He'll be Fine

Lowetide
November 05 2011 09:29AM

A few years ago, one of my kids asked me a question that floored me and pointed out a truth about all of us--we worry too much about things we shouldn't worry about at all. The child--who will remain nameless to protect their identity and further embarrassment as I've told the story many times--said "Dad, everyone is getting married. Is there going to be anyone left for me?"

Well, yes. Don't worry.

I think it's pretty much the same thing worrying about Paajarvi's scoreless streak to start the season. History tells us that there will be someone for you when it's time, and that Magnum PS will see his numbers align with historical totals. Honest.

A year ago, Paajarvi averaged 13 and a half minutes per game at 5x5 even strength and scored 1.36 points-per-60 minutes of playing time. This year, he's averaging just over 11 minutes a night at even strength and has zero points.

Question: How many points at even strength would Paajarvi require to reach last year's scoring total of 1.36? Answer: three. Three points would have Paajarvi at 1.34/60 for this season based on his current time on ice.

It's random, it's luck, it's lack of chances leading to a crisis of confidence, it's playing with less talented teammates, it's being in the wrong place at the right time (Corey Potter scored a goalmouth goal the other night--that could/should have been Paajarvi when he's going).

Last season, Magnus Paajarvi posted a nice year in a secondary role. He didn't get the push Hall/Eberle did, and that's cool those guys were #1 overall and a year older. This season, the lineup has established chemistry in ways that see the young Swede on the outside looking in.

Three points. 3.

Perhaps tonight, a puck will hit his skate and find twine, or a shot from the point will go off his butt and into the net. No matter, it'll happen at some point and he'll begin to see those numbers fall in line.

Magnus Paajarvi has the confidence of his coach and is getting at-bats. He forced a penalty by driving to the net the other night, and that chance could have turned into a fluke goal with only a little luck.

WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?

Players don't develop or establish themselves in a straight line. Magnus Paajarvi may not be Hall or Eberle's offensive equal--I think we have some evidence of that now--but he should be able to score 20 in a season based on his rookie season and provide the Oilers with a quality 2-way winger for any of the top 3 lines.

It's all good, these are just growing pains and the forces of luck, confidence and timing.

--

Nation Radio is on the air at noon today (Team 1260). Your emails are welcome at nationradio@theteam1260 or you can tweet @lowetide_ and tell me what you're thinking. Among the guests scheduled to appear:

  1. Bruce McCurdy from the Cult of Hockey. Bruce has been doing outstanding work at the Cult of Hockey and also has a tremendous memory dating back before expansion. That's a valuable resource, and I'll ask him to break down the reasons for the Oilers early season success.
  2. Thomas Drance from Canucks Army. Thomas will drop by to talk about the Canucks--who are still unable to fire on all pistons--and the early days of the NW division this season. He has some good insights.
  3. Cam Charron from the Nations. He's done some comparison looking at Toronto and Edmonton, and I'd like to know if both teams can keep up this pace. There are some cracks forming--Maple Leafs goaltending and Oilers lack of depth on the blue--and I'll ask Cam to address those things.
  4. Kent Wilson from Flames Nation and the Nations sites. Kent is a terrific source of information, sussing out the real story using underlying numbers and spotting trends ahead of the curve. I'll ask him about the Flames (promise not to giggle), and whether or not he feels the Oilers could be real this season.

I always enjoy doing the show, the best questions come from you. So drop me a line here  or email/tweet me.

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 TSN 1260.
Avatar
#51 war
November 05 2011, 12:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

excellent article,have to agree magnus is going to be fine and I think he fits better with our long term plans than omark(we need some size)he will develop into a 20 goal scorer and i think Hemsky coming back and magnus getting a few better chances will turn this around.omark and ganger will be trade bait for a defenceman,and hartikkianan is going to be part of the long term oilers plan as well.

Avatar
#52 Captain Obvious
November 05 2011, 12:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Jerk Store wrote:

Then why not just take the top 12 Canadian scorers and top 6 scoring defenseman for the 2014 Olympics. Should work, right? I mean MA Bergeron is going to be far more valuable than Shea Weber. Step aside Mike Richards, Alex Tanguay is hot. There is a reason Toewes was our best Olympian. He knew his ROLE and played it to perfection. Role players by definition "fill a role". Possibly the craziest thing I have heard. Are you channeling Madjam or something?

I know it is too much to expect basic literacy around here but I didn't say that the 12 best scorers were the 12 best players.

Toews role on the Olympic team was to contribute to more goals than he lets in. That's it. He is an excellent player because when he is on the ice his team has the puck and this leads to more goals going into the opposition net than go into his net.

The way you are using role isn't just sloppy it is magical. It is literally non-sense.

Avatar
#53 BArmstrong
November 05 2011, 12:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Archaeologuy wrote:

Youth, pedigree, experience, and talent? I guess I would start with those things.

Arch - those are good places to start. But take off your "I hate that little cocky Swede" glasses for a second. Omark has plenty of talent. What sets apart good NHL players from bad is figuring out how to use ones talents against other world class players.

The point Tiger Under Glass makes is that Omark is not be afforded that opportunity.

My point is it won't be the first time a small player has been cut loose from this team after not immediately panning out, or not ordained by management and perhaps ends up succeeding elsewhere (Ray Whitney? to name just one)

Anyway - who cares:) The Oilers are on a six game winning streak without that little bastard:)

Avatar
#54 DSF
November 05 2011, 01:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Interesting to note that, on a team that is +10 in goal differential, there are only two players that are giving up more than they're getting while playing middling competition.

Belanger and Paajarvi.

