Delauriers and XMAS Din Din

Jason Gregor
December 27 2008 02:51PM

How do you feel after gorging yourself with two dinners a day for three days?Satisfied, but also dreading stepping on the scale and realizing you will have to resort to three straight days of booze - the only diet to get rid of the excess weight, because as Wanye says, “exercise is overrated.”

I’m guessing a goalie feels the same after not playing in a month. Jeff Deslauriers hasn’t played since a 4-3 loss in Dallas on November 30th. He is rustier than a guy who’s been married for 20 years, gets divorced and then has to go and wheel the ladies. It’s not pretty and neither would Deslauriers’ next NHL start be after sitting out for a month, so expect the Oilers to send him down to Springfield on a conditioning stint.

Now that the trade embargo and waiver freeze is over, Deslauriers can be sent down to see some rubber. Under the CBA, a team can send a player down for a two-week conditioning stint that doesn’t require him to clear waivers. A player basically needs to be inactive for close to a month for it to be considered legitimate, and not just a way to bypass the waiver process.

The Oilers want JDD to get down to Springfield and get him at least five or six games. Expect him to be sent down this coming Monday. That would give him a day or two of practice before the Falcons play on Wednesday. When the Oilers send him down on Monday, Dec 29th, he could play up to eight games in the two weeks that he is allowed to be there. He won’t play in all eight games, since there are two sets of three games in three nights, but you can expect him to play six. Here is the Springfield schedule for the next two weeks:

Wed Dec 31 v. Hershey Fri Jan 02 v. Manchester Sat Jan 03 v. Providence Sun Jan 04 @ Portland Wed Jan 07 v. Binghamton Fri Jan 09 v. Hartford Sat Jan 10 @ Portland Sun Jan 11 @ Portland

Look for Deslauriers to play on the 31st, 02, 03, 07, 09 and then either the 10th or the 11th. And Springfield could use him having lost seven of their last eight going into tonight’s game v. Hartford.

Devan Dubynk has carried the load in Springfield starting 30 of the 31 games, so he could use a bit of a breather having allowed 3 or more goals in his last eight games. This isn’t the ideal situation for Deslauriers and the Oilers, but when he is recalled expect him to see NHL rubber right away. He will return to Edmonton on January 12th, and once he is recalled the Oilers hope to have found a trading partner to solve their three-headed monster. I’ve been told that Steve Tambellini has been working the phones for a month trying to solve the problem, but so far no team is interested in either Garon or Roloson. There has been lots of interest in Deslauriers, but the Oilers don’t want to move him.

NAMES THAT TEAMS ASK FOR

The names that opposing GMs throw out the most when trade talks arise are Andrew Cogliano, Tom Gilbert and Jeff Deslauriers. I have it confirmed that not one single team has even brought up Rob Schremp’s name in a trade. It is interesting that just before Christmas Marc Pouliot started to get some feelers. I’m not a big rumour spreader, so I’m not saying that he will be moved, but it is interesting to hear what players other teams are interested in. Of course Ales Hemsky’s name comes up, but it’s not a long conversation obviously.

Ddf3e2ba09069c465299f3c416e43eae
One of Canada's most versatile sports personalities. Jason hosts The Jason Gregor Show, weekdays from 2 to 6 p.m., on TSN 1260, and he writes a column every Monday in the Edmonton Journal. You can follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/JasonGregor
Avatar
#1 Adam Dyck
December 27 2008, 03:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I imagine offers for Gilbert are fairly lowball, given his play of late?

Avatar
#2 Jason Gregor
December 27 2008, 04:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Adam Dyck: You'd be surprised. GMs don't try to embarrass one another with ridiculous offers, like Gilbert for a 3rd rounder or a 4th liner. When Gilbert's name comes up it normally involves a top six forward. But it would have to be a top six guy with some size and those guys are rare.

Avatar
#3 doritogrande
December 27 2008, 04:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Thanks for the heads up on Deslauriers. It's been a long time since he's even been mentioned.

The Falcons can sure use his help as of late. Dubnyk's been completely overworked this year.

