the most part he put up numbers significantly better than that for most of the season.



Do you think Chimera would have allowed the Oilers to move up 18 spots in the draft and add an additional 4th round pick at training camp? The Oilers weren't going to have enough space on the Roster to allow everyone to play 25 games, so unless you were going to send one guy down and risk losing him on waivers, the Oilers needed to make some kind of move to let Rita have a shot at the NHL.

No one is going to make a trade with you if you have to put a guy on waivers. Trying to trade Jussi at training camp probably would have resulted in him not getting dealt and instead ending up on waivers. Same with Chimera this season... you weren't going to get much more than a 4th round pick for him if you tried to trade him during training camp.



Sometimes you need to get the guys you want when they are available. If guys like Dvorak and Torres were targetted by Lowe and his scouts, then get them when you can. No one knows what the thought process was during those trades, but I will tell you this... we were a better team with Dvorak than we were with Carter, and had Dvorak remained healthy, the Oilers would have beat the Stars. It's not always about unloading high priced guys for draft picks. Sometimes you target guys that you like, and you go and get them when you can, especially when they are at the price you like.



You'd think it was 2007 and the Oilers were trying to find their identity. How on earth could you possibly know that Lowe doesn't understand the necessary ingredients that make a championship team? I mean, he only played on 6 Stanley Cup championship teams, and was only a key member of the 2002 gold medal team's executive. I don't think Kevin Lowe has stopped and said "Okay, I'm done... here's my team that is going to win me the cup!". I think Lowe is far from finished, and he's said that several times.



Neither was particularily good when those guys were there either. The big difference being that the Oilers had a brutal stretch on the PK where nothing went right... but for most of the year the Oilers PK put up better numbers than it did in the history of the franchise.

The PP was weak, but once again, I don't think this is the team that Lowe plans on making a cup run with. I have no doubt that there are still lots of moves he wants to make, and that there are a lot of holes that will either be filled by up and coming players, or will be addressed when the time and the price is right.



Maybe the team Kevin Lowe is building is 3-5 years away from making an impact as well? The problem is, there are a lot of decent goaltenders, but these decent goaltenders aren't going to solve the problems and make the Oilers contenders. Weekes is a decent goaltender, but he isn't going to take the team much farther than Conklin/Markkanen. The Oilers need a true impact goaltender, and they aren't cheap. It'll cost a lot to acquire one, and it'll cost a lot to keep him... unless the CBA changes, which I think is the big point here.

With the way the CBA is, it didn't make sense to try and fill all the holes now because the glaring holes are a legit top line centre, a scoring winger, an offensive defenceman and a top notch goaltender... that runs in the neighbourhood on roughly $25mil just for those 4 players.

Now a decent CBA, will see the price for that core drop a tonne (hopefully to around $14mil), which will allow the Oilers to go in and fill those holes if guys like Schremp or JDD don't pan out.
Some points here Dawgbone;

Yeah its hard to make quality trades in the Dec-Feb period thatís why only good GMís can usually succeed at it. Anybody can make trades at the deadline when the market is tweaking. Sather made his Carson for Klima/Murphy/Graves trade and his BoBo/Grande Cache Flash for Moreau/Kilger/Cleary trades in midcourse as a direct result of a slumping team. Look at how Sutter addressed his goaltending situation, nobody expected him to get a Vezina candidate out of Kipper but he saw a problem and fixed it. Look at the value Sullivan gave the Preds when they acquired him a few weeks before the deadline.

Spin all the stats you want about Salo Dawgbone, I can make Dan Cleary seem like a 40 goal scorer with a 10 game sample. The fact remains, Saloís trademark in the last 2.5 years here was indifferent play, few stolen games and bad goals at bad times. He went from being a Good Consistent goalie who could steal games, to a hot and cold streaky goalie, to a mediocre-cold goalie, to a brutal cold goalie. Lowe failed to spot the trend.

You prove my point about Rita and Chimera (who we had to add a 3rd with to get a 2nd and 4th). Why do we need to make room for Rita, why canít Rita make some room for himself? Just like why did we need to make room for Cleary who hadnít proven squat when Lowe moved Grier to trim our overflowing roster.

Yeah Lowe does probably understand the makings of a cup contender and this isnít the team heís satisfied with but heís traded his Offensive DMen, his skilled centers and his special team specialists basically for winger depth and futures. Now guess where he has to fill holes.


