Six Degrees of Separation

Lowetide
July 14 2010 08:20AM

Earlier this week, I was listening to NHL radio on XM/Sirius. They're running old playoff series during the summer, and this particular day it was G1 SCF 2006. I turned the radio so quickly it startled the passengers. I don't know that I'll ever be able to watch or listen to G1 SCF 2006. However, there are some things to be learned from that hockey club.

The 2006 Edmonton Oilers had a lot of very good players before the trade deadline. Pronger and Peca arrived in summer, and they had an immediate impact on the team. The deadline (adding Roloson, Spacek, Tarnstrom, Samsonov) marked Oiler management's high water mark for the decade and we all enjoyed that wonderful team and their terrific run to the Stanley cup finals. Many look back on that team's regular season (barely won 8th in the conference) and suggest it was a weak team that got hot at the right time. Rubbish. It was an outstanding team in search of goaltending until the deadline. Anyone who watched that spring knew this team could win a playoff round or more.

It would be a mistake to give too much credit to the hired guns that season. The 2005-06 Edmonton Oilers were blessed with 6 stunning "value contracts" and their presence gave the team exceptional depth (especially up front) and more than one line capable of outscoring the best opposition. Here are the players, their contracts and their accomplishments that season (in alpha order):

  • Marc Andre Bergeron ($931k). Bergeron played 1600 minutes in the 05-06 season, 350 of that on the powerplay. He delivered 2.74/60 with the man advantage but was pretty solid at EVs (1/60) and his 15-20-35 for the season was exceptional for the price.
  • Ales Hemsky ($901,740). Hemsky played 1375 minutes in the 05-06 season, slightly over 400 of them on the powerplay. His PP/60 number (6.17) was very nice, his EV number 2.25 was a little better than he managed this past season (2.09); that PP number helped him lead the team in scoring (19-58-77) and he delivered 6-11-17 in the playoffs too. A wonderful payoff for less than a million, a season to remember.
  • Shawn Horcoff ($1M). Horcoff played almost 1600 minutes, almost 300 on the PP and 225 on the PK. In 05-06 he went 3-3-6 on the PK (about 1.6/60), went 4.82/60 on the PP and then 2.44 at EVs and this was against the other team's good players. A very underrated season when all was said and done.
  • Fernando Pisani ($611,800). In 05-06 he was excellent in the regular year and ridiculous in the postseason. Pisani played 1100 minutes in 05-06, 150 on the PP. He did a lot of heavy lifting at EVs and still managed to score 1.84/60 and 3.59 on the PP. Pisani was Guy Lafleur in the post season, 14-4-18 in a run I will never forget. At $611,800 he was ridiculous value.
  • Jarret Stoll ($501,600). Stoll played 1500 minutes in 05-06, 410 on the PP and 200 on the PK. He was a pretty valuable hockey player. On the PP he was 4.53 and at EVs he was 2.35 on the way to 82gp, 22-46-68 totals. At the price, he was extremely valuable.
  • Raffi Torres ($875,000). Raffi played 1100 minutes in 05-06, 224 of them on the PP. He's pretty famous for wandering out there but his results have always been solid. His EV number in 05-06 (2.07) and his PP number (2.95) were very good considering he spent little time on the club's top line or #1 PP. Torres' biggest moments in the season came during the playoffs when he made some massive hits (one of which had an impact on the SJS series). At this price, he was a bargain.
     

Taylor Hall is a huge part of the Edmonton Oilers future, but his entry level contract (with bonuses) is $3.75 million dollars a year. Since the club will no doubt start burning that entry level deal this fall, chances are that Hall won't over-deliver on that contract based on expectations for a teenager in the NHL. A young man like Tyler Pitlick--should he stay in junior and sign at age 20--has an excellent chance of being a "value contract" at a time when the Oilers should be pushing for a deep run into the playoffs (2012, 2013, 2014).