Avatar
#4 ramped up
December 27 2008, 05:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Jason Gregor: So if they don't play Garon for a month can they send him down when JD gets back and give them selves another few weeks to deal??

Avatar
#5 David S
December 27 2008, 07:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

In all that's holy up above. Please not Cogliano.

Thanks for the update Jason. I thought the phones would be pretty busy at Oilers HO the last while. The way some guys mouth off here, you'd swear Lowe and Tambellini were spending a nice winter golfing in Arizona or something.

Avatar
#6 Jonathan Willis
December 27 2008, 07:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Appreciate the update Jason - I was wondering if the Oilers would send JDD down for a conditioning stint, but I didn't realize he needed a month's inactivity, so thanks for that as well.

Avatar
#7 misfit
December 27 2008, 08:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

If teams are asking for JDD, why on earth haven't they moved him yet? He's clearly not one of the team's top 2 goaltenders, and I'm worried that the team will not look to solidify the goaltending long term as long as JDD is in the system. I'm not a goaltending coach, scout, or GM, but I just don't see a future starting goaltender when I look at Deslauriers.

Avatar
#8 Milli
December 28 2008, 09:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'd like to see this worked out, but given Roli's play, I'm surprised that there isn't any interest in him. As well, with garon small contract, you'd have to think there might be a taker, although given his play....Does anyone really think that Cogs or gibby would be moved??? I gotta think no. The Gm has to think long term while we can though around crazy eklund like speculation.

Avatar
#9 Jonathan Willis
December 28 2008, 09:22AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Milli wrote:

Does anyone really think that Cogs or gibby would be moved???

Perhaps not Cogliano, but look at the money tied up on the backend:

Visnovsky - 5.6M until 12-13 Souray - 5.4M until 11-12 Gilbert - 4M until 13-14 Staios - 2.7M until 10-11 Grebeshkov - RFA at the end of the season Smid - RFA at the end of the season Strudwick - UFA at the end of the season

I've got to think there's going to be at least one subtraction from that top-five, and while I imagine it will be Staios or Grebeshkov, perhaps Gilbert is available if the right scenario arises.

Avatar
#10 Adam Dyck
December 28 2008, 09:31AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Because Roloson CAN'T be a long term starter here (he's 39 years old, c'mon!), Garon is nothing like a sure thing anymore, and in that sort of a situation you don't trade your top prospect. Or, at least, that's how I see it.

As for Gilbert, I could see trading him for a big scorer. The ideal man in my mind is Lucic (an amazing player, IMO), but we'd certainly have to throw in more parts, and I doubt Boston would even consider it.

Avatar
#11 Darcy
December 28 2008, 09:35AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Good stuff Jason.

I'm not surprised that other teams are interested in Cogs.

Everyone has high hopes for Gagne and preach patience because he is undersized and young. Cogliano is only 2 years older and SMALLER than Gagne, and he seems to have adapted to the NHL very well.

Gagne is listed at 5'11 191lbs Cogliano is listed at 5'10 184lbs

If the Oilers really want to improve up front with someone like Spezza or Kovalchuk they will probably need to give up a top rated d-man, Cogs and a pick at the least.

If Cogliano can improve his faceoff % from his dismal 38.8% I don't think the Oilers need to improve at center, just left wing.

Avatar
#12 Darcy
December 28 2008, 09:38AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

misfit wrote:

If teams are asking for JDD, why on earth haven’t they moved him yet? He’s clearly not one of the team’s top 2 goaltenders, and I’m worried that the team will not look to solidify the goaltending long term as long as JDD is in the system. I’m not a goaltending coach, scout, or GM, but I just don’t see a future starting goaltender when I look at Deslauriers.

He hasn't been moved because he the goalie of the future for the Oilers. With Garon and Roli UFAs at the end of the season, and JDD tied up for 1 more year at 1mil and then a RFA, it would be ludicrious to give him up and not get a good goalie under contract in return.

Given where Loweballini are spending their money, then need to keep cheap goalies to stay under the cap.

