Bizarre Quote of The Day

Jonathan Willis
September 22 2009 06:42PM

Kevin Prendergast, on forward prospect Ryan O'Marra:

"He showed the type of player he was when we traded for him."

Actually, that's not entirely accurate.  A more accurate version of that quote would be as follows:

"We showed what kind of management team we were when we traded Ryan Smyth for Nilsson, O'Marra and a draft pick.  Ryan O'Marra showed what kind of player he is by scoring 3 goals in 93 AHL games after we acquired him."

In fairness to O'Marra, he did by most accounts have a fine training camp.  That said, it'll take more than a few weeks of practice and some exhibition games to erase two years of disappointing results.  On top of that, with Robert Nilsson barely hanging on to an NHL career and the revolving door on the top line's LW, I would have thought the last thing Oilers management would want to do is bring back the memory of the Ryan Smyth trade.

74b7cedc5d8bfbe88cf071309e98d2c3
Jonathan Willis is a freelance writer. He currently works for Oilers Nation, Sportsnet, the Edmonton Journal and Bleacher Report. He's co-written three books and worked for myriad websites, including Grantland, ESPN, The Score, and Hockey Prospectus. He was previously the founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue.
Avatar
#51 Chris
September 22 2009, 11:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

MattL wrote:

I think we both have problems with this, yours is that Smytty was traded, my problem is that they did a bad job replacing him, but I still liked the choice, even if it hasn’t worked out that well.

For the right deal ANYONE is tradable. My problem is that Lowe didn't sign Smyth. Let's face it, had Lowe signed Smyth before Christmas, he could have traded him that summer for a much bigger return... Or, at the very least, he wouldn't have been under the gun to just get something as the trade deadline approached. Big mistake.. And then to say something stupid like, "If I had known how much the cap would go up, I would have probably resigned Smyth." (Or something like that)

Avatar
#52 Bob Cob
September 22 2009, 11:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

If O'marra would come in and crunch Robyn Regher like he hit that guy in the video that would make my year regardless of if the Oilers made the playoffs or not. Dion Phanuef would work to, I cant stand that Caveman.

Avatar
#53 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

@ Ogden Brother: I’d like to add to your six points. 7) Three years out of the playoffs. Difficulty adding many desirable UFA’s thanks to a twenty game losing streak. 9) A multi year carousel at first line LW 10) Trouble with team culture. 11) Years later, Smyth is still tradeable but Nilsson, and O’Marra both suck. You point out a chain of events/players to arrive since Smyth’s departure; but neglect the obvious fact that other players would have still been drafted, other players would still have been signed, and even Smyth at a huge cap hit still has more cache around the league than Nilsson and O’Marra and Plante combined.

7 - No way to know if Smyth's presence would have bumped the team into the PO... Like I said in point , Penner/Smyth production has been basically identical the last 2 years... would Smyth's "others" pushed the team into the PO?

8 - I highly doubt the "un-attractivness" of the team is related to no Ryan Smyth

9 - We've got our 1st line LW, that is one place I put fault on MacT

10 - Is Smyth less of a leader then Souray? I'd say the cancel each other out in that department

11 - Gagner likely wouldn't have been drafted, who would we have instead? Shattenkirk? Gilles? Couture? I'll stick with Gagner. Plant obviously wouldn't have been drafted (nor replaced)

Avatar
#54 MattL
September 22 2009, 11:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I just watched the clip finally. I might like McGuire more if he pulled out "wha-BAM" a little more, and "roof-daddy" a little less.

Avatar
#55 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Zamboni Driver wrote:

Gunner wrote: Zamboni Driver wrote: Hmmmm…what would be the 5.5 million dollar upside to that. Fixed before Ogden Brother sees it. *laugh* Thanks for looking out for me. Leave him to his delusions.

Delusions? Hey, figure out how the salary cap works and then we can talk.

Avatar
#56 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

MattL wrote:

I’m with Ogden on this one. First of all, it’s hard to judge this trade for another couple of years until Nilsson proves or disproves his worth under a new staff, and until Plante matures enough to judge his worth too. Smyth was way too much of a gamble at the money he signed for. I’m glad the Oilers didn’t roll the dice on him, no matter how much I miss the mou-let.

I think the real key that people miss is the value of that mid first round pick. Think of the pissing and moaning by people when they are traded away.