Which players could deliver the most value this season? Colin Fraser (.825M); Smid (1.3M); Dubnyk (.800M). RFA's Sam Gagner, Andrew Cogliano and Gilbert Brule could also deliver more than their contracts, but we don't know their cap number yet. The rookies mentioned here are unlikely to outperform their cap hits as rookies, but in year two and three it is entirely possible.

With Pääjärvi (1.525M), Eberle (1.158M) and Linus Omark (.875M) joining Hall as possible rookies, years two and three of their entry-level contracts offer a real opportunity for creating a list similar to the 2006 group above (although Hall will have his work cut out for him). Add Vande Velde, Peckham, Lander, Plante, Petry and a host of young pro level kids, plus Pitlick, Marincin and a few other quality picks (should they develop) and this team should have a nice group of value contracts in the next few seasons. We can only hope for a group as strong as the 2006 six.

This is the most important area for the team. Big name free agents, high cost offer sheets, even #1 overall picks bring their own cap hits and a team must pay 100 cents on the dollar. Those value contracts--like the ones we saw in 2006--will allow the Edmonton Oilers some separation from the rest of the NW division.

C2a6955161684b5e3189319acfa5ebe4
Lowetide has been one of the Oilogosphere's shining lights for over a century. You can check him out here at OilersNation and at lowetide.ca. He is also the host of Lowdown with Lowetide weekday mornings 10-noon on Team 1260.
Avatar
#51 RossCreekNation
July 14 2010, 01:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@DJ Dynasty Handbag

I think Hay was rushed at the NHL level. I'm sure he'll make a great assistant, though.

Avatar
#52 ubermiguel
July 14 2010, 01:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Chris.

Jussi played just as well as Rollie when given the task. Their stats from the playoffs show it:

Rollie: 2.33 GAA, .927

Jussi: 2.17 GAA, .905

I blame Conklin for gift wrapping the puck and giving it to Brind'Amour.

I blame MacT for dressing Conklin who was clearly the lesser goalie.

If they won Game 1 it would have been a whole different series, so I'm ok with saying the mistakes made Game 1 cost the Cup.

Not that I'm still bitter or anything.

Avatar
#53 danjo1
July 14 2010, 01:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Senator Theo wrote:

Crossing Jordan was a terrible show though - Law & Order put her on the map!

lol well there was only one reason I watched Crossing Jordan ;)

Avatar
#54 RossCreekNation
July 14 2010, 01:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Via the Edmonton Journal...

Sources say former Atlanta Thrashers assistant coach Todd Nelson will likely be the new Oklahoma City Barons head coach.
The Edmonton Oilers’ American League farm club has been looking for a coach since not rehiring Rob Daum.
Nelson was interviewed for the head coach job with the Edmonton Oil Kings but Derek Laxdal was hired instead. Nelson was on John Anderson’s staff in Atlanta until they cleaned house at the end of the NHL season.

Avatar
#55 Manfly
July 14 2010, 01:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ubermiguel...if we won game 1 of the '06 finals, we would have won the cup. blowing a 3-0 lead is what cost us the cup, not Bergeron dumping a guy on Roli, though fans blame this incident for us not winning the cup.

Avatar
#56 rindog
July 14 2010, 01:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Chris. wrote:

The Bergeron "value contract" cost us the cup.

I can't stand people that blame MAB for that play.

He played that perfectly. He covered for his D partner that got totally beat. He tried to play the man and not just swipe at the puck.

It was just unlucky that Roli got hurt.

Avatar
#57 rindog
July 14 2010, 01:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Go watch the video again.

If MAB didn't come across and hit the guy the coaching staff would have been up in arms for not playing the man.

It was a great hockey play that ended up with a bad result.

Avatar
#58 rindog
July 14 2010, 01:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Chris. wrote:

Respectfully disagree. Staios may have cost us a goal, or the game.... It was Bergeron dumping Ladd on Roli that cost us the cup. Stupid stupid play. Like Lowetide said, "It was an outstanding team in search of goaltending..."

