C13-II SEARCHING FOR CAPTAIN POWER

Wanye
July 19 2010 12:27PM

We need good ice hockey here in the OilersNation. We have been kicked around, beaten down, walked out on, refused to be signed with and forced to watch injured players to beat the band.

It’s time for a change of pace and a return to respectability. The path to anywhere but here will be navigated in large part by the next Captain of the Edmonton Oilers.

As the long rainy Alberta summer marches on, we have been proposing and debating the different candidates for The Job. Last time out we took a look at Ales Hemsky and Mike Comrie and today we will spend some time taking a look at one of the more controversial candidates: BC Native Shawn Horcoff.

SHAWN HORCOFF

 

The fact that Shawn Horcoff is considered by many to be an overpaid multimillionaire, rich even by NHL standards is a particularly delicious piece of irony.

Once considered a long shot to play a regular shift at all, Horcoff willed himself to become a valuable 2-way player, clawing his way from NHL longshot to 4th line player to a point per game man with the ability to deliver valueable defensive hockey at the same time.

Take a look:

Many Horcoff haters forget the instrumental role he played in the SCF run of 2006. He was almost a point a game player during both the regular season and the playoffs that year and was widely considered to be one of the Oilers best players.

He followed up the Cup run with a disappointing season, but bounced back big time in 2007, returning to nearly a point-per-game status and an invitation to the 2008 All Star Game in Atlanta.

Ordinarily a fluffy game of shinny that has a better chance of boring someone to death than injuring anyone playing in the game – for Horcoff it is basically when everything fell to hell. Rumours that Horcoff had injured himself during the All Star Game began to fly in the days following the game as his play declined and he was forced to remove himself from the line up. 

Whether he had aggrevated an existing injury or was actually impossibly hurt during the game, his 07-08 campaign came to a close shortly thereafter as he was forced to undergo season ending shoulder surgery in February 2008.

Then on July 16, 2008 everything changed.

 

This was the day when the money train pulled up to the Horcoff Mansion and didn't stop unloading bags of cash until he had inked a 6 year contract worth 33 million dollars. At the time, it was considered a coup for the Oilers, who were able to stop the long time migration of premiere NHL players to richer waters.

An Oiler his entire career, Horcoff was under lock and key until the 2014-15 Season.

''Shawn has proven himself as one of the premier players in the National Hockey League and has been and will continue to be an integral part of our organization moving forward,'' said Kevin Lowe at the announcement of the contract.

' 'By being proactive with this deal, we avoid being in a situation where Shawn could become an unrestricted free agent after next season and the unknown free agency can bring to the organization. Having him under contract long-term is something that has been on our radar for a long time and we are extremely pleased to finalize this deal.''

Perhaps it was being placed in the rarified air of the NHL elite or perhaps it was the damage done to his surgically repaired shoulder from lifting his now considerable wallet. For whatever reason, Horcoff has been unable to meet the massive expectations of his long term deal, attracting the rage of many of the OilersNation in the process.

Scorecoff, became Whiffcoff, Crapcoff, What-a-rip-coff and the poster boy for the Oilers woes in the seasons following the Cup run. The fact he can be brought up as a potential candidate for the next Captain of the Oilers is a testament to his value even under the burden of a massive contract.

One of the fittest players in the NHL, Horcoff can be accused of being many things – but his work ethic and dedication to the game cannot be among them. He hasn't complained once publicly during the past 4 seasons unlike many of his veteran brothers and has remained popular in the dressing room - reportedly shying away from the Souray-Moreau faction, instead focusing on his own game and returning to form.

This could be exactly what the 2010-11 Oilers need in a Captain.

THE PITCH

We would argue that Shawn Horcoff isn't nearly as bad as his haters would have you believe. Would he be re-signed to the same deal if Lowe could go back in time? Obviously not. Is he as bad as his 36 point campaign in 2009-10 would lead you to believe? No.

Is he going anywhere with a cap hit of $5.5 milion until the end of the 2014-15 season? Get real.

If Horcoff is going to be here anyway – and best believe he will – making the mature veteran into the C13 might be an excellent way to derive further value from him for the next 5 years.

Maturity, dedication and the ability to function with a crippling case of heterochromia. Fitness, determination and the bank to lend any young Oilers money to tide them over until the next payday.

This is what Horcoff can bring to the table as the next Captain of the Oilers.

09049f03ecb006ab29372206f2a88f75
Blog so hard motherf**ckers try and find me. Email me at wanyegretz@gmail.com or tweet me @wanyegretz provided it is about Jordan Eberle or babes.
Avatar
#151 mike
July 20 2010, 01:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

"I think it's a fair question."

Not really. Unless he's right about harder to SCORE against being irrelevant.

Avatar
#152 rubbertrout
July 20 2010, 01:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Crash

There's a big difference between being seen as an extremely valuable member of a club team and being on team Canada. Plus Mac-Ts comments were early in the season before it was obvious to most that Horc was hurting. Quinn loves Horc, Mac-T loves Horc and Renney will too.