Last edited by HotToddy: 08-04-2004 at 01:31 AM.
HotToddy is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 01:09 AM
  #116
xerburt
Registered User
 
xerburt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: vancouver
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
Wow, some great debating going on here.

From HotToddy's post, it seems that Lowe times all of his trades based primarily on one key aspect alone: the theory of buy low, sell high. It seems to me like he's picked times where he thought he could get the best value for an asset, irregardless of how it affected the current state of the hockey club.

The draft, training camp, and the trading deadline are all times when GMs around the league are priming up their teams or looking to move assets. It's a seller's market, to be sure. Demand is high for various assets, and this is when Lowe seems to pull the majority of his trades. Offhand, the only exception I can think of is the Comrie fiasco, and that situation seemed to be an entirely different breed altogether.

xerburt is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 09:24 AM
  #117
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,211
vCash: 500
quoted by Hot Toddy

Spin all the stats you want about Salo Dawgbone, I can make Dan Cleary seem like a 40 goal scorer with a 10 game sample. The fact remains, Saloís trademark in the last 2.5 years here was indifferent play, few stolen games and bad goals at bad times. He went from being a Good Consistent goalie who could steal games, to a hot and cold streaky goalie, to a mediocre-cold goalie, to a brutal cold goalie. Lowe failed to spot the trend.

Salo goes to the all-star game. The next year, Lowe signs him to a 3 year deal with club options for to more years. In the first two years, Salo is the Team MVP. In the third year, he sucks beyond all belief and is traded at the deadline for a decent prospect.

That does not seem like a damning scenario for a GM. After 10 games last year, everyone said "trade salo" but this only shows our ignorance. Do we expect other GM were hit by a stupid stick? What GM in their right mind would trade for a guy who is currently playing poorly and has not recovered from the Belarus / wife leaving him situations? Lowe's only options were to keep him and hope his play improves (which it did) or cut him loose.

I think we can all agree that the last year of salo was not a good one for Lowe's track record but we should also agree that signing him to a 3 year deal was the right move at the time.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 10:41 AM
  #118
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Good Thread, as one of the resident HF Lowe apologists I feel the need to weigh in.

Goaltending - I thought Lowetide had a very good post on Tommy Salo a page or so back. Pretty much sums up my thoughts as well. Too me this was a case where I think Lowe made decent decisions as they came along (this is a case where the problems lie squarly with Salo himself) and wether or not it would have been nice to move Salo sooner is irrelevant. You need a trading partner and that wasn't going to happen any sooner than it did without Salo turning his game around, which he didn't.

As far as Conklin and Markannen, I am comfortable is saying this tandem is a middle of the pack duo that will be sufficient for the short term (2 years or so). Nobody has sold them as anything more. Under Sathers charge, this team was made up of 2 or 3 high end players, decent defence and a good goalie. That goalie HAD to be good for any chance of success because there were 3 lines that played in the Oilers end on a game to game basis. Under Lowe's charge he has for the most part established a team that will not knock you socks off with talent but is rounded enough that the need for a top end goalie is lessened.

Further to that, to revisit the whole Sutter is a genius for Kipprusoff crappola (which I don't particularily buy), what if, by some chance, there is that same potential in Conklin? Does that make Lowe a genius? I find it rediculous that Lowe gets critisized for not finding that unproven diamond in the rough AND critisized for giving an unproven Conklin a legitimate shot at proving himself.

Even further more, both Conklin and Markannen are movable players. Even if they don't pan out the way they hope, they are at minimum capable back ups that are not commanding sky high salaries. Unlike Salo, Lowe is not stuck with guys for the duration of their contracts.