I still can't get over you calling it a "stupid, stupid play".

Why don't you explain how he should have played it? Should he have just let Ladd blow by Greene and walk right in and score?

He didn't even hit Ladd from the behind. He hit him from the side and Ladd's forward momentum took him into Roli.

I am willing to go so far as to say that it was an excellent play that he should be commended for stopping what could have been a goal (and please don't tell me that Ladd had lost control of the puck and wasn't a threat to score, because he lost a split second before MAB made the hit).

Avatar
#59 George B
July 14 2010, 02:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I don't think anyone remembers that the Oilers didn't play well down the stretch. From March 9 to the end of the season the team was 9-7-4...thank god for the loser point. We ended up beating out the Nucks who sucked down the stretch and we backed into the playoffs.

This, unlike what Lowetide stated in his article is the way it happened. In that stretch of the last 20 games, the Oilers played the last place in the division Minnesota Wild going 1-2-1 in games you have to win.

In the same stretch, the Oilers played Vancouver back to back to back and went 1-1-1.

So this "outstanding team" was 2 wins, three losses and two OT losses vs. 2 non playoff teams in the last 20.

Sorry LT, but I can't agree with your assessment. The team caught lightning in a bottle and gelled at the perfect time. Result was the same, but outstanding team it was not...until April 21.

Avatar
#60 Crash
July 14 2010, 02:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
rindog wrote:

I can't stand people that blame MAB for that play.

He played that perfectly. He covered for his D partner that got totally beat. He tried to play the man and not just swipe at the puck.

It was just unlucky that Roli got hurt.

Totally agree with you....I think it was Matt Greene that got beat by the forward to the outside and Bergeron had to come across from his defensive position on the other side to try to save Greene on the play.

The guy had a clear break on net and Bergeron made a reactionary play to try to get the guy before he had a clear shot on net...it was a freak injury to Roli...

The biggest problem in that game is the Oilers not locking it down once they went up 3 zip...

If I remember correctly they gave up the 1st goal late in the 2nd period on an odd man rush which should never have happened at that point in the game...

IMO blowing that lead in game 1 and then losing it is what ultimately cost the Oilers the series...

Avatar
#61 sec206
July 14 2010, 02:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ubermiguel

agree 100%-

Avatar
#62 Wanye
July 14 2010, 02:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
SweetJibs wrote:

But we are to never speak of that game again. Ever.

AGREED

I just can't take it*

*That's what she said

Avatar
#63 smiliegirl15
July 14 2010, 03:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Wanye

You wish!

Avatar
#64 Chris.
July 14 2010, 03:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@rindog

Okay, Okay... The "value" contract player wasn't big enough to handle Ladd... He lost the confidence of the coaching staff, didn't dress for the final games of the series, and went on to be a terrible defender the following season. Marc Andre Bergeron is a swear word in my house.

*Edit* I forced myself to watch the play again on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoZNiv6kysc

Stupid stupid play. From the side? Bergeron directed Ladd right onto Roli!

I'm sorry you can't stand people who blame MAB... I can't stand can't understand people who think he played that "perfectly". It's okay to disagree.

Avatar
#65 Nate Full of Hate
July 14 2010, 04:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

If Ales Hemsky has a healthy season, 82points or more could put his contract in the "value" category.

Then again it's doubtful since he misses as many games as Souray the last few years.

Avatar
#66 DC
July 14 2010, 04:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

So it sounds like Todd Nelson will be the Head Coach Of Ok City. As per twitter. Hmmmmm. Best option? I don't know enough about him. Stats so no IMO but maybe he is ready.

Avatar
#67 Pucker
July 14 2010, 04:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Chris.

This was a frustating play with Bergeron. Not stupid. He's a good skater that covers a lot of ice, but he's small. Couldn't control his take out and the guy went into Roli.

He did the best with what he's got. Frustrating but not stupid.

