The Oilers, Minus Trades

Jonathan Willis
April 27 2010 12:02PM

2009 NHL Entry Draft, First Round

One way to assess the work done by the scouting staff is to go back and look at what a team would look like if they only used players taken in the NHL Draft. With news about the Oilers fairly slow at the moment, this seemed like a good time to indulge in this exercise with them.

One problem with this exercise is that the teams produced using just drafted players can be fairly unbalanced. In the Oilers’ case, this means they lack top-end defencemen (Matt Greene may be the best active defenceman drafted by the team) and a proven starting goaltender. Sometimes, teams address those holes by acquiring undrafted free agents – in the Oilers case, for example, we might add Marc-Andre Bergeron. However, since it’s difficult to track all those players, I’m going to exclude them.

Here’s the list of active NHL’ers, by position, drafted by the Oilers. I believe it to be complete, but please let me know if I’ve missed anyone.

Centre

Edmonton Oilers v Nashville Predators

  • Jason Arnott
  • Kyle Brodziak
  • Andrew Cogliano
  • Sam Gagner
  • Shawn Horcoff
  • Matthew Lombardi
  • Marc Pouliot
  • Jarret Stoll

Wing

Edmonton Oilers v Toronto Maple Leafs

  • Troy Bodie
  • Jason Chimera
  • Mike Comrie
  • Dwight Helminen
  • Ales Hemsky
  • Jean-Francois Jacques
  • Georges Laraque
  • Kirk Maltby
  • Fernando Pisani
  • Miroslav Satan
  • Rob Schremp
  • Ryan Smyth
  • Zack Stortini
  • Brad Winchester

Defence

  • Taylor Chorney
  • Matt Greene
  • Theo Peckham
  • Tom Poti
  • Mathieu Roy
  • Danny Syvret

Goal

  • Jeff Deslauriers
  • Devan Dubnyk

That’s some ugliness on defence, a lot of quality up front and depending on how one feels about Nikolai Khabibulin anything from a big drop-off to a vastly improved situation in net.

When I look at that group of players, I feel fairly confident that if Steve Tambellini had the option to swap out his current group for that group, he would. Even if one ended up moving some combination of Horcoff/Stoll/Lombardi/Cogliano for defencemen, I think the team would be better off.

Granting that this is an indulgent, hypothetical exercise, is it fair to argue that the last 10-15 years of Oilers drafting has outpaced the last 10-15 years of Oilers management? What if we narrow it down, tossing out the late ‘Fraser in Mexico’ years and just focus on the Prendergast/MacGregor stuff?

I think it’s fair to say that. I’m not defending Prendergast here; his work with the AHL team speaks for itself (I agree with Scott Reynolds’ evalutation of Prendergast) but I think the scouting staff has probably been about NHL average or maybe a little better, and to my eye they’ve improved since MacGregor took over. Even with all the misses, they certainly put together an enviable group of forwards.

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 Ender
April 27 2010, 02:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Bucknuck

The sucession of trades that turned Arnott into Dvorak and Cross looks a bit ugly but I can't pick on the first part of it at all. I remember one of the first differences I noticed watching games live VS watching them on TV was that the TV never showed Arnott leisurely meandering back to his own zone following a turnover. Arnott has many things to his credit, but the thing that will be forever burned into my mind about him was his (apparent lack of) work ethic in Edmonton. When Billy Guerin came to E-town, I was so darn happy I just about cried.

Avatar
#52 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 27 2010, 02:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Bucknuck wrote:

So the team drafted is weak on defense.

You should probably trade Stoll and greene to get Visnovsky. He's a great defenseman.

Signing a free agent defenseman is probably a good idea (Souray).

We're also a little small so let's put down an offer sheet on a big winger (Penner).

Hmm... Goaltending is a little weak. We better get a free agent (rekhabibulin).

There - NOW we have a team!!

I am probably oversimplifying here, but the way I see it the key moves that have let the team down from where it could have been were losing Arnott, Smyth, and Satan.