Avatar
#153 Aleslav Smidsky
July 20 2010, 01:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I bet all of them like Joey too.

Avatar
#154 Crash
July 20 2010, 01:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
rubbertrout wrote:

There's a big difference between being seen as an extremely valuable member of a club team and being on team Canada. Plus Mac-Ts comments were early in the season before it was obvious to most that Horc was hurting. Quinn loves Horc, Mac-T loves Horc and Renney will too.

Well I'm hoping that Renney won't love Horc as much as those guys did or the team WON'T move forward...I'm hoping Renney will have more love for the young kids in the same manner as Sather did back in the 80's.

Cut Horcoff's minutes and take him out of the top six and he may be able to contribute in a defensive role...

Keep throwing big minutes his way and playing him in a top six role and I would suggest to you that we will see more of the same as we saw last year..

Avatar
#155 Crash
July 20 2010, 01:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mike wrote:

"I think it's a fair question."

Not really. Unless he's right about harder to SCORE against being irrelevant.

Yes really...what gives you the impression that Horcoff is hard to SCORE against?

Was it his +/- numbers from last year or over his career for that matter.

Avatar
#156 Ender
July 20 2010, 01:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers

@ Crash

I don't pretend that Horcoff is the Messiah to lead this organization to their next Stanley Cup. I just get annoyed when clowns run their mouths with absolutely no argument to back it up. Statements like "Basically any opposing player can retrieve pucks without the fear of being hit from Horcoff - this makes their job much, much easier." seem to single out Horcoff needlessly; there are a lot of 'brand-name' players who hit less than Horcoff and yet don't get singled out for being easy to play against because of it. Similarly, saying "They don't have to worry about Horcoff offensively - Horcoff couldn't create a ham sandwich never mind a scoring chance . . . Horcoff = zero threat" is obviously untrue, unless your point is that the hundreds of players who scored less than him are also not offensive threats.

The argument about Horcoff always seems to come back to salary and there's no way that his salary is in line with his output. Hear me clearly: That is not Horcoff's fault. Say what you want about his being overpaid and I'll agree with that, but try telling me that he doesn't belong in the line-up and I'll disagree. He hits, he scores, and he does whatever is asked of him by the organization. The fact that his contribution may not be directly proportional to his salary is not part of the argument the esteemed Traktor was making.

Avatar
#157 BUCK75
July 20 2010, 01:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Alan

For sure. I listen to Jason's show daily & I think him & Bob compliment each other really nicely. I should have preceded my comment with "arguably" the best show host.

Avatar
#158 Traktor
July 20 2010, 01:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mike wrote:

Traktor wants hard to play against. Not interested in hard to score against.

Some jokes almost write themselves.

Where did I say I didn't want players that are hard to score against?

For starters, I said it was debatable whether Horcoff is even hard to score against (he's -43 the past 4 seasons).

We know that Pat Quinn didn't match lines last year and yet Horcoff faced tough opp most nights so this tells us that opposing coaches matched their best against Horcoff because they thought that would bring the biggest return. Horcoff's gfga differential tells us those coaches were right.

Outside of that, is it possible to bring in a player that's both hard to play against AND hard to score against?

There's only so few roster spots. If we have a Getzalf or Kesler in our top 6 we can get away with a non-physical 3rd line C but that isn't the case.

As it is right now Horcoff only further swings the pendulum in the cream puff direction.

Avatar
#159 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 20 2010, 01:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Aleslav Smidsky wrote:

How do you make a comment like that? How would I feel I outsmarted them? What are you getting at?

You said he has nothing to offer, if that was the case then I'm pretty sure 2 different coaching staffs wouldn't have used him more then any other forward.

Avatar
#160 Aleslav Smidsky
July 20 2010, 01:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Ender

No one said he doesn't belong in the line-up.

He hits once every 2 games, maybe less.

He doesn't score. He doesn't create offence.

He does what is asked, if he didn't, he would have been on waivers long time ago.

Avatar
#161 Traktor
July 20 2010, 01:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

"He hits, he scores, and he does whatever is asked of him by the organization."

He hits less than Robert Nilsson. That's been proven.

Whether or not you think Robert Nilsson is the Hallmark for grit is up to you.

Avatar
#162 DougWeightProblem
July 20 2010, 01:43PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Crash wrote:

Well I'm hoping that Renney won't love Horc as much as those guys did or the team WON'T move forward...I'm hoping Renney will have more love for the young kids in the same manner as Sather did back in the 80's.

Cut Horcoff's minutes and take him out of the top six and he may be able to contribute in a defensive role...

Keep throwing big minutes his way and playing him in a top six role and I would suggest to you that we will see more of the same as we saw last year..

I think, in part, it's your obsession with "role" that's jading your view of Horcoff. He plays so many, and cannot be slotted into just one, which is what makes him so valuable to this team.

He can play a shut-down role, taking away scoring chances. He can play penalty kill, mentoring the youth in positioning skills. He can move into an offensive role when the youth struggle and can't find their own game, or the rigours of an NHL season become too much. He will be out in the last minute of the game to win a crucial faceoff. Because he can do so many things he will get lots of minutes, not because of the "role" he plays but because he can play so many "roles". That is why he will be our next captain.