Finally, how Mizral can say with a straight face that Lowe has proven he doesn't know what it takes because it took two years for him to finally move away from Salo after he started gassing games and let in the Belarus goal, followed by Conklin not being worth the chance because he is "inconsistent" is beyond me. Does anyone else see the irony in his critisisms against Lowe's handling of goaltending when Vancouver is the poster child of "not getting it"? The mighty Vancouver Canucks not only stuck with Cloutier for the three years since he gassed the center ice Lidstrom shot that turned an entire playoff series around and has since never been able to take the Canucks beyond the first round without the help of 20 flu ridden, puking St Louis players and yet instead of the Canucks seeing the light and looking towards another goalie, was it Kevin Weekes that Mizral threw out as a good alternative, they actually rewarded Cloutier with another contract? Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Center - Yes center has been lacking but I don't agree that thesituation is quite as dire as some may argue. I actually like York at center and frankly can't see him anywhere else. The depth on wings demands that York play center in order to keep from a decent offensive talent being supressed on the 4th line. I also have no problem with Reasoner, Horcoff and Stoll taking the bottom two center positions. So really in my mind we are really talking about 1 center position and Nedved's play at the end of the season proved how important that can be. That said, would it really have been worth it for this team to go out and give up a ton for that player before now? The team wasn't ready to compete so getting an expensive top flight vet would be somewhat of a waste, to get a young center that would be around for a while would cost a ton in assets and there are kids in the system that MAY fill the void for them. Yes it would have been nice to have that guy sooner and it's fair to perhaps critisize Lowe for not doing something about it early but at the same time is the team THAT much worse off going into the next couple seasons - the time most expect to see the fruits of Lowe's labours pay off - as long is it is done before next season or shortly after camp finishes?

Drafting - I never would have thought that I would see the day when decent drafting, aquiring picks and using them well would be critisized when discussing how a team is being managed. On top of the I MOST DEFINATELY would not have expected to see a hint of defence towards Sathers drafting while he was in Edmonton. Sometimes this palce is like Bizzaro world.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 10:50 AM
  #119
Yanner39
Registered User
 
Yanner39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ottawa ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
You prove my point about Rita and Chimera (who we had to add a 3rd with to get a 2nd and 4th). Why do we need to make room for Rita, why canít Rita make some room for himself? Just like why did we need to make room for Cleary who hadnít proven squat when Lowe moved Grier to trim our overflowing roster.
An NHL team can only carry 23 players. You can't send Chimera down to the farm because a) he has to clear waivers and b) the Oilers can afford to pay that salary for a minor league player. Lowe's not giving the job to Rita. He's just shuffling the roster to make room for Rita in case he makes the team. I hope you're not upset they left a player like Chimera go.

Will agree with you that Lowe does tend wait a little too long to pull the trigger on some deals, although I not in a position to dispute his train of thought.

My take of this whole Lowe debate is that considering the mess he heritated, it's hard for me to bash him completely. In my mind, there is not one trade he made where I think he got fleeced. Does that mean I'm not critical of things he's done? No and Lowe probably expects some criticism has most GMs do. You should see the heat Muckler is taking here in Ottawa.

The fact is that is some Oilers fans are not happy with the work he's done so far in positionning the Oilers for the upcoming 2, 3 or 4 years, then I just don't understand what these fans expect. If it's a stanley cup even with the best team in the league it's never guaranteed.

Yanner39 is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 10:57 AM
  #120
Yanner39
Registered User
 
Yanner39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ottawa ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue
Good Thread, as one of the resident HF Lowe apologists I feel the need to weigh in.

Goaltending - I thought Lowetide had a very good post on Tommy Salo a page or so back. Pretty much sums up my thoughts as well. Too me this was a case where I think Lowe made decent decisions as they came along (this is a case where the problems lie squarly with Salo himself) and wether or not it would have been nice to move Salo sooner is irrelevant. You need a trading partner and that wasn't going to happen any sooner than it did without Salo turning his game around, which he didn't.

As far as Conklin and Markannen, I am comfortable is saying this tandem is a middle of the pack duo that will be sufficient for the short term (2 years or so). Nobody has sold them as anything more. Under Sathers charge, this team was made up of 2 or 3 high end players, decent defence and a good goalie. That goalie HAD to be good for any chance of success because there were 3 lines that played in the Oilers end on a game to game basis. Under Lowe's charge he has for the most part established a team that will not knock you socks off with talent but is rounded enough that the need for a top end goalie is lessened.

Further to that, to revisit the whole Sutter is a genius for Kipprusoff crappola (which I don't particularily buy), what if, by some chance, there is that same potential in Conklin? Does that make Lowe a genius? I find it rediculous that Lowe gets critisized for not finding that unproven diamond in the rough AND critisized for giving an unproven Conklin a legitimate shot at proving himself.