1 full year of Tanguay got a late 1st

1 full year of Cammy got a late 1st

5 years of Kessel got 2 x 1st + 2nd

And we got a mid first++ for 20 games of Smyth?

The rational for trading him may or may not pan out (as well as the package we got) but strickly judging the trade, we got more then fair value for 20 games of Smyth.

Avatar
#57 Jay
September 22 2009, 11:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

The right time? How about three years too early? Did you miss the part where Smyth would have led this team in scoring last season? Why are guys in “decline” who scores 60 points so much less desirable to you than guys with “potential” (like Nilsson) who score less than 40 points while making piles of costly rookie mistakes?

While I'm not against holding onto a leading scorer, I have to say that a 60 point one dimensional player is not good enough to earn 6 mil a year, especially since he largely does not make players around him better. Also, a 60 point a season player is not an elite player. I agree that it sucks that Nilsson hasn't panned out, but if you factor out the part where we traded ryan smyth for not much so far, it's not a bad move to get rid of the guy something (or at least we thought we got something). Guys like hemsky make players around them better and hence, deserve the big bucks (we're extremely lucky hemsky isn't really big bucks even). In short, I would deal smytty every time if i had a chance for a do-over, but I would've fired the scouting staff long ago for suggesting that the guys they got in return would pan out to be at least one good prospect

Avatar
#58 RossCreek
September 22 2009, 11:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Harlie wrote:

Kevin “Ted Turner” Prendergast?

LOL. Good1.

Avatar
#59 Jay
September 22 2009, 11:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Jay wrote:

get rid of the guy something

that should say "for something"

Avatar
#60 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

MattL wrote: I’m with Ogden on this one. First of all, it’s hard to judge this trade for another couple of years until Nilsson proves or disproves his worth under a new staff, and until Plante matures enough to judge his worth too. By your logic, if Tambellini traded Hemsky to the Islanders for their 2011 first round pick, nobody would be free to pass judgment on the deal till 2015: Yet it wouldn’t be hard to see the void left behind. Smyth left a similar void; one that three years later has still not been filled. Based on this alone…. I pass judgment.

The picture is alot clearer if Hemsky had 3 months left on his contract and we didn't know what his plans were post July 1.

Avatar
#61 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

MattL wrote:

Chris wrote: Yet it wouldn’t be hard to see the void left behind. Smyth left a similar void; one that three years later has still not been filled. Based on this alone…. I pass judgment. I think we both have problems with this, yours is that Smytty was traded, my problem is that they did a bad job replacing him, but I still liked the choice, even if it hasn’t worked out that well.

And in fairness to the orginization, Penner was roughly choice #32 to replace Smyth.... Did you know we'd be snubbed (with a fist full of cash in exchange for services) by piles of top end offensive FA's? I sure didn't.

Avatar
#62 RossCreek
September 22 2009, 11:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother wrote:

Gagner likely wouldn’t have been drafted, who would we have instead?

I think his point was moreso that they would've won a bit more in the last 20 games, thus getting a lower pick. I could be mistaken, however. Chris?

Avatar
#63 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

MattL wrote: I think we both have problems with this, yours is that Smytty was traded, my problem is that they did a bad job replacing him, but I still liked the choice, even if it hasn’t worked out that well. For the right deal ANYONE is tradable. My problem is that Lowe didn’t sign Smyth. Let’s face it, had Lowe signed Smyth before Christmas, he could have traded him that summer for a much bigger return… Or, at the very least, he wouldn’t have been under the gun to just get something as the trade deadline approached. Big mistake.. And then to say something stupid like, “If I had known how much the cap would go up, I would have probably resigned Smyth.” (Or something like that)

Hey, everyone complains about "overpaid players". Pretty hypocritical to complain about him playing hardball as well.

Avatar
#64 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

RossCreek wrote:

Ogden Brother wrote: Gagner likely wouldn’t have been drafted, who would we have instead? I think his point was moreso that they would’ve won a bit more in the last 20 games, thus getting a lower pick. I could be mistaken, however. Chris?

I know, that's what I was responding too, we likely would have drafted what? 11? 13? somwhere in there... so unless Gagner fell that far (highly unlikely) we wouldn't be getting him, and would then have drafted one of the lesser lights.