Avatar
#68 TigerUnderGlass
July 14 2010, 04:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Nate Full of Hate wrote:

If Ales Hemsky has a healthy season, 82points or more could put his contract in the "value" category.

Then again it's doubtful since he misses as many games as Souray the last few years.

Here's an idea. Take a look at how many players outproduce Hemsky and are within a million dollars of his cap hit.

The idea that he needs to produce 82 points to be called a value contract as wrong.

Avatar
#69 Chris.
July 14 2010, 04:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Pucker wrote:

This was a frustating play with Bergeron. Not stupid. He's a good skater that covers a lot of ice, but he's small. Couldn't control his take out and the guy went into Roli.

He did the best with what he's got. Frustrating but not stupid.

Exactly the danger of some value contracts. Sometimes guys are cheaper because they lack some essential tools. Bergeron's small stature, and lack of good judgment may have cost the Oilers the cup.

I may be a little bit overemotional when I call that play stupid. Watch it again, and you be the judge. One thing is for certain: I'll never, ever be convinced that Bergeron played Ladd perfectly...

Avatar
#70 TigerUnderGlass
July 14 2010, 04:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Chris. wrote:

Exactly the danger of some value contracts. Sometimes guys are cheaper because they lack some essential tools. Bergeron's small stature, and lack of good judgment may have cost the Oilers the cup.

I may be a little bit overemotional when I call that play stupid. Watch it again, and you be the judge. One thing is for certain: I'll never, ever be convinced that Bergeron played Ladd perfectly...

The term "value contract" refers to players who outperform their salary.

If they are cheap because of lacking tools they would not be defined as a value contract.

Bergeron was a better player than his salary would have dictated on the open market. This is the a value contract.

You can argue all you want that he lacked certain tools, but that is not what created the value in his deal.

Avatar
#71 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 14 2010, 04:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Sometimes I get the feeling Oiler fans would prefer a 20th place team with the lowest payroll in the league over a 10th place team with the highest payroll in the league.

Avatar
#72 Nate Full of Hate
July 14 2010, 04:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

Here's an idea. Take a look at how many players outproduce Hemsky and are within a million dollars of his cap hit.

The idea that he needs to produce 82 points to be called a value contract as wrong.

1st, Hemsky has a good contract.

I'm suggesting that being a "value" contract would entail exceeding expectations. Hemsky should be a point a game player if healthy...

@ 4.25 it doesn't exactly sneak up on you, it's still costly.

Avatar
#73 Ender
July 14 2010, 05:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

Sometimes I get the feeling Oiler fans would prefer a 20th place team with the lowest payroll in the league over a 10th place team with the highest payroll in the league.

While your point (I assume it's that 10th is always better than 20th) has some merit, I think to a lot of people it's about hope for the future.

Let's take your scenario to the extreme. What if this year, you could build a team that was chock-full of expensive contracts, was pretty much guarenteed to finish in the playoffs (say 5th in the conference using your analogy), and was also pretty much guarenteed to need to be completely rebuilt from scratch in the off-season with no decent picks or prospects in the system (because you traded them all away to get the expensive players for this year).

OR

You could build a team that was full of picks and blue-chip prospects that was close to the cap floor that you knew you could keep together for at least the full length of all their entry-level contracts, several years the way you had it structured. This team would probably only be good for 10th place in the conference this year, finishing out of the playoffs.

In scenario one, you better get it right, because if you miss the cup with that one shot, you are out of the race for a LOT of years. (Hello Calgary Flames)

In scenario two, you are pretty much sacrificing this years playoffs for a chance to be in the playoffs for the next several years and maybe a serious and powerful contender for a couple of those years. (Hello Edmonton Oilers)

I know which team I'd rather be on.

Avatar
#74 TigerUnderGlass
July 14 2010, 05:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Nate Full of Hate wrote:

1st, Hemsky has a good contract.