I like the idea of signing Roli to a 1 year at 1.75-2 to split time next year with JDD.

Avatar
#13 Clarkenstein
December 28 2008, 09:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Darcy wrote:

misfit wrote: If teams are asking for JDD, why on earth haven’t they moved him yet? He’s clearly not one of the team’s top 2 goaltenders, and I’m worried that the team will not look to solidify the goaltending long term as long as JDD is in the system. I’m not a goaltending coach, scout, or GM, but I just don’t see a future starting goaltender when I look at Deslauriers. He hasn’t been moved because he the goalie of the future for the Oilers. With Garon and Roli UFAs at the end of the season, and JDD tied up for 1 more year at 1mil and then a RFA, it would be ludicrious to give him up and not get a good goalie under contract in return. Given where Loweballini are spending their money, then need to keep cheap goalies to stay under the cap. I like the idea of signing Roli to a 1 year at 1.75-2 to split time next year with JDD.
Avatar
#14 Clarkenstein
December 28 2008, 09:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Clarkenstein wrote:

Darcy wrote: misfit wrote: If teams are asking for JDD, why on earth haven’t they moved him yet? He’s clearly not one of the team’s top 2 goaltenders, and I’m worried that the team will not look to solidify the goaltending long term as long as JDD is in the system. I’m not a goaltending coach, scout, or GM, but I just don’t see a future starting goaltender when I look at Deslauriers. He hasn’t been moved because he the goalie of the future for the Oilers. With Garon and Roli UFAs at the end of the season, and JDD tied up for 1 more year at 1mil and then a RFA, it would be ludicrious to give him up and not get a good goalie under contract in return. Given where Loweballini are spending their money, then need to keep cheap goalies to stay under the cap. I like the idea of signing Roli to a 1 year at 1.75-2 to split time next year with JDD.

Darcy, for 8 years we've been hearing about the "future"!!! How about the present?? If I had the chance to trade Gilbert, JDD, and virtually anybody else save 3 or 4 I would do it in a New York second if it improved our team for NOW!! Gilbert is overpaid considering a cap drop coming and if JDD was so good he would have been starting by now (why do u think they carried 3 tenders this year.. they thought he would earn the job by now... has he?) This team needs size and toughness and they need it right now. What amazes me so far is that we haven't had more injuries considering the Midget team we have out there.

Avatar
#15 Darcy
December 28 2008, 09:54AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Clarkenstein wrote:

Clarkenstein wrote: Darcy, for 8 years we’ve been hearing about the “future”!!! How about the present?? If I had the chance to trade Gilbert, JDD, and virtually anybody else save 3 or 4 I would do it in a New York second if it improved our team for NOW!! Gilbert is overpaid considering a cap drop coming and if JDD was so good he would have been starting by now (why do u think they carried 3 tenders this year.. they thought he would earn the job by now… has he?)

The Oilers had to sign JDD to an NHL contract or lose him for nothing this year, that's why he's up here.

The Oilers do need some help right now, but if you trade the only goalie that you have under contract next year and not get a goalie under contract in return you are in big trouble.

There is no question that the Oilers need to move a goalie, and with the way Roli is playing, the goalie to move is Garon. I'm sure that Loweballini would have moved him by now if they could have.

Avatar
#16 ramped up
December 28 2008, 11:02AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I like the idea of keeping Roli for another if not 2 more years to tutor JDD. We've seen Roli in the playoffs and if we can get there again we stand the chance at another good run. Garon is the guy to move but honestly if he plays mediocre for the season the Oil wouldn't pay him as much based on performance and could also keep him as a back-up,or share the minutes with JDD if Roli wants to move on. Either way the Oil are good in goal as far as I can see and should look to sign a top 6 forward STAT!!

Avatar
#17 Jonathan Willis
December 28 2008, 12:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

FYI - The cap isn't dropping off the face of the Earth - it should be in a range between 1 million lower and 1.5 million higher. And Tom Gilbert may be overpaid now, but I'd be unsurprised if that contract of his looks like a steal in two years time.