Avatar
#163 Aleslav Smidsky
July 20 2010, 01:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

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

Who were the other options for these coaches?

Avatar
#164 mike
July 20 2010, 01:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Crash. that would be career. I'll judge where Horcoff should play in the new season when we see what he looks like.

Traktor's argument went beyond last year. Sure he might have been hard to score, but he's easy to play against. WTF?

On re-entry waivers 28 teams don't even get a chance to salivate. Not cracking the lineup is Traktor's fantasy.

Avatar
#165 Aleslav Smidsky
July 20 2010, 01:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@DougWeightProblem

Are you serious?????????????

Shutdown role? He has one of the worst plus/minus in the league. Shutdown role?

Penalty kill? One of the worst in the league as well. Penalty kill?

What role on offence is that? Turn your back into the d-man on offence?

Wake the fcuk up and stop throwing random sh!t out there.

Avatar
#166 Crash
July 20 2010, 01:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Ender wrote:

@ Crash

I don't pretend that Horcoff is the Messiah to lead this organization to their next Stanley Cup. I just get annoyed when clowns run their mouths with absolutely no argument to back it up. Statements like "Basically any opposing player can retrieve pucks without the fear of being hit from Horcoff - this makes their job much, much easier." seem to single out Horcoff needlessly; there are a lot of 'brand-name' players who hit less than Horcoff and yet don't get singled out for being easy to play against because of it. Similarly, saying "They don't have to worry about Horcoff offensively - Horcoff couldn't create a ham sandwich never mind a scoring chance . . . Horcoff = zero threat" is obviously untrue, unless your point is that the hundreds of players who scored less than him are also not offensive threats.

The argument about Horcoff always seems to come back to salary and there's no way that his salary is in line with his output. Hear me clearly: That is not Horcoff's fault. Say what you want about his being overpaid and I'll agree with that, but try telling me that he doesn't belong in the line-up and I'll disagree. He hits, he scores, and he does whatever is asked of him by the organization. The fact that his contribution may not be directly proportional to his salary is not part of the argument the esteemed Traktor was making.

Whoa, calm down...

I never said he doesn't belong in the lineup...I just don't want to see him playing in our top six...I go to the games and yes Horcoff lacks the skill set and hockey sense to contribute in a top six role...the play often dies on his stick when he's trying to create offense and I mean often.

So IMO he has played way too many minutes over the years...maybe it was because we had no options before but now the options are there...I've accepted the fact that Horcoff is overpaid and can live with that. But I just wish that the Oilers coaching staff would quit force feeding us Horcoff in the top six because of this overpayment....it's like they're trying to prove to us that they didn't overpay.

I do beg to differ on your thought that Horcoff hits and scores (stats show otherwise)....I can agree with the guy has heart and is a hard worker...this is why I'd love to see him used with reduced minutes and in more of a shutdown role...maybe with reduced minutes and a defined role that doesn't require as much skill as it does hard work and tenacity he will thrive and be a solid contributor and have enough gas left in the tank to be successful at it.

I'm not one of these guys that goes to games and boos the players...I don't see the point in it...

Yes maybe Traktor comes on a bit strong about his distaste for Horcoff but IMO there is some validity in his arguement.

Avatar
#167 Traktor
July 20 2010, 01:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

"He can play a shut-down role"

I can play a shut-down role. Of course I would also bleed goals like Horcoff. I could also always get Stoll, Reasoner and Peca to play the shutdown role and then take credit for it when it comes to negotiations.

"He can play penalty kill"

No question that he played on one of the leagues worst PP the past couple of years. Playing on a PK and killing a penalty are not the same.

Avatar
#168 Crackenbury
July 20 2010, 01:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

I'd like to hear how many of the Horcoff bashers have actually played a team sport at a fairly high level. It seems to me most of the arguements against Horcoff all come down to focus on some kind of stat with no consideration for the man.

He is clearly seen as a team leader by his own teammates and succesive coaches despite his poor record over the past couple of seasons. There is obviously a reason for it. Why guys feel the need to endlessly bash the guy doesn't make much sense to me. He is here to stay and it's possible he may be made captain.

I think the former Penner bashers have found a new goat. Don't snap your ankles jumping back on the bandwagon if Horcoff returns to form of 2 seasons ago where he was on pace for career high in goals and points prior to being injured.

Avatar
#169 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 20 2010, 01:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Aleslav Smidsky wrote:

Who were the other options for these coaches?

So just so we're clear, you are saying he was the best option for multiple roles over multiple years.

Yet he has nothing to offer.

Avatar
#170 Crash
July 20 2010, 01:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
DougWeightProblem wrote:

I think, in part, it's your obsession with "role" that's jading your view of Horcoff. He plays so many, and cannot be slotted into just one, which is what makes him so valuable to this team.