I'm suggesting that being a "value" contract would entail exceeding expectations. Hemsky should be a point a game player if healthy...

@ 4.25 it doesn't exactly sneak up on you, it's still costly.

You are suggesting that to be a value contract at 4.25 he needs to score 82 points.

If he is not value then please tell me how many guys making his money outperform him. Hemsky may not be exceeding YOUR expectations but he is exceeding the value of his contract.

Avatar
#75 TigerUnderGlass
July 14 2010, 05:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Ender wrote:

While your point (I assume it's that 10th is always better than 20th) has some merit, I think to a lot of people it's about hope for the future.

Let's take your scenario to the extreme. What if this year, you could build a team that was chock-full of expensive contracts, was pretty much guarenteed to finish in the playoffs (say 5th in the conference using your analogy), and was also pretty much guarenteed to need to be completely rebuilt from scratch in the off-season with no decent picks or prospects in the system (because you traded them all away to get the expensive players for this year).

OR

You could build a team that was full of picks and blue-chip prospects that was close to the cap floor that you knew you could keep together for at least the full length of all their entry-level contracts, several years the way you had it structured. This team would probably only be good for 10th place in the conference this year, finishing out of the playoffs.

In scenario one, you better get it right, because if you miss the cup with that one shot, you are out of the race for a LOT of years. (Hello Calgary Flames)

In scenario two, you are pretty much sacrificing this years playoffs for a chance to be in the playoffs for the next several years and maybe a serious and powerful contender for a couple of those years. (Hello Edmonton Oilers)

I know which team I'd rather be on.

I have yet to see any real evidence that it is purely an either/or proposition.

Avatar
#76 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 14 2010, 05:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Ender wrote:

While your point (I assume it's that 10th is always better than 20th) has some merit, I think to a lot of people it's about hope for the future.

Let's take your scenario to the extreme. What if this year, you could build a team that was chock-full of expensive contracts, was pretty much guarenteed to finish in the playoffs (say 5th in the conference using your analogy), and was also pretty much guarenteed to need to be completely rebuilt from scratch in the off-season with no decent picks or prospects in the system (because you traded them all away to get the expensive players for this year).

OR

You could build a team that was full of picks and blue-chip prospects that was close to the cap floor that you knew you could keep together for at least the full length of all their entry-level contracts, several years the way you had it structured. This team would probably only be good for 10th place in the conference this year, finishing out of the playoffs.

In scenario one, you better get it right, because if you miss the cup with that one shot, you are out of the race for a LOT of years. (Hello Calgary Flames)

In scenario two, you are pretty much sacrificing this years playoffs for a chance to be in the playoffs for the next several years and maybe a serious and powerful contender for a couple of those years. (Hello Edmonton Oilers)

I know which team I'd rather be on.

Point was it's gotten so no one looks big picture anymore because everyone is too busy trying build the cheapest team possible.

Avatar
#77 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 14 2010, 05:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

I have yet to see any real evidence that it is purely an either/or proposition.

Exactly

Avatar
#78 RossCreekNation
July 14 2010, 05:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

You are suggesting that to be a value contract at 4.25 he needs to score 82 points.

If he is not value then please tell me how many guys making his money outperform him. Hemsky may not be exceeding YOUR expectations but he is exceeding the value of his contract.

Correct. If he were on the open market, he'd be in the $5.5M range... for what he already DOES. A point/game at 5.5 would be the expectation. SO... if he puts up a point/game, he'd be providing services at $1.25M cheaper than market value, OR... a "good value" contract.

In other words, its (relatively) easy for Hemsky to outperform his current $4.25M contract. It'd be (relatively) that much harder for him for him to outperform a $5.5M contract (without him taking a big step passed the 90+ point barrier).

Avatar
#79 Bryzarro World
July 14 2010, 05:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
SweetJibs wrote:

Steve Staios not being able to clear the puck when he had complete control cost us the cup.