Avatar
#18 Joe
December 28 2008, 12:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Jonathan Willis wrote:

And Tom Gilbert may be overpaid now, but I’d be unsurprised if that contract of his looks like a steal in two years time.

Couldn't agree with you more Jonathan. He's still young, and defensemen don't really reach their prime until their late 20s. We've got him locked up until he's 30. The potential is there, and development for this guy is only going to move in one direction...especially with the tutelage of Souray.

Avatar
#19 Jason Gregor
December 28 2008, 01:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Tonight's lineup...

Moreau will be a game time decision. If he goes, then Liam Reddox comes out. Roloson will start.

Avatar
#20 RobinB
December 28 2008, 01:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Joe: Really? What makes you sure Gilbert is going to improve? He turns 26 in two weeks and I'm not sold he'll be anything markedly better than he is now. If Gilbert reaches 40 points more than once during this contract, I'll build you a watch.

And Jonathan, if you think a salary of $5.5 million and a cap hit of $4 million for Gilbert two years from now -- when the cap is likely to be closer to $50 million than $60 million -- will be a "steal," you're mistaken.

Avatar
#21 rindog
December 28 2008, 04:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ RobinB:

What is a solid #2 or #3 defenseman that has the potential to put 35+ points every season (and has done so) while getting limited PP time worth????

Does Gilbert really need to get 40 points playing behind Visnovsky and Souray to be considered good?

Does he not bring other things to the game besides offense? I could name a few, but I am interested in your analysis??

What kind of contracts do you think guys like Beauchemin or Barker will be getting next year?

Avatar
#22 RobinB
December 28 2008, 08:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ rindog: When has Gilbert put up 35-plus points in the NHL? I missed that season.

Does Gilbert really need to get 40 points to be considered good? Well, no, but I never said that. But, if he's going to be a "steal," as Willis offers he might be later in his contract, he'd better provide something tangible and generating offence seems to be his best bet, given his skills.

I consider Gilbert soft. He's not a shutdown guy. He doesn't bring toughness or a physical presence. He's not the team's best shot-blocker. So what will make him "a steal" at $5.5 million?

I've seen players like Gilbert many times -- nice skills and results at a relatively early age -- that prompt people to project this or that two or three years down the road like it's just a matter of time.

Tom Poti (who had 35 points in his second full season with the Oilers), and was younger at the time, comes to mind. Gilbert's not a bad player, but with the way his contract is structured and with the cap sure to decrease over the next two seasons, a 30-35 point guy who does little else isn't going to be "a steal" at $5.5 million.

Avatar
#23 Jonathan Willis
December 28 2008, 08:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ RobinB:

I didn't say his contract would be a steal; I said I'd be unsurprised if things turn out that way.

Also - shut down defensemen don't need to be physical - Lidstrom's the obvious example, but there are others (Hejda for one) who do it more through positional play than anything else.

As for Gilbert, the development curve for defensemen is different - there are plenty of examples of guys coming into their own late in the game. Rafalski's the obvious one, but hell, Souray didn't top 12 points until he turned 28.

Avatar
#24 RobinB
December 28 2008, 09:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Jonathan Willis: Stop tap-dancing and massaging your argument and my words.

I didn't say shutdown defencemen need to be physical or tough. I'm saying Gilbert doesn't fall into the category of a shutdown defenceman and he doesn't fit as a physical or tough defenceman, either. Big difference. And being "unsurprised" that he could turn out to be a steal is just fudging. You're suggesting he might be a bargain at his salary down the road and I'm telling you flat out you're wrong.

One last thing: did you really cite Lidstrom as an example of a non-physical shutdown guy, like I didn't know that, and then top things off by explaining the development curve is different for defencemen? Gosh, thanks for that, Jon. I need you to point out that to me?

Avatar
#25 misfit
December 29 2008, 01:19AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Darcy He hasn’t been moved because he the goalie of the future for the Oilers.

That's exactly the concern I was trying to express.