Arnott was traded for Guerin, Guerin for Carter, Carter for Dvorak and Cory Cross. Talk about a downgrade... ugh. Smyth turned into Nilsson and O'marra... Ugh. Satan was traded for nothing much... ugh.

Ha-ha

Well done.

Avatar
#53 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 02:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@Ender

No, I think the impatience the club showed with Arnott is only equalled by the impatience with Lupul and Pitkanen.

Avatar
#54 Ender
April 27 2010, 03:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Archaeologuy

I guess it's hard to show patience when you are paying a kid big-bucks (in the presalary-cap era when the Oil were poor) and you've given the kid 3 years to perform and he's on pace for a career low and is getting booed every time he touches the puck. Exactly how patient did you want them to be?

Avatar
#55 Bucknuck
April 27 2010, 03:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Ender

I was a season ticket holder in those years. It was not that bad. I remember that Arnott was much like Penner is now. Sometimes he frustrates you, but he hit somebody almost every game. He played hard 70% of the time, and a seasona and a half later after he left the oilers he played on the first line of the team that won the stanley cup.

Two years is probably how much more patient they needed to be.

Avatar
#56 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 03:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Ender

I'd say a little more patient than dumping a young player that will eventually tally 873 points in 1099 games after 35 poor games 1 season. What can I say, I'd be more patient than that.

Same goes for Lupul and Pitkanen. What do have to show for them, Patty O'Sullivan? Sweet. Maybe 1 season of struggles isnt enough to dump young players.

Avatar
#57 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 27 2010, 03:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

I'd say a little more patient than dumping a young player that will eventually tally 873 points in 1099 games after 35 poor games 1 season. What can I say, I'd be more patient than that.

Same goes for Lupul and Pitkanen. What do have to show for them, Patty O'Sullivan? Sweet. Maybe 1 season of struggles isnt enough to dump young players.

Don't you want to dump O'Sullivan?

Avatar
#58 Ender
April 27 2010, 03:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Bucknuck

@Archaeologuy

The luxuries of hindsight. Maybe Moreau, Nilsson, or Patty'O will win a Cup in a couple of years as well. I don't see a lot of people demanding that they be a lock on this team for next 2 seasons just in case.

Avatar
#59 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 03:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Ender wrote:

@Archaeologuy

The luxuries of hindsight. Maybe Moreau, Nilsson, or Patty'O will win a Cup in a couple of years as well. I don't see a lot of people demanding that they be a lock on this team for next 2 seasons just in case.

Moreau isnt under 25. I think the best comparable is Cogliano or Gagner.

Avatar
#60 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 03:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

Don't you want to dump O'Sullivan?

25 years old and wasnt highly touted at any point in his career. He has no history to suggest he will accomplish anything of note. He's also grossly over-paid. There are a lot of reasons why he shouldnt be compared to Arnott.

Avatar
#61 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 27 2010, 03:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

25 years old and wasnt highly touted at any point in his career. He has no history to suggest he will accomplish anything of note. He's also grossly over-paid. There are a lot of reasons why he shouldnt be compared to Arnott.

I'm more comparing him to Lupul, it's a pretty fair comparison of situations.

Avatar
#62 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 03:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

I'm more comparing him to Lupul, it's a pretty fair comparison of situations.

Are we talking about the same Lupul that was drafted 7th overall, scored 106 points in his draft year and had scored 28 goals in the NHL the year before we acquired him? Nope, cant say I see the comparison in terms of potential.

Avatar
#63 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 27 2010, 03:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

Are we talking about the same Lupul that was drafted 7th overall, scored 106 points in his draft year and had scored 28 goals in the NHL the year before we acquired him? Nope, cant say I see the comparison in terms of potential.

Yes we are, O'sully had 22 goals and 53 points in his second season as a 22 year old. He was a very highly regarded young player at the time.

Avatar
#64 Bucknuck
April 27 2010, 03:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

No. Compare him to Penner.

Arnott had 33 goals his rookie season, much like penner and his 28. He was a big body. He had a skating style that looks slower than it actually is. He doesn't use his size to punish people though does use it at least once a game.