Avatar
#65 JonW
September 22 2009, 11:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ok I was curious on this argument about Smyth so I wanted to see what he did compared to Oilers he was "traded" for if you include Penner. (I include him because without the trade you would not have him... never mind Souray)

In Colorado from 2007-2009 Goals 40 Assists 56 Total 96 points over two years.

Nilson 2007-2009 Goals 19 Assists 51 Total 70 points

Penner Goals 40 Assists 44 Total 84 points

In other words neither are that big of a drop off from Smyth. Particularly Penner.

Now this year and next will be the determining factor on whether Smyth is worth his 6.25 strictly on points verses two compariable players who "replaced" him.

Now you can piss and moan about the trade I guess but the idea that some how Smyth would have won enough games through his "heart" and possible production begs reality. That even before you discuss whether his agent was prepared to try free agency when they failed to come to an agreement.

I think New York lost the trade, big time. Considering what they got in return. I think the Oilers in 2007 would have missed the playoffs due to injuries more than the Smyth trade.

Nilsson, O'Mara and Plante could still be winners even after Smyth went to Colorado. Keep in mind that one player we traded for Tikkanen, who did not do much after he got traded, turned out to be pretty good. Doug Weight.

Avatar
#66 RossCreek
September 22 2009, 11:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Ogden Brother: Alright. Think I got confused which one of you was on which side. *shakes fist* Damn you, mediocre brain.

Avatar
#67 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

JonW wrote:

Ok I was curious on this argument about Smyth so I wanted to see what he did compared to Oilers he was “traded” for if you include Penner. (I include him because without the trade you would not have him… never mind Souray) In Colorado from 2007-2009 Goals 40 Assists 56 Total 96 points over two years. Nilson 2007-2009 Goals 19 Assists 51 Total 70 points Penner Goals 40 Assists 44 Total 84 points In other words neither are that big of a drop off from Smyth. Particularly Penner. Now this year and next will be the determining factor on whether Smyth is worth his 6.25 strictly on points verses two compariable players who “replaced” him. Now you can piss and moan about the trade I guess but the idea that some how Smyth would have won enough games through his “heart” and possible production begs reality. That even before you discuss whether his agent was prepared to try free agency when they failed to come to an agreement. I think New York lost the trade, big time. Considering what they got in return. I think the Oilers in 2007 would have missed the playoffs due to injuries more than the Smyth trade. Nilsson, O’Mara and Plante could still be winners even after Smyth went to Colorado. Keep in mind that one player we traded for Tikkanen, who did not do much after he got traded, turned out to be pretty good. Doug Weight.

Who scores more goals over the next 3 years? My $$ is with Penner.

Avatar
#68 Chris
September 22 2009, 11:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ah. I need sleep. My point is, General managers need to identify key players and keep them under contract. Smyth was a key player, and he was still performing at a high level, and Lowe failed to get him under contract... And then, (even worse) Lowe left himself no time to get a full return for the asset, and THEN Lowe repeatedly failed to replace the void left behind. Lowe should have made it a top priority to sign Smyth... And now, with the benifit of hindsight, the magnitude of the series of mistakes is becomming even more obvious; hence Willis' amazement that the organization is drawing attention to the whole mess. Three difficult years later: Nilsson is a bust. O'Marra is a bust. Plante is a bit suspect... and Smyth whose skills may or may not be fading, is still a more tradeable commodity than the players Lowe recieved as last second compensation for what was one of his best players.

I don't know if Smyth would still be an Oiler today had Lowe signed him... and it really doesn't matter. Who knows what Ryan may have fetched in the meantime? For me, the Ryan Smyth debaucle is just another example of poor asset management under the Lowe reign of indecision.

Avatar
#69 Chris
September 22 2009, 11:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ JonW:

Smyth was injured. His PPG totals and current trade value are superior to Nilsson. There is a big "dropoff".

Avatar
#70 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

Lowe left himself no time to get a full return for the asset.

Here's my major beef, I don't think people are placing the trade in the proper context. Trading a guy under contract is far different then trading a FA. He got fair market value for the guy. Easily.

Avatar
#71 Ogden Brother
September 22 2009, 11:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

@ JonW: Smyth was injured. His PPG totals and current trade value are superior to Nilsson. There is a big “dropoff”.

PPG doesn't win you hockey games though, that was one of the (major) variables with the Smyth trade... his injury history (and style of play) made him a high risk signing for a long term deal.