No... Bergeron cost us the cup when the freaking MORON shoved an opposing player on top of our goalie. THAT cost us the cup! With Roli we had it in 5 or 6

Avatar
#80 rindog
July 14 2010, 05:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Chris. wrote:

Okay, Okay... The "value" contract player wasn't big enough to handle Ladd... He lost the confidence of the coaching staff, didn't dress for the final games of the series, and went on to be a terrible defender the following season. Marc Andre Bergeron is a swear word in my house.

*Edit* I forced myself to watch the play again on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoZNiv6kysc

Stupid stupid play. From the side? Bergeron directed Ladd right onto Roli!

I'm sorry you can't stand people who blame MAB... I can't stand can't understand people who think he played that "perfectly". It's okay to disagree.

Ladd was already going towards Roli (and off balance as well). Bergeron came at him from the side and and tried to seprate him from the puck. It was Ladd's forward momentum that kept him goin gon the path he was already on.

You are getting way too hung up on results of the play rather than looking at the play itself.

You still have not offered up an alternative as to how he should have made the play?

Agreeing to disagree is one thing, but blaming a player for costing his team the Stanley Cup (based on that play) is a little difficult to respect?

Maybe I should have said, "I can't stand it when people blame..."

And please lets not get into the ability of the "coaching staff" to value the players properly.

We have finally rid ourselves of most of the "valued" players that MacT and the boys loved so dearly...

Avatar
#81 Archaeologuy
July 14 2010, 05:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I thought we agreed never to speak of that terrible game ever again.

And if anyone is to blame it's MacT for dressing Ty Conlkin instead of Markannen* as the back-up. MacT cost us the Cup.

*I already forgot how to spell his name

Avatar
#82 rindog
July 14 2010, 05:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Archaeologuy wrote:

I thought we agreed never to speak of that terrible game ever again.

And if anyone is to blame it's MacT for dressing Ty Conlkin instead of Markannen* as the back-up. MacT cost us the Cup.

*I already forgot how to spell his name

MacT's decisions as well as the inability to capitalize on our 5-on-3 powerplays cost us the cup...

Avatar
#83 Nate Full of Hate
July 14 2010, 05:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
RossCreekNation wrote:

Correct. If he were on the open market, he'd be in the $5.5M range... for what he already DOES. A point/game at 5.5 would be the expectation. SO... if he puts up a point/game, he'd be providing services at $1.25M cheaper than market value, OR... a "good value" contract.

In other words, its (relatively) easy for Hemsky to outperform his current $4.25M contract. It'd be (relatively) that much harder for him for him to outperform a $5.5M contract (without him taking a big step passed the 90+ point barrier).

You're both exactly right, BUT...

Here's some hockey economics in my opinion..

Missing 96 games x 4 years, that's 4.975 ...

Hemsky is essentially a 5.49 player based on when he's really IN the lineup..

I don't wanna argue this because it's the best angle I could come up with..Hemsky's contract isn't a problem, it's good...

Avatar
#84 Lofty
July 14 2010, 06:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
rindog wrote:

MacT's decisions as well as the inability to capitalize on our 5-on-3 powerplays cost us the cup...

If you're willing to blame Mac T for loosing the last game of the last series in 06' doesn't that afford him the credit for getting the team there?

A lot of things had to be done right for them to be in a position to win a game and take the cup. I think he did a hell of job to get the team to that game. You gotta give credit where credit is due.

Avatar
#85 Racki
July 14 2010, 06:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

On the Bergeron hit on Ladd that took Roli out.... it's easy to say it's a stupid play on Bergeron's part. Hockey unfortunately is a game that comes down to split second decisions. Ladd beat Greene, and Bergeron saw that Ladd was about to have a pretty damn good opportunity on Roloson.