He can play a shut-down role, taking away scoring chances. He can play penalty kill, mentoring the youth in positioning skills. He can move into an offensive role when the youth struggle and can't find their own game, or the rigours of an NHL season become too much. He will be out in the last minute of the game to win a crucial faceoff. Because he can do so many things he will get lots of minutes, not because of the "role" he plays but because he can play so many "roles". That is why he will be our next captain.

That's one of the problems IMO.. that he has been given the minutes to play all of these roles and he doesn't really excell at any of them.

What I don't understand is how is supporters continue to tell us that he can play penalty kill and mentor young players yet we have had one of the worst PK's in the league for awhile now.

How can you say that he takes away scoring chances...after the last couple of seasons you'd be hard pressed to sell that he takes away scoring chances.

You certainly aren't going to be able to sell to me that he can move into an offensive role....there's no one on that team that struggles more in an offensive role than Horcoff.

And finally where is the proof that Horcoff is the go to guy for taking key faceoffs....you can't go by last season...his faceoff numbers were terrible.

So as you say he has all of these roles he has to play so he gets big minutes yet the fact is he doesn't excell at any of the roles....

So my thinking was if you reduced his minutes and gave him ONE defined role that matches his skill set then maybe he could excell at that role and with reduced minutes he would have enough gas left in the tank to continue to contribute at the role...it might also help him to stay healthy with less minutes

Avatar
#171 Traktor
July 20 2010, 02:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Nobody would touch Horcoff on re-entry.

The closest comp is Malhotra at 2.5 but he only has 3 years compared to Horcoff's 5.

Malhotra is also a better 3rd line center. Horcoff might be a better top 6 guy but for the 3rd line role Malhotra is a much better prototypical 3rd line C.

Most importantly, and what Horcoff's supporters keep telling me: Shawn Horcoff hasn't been healthy/can't stay healthy/all his bad seasons are because of bad health.

Why in the hell would any sane GM pick up 5 years of a player with a shoulder made out of paper towel?

Avatar
#172 mike
July 20 2010, 02:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

crash, Which is it? Horcoff belongs in the line up? Traktor's making sense?

Avatar
#173 Archaeologuy
July 20 2010, 02:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

So just so we're clear, you are saying he was the best option for multiple roles over multiple years.

Yet he has nothing to offer.

OB, Horc was the best option in the past. But what Horcoff could offer 3-4 years is not what he can offer now. He isnt healthy and he isnt effective in the top 6 spots.

His last few years have been trending down. He's on the wrong side of 30. He has a chronic shoulder injury. He isnt willing to play physical. He hasnt been able to regain his top 6 scoring touch. His +/- has been worse than -20 in 2 of the last 4 years.

He does not deserve to be a top 6 forward on this team or any other until his on-ice performance improves, and I'm not holding my breath. It's foolhardy to assume that this player, given all of the circumstances, will bounce back to playing the way he did when he was 28 and healthy. He finished the year on the 3rd line of the basement club in the NHL.

I think it's fair to question the people who want to see him back in the top 6 before he proves he can still do it.

Avatar
#174 Aleslav Smidsky
July 20 2010, 02:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

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

How are we clear?

How did you come to a conclusion by me asking you a question?

Where did I say the word "BEST"?

Do you want to read the question again, or do you want a link to hooked on phonics?

Avatar
#175 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 20 2010, 02:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Archaeologuy wrote:

OB, Horc was the best option in the past. But what Horcoff could offer 3-4 years is not what he can offer now. He isnt healthy and he isnt effective in the top 6 spots.

His last few years have been trending down. He's on the wrong side of 30. He has a chronic shoulder injury. He isnt willing to play physical. He hasnt been able to regain his top 6 scoring touch. His +/- has been worse than -20 in 2 of the last 4 years.

He does not deserve to be a top 6 forward on this team or any other until his on-ice performance improves, and I'm not holding my breath. It's foolhardy to assume that this player, given all of the circumstances, will bounce back to playing the way he did when he was 28 and healthy. He finished the year on the 3rd line of the basement club in the NHL.

I think it's fair to question the people who want to see him back in the top 6 before he proves he can still do it.

Your missing the point, these guys are saying he shouldn't be on the roster and that he has nothing to offer.

Eventually that will be true, hell maybe even as early as next year. But up to 4 months ago Pat Quinn disagreed with Kip and Traktor.

I'll take Pat's word for it.

Avatar
#176 mike
July 20 2010, 02:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Traktor, Your logic is odd. If Malholtra and Horcoff were available at 2.5M ,you really figure the NHL only has 1 roster spot to fill? If my grandma had wheels...

Avatar
#177 Ender
July 20 2010, 02:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Crash

My frustration isn't so much directed at you as it is any defence of the argument by the guy who states "Horcoff could make 2 million and I still wouldn't want him on the club."