Avatar
#26 Antony Ta
December 29 2008, 02:35AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

JDD is the goalie of the future. I'm okay with moving one of the veteran goalies right away if it means we can kill two birds with one stone.

Steve Begin is in the dog house in Montreal maybe we can get him if they feel Price needs some veteran backup.

Avatar
#27 Fiveandagame
December 29 2008, 07:09AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ RobinB:@ Jonathan Willis:

I am not going to pretend to know more about the game of hockey than either of you two, but this is my take on Gilbert.

I'd rather be paying Gilbert an average of 4 mil per season that Staios 2.7.

If the OIlers have a bloated contract on the back end it's Staios. A passed his prime under sized d-man with no offensive upside.

No matter what you can't prognosticate the future. Based on Gilbert's impressive development last year into a solid NHL d-man, his first year in the league, you have to put your money on him, that given experience and more games, that he'll continue to progress. Not at the same mind blowing rate as last year, but developing none the less.

He also may have peaked and this is as good as his game allows him to be. But I think Lowe and Co. would tell you they believe he has the tools and the head to be a much bigger impact player. If they didn't see that in his game they would have never signed him long term, of course they could be wrong.

I think it is a very fair contract and obviously other teams do as well, as Gregor has pointed out, teams are interested in Gilbert, and that means his long term contract too.

I also think the Oilers do have a steal of a contract on the back end and that's Souray's.

Avatar
#28 Jonathan Willis
December 29 2008, 08:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ RobinB:

Gosh, Robin, I'm sorry for doing things like citing the actual words that I used. I just want to make sure that you understand the context of my statement.

Let me put it this way - two seasons from now, in 2010-11, Tom Gilbert will be 27, in his prime, and given that he has already spent significant time playing top competition this year and last, I see no reason why he can't be a top-pairing defender. I also very much doubt that the league is going to contract by nearly 20% in that timespan (which is the number required to drop the cap from 60M to 50M).

Your statement about the cap is wrong, and I think your projection on Gilbert is wrong. He's a bright enough positional player with a bunch of size if not toughness, and I think he can handle a top-two role.

Here's a question for you - which contract is most likely to be a boat anchor in that time frame - Gilbert's 4M cap hit, or the 5.6M cap hit of Visnovsky (35) or 5.4m cap hit of Souray (35)? Both players will be well on the down-swing and with time remaining on their contracts.

Avatar
#29 RobinB
December 29 2008, 10:02AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Jonathan Willis: I'm not going to get into a back and forth with you because, frankly, I don't need to.

Your comprehension skills are no match for your willingness to come on here and go on and on and on about what you know, or think you know.

An example:

I WROTE: "And Jonathan, if you think a salary of $5.5 million and a cap hit of $4 million for Gilbert two years from now — when the cap is likely to be closer to $50 million than $60 million — will be a “steal,” you’re mistaken."

YOUR INTERPRETATION: " . . . I also very much doubt that the league is going to contract by nearly 20% in that timespan (which is the number required to drop the cap from 60M to 50M). Your statement about the cap is wrong . . ."

Where did I say the cap will drop from $60 million to 50 million? Where? How can it decrease from $60 million when it's not at $60 million now? "Closer to 50 million than 60 million" can be 54 million, 53 million, pick a number. There's a difference.

As for Gilbert, your projection on him is based on what? Do you have more sources of information on Gilbert than I do, or is it the other way around? Maybe you're just more perceptive. Maybe you're just smarter. Then again, no.

You've gone from suggesting you'd be unsurprised if Gilbert is a steal in two years to asking which contract is the best of a bad bunch -- Souray, Visnovsky or Gilbert. There's a ringing endorsement. You back off faster than the Italian army when challenged without even knowing it.

Avatar
#30 topshelf
December 29 2008, 10:24AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

...oh snap

Avatar
#31 Jonathan Willis
December 29 2008, 10:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ RobinB:

Fair enough on the salary cap point - I saw 50 and 60 million, but I was thinking 40 and 50 million. Silly error on my part.