Some say that it was dumb of him to throw the hit, but what is he going to do, let him skate in cleanly? Obviously his intention was to body Ladd away from Roloson completely, but momentum didn't quite allow that. Bergeron isn't going to stop and think "hmm, Ladd is travelling at X Km/h at xxx angle, and I'm travelling at y km/h at yyy angle, I wonder where he'll end up when I hit him...". No. Like anyone, his thought would have been "holy f---ing s---, Ladd's in all alone", and he did all he could do to stop a goal.

The alternative to the play... watch Ladd go in all alone. Roli would have made the save cause Ladd lost the puck, but Bergeron didn't know that. If he does that though, he looks just as bad because he's now doing nothing to stop a guy from getting in clear on Roloson.

Honestly, he's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't on that play. It's not a play where he had enough time to think of a safe way out. Arguing that he lost the Cup for us on that play is incredibly narrow-minded.

Avatar
#86 David S
July 14 2010, 06:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Lofty wrote:

If you're willing to blame Mac T for loosing the last game of the last series in 06' doesn't that afford him the credit for getting the team there?

A lot of things had to be done right for them to be in a position to win a game and take the cup. I think he did a hell of job to get the team to that game. You gotta give credit where credit is due.

I think alot of people forget it was Lowe who loaded up the team and MacT who made the most of what he had. Say what you want about them in the time since, but they turned dirt into gold in 06.

Avatar
#87 Nate Full of Hate
July 14 2010, 06:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
David S wrote:

I think alot of people forget it was Lowe who loaded up the team and MacT who made the most of what he had. Say what you want about them in the time since, but they turned dirt into gold in 06.

I'll give the players the credit.

Making it to game 7 of the finals playing a trap says more about them then the coach.

When you have a goalie playing out of his mind and everyone commited to selling out defensively the coach looks brilliant.

Avatar
#88 RossCreekNation
July 14 2010, 06:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Since we're off the rails anyways, I just headed over to capgeek to fill out the Oilers roster (I've got 2 extra F, and an extra D above the 23-man roster). Here's what I came up with...

FORWARDS
Taylor Hall ($3.750m) / Dustin Penner ($4.250m) / Ales Hemsky ($4.100m)
Magnus Pääjärvi ($1.525m) / * Sam Gagner ($1.750m) / * Gilbert Brule ($1.975m)
* Jochen Hecht ($3.525m) / Shawn Horcoff ($5.500m) / * Mike Comrie ($1.975m)
Ryan Jones ($0.975m) / Colin Fraser ($0.825m) / Zack Stortini ($0.700m)
Jean-Francois Jacques ($0.615m) / Steve MacIntyre ($0.500m)
Jordan Eberle ($1.158m) / * Andrew Cogliano ($0.975m)
DEFENSEMEN
Ryan Whitney ($4.000m) / Tom Gilbert ($4.000m)
Ladislav Smid ($1.300m) / Kurtis Foster ($1.800m)
Jim Vandermeer ($2.300m) / * Theo Peckham ($0.725m)
Jason Strudwick ($0.725m) / Shawn Belle ($0.600m)
GOALTENDERS
Nikolai Khabibulin ($3.750m) / Devan Dubnyk ($0.800m)

CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS
ROSTER: 26; CAP:$59.4m; CARRY-OVER PENALTY: $0.354m;
PAYROLL: $54.370m; CAP ROOM: $8.818m; BONUSES: $3.788m

Avatar
#89 David S
July 14 2010, 06:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Nate Full of Hate wrote:

I'll give the players the credit.

Making it to game 7 of the finals playing a trap says more about them then the coach.

When you have a goalie playing out of his mind and everyone commited to selling out defensively the coach looks brilliant.

So does getting the team to buy in and execute the trap to perfection.

Avatar
#90 Nate Full of Hate
July 14 2010, 06:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@RossCreekNation

Good thing Quinn, Daum, Predergast, and trainers don't count against the cap..

(MacT's off the books now right?

Avatar
#91 DC
July 14 2010, 06:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
RossCreekNation wrote:

Since we're off the rails anyways, I just headed over to capgeek to fill out the Oilers roster (I've got 2 extra F, and an extra D above the 23-man roster). Here's what I came up with...