Avatar
#72 Chris
September 23 2009, 12:07AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother wrote:

Who scores more goals over the next 3 years? My $$ is with Penner.

Extending Smyth would not have cost draft picks: Penner cost us three.

Sure, it's easy to generate alternative scenarios wherby you prove 6M would be better spent elsewhere, than on Smyth. Heck I can generate thousands of argument wherby I prove Penner's 4.25M would have been better spent elsewhere. It's a pointless argument because you can play that game with any player in the league... RFA raids, and UFA disappointment arent't necessary if you get your guys signed. When a change is needed; you find a scenario that made sense, and make a trade from a position of power. You just don't unload key players at the last second.

Avatar
#73 Chris
September 23 2009, 12:09AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother wrote:

Here’s my major beef, I don’t think people are placing the trade in the proper context. Trading a guy under contract is far different then trading a FA. He got fair market value for the guy. Easily.

So why didn't Lowe get him under contract?

Avatar
#74 Ogden Brother
September 23 2009, 12:24AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

Ogden Brother wrote: Who scores more goals over the next 3 years? My $$ is with Penner. Extending Smyth would not have cost draft picks: Penner cost us three. Sure, it’s easy to generate alternative scenarios wherby you prove 6M would be better spent elsewhere, than on Smyth. Heck I can generate thousands of argument wherby I prove Penner’s 4.25M would have been better spent elsewhere. It’s a pointless argument because you can play that game with any player in the league… RFA raids, and UFA disappointment arent’t necessary if you get your guys signed. When a change is needed; you find a scenario that made sense, and make a trade from a position of power. You just don’t unload key players at the last second.

Well in essence extending Smyth would of cost us picks

1st = 1st O'marra = 2nd (at the time anyways..actually he was probably worth more at the time, he was just drafted 15th overall and was still producing in the OHL, I'm confident most GM's would have swapped a 2nd for him at that time) Nilsson = 3rd (Had to be worth at least a 3rd, he was in his 2nd year at the AHL with resonable success)

Avatar
#75 Chris
September 23 2009, 12:26AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Ogden Brother:

This is the beef of my argument. I've written it every concievable way: Lowe SHOULD have gotten Smyth under contract. It was a mistake to not get Smyth signed. Period.

Whether it was time to trade Smyth, or how I feel about the Oilers trading Smyth, or who should have replaced Smyth, are all seperate and emotional arguments.

Lowe lost control of a key asset. Thanks to this massive brain cramp, he was forced to take a poor return for a valuable player. I don't care if it was a good return considering the circumstance: Lowe was the author of that circumstance.

Even if Smyth wasn't in Lowe's future plans, it's clear that it was a mistake not to make it a high priority to extend Smyth in a timely manner.

Avatar
#76 Ogden Brother
September 23 2009, 12:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

Ogden Brother wrote: Here’s my major beef, I don’t think people are placing the trade in the proper context. Trading a guy under contract is far different then trading a FA. He got fair market value for the guy. Easily. So why didn’t Lowe get him under contract?

Good question, you'd have to ask Lowe/Smyth.

Another thing I think most forget is that the players have a say in contract negotiations as well. Everyone rags on the signings, but the players have the right to say "no" when presented with a deal. If they are pending UFA's or an RFA with arb/potential for an offer sheet they have full power to use their right to say no. Also, the better the player the more leverage they have and the less leverage the team has.

Simple supply and demand, their were far more teams looking for a Ryan Smyth then their were Ryan Smyths. He knew this (or at least his agent did) he knew he had all the power.

Avatar
#77 Ogden Brother
September 23 2009, 12:30AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

@ Ogden Brother: This is the beef of my argument. I’ve written it every concievable way: Lowe SHOULD have gotten Smyth under contract. It was a mistake to not get Smyth signed. Period. Whether it was time to trade Smyth, or how I feel about the Oilers trading Smyth, or who should have replaced Smyth, are all seperate and emotional arguments. Lowe lost control of a key asset. Thanks to this massive brain cramp, he was forced to take a poor return for a valuable player. I don’t care if it was a good return considering the circumstance: Lowe was the author of that circumstance. Even if Smyth wasn’t in Lowe’s future plans, it’s clear that it was a mistake not to make it a high priority to extend Smyth in a timely manner.