Their point toals are pretty close, and they are both streaky. When Arnott was on his game he was unstoppable, and so is Penner.

The only other player the oilers have who has scored as much as Penner and Arnott did in their first full year is Comrie. You could compare them except that they play a way different style.

Avatar
#65 Bucknuck
April 27 2010, 03:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

HIghly regarded and dominant are two very different things. O'Sullivan has never shown the ability to dominate a game the way Arnott and Penner did.

22 goals and 53 points are good figures, and I am sure that Paddy O will hit them again, but he does not have the upside that Arnott had.

Avatar
#66 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 03:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

Yes we are, O'sully had 22 goals and 53 points in his second season as a 22 year old. He was a very highly regarded young player at the time.

Not by this anonymous Armchair GM. He wasnt even an early 2nd rounder. He wasnt doing particularly well in LA when we got him, and he's continued that here. I cant honestly say the potential expected from Lupul and O'Sullivan are comparable at all from my perspective.

Avatar
#67 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 27 2010, 03:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

Not by this anonymous Armchair GM. He wasnt even an early 2nd rounder. He wasnt doing particularly well in LA when we got him, and he's continued that here. I cant honestly say the potential expected from Lupul and O'Sullivan are comparable at all from my perspective.

You've got hindsight on your side. Kings fans were very high on him two years ago, he was considerd a solid 2 way up and coming player.

Avatar
#68 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 03:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

You've got hindsight on your side. Kings fans were very high on him two years ago, he was considerd a solid 2 way up and coming player.

You can track my statements back to when we acquired him (cuz I'm too lazy). I havent liked the deal to get POS from day one, but that's neither here nor there. What Lupul was supposed to be and what POS was supposed to be arent the same at all. Let's move off this comparison though because it isnt going anywhere.

Avatar
#69 Bucknuck
April 27 2010, 04:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Matt Henderson

Both suck and I hope that by next year both are ex-oilers. Neither was or is projected to be dominant. They are both complementary players on a good club and need a strong leadership core to smack them around. ;-P

Avatar
#70 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 27 2010, 04:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

You can track my statements back to when we acquired him (cuz I'm too lazy). I havent liked the deal to get POS from day one, but that's neither here nor there. What Lupul was supposed to be and what POS was supposed to be arent the same at all. Let's move off this comparison though because it isnt going anywhere.

"What Lupul was supposed to be and what POS was supposed to be arent the same at all"

If you say so.

Lupul was 23 his first season here, his career #'s before we aquired him were .26GP/.55PPG

O'sully was 24 his first season here, his career #'s before we aquired him were .22GPG/.58PPG + he had the reputation of a decent PK/2 way player

Avatar
#71 Bucknuck
April 27 2010, 04:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

"What Lupul was supposed to be and what POS was supposed to be arent the same at all"

If you say so.

Lupul was 23 his first season here, his career #'s before we aquired him were .26GP/.55PPG

O'sully was 24 his first season here, his career #'s before we aquired him were .22GPG/.58PPG + he had the reputation of a decent PK/2 way player

I say so too.

Avatar
#72 Bucknuck
April 27 2010, 04:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Bucknuck

Hey awesome - when you updated your edit, it updated my quote. the technology is amazing Props to you bingofuel.

Avatar
#73 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 04:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

It goes further back than their first couple years pro, OOB-TH. The difference between 7th overall and 56th overall is pretty stark.

Avatar
#74 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 27 2010, 05:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

It goes further back than their first couple years pro, OOB-TH. The difference between 7th overall and 56th overall is pretty stark.

I agree to a point, but eventually NHL production trumps jr pedigree.

Does Gagner still have more "potential" then Perron?

Does James Shepard still have more "potential" then Lucic?

Avatar
#75 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 05:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

I agree to a point, but eventually NHL production trumps jr pedigree.

Does Gagner still have more "potential" then Perron?

Does James Shepard still have more "potential" then Lucic?

Since his season here, Lupul's had 0.7 points per game.