If you make a blanket statement, be prepared to demonstrate logically (with some kind of verifiable independant data) that it is fact and not your immagination and ego speaking. Even saying "the play often dies on his stick when he's trying to create offense and I mean often" is iffy; yes, I've seen 'Whiffcoff' fan on a one-timer a time or two myself. That doesn't necessarily mean that he does it more often than other forwards. It could very well be true, but be prepared to show that it is true if you are prepared to say it. I've shown my reasons why I believe that Horcoff statistically falls within the top 6 or 7 skaters on the average NHL team (all skaters, not just forwards), so when you say "Horcoff lacks the skill set and hockey sense to contribute in a top six role", I'm prepared to hear your argument; I'm just not sure what your argument is other than your gut tells you so.

You seem to make some logical points, Crash, unlike some other posters; I just want to see more thought put into statements before they're made and less reactionary opinion being touted as fact.

Avatar
#178 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 20 2010, 02:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Aleslav Smidsky wrote:

How are we clear?

How did you come to a conclusion by me asking you a question?

Where did I say the word "BEST"?

Do you want to read the question again, or do you want a link to hooked on phonics?

You asked:

"Who were the other options for these coaches?"

In responce to me saying:

"I'm pretty sure 2 different coaching staffs wouldn't have used him more then any other forward."

Are you not then implying that he was the best option?

If not, what is your point?

Avatar
#179 Crash
July 20 2010, 02:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Crackenbury wrote:

I'd like to hear how many of the Horcoff bashers have actually played a team sport at a fairly high level. It seems to me most of the arguements against Horcoff all come down to focus on some kind of stat with no consideration for the man.

He is clearly seen as a team leader by his own teammates and succesive coaches despite his poor record over the past couple of seasons. There is obviously a reason for it. Why guys feel the need to endlessly bash the guy doesn't make much sense to me. He is here to stay and it's possible he may be made captain.

I think the former Penner bashers have found a new goat. Don't snap your ankles jumping back on the bandwagon if Horcoff returns to form of 2 seasons ago where he was on pace for career high in goals and points prior to being injured.

I guess you could say I'm one of the bashers and yes I have played a team sport at a fairly high level and hockey is one of them to boot.

You've chosen to only pick out parts of what is being said. I've seen Horcoff play countless number of times...live, and it's not a stat when I tell you that he doesn't think the offensive game quick enough to create offense...he seems to struggle with making some of the skill plays that are required to create offense such as making a simple saucer pass....I've watched many times the attack die on Horcoff's stick and some of those times he isn't even being pressured.

I'm not trying to endlessly bash the guy...I just want to see him moved to a role that is more condusive to his skill set and I'd like to see him perfect that role or at least contribute.

Some people have stronger opinions than just moving him to more of a defined defensive role....who is to say they are wrong because right now Horcoff's results aren't exactly showing us he is getting it done.

Oh and for the record...I've never understood the Penner bashing...I've been in his corner since day one and I remain in it....In year one he lead the team in goal scoring, in year two despite being crapped on by the coach and having his minutes reduced significantly he still managed to score around 17 goals and he was the top +/- forward on the team and year 3 was his finest offensive year to date....so no, not all the Horcoff detractors are former Penner bashers.

Avatar
#180 DougWeightProblem
July 20 2010, 02:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Crash wrote:

That's one of the problems IMO.. that he has been given the minutes to play all of these roles and he doesn't really excell at any of them.

What I don't understand is how is supporters continue to tell us that he can play penalty kill and mentor young players yet we have had one of the worst PK's in the league for awhile now.

How can you say that he takes away scoring chances...after the last couple of seasons you'd be hard pressed to sell that he takes away scoring chances.

You certainly aren't going to be able to sell to me that he can move into an offensive role....there's no one on that team that struggles more in an offensive role than Horcoff.

And finally where is the proof that Horcoff is the go to guy for taking key faceoffs....you can't go by last season...his faceoff numbers were terrible.

So as you say he has all of these roles he has to play so he gets big minutes yet the fact is he doesn't excell at any of the roles....

So my thinking was if you reduced his minutes and gave him ONE defined role that matches his skill set then maybe he could excell at that role and with reduced minutes he would have enough gas left in the tank to continue to contribute at the role...it might also help him to stay healthy with less minutes

First off, thanks for replying to my earlier post in a considerate manner. I wouldn't waste my time on screaming idiots (Kip Dodry) that feel the need to say your wrong without really saying anything coherent at all.

That said, Horcoff's big minutes have certainly been overused this past year or two, and I'm certain he can get back to the form he has exhibited in each of his other NHL seasons since the lockout. Outside this year his faceoff numbers were consistently above 50%, almost to 60% some seasons, and he takes a RIDICULOUS amount of draws. ~20 goals and ~50 points are average for him (since the lockout), and I would expect him to equal if not exceed those numbers. With the rarity of proven twenty goal scorers in the NHL, I have no problem throwing him on the 2nd power play when it needs a boost, or putting him out with Hemsky and Hall when Gagner struggles. Fact is, Gagner has done no better than Horcoff over the past couple years, playing easier minutes and all.

16 to 18 minutes should be good for Horcoff this year in a "jack of all trades" role - a mentor to the rest of the team that the kids should look up to and eventually exceed.