See above. The (star) players have the hammer.... Lowe can beg and plead and offer all the money in the world he wants, in the end if the player has demand for his services, he will chose where he signs.

Avatar
#78 cableguy
September 23 2009, 06:49AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

Lowe SHOULD have gotten Smyth under contract. It was a mistake to not get Smyth signed

lowe cant force a guy to sign. the oilers (reportedly) offered smyth what he wanted, within a couple hundred grand, and (reportedly) offered to make up the difference by giving him a luxury suite to do with what he wanted. i'm sure brownlee can sort that out.

smyth still said no.

and there is no way smyth is worth that kind of money over that long of a term

Avatar
#79 Chris
September 23 2009, 07:11AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Ogden Brother: @ cableguy:

Smyth wanted to sign: it was about money. Immediately following the news he had been moved, Smyth told his teammates in the dressing room that he "f*cked up". Also, Smyth didn't fake the tears at his airport presser.

Had Lowe begun hard negotiations sooner, they may have come to term.

Ogden Brother wrote:

Simple supply and demand, their were far more teams looking for a Ryan Smyth then their were Ryan Smyths

Another excellent reason to sign him.

cableguy wrote:

lowe cant force a guy to sign. the oilers (reportedly) offered smyth what he wanted, within a couple hundred grand, and (reportedly) offered to make up the difference by giving him a luxury suite to do with what he wanted. i’m sure brownlee can sort that out. smyth still said no.

So you sign him for a couple of grand more than you want (millions less than Smyth got during free agency)... evaluate the cap the following year (which went way up).... Evaluate your team (lineup so thin thet threw millions at other peoples players to try and fill the void left by a proven performer.) And make a decision. cableguy wrote:

and there is no way smyth is worth that kind of money over that long of a term

If that is your decision, move the player via trade. Proven players under contract always fetch a better return. I never heard that Smyth was after a suite, or a NMC, or anything else... That's speculation on our part.

Avatar
#80 cableguy
September 23 2009, 07:55AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

Smyth told his teammates in the dressing room that he “f*cked up

and this is still lowes fault?

i agree 110% that the deal COULD have been done.

i am one of the few, apparently, who didnt want smyth at that much $$$$ over that long of a term.

Avatar
#81 Jeff
September 23 2009, 08:04AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

It was a pretty fair trade. A lot of people seem to forget that if we hadn't traded Smyth we probably wouldn't have gotten Gagner. That's a positive thing that happened I think.

Avatar
#82 Ogden Brother Jr.
September 23 2009, 08:06AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Ogden Brother: Very fair indeed. And hey the first year we had Nilsson he out scored Smyth (although smyth had injuries). I really don't think the trade was that bad even in hindsight.

What kinda gets me is that management at the time were quite high on O'Marra. I didn't see anything that made me impressed with him. I thought he was suppose to be a decent faceoff guy and that wasn't even true.

Avatar
#83 Ogden Brother Jr.
September 23 2009, 08:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I haven't read through all the comments but it appears everyone forgot why Smyth was traded. Lowe didn't have the green light to spend more money. That was the problem with the old owners, it took up to a month for them to get together and make a decision.

Avatar
#84 Ogden Brother Jr.
September 23 2009, 08:14AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother wrote:

Chris wrote: Lowe left himself no time to get a full return for the asset. Here’s my major beef, I don’t think people are placing the trade in the proper context. Trading a guy under contract is far different then trading a FA. He got fair market value for the guy. Easily.

What pisses me off about this is why the hell did Lowe wait so long to negotiate?

Avatar
#85 Jeff
September 23 2009, 08:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

If you think about it who would have missed that often mentioned 100,000 dollars more?? Smyth? Probably not! The Oilers on the other hand might have to send someone down or make a trade.

Avatar
#86 Ender the Dragon
September 23 2009, 08:20AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Ogden Brother:

I completely agree with everything you've written in this thread. Good analysis.

Chris wrote:

This is the beef of my argument. I’ve written it every concievable way: Lowe SHOULD have gotten Smyth under contract. It was a mistake to not get Smyth signed. Period.

I completely disagree. The NHL is littered with contracts and players that are hopelessly untradeable, sometimes because the contract is ridiculously overpriced and sometimes because the movement of the salary cap (yes, sometimes down) means even teams that want your player might not have room for him. Ryan Smyth was (and still is) a fine player. I'm happy for him. But his age and style of play made him a huge gamble and as Ogden Brother has already pointed out, even the contract we were offering at the end that Ryan refused was offered more out of loyalty than because Oilers management really thought he would be worth those dollars through the life of the contract.