Including the season he became an Oiler (08/09) POS has 0.49 points per game. So yes. NHL production does eventually trump pedigree, but Lupul has the pedigree and a better NHL career, so I'm sticking with him.

Avatar
#76 tat
April 27 2010, 05:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Tom Poti?

Avatar
#77 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 27 2010, 05:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

Since his season here, Lupul's had 0.7 points per game.

Including the season he became an Oiler (08/09) POS has 0.49 points per game. So yes. NHL production does eventually trump pedigree, but Lupul has the pedigree and a better NHL career, so I'm sticking with him.

The point is that we have 2 guys that we aquired at almost the exact same age, have played almost the exact same amount of games (elsewhere) and produced at near identical pace (elsewhere) and then both stunk it up here.

Yet you are chastising the team for giving up on one after 80 games while at the same time advocating they give up on the other after 100 games (and in reality going back to last summer, after 20 games)

Avatar
#78 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 05:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
tat wrote:

Tom Poti?

In other Tom Poti news: Tom Poti will miss Game 7 with a broken orbital bone.

Avatar
#79 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 05:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

The point is that we have 2 guys that we aquired at almost the exact same age, have played almost the exact same amount of games (elsewhere) and produced at near identical pace (elsewhere) and then both stunk it up here.

Yet you are chastising the team for giving up on one after 80 games while at the same time advocating they give up on the other after 100 games (and in reality going back to last summer, after 20 games)

One is a former 7th overall pick that was coming off of a 28 goal season

The other is Patrick O'Sullivan

Avatar
#80 cableguy - 2nd Tier Fan
April 27 2010, 07:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

is it possible to pull a nipple muscle? cause i think i did.

Avatar
#81 OilFan
April 27 2010, 09:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Matt Henderson

I always like your comments and point of view but in the Lupul and Patty O conversation I'd have to disagree.I don't recall ever reading or hearing anything about Lupul being a great player but I do reamember Patty O playing for team USA in the World Juniors. I may have missed Lupul's year, if so my bad. You can always judge potential by a draft # but after three or four seasons you see what you really have. Zetterburg wasn't a high pick to name one of many that prove they are worth the pennies. Yes Zetterburg isn't a player that you judge his potential on at this stage in his career. At some time Detroit did. The real question in my mind is at what point does a team give up on potential and face reality? Patty O not worth a dollar to me same can be said about Lupul. We have had so may players come throught Edmonton that been high prospect that have cratered i.e Schremp,Poti. We all know the complete busts also

Avatar
#82 Matt Henderson
April 27 2010, 10:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@OilFan

Lupul did play for Team Canada at the WJC in 02/03.

I was uber disappointed when Lupul was shipped out (can you tell?). I do think he is significantly better than POS at this point in their careers. Nonetheless, I agree that there is a point when potential doesnt matter anymore.

But enough about this topic from me. Now, Pitkanen vs POS, that's a whole other can of worms...

Avatar
#83 Muller
April 27 2010, 10:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

I only notice three top ten picks in here, it's not easy to build a franchise around average players. Sather always kept the Oilers respectable during the mid nineties[non cap era] usually drafting somewhere between twelve and sixteen. Sometimes you get a diamond in the rough,I believe Hemsky went thirteen in one draft. If it's not a deep draft your usually drafting "potential players"I find this article a little misleading.

Avatar
#84 OilFan
April 28 2010, 01:03AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Matt Henderson

yeah I never knew that he played for Canada thank s for the info. I'd take all most any one over POS. Pitkanen seems like he could be really good but lacks his own end skills.

Avatar
#85 RossCreekNation
April 28 2010, 08:54AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I think Lupul & O'Sullivan are fair comparables to a point. If I'm not mistaken, O'Sullivan was ranked much higher (supposed to be a late 1st rounder IIRC) but fell a bit on draft day... I think some questioned his character & attitude, not to mention the whole daddy thing. I've still got The Hockey News pre-draft issue from that year (and the past 17 years). I'm in the process of moving so I don't have it directly in front of me now, but I'm going to make a point of seeing what they had to say about O'Sullivan. He did score 40 in his draft year.