Avatar
#181 Archaeologuy
July 20 2010, 02:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Crash

You can also put me in the pro-Penner camp since day 1 and I am one of ON's loudest Horcoff anti-fans.

Avatar
#182 Crackenbury
July 20 2010, 02:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Traktor

What secret information do you have on Horcoff that isn't available to all of his teammates, coaches and various members of the media that feel Horcoff is a suitable candidate for captain?

Don't rehash the same old crap. You must have something to be smarter than the paid hockey professionals that seem to think Horcoff is a pretty good team leader.

Avatar
#183 Crackenbury
July 20 2010, 02:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Crash

Your argument against Horcoff is presented reasonably. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and there are a number of points you bring up about Horcoff that I agree with.

I'm referring more to the guys that call him a waste of space and one of the worst players in the league that no one would want even on re-call waivers.

Avatar
#184 Crash
July 20 2010, 02:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mike wrote:

crash, Which is it? Horcoff belongs in the line up? Traktor's making sense?

Could be both Mike...I think that it is quite possible that what Traktor is saying is true...Archaeologuy in post #173 makes a lot of good points about Horcoff now being on the wrong side of 30 and having a chronic shoulder, etc.

A lot of what Traktor is saying is true...and it's possible that Horcoff isn't a usable as he once was.

What I'm saying...again...is I'd like to see Horcoff tried out in a single role as a shutdown guy with reduced minutes...I'd like to give him the chance to show he can excell at it...I am an Oiler fan and am hopeful that he can but given his output in recent years it could be that Horcoff can't get it done anymore...so some may already believe that (ie: Traktor)...and who knows, maybe he's right.

Avatar
#185 DK0
July 20 2010, 02:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

You guys do know that the easiest way to win an internet argument is to type in all caps.

Since there is no font selection you literally CANNOT TYPE BIGGER AND LOUDER THEN THIS!! Argument won.

Avatar
#186 Ender
July 20 2010, 02:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

DKO wrote:

you literally CANNOT TYPE BIGGER AND LOUDER THEN THIS!!

ARE YOU ABSOLUTELY SURE?!!

Avatar
#187 DK0
July 20 2010, 02:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Ender

*Swoon*

Avatar
#188 DougWeightProblem
July 20 2010, 02:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I guess what it comes down to is this ... and maybe I'm being a little selfish here ... I want a captain NEXT YEAR. There should be no trial period or three A's crap. Gagner is too young, Whitney's been here a month, Souray is on the out as a poisonous traitor, and Taylor Hall can't make his bed yet, let alone lead men. Therefore Horcoff HAS to be the defacto captain. If you disagree, read the article above.

*stick out tongue and shuts off the whole interwebs*

Avatar
#189 mike
July 20 2010, 02:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Crash, A stopped watch is right twice a day. When Horcoff retires it's not going to prove Traktor was right about Horcoff not belonging in the line up today.

Avatar
#190 Crash
July 20 2010, 02:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Ender wrote:

My frustration isn't so much directed at you as it is any defence of the argument by the guy who states "Horcoff could make 2 million and I still wouldn't want him on the club."

If you make a blanket statement, be prepared to demonstrate logically (with some kind of verifiable independant data) that it is fact and not your immagination and ego speaking. Even saying "the play often dies on his stick when he's trying to create offense and I mean often" is iffy; yes, I've seen 'Whiffcoff' fan on a one-timer a time or two myself. That doesn't necessarily mean that he does it more often than other forwards. It could very well be true, but be prepared to show that it is true if you are prepared to say it. I've shown my reasons why I believe that Horcoff statistically falls within the top 6 or 7 skaters on the average NHL team (all skaters, not just forwards), so when you say "Horcoff lacks the skill set and hockey sense to contribute in a top six role", I'm prepared to hear your argument; I'm just not sure what your argument is other than your gut tells you so.

You seem to make some logical points, Crash, unlike some other posters; I just want to see more thought put into statements before they're made and less reactionary opinion being touted as fact.

I understand your frustration and the venom that some go at this is definitely harsh but at the same time it's the way they feel...

They are probably frustrated at those that suggest that Horcoff should be the C13 or that he should play on the top line with top PP time...or they may be frustrated at those that continue to sell that Horcoff is a good PKer or good on faceoffs when the stats show otherwise.

As far as having verifiable independant data to support the arguement well the data is there...look at last year alone and the data is there moreso to back the Horcoff is done theory over the Horcoff should be C13 and the 1st line center theory.

I did use some of that data when I spoke of being right at the bottom of the league in the +/- category....this stat certainly doesn't support Horcoff being sound defensively...possibly just a one off bad year except for the fact that he has been trending this way. There are also his terrible faceoff numbers from last year and his low point total despite having more mintues played at forward than any other forward.

There are some things you can't back up with actual data...it's observing...all I can do when I give my opinion on what I observe is tell it the way I am seeing it...it's not what my gut tells me, it's what I'm seeing on a night to night basis as I watch the games.