As for proof on Gilbert, I'm working on it and I'll put it up soon - I'm looking at comparable NHL'ers from around the league, but it takes some time. My feeling on Gilbert's possible upside is based more on watching his play than anything - but I also have the feeling that older rookie defenseman from the NCAA tend to progress more than might be expected for their age.

As for you - if Souray, Visnovsky and Gilbert are all bad contracts (which you seem to imply), is it so obvious to you because you're in a more knowledgeable position than the GM's who signed those deals? Do you have more sources or information on those three players than the G.M's did? Maybe you're just more perceptive. Maybe you're just smarter. Then again, no.

And I really don't understand why you feel compelled to treat these discussions like a battleground, Robin. I'm tossing out the idea that Tom Gilbert will progress enough that a 4-million cap-hit isn't ridiculous, and trying to add some context by comparing him to other players. I'm not stating that Tom Gilbert is the bomb and will definitely make Kevin Lowe look like a genius and that his contract will be a steal. I'm not certain on any of those counts, but I do think there's a reasonable chance he'll progress. I'm open to having my mind changed, but you're busy digging trenches and mocking my "retreat".

In short, you're taking this way too personally, especially for someone who doesn't need to go back and forth.

Avatar
#32 Fiveandagame
December 29 2008, 11:14AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Jonathan Willis:

Don't worry Willis, Robin's insight and connections also led to him stating that Garon had to start 60-70 games this year for the Oilers to have a chance to make the playoffs.

When I said he was way off the mark that that was way to many games for any of our goalies to be playing considering we had three of them, he was also quite indignant.

I said he was off his rocker and he threatened to get me kicked off the site.

Garon will not play 60-70 games this season as Roloson is the clear number one guy again and is playing stellar.

Why he takes differing opinions personally is anybody's guess and if he doesn't want the back and forth I am not entirely sure why he posts a blog.

The blogs and insight are great and I think we all appreciate it. I also think we all respect his tenure in the media and his extensive coverage of the Oilers and but I gotta ask.

"why so serious"

Avatar
#33 RobinB
December 29 2008, 11:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Jonathan Willis wrote:

As for you - if Souray, Visnovsky and Gilbert are all bad contracts (which you seem to imply), is it so obvious to you because you’re in a more knowledgeable position than the GM’s who signed those deals? Do you have more sources or information on those three players than the G.M’s did? Maybe you’re just more perceptive. Maybe you’re just smarter. Then again, no.

Then again, yes. It's easier to second guess these contracts, and others, now in hindsight because of what we know about the economy.

Gilbert's contract, and many like it, were put together at a time when the cap had esclated steadily. The problem is too many general managers did these deals on the premise that the esclation would continue and that deals might be overpays when signed, but would look better two years down the road when the cap had gone up XXXX-amount. That's out the window now.

That escalation, as we know now, has hit the wall and the overpay of 2007 will be a worse overpay in 2010 -- or for however long it takes the pendulum to swing again. Pretty simple.

And yes, Jon, I do take it personally when somebody who wasn't even born when I started covering hockey for a living says something as patronizing as, "You know, Robin, defencemen take longer to develop."

No shit, Sherlock.

Avatar
#34 RobinB
December 29 2008, 11:31AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Fiveandagame: Why so serious? Let's review . . .

You signed off on your initial two or three comments on that Garon thread with "MacT spot on, Brownlee off his rocker." Nobody ever takes it personally when you call them nuts.

You later apologized for being an asshole. Do I recall correctly?

Avatar
#35 myteammytown
December 29 2008, 11:34AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

c'mon brownlee, common sense has no place on internet message boards.

Avatar
#36 Jonathan Willis
December 29 2008, 11:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ RobinB:

For starters: I was wrong. I misunderstood what you said about the cap and wound up with egg on my face when I ran with that assumption. I've also done some digging, and I think that expecting Gilbert to take a big step forward is probably a mistake - so I was wrong there too.

On top of that, I wasn't intending to patronize you - when you post something on the internet, everybody reads it so tossing out examples isn't a bad idea. If you really want to take offense to it, that's your call, but I have plenty of respect for both your level of knowledge and your intelligence, so please don't think that I view you as an idiot.