It's easy to sit back now and look at Smyth still playing well and saying "I bet we could have afforded to keep him. Look how well he's doing." The other side to the coin, though, is how you'd feel if Smyth was here for this season, looking older, slower, still full of heart but noticeably less effective than in days of yore.What if he'd stayed and the years had caught up to him like Lowe and many others expected (and they still will; no one is immune there) and he was playing with a cap hit bigger than both Horc and Hemmer but producing half the points? You think there wouldn't be grumbling among the Oiler faithful then?

So trade him out of town, right? Not a chance. Even when Smyth hit free agency, there were only a couple of teams willing to gamble bigger than the Oilers would have on a big Smyth contract. Add a year or two onto Ryan, drop the cap, and take away that hot market; now you've got a player he is going to eat your cap space through the remainder of his term whether he's earning it or not.

Signing Smyth would have been like playing blackjack. Sometimes you win, but the odds are always tilted out of your favour. I'm glad Lowe played with the house on that deal.

Avatar
#87 Ogden Brother Jr.
September 23 2009, 08:21AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

My other issue is if Smyth wanted to play here so bad how come he never returned Lowe's call on July 1st?

Avatar
#88 Robin Brownlee
September 23 2009, 08:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ cableguy: The difference was $100,000 per season for each year of what I recall was a five-year deal, or $500,000 in total. Lowe had his number and he wasn't prepared to go anywhere near what Smyth eventually got from Colorado. Over the term of his deal with the Avs, Smyth came out about $3 million ahead of the deal Lowe was offering at the deadline, if I'm not mistaken.

Avatar
#89 Ogden Brother
September 23 2009, 08:51AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris wrote:

@ Ogden Brother: @ cableguy: Smyth wanted to sign: it was about money. Immediately following the news he had been moved, Smyth told his teammates in the dressing room that he “f*cked up”. Also, Smyth didn’t fake the tears at his airport presser.

If he really "wanted to sign" he would of. As you stated, he even said he'd F'ed up.

Why didn't Buff sign Brier/Drury? why didn't Atl sign Hossa? Why didn't Florida sign Bow? Every year their are pending FA's that test the market, that is simply the reality of the situation

At the end of the day, we have no real idea whether he wanted to test the market. But we do know it was his decision to make.

Avatar
#90 Chris.
September 23 2009, 09:00AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ender the Dragon wrote:

I completely disagree. The NHL is littered with contracts and players that are hopelessly untradeable,

But Smyth is tradeable. (We are talking about Smyth; right?) He easily signed for more money than he wanted from the Oilers, and was still tradable years later. You think him overvalued? You are wrong. The value of any player, musch like real estate, has nothing to do do with what you think the asset is worth, and everything to do with what others are willing to pay. Lowe got the value wrong. He made a mistake. Why can't you see that?

I'm not saying EVERY player should be signed, at any price. I'm saying Lowe should have signed THIS player at THAT price. Hindsight proves it.

All UFA eligible players cost more; because you are competeing with other GM's for players with experience and a proven track record. There is an element out there in Oiler Nation that is against ANY signing experienced/established players based on money. These people always crawl out of their hole to wail when management signs a Souray, or extends a Horcoff, or tries to land a Heatley... It's okay to disagree with a particular contract offer at a particular time... But some people just don't have any kind of handle on the marketplace and are just automatically against every big ticket signing. I wonder if these guys want the Oilers to run an AHL training camp forever?

Avatar
#91 Ogden Brother
September 23 2009, 09:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Chris

What would be your feelings today if the Oil announced the following trade today:

To Edmonton: Shane Doan (assume he's on a 5 year contract starting this season @ 6.5 million... to compensate for the cap increase)

To Pheonix: Next years 1st, Linus Omark, Taylor Chorney.

Avatar
#92 Ogden Brother Jr.
September 23 2009, 09:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Chris.: It was all about money at the time. Lowe didn't have his next year budget and had a hard numbers to deal with. When we signed Penner, Souray and extended Horcoff, which ever ownership said spend the max.