FORWARDS
Taylor Hall ($3.750m) / Dustin Penner ($4.250m) / Ales Hemsky ($4.100m)
Magnus Pääjärvi ($1.525m) / * Sam Gagner ($1.750m) / * Gilbert Brule ($1.975m)
* Jochen Hecht ($3.525m) / Shawn Horcoff ($5.500m) / * Mike Comrie ($1.975m)
Ryan Jones ($0.975m) / Colin Fraser ($0.825m) / Zack Stortini ($0.700m)
Jean-Francois Jacques ($0.615m) / Steve MacIntyre ($0.500m)
Jordan Eberle ($1.158m) / * Andrew Cogliano ($0.975m)
DEFENSEMEN
Ryan Whitney ($4.000m) / Tom Gilbert ($4.000m)
Ladislav Smid ($1.300m) / Kurtis Foster ($1.800m)
Jim Vandermeer ($2.300m) / * Theo Peckham ($0.725m)
Jason Strudwick ($0.725m) / Shawn Belle ($0.600m)
GOALTENDERS
Nikolai Khabibulin ($3.750m) / Devan Dubnyk ($0.800m)

CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS
ROSTER: 26; CAP:$59.4m; CARRY-OVER PENALTY: $0.354m;
PAYROLL: $54.370m; CAP ROOM: $8.818m; BONUSES: $3.788m

Whats up with bringing Hecht back? Not at 3.23 mil. PS: Thanks again for pointing out Caddyshack was on TSN yesterday on twitter.

EDIT: Even worse 3.525 mil.

Avatar
#92 Nate Full of Hate
July 14 2010, 06:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
David S wrote:

So does getting the team to buy in and execute the trap to perfection.

If you wanna play that card fine...

I'll use the Pronger of Spades...

Thanks for coming out.

Avatar
#93 RossCreekNation
July 14 2010, 06:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
DC wrote:

Whats up with bringing Hecht back? Not at 3.23 mil. PS: Thanks again for pointing out Caddyshack was on TSN yesterday on twitter.

EDIT: Even worse 3.525 mil.

Haha... & I have Hecht in at 3.525 rather than Souray at 5.4. Think Buffalo makes that swap? I think they might.

Avatar
#94 David S
July 14 2010, 06:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Nate Full of Hate wrote:

If you wanna play that card fine...

I'll use the Pronger of Spades...

Thanks for coming out.

The team makes the player every bit as much as the player makes the team.

BTW - who brought in Pronger?

You're welcome.

Avatar
#95 RossCreekNation
July 14 2010, 06:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
David S wrote:

The team makes the player every bit as much as the player makes the team.

BTW - who brought in Pronger?

You're welcome.

BOO-YAA!

Avatar
#96 Nate Full of Hate
July 14 2010, 06:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
David S wrote:

The team makes the player every bit as much as the player makes the team.

BTW - who brought in Pronger?

You're welcome.

I'll take the best player on my team over the best coach.

Where did I dispute who brought Pronger in? If you're implying it was you, then thanks Mr. Lowe.

It's no coincidence Pronger's taken 3 teams to the finals...

Avatar
#97 DC
July 14 2010, 06:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
RossCreekNation wrote:

Haha... & I have Hecht in at 3.525 rather than Souray at 5.4. Think Buffalo makes that swap? I think they might.

Ok well that I would do.

Avatar
#98 Oil_Loc8or
July 14 2010, 06:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
RossCreekNation wrote:

BOO-YAA!

What makes you think the Oilers are interested in Hecht ?

Avatar
#99 Nate Full of Hate
July 14 2010, 06:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Oil_Loc8or wrote:

What makes you think the Oilers are interested in Hecht ?

It's the inner Sutter seeping out in him...

He doesn't know what the hecht he's talking about.

Comments are closed for this article.