That said, we all get it. You're old - you've done this forever. I'm young - I haven't done this forever. If your ego is really so sensitive that your offended by "defencemen take longer to develop", the internet is probably not for you.

Avatar
#37 kris
December 29 2008, 12:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Jonathon:

Don't feed the trolls.

Avatar
#38 Jonathan Willis
December 29 2008, 12:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ kris:

He's not a troll. In point of fact, he's pretty much spot on with his evaluation of Gilbert's upside, but he's so damn snarky that it's almost impossible to avoid making snarky comments in response.

Avatar
#39 kris
December 29 2008, 12:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Robin B said:

"One last thing: did you really cite Lidstrom as an example of a non-physical shutdown guy, like I didn’t know that..."

This is extremely funny and shows Robin was itching for a fight because Jonathon had actually said,

"Lidstrom is the OBVIOUS example"

I mean, that word "obvious" plays an important role; it allows Jonathon to cite Lidstrom as evidence for his conclusion without being condescending.

Shame on you Robin.

Avatar
#40 Fiveandagame
December 29 2008, 12:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ RobinB:

You remembered? Aww sucks I am honored you remember the back and forth we had oh so long ago in the preseason when I thought the Oilers would be 34-0-1 at this point and you said they would be struggling to make the playoffs.

And Yes I did apologize. I also said that I was sorry that my playful poking was taken out of context. I was shocked at the wrath it inspired and learned to tread lightly on your blogs. Wayne gets the full brunt of my off colour comments now and I save any playful digs for gameday threads.

Do I think you need a straight jacket and time in Bellevue? No. You're clearly not Wayne Gretz crazy.

Did I think you were way of the mark in the assumption that Garon had to play 60-70 games to make the playoffs. Yes.

Regardless, nobody here has ever called into question your professional knowledge. insight or connectedness with the Oilers.

But even if you were a level 12 Oiler Wizard and could see the future, people here would still argue with you.

This is the internet and every jackhole (myself included on my new commodore 64) with a computer has an opinion.

I just don't think you need to cite your resume every time someone disagrees with you. Even retards are entitled to their opinions (myself included).

Relax it's just the internet. Put on some Zeppelin crack a beer and be happy you were right about the Oilers struggling to make the playoffs and us blind.

So yeah this is all off topic now and I don't know why it's come up.

I do have a question though Robin. With the Oilers sending down JDD, who do you think gets the call up if anyone? AND Where do you see Pisani fitting in when he's healthy? Would he be taking Moreau's place on Cogliano's line and Moreau taking Strudwick's on the 4th?

Avatar
#41 kris
December 29 2008, 12:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

He is the Jekyll and Hyde of ON. When he posts, he's great. But at night, in the dark confines of the comments section, he turns into the horrifying troll-Robin.

Avatar
#42 Corbs
December 29 2008, 12:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

btw, I also thought the gilbert contract was a considerable overpay,.. but that was just a gut-opinion..

(hopefully my first comment made it through the censor)

Avatar
#43 RobinB
December 29 2008, 12:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Fiveandagame: JDD is on a conditioning assignment. His trip to the AHL doesn't open a roster spot.

I don't know where Pisani will fit, at least not based on the roster now. Then again, the roster might be in for a change shortly based on how difficult it's been to get hold of K LKowe lately.

In the past, that's often been a sign he's busy working the phones and something is up. I don't know that to be the case here -- he might just be taking some time off and letting Tambellini kick tires.

Avatar
#44 RobinB
December 29 2008, 12:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Jonathan Willis: What is the internet?

Avatar
#45 Fiveandagame
December 29 2008, 01:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

RobinB wrote:

JDD is on a conditioning assignment. His trip to the AHL doesn’t open a roster spot.

Thanks for the info and clarifying that. I think everyone in Oiler Nation can hope that something is "up". Lets just hope a goalie is on the move.

Avatar
#46 rindog
December 29 2008, 04:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ RobinB:

My sincerest apologies.....