Avatar
#93 Ogden Brother
September 23 2009, 09:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Chris. wrote:

Ender the Dragon wrote: I completely disagree. The NHL is littered with contracts and players that are hopelessly untradeable, But Smyth is tradeable. (We are talking about Smyth; right?) He easily signed for more money than he wanted from the Oilers, and was still tradable years later. You think him overvalued? You are wrong. The value of any player, musch like real estate, has nothing to do do with what you think the asset is worth, and everything to do with what others are willing to pay. Lowe got the value wrong. He made a mistake. Why can’t you see that? I’m not saying EVERY player should be signed, at any price. I’m saying Lowe should have signed THIS player at THAT price. Hindsight proves it. All UFA eligible players cost more; because you are competeing with other GM’s for players with experience and a proven track record. There is an element out there in Oiler Nation that is against ANY signing experienced/established players based on money. These people always crawl out of their hole to wail when management signs a Souray, or extends a Horcoff, or tries to land a Heatley… It’s okay to disagree with a particular contract offer at a particular time… But some people just don’t have any kind of handle on the marketplace and are just automatically against every big ticket signing. I wonder if these guys want the Oilers to run an AHL training camp forever?

Going into speculation here, but I think it's safe to say that we would only have room for 3/4 of Horcoff/Vish/Souray/Smyth.

Did we pick the right 3? Maybe... but it certainly isn't a slam dunk either way.

Avatar
#94 Ogden Brother
September 23 2009, 09:11AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother wrote:

@ Chris What would be your feelings today if the Oil announced the following trade today: To Edmonton: Shane Doan (assume he’s on a 5 year contract starting this season @ 6.5 million… to compensate for the cap increase) To Pheonix: Next years 1st, Linus Omark, Taylor Chorney.

Actually you could probably even put Doans cap hit up to 7.1 million for comparisons sake (cap is 30% today then it was when Smyth was traded).

Avatar
#95 Ogden Brother Jr.
September 23 2009, 09:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Off-Topic, not sure if mentioned but Potulny, Arsene and Minard all cleared waivers.

Avatar
#96 Ducey
September 23 2009, 09:13AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

“We showed what kind of management team we were when we traded Ryan Smyth for Nilsson, O’Marra and a draft pick. Ryan O’Marra showed what kind of player he is by scoring 3 goals in 93 AHL games after we acquired him.”

I took Kevin P's quote as public encouragement for a guy who has been struggling and apparently fighting management over the role is to play.

I don't see anything wrong with a little praise in the circumstaces.

Avatar
#97 BingBong
September 23 2009, 09:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother Jr. wrote:

Off-Topic, not sure if mentioned but Potulny, Arsene and Minard all cleared waivers.

Springfield should be much better this year.

On another note, did anybody read Jones' article in the Sun today? Basically quoting Quinn & Tambo saying they have no idea where the vets are and why they haven't shown up yet. I assume this refers to Hemsky, Moreau, Pisani, etc. I'm sort of looking forward to when Quinn goes completely nuts for the first time...

Avatar
#98 Bob Cob
September 23 2009, 09:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Ogden Brother wrote:

What would be your feelings today if the Oil announced the following trade today: To Edmonton: Shane Doan (assume he’s on a 5 year contract starting this season @ 6.5 million… to compensate for the cap increase) To Pheonix: Next years 1st, Linus Omark, Taylor Chorney.

Phoenix would't go for that, its not enough for Doan. A player from the active roster would have to be going the other way. Possibly one of the NHL ready d men we have. To get something you have to get something and Phoenix wont take 3 unknown entities.

Avatar
#99 oilman007
September 23 2009, 09:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

O'Marra has clearly been a bust to date.

Nilsson however, gets crapped on way more than he deserves. He is a legit top 6 player on the offensive side of the ice. He is only 24 and still has time to ronud out his game. Expect a big bounce back year from him, hopefully the brass is smart enough to keep him here.

Keep in mind he was on pace for 47 points 2 seasons ago. That put him in the very top range of second line calibre scorers last year. Last year he was on pace for 37 points (1 point back of Cogs/tied with Penner) which would be bottom range of second liners. So a good year puts him as a top second liner and a bad year puts him as a bottom one. Seems to me like he is a second liner, but he still has potential for improvement.

Avatar
#100 Bob Cob
September 23 2009, 09:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Bob Cob: I meant to say "to get something you have to give something"...

Comments are closed for this article.