Avatar
#86 RossCreekNation
April 28 2010, 08:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

As per Nick Kypreos... Tyler Seguin to edge out Taylor Hall again. Look for the #1 ranked prospect to be announced as OHL most outstanding player of the year.

Avatar
#87 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 28 2010, 09:07AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
RossCreekNation wrote:

I think Lupul & O'Sullivan are fair comparables to a point. If I'm not mistaken, O'Sullivan was ranked much higher (supposed to be a late 1st rounder IIRC) but fell a bit on draft day... I think some questioned his character & attitude, not to mention the whole daddy thing. I've still got The Hockey News pre-draft issue from that year (and the past 17 years). I'm in the process of moving so I don't have it directly in front of me now, but I'm going to make a point of seeing what they had to say about O'Sullivan. He did score 40 in his draft year.

Ah, someone else that follows the NHL as a whole. Do you remember the buzz around O'sully coming out of LA during his 22G/53p season?

Avatar
#88 OilFan
April 28 2010, 09:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@RossCreekNation

Your going by what Kypreos or some one that actually that knows anything about Hockey

Avatar
#89 Matt Henderson
April 28 2010, 09:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
RossCreekNation wrote:

As per Nick Kypreos... Tyler Seguin to edge out Taylor Hall again. Look for the #1 ranked prospect to be announced as OHL most outstanding player of the year.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!

Dont let Crash see this.

Avatar
#90 RossCreekNation
April 28 2010, 11:03AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@OilFan

Well, smart a$$, I believe Kypreos was breaking the story, not making a prediction.

Avatar
#91 Matt Henderson
April 28 2010, 11:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@RossCreekNation

TSN is reporting it too.

Avatar
#92 Hemmertime
April 28 2010, 12:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Matt Henderson

Oo, Wonder if Seguin or Eberle will win Junior player of year. My money on Eberle even though no playoffs

Avatar
#93 Matt Henderson
April 28 2010, 12:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Hemmertime

I think so as well.

Avatar
#94 TigerUnderGlass
April 28 2010, 01:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

What does playing in the world juniors have to do with anything?

Seguin will most likely never see that tournament yet he has a 50/50 shot at going number one overall.

AS for the O'Sullivan-Lupul thing, I think back to expectations when each player arrived, and any claims that anyone thought O'Sullivan was expected to do as much as Lupul are ridiculous.

Lupul comes to town and we heard, "Great pick-up, potential future star"

O'Sullivan comes to town and we heard, "Hey, not bad considering we were going to lose Cole for nothing."

Regardless of their numbers, Lupul was much more highly regarded than O'Sullivan. At this point though who wants either one?

Avatar
#95 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 28 2010, 01:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

What does playing in the world juniors have to do with anything?

Seguin will most likely never see that tournament yet he has a 50/50 shot at going number one overall.

AS for the O'Sullivan-Lupul thing, I think back to expectations when each player arrived, and any claims that anyone thought O'Sullivan was expected to do as much as Lupul are ridiculous.

Lupul comes to town and we heard, "Great pick-up, potential future star"

O'Sullivan comes to town and we heard, "Hey, not bad considering we were going to lose Cole for nothing."

Regardless of their numbers, Lupul was much more highly regarded than O'Sullivan. At this point though who wants either one?

" AS for the O'Sullivan-Lupul thing, I think back to expectations when each player arrived, and any claims that anyone thought O'Sullivan was expected to do as much as Lupul are ridiculous.

Lupul comes to town and we heard, "Great pick-up, potential future star" "

I think alot of that was an overhyping of Lupul because he was the center piece of the Pronger trade.

On the flip side, a little bit of the luster off O'sully had worn off by the time he got here becaus of his contract dispute (which elevated some character concerns) and because his numbers had tailed off a bit from the year before.

Anyways, the point was to illustrate the hypocrisy between chastising the team for being impatient with one young player (for dumping him after 80 games) while at the same time calling for the team to dump another young player after 100 games.