Even further more, both Conklin and Markannen are movable players. Even if they don't pan out the way they hope, they are at minimum capable back ups that are not commanding sky high salaries. Unlike Salo, Lowe is not stuck with guys for the duration of their contracts.

Finally, how Mizral can say with a straight face that Lowe has proven he doesn't know what it takes because it took two years for him to finally move away from Salo after he started gassing games and let in the Belarus goal, followed by Conklin not being worth the chance because he is "inconsistent" is beyond me. Does anyone else see the irony in his critisisms against Lowe's handling of goaltending when Vancouver is the poster child of "not getting it"? The mighty Vancouver Canucks not only stuck with Cloutier for the three years since he gassed the center ice Lidstrom shot that turned an entire playoff series around and has since never been able to take the Canucks beyond the first round without the help of 20 flu ridden, puking St Louis players and yet instead of the Canucks seeing the light and looking towards another goalie, was it Kevin Weekes that Mizral threw out as a good alternative, they actually rewarded Cloutier with another contract? Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Center - Yes center has been lacking but I don't agree that thesituation is quite as dire as some may argue. I actually like York at center and frankly can't see him anywhere else. The depth on wings demands that York play center in order to keep from a decent offensive talent being supressed on the 4th line. I also have no problem with Reasoner, Horcoff and Stoll taking the bottom two center positions. So really in my mind we are really talking about 1 center position and Nedved's play at the end of the season proved how important that can be. That said, would it really have been worth it for this team to go out and give up a ton for that player before now? The team wasn't ready to compete so getting an expensive top flight vet would be somewhat of a waste, to get a young center that would be around for a while would cost a ton in assets and there are kids in the system that MAY fill the void for them. Yes it would have been nice to have that guy sooner and it's fair to perhaps critisize Lowe for not doing something about it early but at the same time is the team THAT much worse off going into the next couple seasons - the time most expect to see the fruits of Lowe's labours pay off - as long is it is done before next season or shortly after camp finishes?

Drafting - I never would have thought that I would see the day when decent drafting, aquiring picks and using them well would be critisized when discussing how a team is being managed. On top of the I MOST DEFINATELY would not have expected to see a hint of defence towards Sathers drafting while he was in Edmonton. Sometimes this palce is like Bizzaro world.
Good post cab,

I just want to add that some people seen to think that big, number #1 centres fall from the sky or grow on trees. During the year I was trying to see who the Oilers could acquire and I found myself thinking: "Why the hell would they trade him to the Oilers." #1 centres are hard to come by. When Lecavalier was having problems with Tortorrella, some fans wanted to Oilers to get him. Huh, yeah but at what cost? T-bay wasn't going to give Vinny to the Oilers just because he doesn't play nice with the coach. There was alot of adsurd thinking going on.

Yanner39 is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 11:42 AM
  #121
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,608
vCash: 500
Sorry about that post


Last edited by HotToddy: 08-04-2004 at 12:03 PM.
HotToddy is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 11:48 AM
  #122
misfit
Registered User
 
misfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: just north of...ever
Posts: 15,773
vCash: 50
Lowe's Center Remedies (short term):

- Dopita (02/03)
- Oates (03/04)
- Nedved (03/04)

Lowe's Center Remedies (long term):

- Ninimaki (2002)
- Pouliot (2003)
- Schremp (2004)

How has Lowe not addressed our biggest need and not tried to get us a top line center? The results might not all be favorable, but you can't say he hasn't tried.

misfit is online now  
Old
08-04-2004, 12:00 PM
  #123
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misfit
Lowe's Center Remedies (short term):

- Dopita (02/03)
- Oates (03/04)
- Nedved (03/04)

Lowe's Center Remedies (long term):

- Ninimaki (2002)
- Pouliot (2003)
- Schremp (2004)

How has Lowe not addressed our biggest need and not tried to get us a top line center? The results might not all be favorable, but you can't say he hasn't tried.
I am neither a Lowe apologist or a detractor, because it isn't an easy job, and I am not someone to suggest I could do better. But utilizing Dopita, Oates and 16 games from Nedved as addressing a deficiency that has lasted 3 years isn't something I would brag about. I will suggest that Lowe took the simplest road, the easiest road, and the least chancy road. He does not seem to have the affinity to make the bold move necessary.(Caveat is that he will make bold moves if he has to cut salary.) Sometimes he seems to wait for things to work out, rather than force them to work out. This is one of the reasons I like Bobby Clarke. You might hate his moves, you might hate his attitude, but damn it, he is never going to get caught looking at strike three.