So as I said I do understand your frustration with some of the statements being made as though they are fact but the truth is I can understand their frustration too with statements made about a Horcoff that used to exist as though that Horcoff still exists and that it is still a fact....it works both ways I suppose.

Avatar
#191 Crash
July 20 2010, 02:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
DougWeightProblem wrote:

First off, thanks for replying to my earlier post in a considerate manner. I wouldn't waste my time on screaming idiots (Kip Dodry) that feel the need to say your wrong without really saying anything coherent at all.

That said, Horcoff's big minutes have certainly been overused this past year or two, and I'm certain he can get back to the form he has exhibited in each of his other NHL seasons since the lockout. Outside this year his faceoff numbers were consistently above 50%, almost to 60% some seasons, and he takes a RIDICULOUS amount of draws. ~20 goals and ~50 points are average for him (since the lockout), and I would expect him to equal if not exceed those numbers. With the rarity of proven twenty goal scorers in the NHL, I have no problem throwing him on the 2nd power play when it needs a boost, or putting him out with Hemsky and Hall when Gagner struggles. Fact is, Gagner has done no better than Horcoff over the past couple years, playing easier minutes and all.

16 to 18 minutes should be good for Horcoff this year in a "jack of all trades" role - a mentor to the rest of the team that the kids should look up to and eventually exceed.

No problem and thanks...

I've never understood the need for the name calling or the talking down to another poster or the firing of insults...

I don't subscribe to it and only will do it in retaliation...and even then sometimes I don't bother.

As far as Gagner goes...I don't think he's really been given a sound opportunity yet to show whether or not he would struggle in a top six role...I'd like to see him given a real opportunity to have a top six role...meaning I'd like to see the coaching staff live through some of the mistakes he might make and just let him play the role.

Avatar
#192 Crash
July 20 2010, 02:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mike wrote:

Crash, A stopped watch is right twice a day. When Horcoff retires it's not going to prove Traktor was right about Horcoff not belonging in the line up today.

Yes, but if Horcoff comes out and plays the same way this year as the last couple of years and then continues on the next year then it will show that Traktor was right about Horcoff not belonging in the lineup today...

Avatar
#193 Crackenbury
July 20 2010, 02:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Crash

If Horcoff is made captain, what is your response?

Avatar
#194 Crash
July 20 2010, 02:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Crackenbury wrote:

Your argument against Horcoff is presented reasonably. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and there are a number of points you bring up about Horcoff that I agree with.

I'm referring more to the guys that call him a waste of space and one of the worst players in the league that no one would want even on re-call waivers.

Thanks, I appreciate that...it makes for a more enjoyable blogging experience when you treat people with respect and try to offer your opinion without being confrontational...

Avatar
#195 Crash
July 20 2010, 02:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Crackenbury wrote:

If Horcoff is made captain, what is your response?

I'm fine with Horcoff being made captain...I just hope the Oilers are sure he is going to be able to contribute for awhile before making that decision.

I'm all for not having a captain this year and waiting to see what happens with this young group after the season.

Avatar
#196 Crackenbury
July 20 2010, 03:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Crash wrote:

I'm fine with Horcoff being made captain...I just hope the Oilers are sure he is going to be able to contribute for awhile before making that decision.

I'm all for not having a captain this year and waiting to see what happens with this young group after the season.

His susceptibility to injury is definitely a concern when considereing him for captain. I don't think they'll go without a captain with the large number of rookies likely to be in the lineup. Injury prone or not I think the Oilers will name Horcoff captain based on the way he handles himself with teammates, coaches and media. There is no bettter example on the Oilers of how to conduct yourself on and off the ice.

Avatar
#197 Ender
July 20 2010, 03:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Crash wrote:

I can understand their frustration too with statements made about a Horcoff that used to exist as though that Horcoff still exists

In 07-08, Horcoff was 33rd in the NHL out of 852 skaters for points per game. Obviously, he didn't repeat that in 08-09 or 09-10, so I think it's clear that people shouldn't put Horcoff in the same rarified air today that we had him in a couple of seasons ago.

Nonetheless, I think people's expectations of a top-six forward are a little off the mark. Last year, Jonathan Willis did an excellent piece on what a top-six forward in the NHL is (one of several, actually), and low and behold Horcoff was one. One of only two on the Oilers at that time, according to the league-metrics Jonathan used.

Today, I showed that 192 skaters scored more points than Horcoff in 09-10. Divide those superior point-getters among 30 teams, you get each team having an average of 6.4 skaters (some of those being defensemen) who would have outscored Horcoff in this dismal year for him. In my books that means that he's a top-six forward, even hurt.

Look, you can argue that he played a lot of minutes and that he wouldn't have scored as much if he had played less. That's a circular argument that goes both ways. You could cut Henrik Sedin's points in half too if you took away half his playing time. Horcoff played the minutes that he did because his coaches felt that he was the best member of the team at the time to be on the ice, the same as any other player in the league.

The bottom line is that if someone doesn't think that Horcoff is a top-six forward, I'd be interested to see their numbers showing why that is true. Maybe some people's expectations are just a little high.