Avatar
#96 Matt Henderson
April 28 2010, 01:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

If you are truly unable to spot the difference between Lupul and O'Sullivan then you have a serious problem.

You are simplifying the issue way too much. You are completely ignoring the fact that one player is significantly better and always has been considered a better prospect.

You are asking me to treat one diminutive underachieving late second rounder the same as a former 7th overall pick that was coming off of a 28 goal season.

I'm sorry, but your claim that I'm being a hypocrite is based solely on your complete disregard for the pedigree and production of the players in question

Avatar
#97 TigerUnderGlass
April 28 2010, 01:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

" AS for the O'Sullivan-Lupul thing, I think back to expectations when each player arrived, and any claims that anyone thought O'Sullivan was expected to do as much as Lupul are ridiculous.

Lupul comes to town and we heard, "Great pick-up, potential future star" "

I think alot of that was an overhyping of Lupul because he was the center piece of the Pronger trade.

On the flip side, a little bit of the luster off O'sully had worn off by the time he got here becaus of his contract dispute (which elevated some character concerns) and because his numbers had tailed off a bit from the year before.

Anyways, the point was to illustrate the hypocrisy between chastising the team for being impatient with one young player (for dumping him after 80 games) while at the same time calling for the team to dump another young player after 100 games.

Do you honestly know a single person whose expectations were tempered by O'Sullivan's contract situation? Come On.

Your point is dependent on the two young players in question having similar expectations. Dumping a struggling young player considered to have significant potential is not the same as dumping a young player whose potential has likely been met. It doesn't matter if you agree about this...when it comes to Arch wanting to keep one and ship the other it only matters that this is Arch's opinion.

You can't call someone a hypocrite based on his evaluations of different players. You clearly disagree on the relative values and potential of the two players, but his stance is based on his view of the players.

It would only be hypocrisy if YOU wanted to keep one and lose the other, because YOU are the one who seems to think they are similar players. Based on his evaluation of the two his position makes perfect sense.

Avatar
#98 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 28 2010, 02:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Matt Henderson wrote:

If you are truly unable to spot the difference between Lupul and O'Sullivan then you have a serious problem.

You are simplifying the issue way too much. You are completely ignoring the fact that one player is significantly better and always has been considered a better prospect.

You are asking me to treat one diminutive underachieving late second rounder the same as a former 7th overall pick that was coming off of a 28 goal season.

I'm sorry, but your claim that I'm being a hypocrite is based solely on your complete disregard for the pedigree and production of the players in question

One of the few guys here that follows the league outside of their Edmonton bubble see's enough similarity to draw a resonable comparison between the two.

That's good enough for me.

Avatar
#99 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 28 2010, 02:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

Do you honestly know a single person whose expectations were tempered by O'Sullivan's contract situation? Come On.

Your point is dependent on the two young players in question having similar expectations. Dumping a struggling young player considered to have significant potential is not the same as dumping a young player whose potential has likely been met. It doesn't matter if you agree about this...when it comes to Arch wanting to keep one and ship the other it only matters that this is Arch's opinion.

You can't call someone a hypocrite based on his evaluations of different players. You clearly disagree on the relative values and potential of the two players, but his stance is based on his view of the players.

It would only be hypocrisy if YOU wanted to keep one and lose the other, because YOU are the one who seems to think they are similar players. Based on his evaluation of the two his position makes perfect sense.

I would guess that LA's managment's expectations of him were temperd based on their contract situation. From what I've heard/read the negotiations didn't go well and character issues became more prominent.

As for the hypocrisy statement, I quoted post 56 and was specifically looking at the following statement:

"Maybe 1 season of struggles isnt enough to dump young players." which doesn't distinguish between which level of young player.

Avatar
#100 Matt Henderson
April 28 2010, 07:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F

I suppose you think the Oilers should treat Liam Reddox the same as Sam Gagner too. Yeah. OK. ~They're totally the same also~

Comments are closed for this article.