Although Clarkie has great advantages over K-lo, you can't tell me that he didn't have the assets at any time over the last several years to make a move for a top 6 center. I think he has, but has been unwilling to do anything about it.

I like Lowe and his long term plan looks solid. I can live with his deficiencies, but over the next few years, either his long term plan works out or his apologists will go from the 80%+ in the poll to the other side in a hurry.

Slats432 is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 12:01 PM
  #124
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. van Nostrin
An NHL team can only carry 23 players. You can't send Chimera down to the farm because a) he has to clear waivers and b) the Oilers can afford to pay that salary for a minor league player. Lowe's not giving the job to Rita. He's just shuffling the roster to make room for Rita in case he makes the team. I hope you're not upset they left a player like Chimera go.

Will agree with you that Lowe does tend wait a little too long to pull the trigger on some deals, although I not in a position to dispute his train of thought.

My take of this whole Lowe debate is that considering the mess he heritated, it's hard for me to bash him completely. In my mind, there is not one trade he made where I think he got fleeced. Does that mean I'm not critical of things he's done? No and Lowe probably expects some criticism has most GMs do. You should see the heat Muckler is taking here in Ottawa.

The fact is that is some Oilers fans are not happy with the work he's done so far in positionning the Oilers for the upcoming 2, 3 or 4 years, then I just don't understand what these fans expect. If it's a stanley cup even with the best team in the league it's never guaranteed.
understand the 23 player rule but why does Lowe make the roster decisions in Summer? What happens if Rita doesn't cut it? Then we've traded a player much like we did with Grier to open up room for a player that could be our next Cleary.

I'm also getting tired of this revisionist myth that Lowe inherited some sort of calamity from Sather. Yes Sather and Co. were terrrible at the draft table and personally I was glad to see Slats replaced by K-Lowe but lets be fair with facts. The cupboard wasn't exactly devoid of prospects (Comrie, Pisani, Rita, Semenov, Lombardi, Horcoff, Salmo, Chimera) and Lowe inherited a team with a dozen quality NHLers, most in their prime (Weight, Guerin, Smyth, Hamrlick, Poti, Ninnimaa, Smith, Moreau, Grier, Marchant, Salo, Murray). That's a lot of assets to work with so it wasn't like Lowe was rebuilding from ruins. Mizral makes a fair point when he says that the Oilers should have a lot of prospects and good youong players because Lowe has moved a lot of assets in his four years here, and valuable assets at that.

HotToddy is offline  
Old
08-04-2004, 12:36 PM
  #125
windowlicker
Registered User
 
windowlicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Murky Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
I'm also getting tired of this revisionist myth that Lowe inherited some sort of calamity from Sather. Yes Sather and Co. were terrrible at the draft table and personally I was glad to see Slats replaced by K-Lowe but lets be fair with facts. The cupboard wasn't exactly devoid of prospects (Comrie, Pisani, Rita, Semenov, Lombardi, Horcoff, Salmo, Chimera) and Lowe inherited a team with a dozen quality NHLers, most in their prime (Weight, Guerin, Smyth, Hamrlick, Poti, Ninnimaa, Smith, Moreau, Grier, Marchant, Salo, Murray). That's a lot of assets to work with so it wasn't like Lowe was rebuilding from ruins. Mizral makes a fair point when he says that the Oilers should have a lot of prospects and good youong players because Lowe has moved a lot of assets in his four years here, and valuable assets at that.
As it boils down to, this is how the current asset managemend looks like:

Comrie = Woywitka & Schremp
Pisani = Still here
Rita = Still here
Semenov = Still here
Lombardi = Lost
Horcoff = Still here
Salmelainen = Still here
Chimera = Paukovich

Weight = JDD & Stoll & Reasoner
Guerin = Hemsky & Lynch & Dvorak
Smyth = Still here
Hamrlik = Brewer & Winchester
Poti & Murray = York & Koltsov
Niinimaa = Torres & Isbister
Smith = Still here
Moreau = Still here
Grier = Zach Stortini
Marchant = Let him walk (The right call at the time)
04' Salo = Tom Gilbert

Thats not too bad.

windowlicker 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 10:19 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.