Avatar
#198 Crash
July 20 2010, 03:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Crackenbury wrote:

His susceptibility to injury is definitely a concern when considereing him for captain. I don't think they'll go without a captain with the large number of rookies likely to be in the lineup. Injury prone or not I think the Oilers will name Horcoff captain based on the way he handles himself with teammates, coaches and media. There is no bettter example on the Oilers of how to conduct yourself on and off the ice.

I will say Horcoff is definitely very well spoken and handles interviews very well...

As far as the captaincy goes...I don't know if you take what Renney had to say seriously when Gregor and Brownlee interviewed him but it sounded as though he wouldn't have a problem going without a captain this year...

I do believe he mentioned that he's done it before and it was successful...don't quote me on that one :)

Avatar
#199 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 20 2010, 03:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Ender wrote:

Crash wrote:

I can understand their frustration too with statements made about a Horcoff that used to exist as though that Horcoff still exists

In 07-08, Horcoff was 33rd in the NHL out of 852 skaters for points per game. Obviously, he didn't repeat that in 08-09 or 09-10, so I think it's clear that people shouldn't put Horcoff in the same rarified air today that we had him in a couple of seasons ago.

Nonetheless, I think people's expectations of a top-six forward are a little off the mark. Last year, Jonathan Willis did an excellent piece on what a top-six forward in the NHL is (one of several, actually), and low and behold Horcoff was one. One of only two on the Oilers at that time, according to the league-metrics Jonathan used.

Today, I showed that 192 skaters scored more points than Horcoff in 09-10. Divide those superior point-getters among 30 teams, you get each team having an average of 6.4 skaters (some of those being defensemen) who would have outscored Horcoff in this dismal year for him. In my books that means that he's a top-six forward, even hurt.

Look, you can argue that he played a lot of minutes and that he wouldn't have scored as much if he had played less. That's a circular argument that goes both ways. You could cut Henrik Sedin's points in half too if you took away half his playing time. Horcoff played the minutes that he did because his coaches felt that he was the best member of the team at the time to be on the ice, the same as any other player in the league.

The bottom line is that if someone doesn't think that Horcoff is a top-six forward, I'd be interested to see their numbers showing why that is true. Maybe some people's expectations are just a little high.

"Nonetheless, I think people's expectations of a top-six forward are a little off the mark."

That's exactly it, everyones expectations are out of whack for almost every position.

- First liners put up a PPG+

- 2nd liners go 25/55

etc etc

when in reality the actual numbers are about 65% of those.

Avatar
#200 Crash
July 20 2010, 03:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Ender wrote:

Crash wrote:

I can understand their frustration too with statements made about a Horcoff that used to exist as though that Horcoff still exists

In 07-08, Horcoff was 33rd in the NHL out of 852 skaters for points per game. Obviously, he didn't repeat that in 08-09 or 09-10, so I think it's clear that people shouldn't put Horcoff in the same rarified air today that we had him in a couple of seasons ago.

Nonetheless, I think people's expectations of a top-six forward are a little off the mark. Last year, Jonathan Willis did an excellent piece on what a top-six forward in the NHL is (one of several, actually), and low and behold Horcoff was one. One of only two on the Oilers at that time, according to the league-metrics Jonathan used.

Today, I showed that 192 skaters scored more points than Horcoff in 09-10. Divide those superior point-getters among 30 teams, you get each team having an average of 6.4 skaters (some of those being defensemen) who would have outscored Horcoff in this dismal year for him. In my books that means that he's a top-six forward, even hurt.

Look, you can argue that he played a lot of minutes and that he wouldn't have scored as much if he had played less. That's a circular argument that goes both ways. You could cut Henrik Sedin's points in half too if you took away half his playing time. Horcoff played the minutes that he did because his coaches felt that he was the best member of the team at the time to be on the ice, the same as any other player in the league.

The bottom line is that if someone doesn't think that Horcoff is a top-six forward, I'd be interested to see their numbers showing why that is true. Maybe some people's expectations are just a little high.

The whole arguement is becoming circular I think, lol.

To me if Horcoff or any player for that matter was at or near the bottom of a scoring list that places him just on the cusp of being a top six player with 36 pts and that player is now over 30 yrs old then the time has come for that player to be replaced in that top six.

Yes you are correct in saying if you cut Henrik Sedin's minutes in half that his numbers would be reduced but cutting H. Sedin's minutes in half would definitely be to the detriment to his team. Whereas I don't think you could say the same about Horcoff.

The numbers you have shown are numbers good enough to show that Horcoff doesn't belong in the top six anymore...maybe a couple of years ago he was a top six, but not now IMO.

The numbers you use to determine a top six can't just be goals and assists it has to be more than that...you have to look at all the numbers and decide if they are numbers that are tracking upwards, tracking downwards or staying the same and then decide.

I don't like Horcoff's chances and like I mentioned before using only my own observations...He doesn't have the skill set or hockey sense to succeed in a top six role or to make his team a better team in that role.

Comments are closed for this article.