33 points with a injury riddled team in his first year was damn close to the 35 mark and the 37 points he is on pace for this year (the reasoning behind my statement in parenthesis) was the point of paragraph.

If we want to knitpick over a couple of points here or there and use it as an open door for sarcasm.....

The point of my post was to point out that Gilbert's success (or failure) does not solely have to ride on his offensive production (especially considering his spot on the totem pole with our team).

And evidently being 2nd best on the team in blocking shots is a negative for Gilbert? I guess 11th overall in blocked shots for all defenseman last year doesn't mean anything because Staios was ahead of him???

I suppose Messier finishing behind Gretzky in the scoring race meant that #11 wasn't all that good at scoring because he wasn't even the best on our team???

I guess I will have to ask you to define soft? Is seperating your man from the puck without using physicality a bad thing? Are you saying that he doesn't take a hit to make a play?

Did guys like Scott Neidermayer, Dan Boyle, Brian Rafalski, etc just stay at status quo from the beginning of their careers? Did they decide to add the shutdown aspect, the shot blocking skill or the physicality that you are using to knock Gilbert?

From what I can tell, they used NHL experience and opportunity to refine their respective games and get to the "next level" that we debate.

I think I need a little help here.... why is the $5.5 million number being used in reference to Gilbert? Maybe I am getting caught up with the $4 million cap hit that is attached to Gilbert. But at a $4 million cap hit for your #3 guy (possibly #2) even if the cap goes down to $50 million is a "steal" based on his past performance alone???

You're saying, no????

Avatar
#47 RobinB
December 29 2008, 04:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ rindog: I'm saying no.

AND . . . "What is a solid #2 or #3 defenseman that has the potential to put 35+ points every season (and has done so) while getting limited PP time worth????"

6 points in 12 games one season and 33 the next is not 35-plus points. Your error in fact does not translate to me nit-picking.

A steal based on "past performance" (as in 128 games) alone? No. Not a steal.

Avatar
#48 RobinB
December 29 2008, 05:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

kris wrote:

@ Jonathon: Don’t feed the trolls.

Congratulations! You have established your credibility and credentials beyond any doubt with those four words. One of the resident writers a troll?

And nice Bryan Hall impersonation with your follow-up when you realized your mistake: "He is the Jekyll and Hyde of ON. When he posts, he’s great. But at night, in the dark confines of the comments section, he turns into the horrifying troll-Robin."

No sale. No cigar. Thanks for coming.

Avatar
#49 rindog
December 29 2008, 05:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ RobinB:

You see it is an error in facts and that is fine...you win (if that is the objective???). Would it help if I reworded it and focused on Gilbert's career ppga putting him at 35 points per (82 games played) or are you going to get stuck on the couple of points he didn't get last year?

If that is the only aspect of the debate (if it is even a debate) you care to respond to - where does that leave us/me?

Do we ever get to discuss his shot blocking (or lack of it in your eyes) or the definition of physicality? What about puck presecene, composure, defensive positioning and the ability to make simple easy breakouts?

I ask your opinion (as a guy that knows stuff). I am very curious as to what a #2 or #3 guy (which maybe you don't believe he is) is worth?

At what point do you make a decision that locks up a young guy long term? What if Gilbert signed only a 1 year deal and then went on to put up 40+ points this year. What kind of contract does he get then?

Do you think he has disappointed management this year?Does a player have to over acheive in order to be worth his contract? I don't think they signed him to the contract thinking it was a bad deal....did they?

If Grebeshkov goes to Russia next year and Chorney turns out to be a Jeff Wojwitka, where does that leave management (in terms of a #3 guy)? What would it cost them to go and get a guy that plays 22+ minutes, moves the puck well, compliments our PP shooters and is very responsible in his own end?

Avatar
#50 rindog
December 29 2008, 05:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ rindog:

That should say puck presence....

Unless I invented new, trendy hockey term

Presecene: the ability to play defense with out getting caught out of position????'

Hey, that might work???

Comments are closed for this article.