For the more traditional among you, it's no surprise they are the only two current roster forwards who are in the red in plus/minus.

Avatar
#55 Jerk Store
November 05 2011, 01:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Thanks for the edification. You are the one using words in a reckless manner. Who are the "best" players. Best scorers, best passers, best penalty killers, best shot blockers, etc? You are throwing around a word without definition in this context. What does best mean? I will keep this very basic for you as your hockey knowledge could be scribed on a childs thumbnail. Succesful teams are typically built with a mix of scoring, pk, checking and physical play among others. Each individual knowing and filling their ROLE. Some may play 25 mins some may play 7. So while your team, the Fantasyland Utopians, will be excellent with the "best players" the rest of us will have fun discussing how the Oil Management are going to fill the various Roles required to build a competitive team. Good day, sir.

Avatar
#56 Captain Obvious
November 05 2011, 01:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Jerk Store wrote:

Thanks for the edification. You are the one using words in a reckless manner. Who are the "best" players. Best scorers, best passers, best penalty killers, best shot blockers, etc? You are throwing around a word without definition in this context. What does best mean? I will keep this very basic for you as your hockey knowledge could be scribed on a childs thumbnail. Succesful teams are typically built with a mix of scoring, pk, checking and physical play among others. Each individual knowing and filling their ROLE. Some may play 25 mins some may play 7. So while your team, the Fantasyland Utopians, will be excellent with the "best players" the rest of us will have fun discussing how the Oil Management are going to fill the various Roles required to build a competitive team. Good day, sir.

This is, once again, mythological thinking. Moreover, it gets in the way of conversation. You might as well be saying blah, blah, blah, blah, for all the substantive content in your post.

Avatar
#57 godot10
November 05 2011, 01:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
DSF wrote:

Interesting to note that, on a team that is +10 in goal differential, there are only two players that are giving up more than they're getting while playing middling competition.

Belanger and Paajarvi.

For the more traditional among you, it's no surprise they are the only two current roster forwards who are in the red in plus/minus.

Compare those plus/minus with Omark and without Omark, and with and without Gagner now.

Avatar
#58 book¡e
November 05 2011, 01:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@Jerk Store

You need to learn to be more respectful in How you discuss topics. You lose respect, credibility and the interest of other readers when you resort to attacking others as opposed to focusing on the argument.

Avatar
#59 Jerk Store
November 05 2011, 01:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@Captain Obvious

If I may translate for others not familiar with your M.O.

"I have no response for your well reasoned response so I will throw out well thought out English terms like 'blah blah blah' along with "moreover" and "substantive" so I can get back to studying for my psych 101 class after cleaning Mom's basement"

Please don't arbitrarily throw out simplistic ideas like -duh, just pick the best players, and then drag out the Thesaurus to try and respond. To paraphrase Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men "I'd prefer you just say Thanks for the lesson and then be on your way". Be well.

Avatar
#60 DSF
November 05 2011, 01:36PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
godot10 wrote:

Compare those plus/minus with Omark and without Omark, and with and without Gagner now.

Omark -2 in 5 games played. Gagner 0 in 6 games played.

Statistically insignificant.

Avatar
#61 Jerk Store
November 05 2011, 01:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@book¡e

I thought I was until I was called illiterate. I do appreciate your comments though.

Avatar
#62 michael
November 05 2011, 02:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
DSF wrote:

Interesting to note that, on a team that is +10 in goal differential, there are only two players that are giving up more than they're getting while playing middling competition.

Belanger and Paajarvi.

For the more traditional among you, it's no surprise they are the only two current roster forwards who are in the red in plus/minus.

2 players with games so different as to be night and day. MP is not going to succeed with Belanger as his center. Next week the stars will align and see him playing alongside Gagner and Hemsky. The Oilers will make a roster move and it will be one most of do not expect. I think we'll see Horichuck sent to OKC . Some say Lander. I believe that the prescence of Eager in the lineup along with Peckham gives the Oilers a formidable deterent. Hordichuck is either sent to the minors or traded to for pick to make the room the Oilers need in the lineup.

Avatar
#63 a lg dubl dubl
November 05 2011, 02:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Over at copper n blue says Omark stated he may not be long for the AHL...TRADE HIM with a pick... NOW ST just my opinion

Avatar
#64 OilFan
November 05 2011, 02:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Trade Gagner, Hemsky and Omark to the Jackets for there first pick and a player to plug into the fourth line

Avatar
#65 DSF
November 05 2011, 02:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
michael wrote:

2 players with games so different as to be night and day. MP is not going to succeed with Belanger as his center. Next week the stars will align and see him playing alongside Gagner and Hemsky. The Oilers will make a roster move and it will be one most of do not expect. I think we'll see Horichuck sent to OKC . Some say Lander. I believe that the prescence of Eager in the lineup along with Peckham gives the Oilers a formidable deterent. Hordichuck is either sent to the minors or traded to for pick to make the room the Oilers need in the lineup.

A Gagner-Hemsky-Paajarvi line would be interesting.

Who would put the puck in the net?

Avatar
#66 Jerk Store
November 05 2011, 02:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@michael

Agree that MPS will see numbers improve with better linemates and Belanger is not helping his cause in the offensive sense. But would you not keep Hordi around because he knows his ro... (Perhaps I will use a different word)... Value to the team and is willing to sit in the PB until needed. If you put a Lander or an MPS in the PB for an extended time are you not doing them a disservice? That was one of the arguments for keeping a Petrell over Harty. Although that worked out favourably for Petrell.

Avatar
#67 Wanyes bastard child
November 05 2011, 02:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@Jerk Store

I'll say it for you :P

"Hordichuck knows his role on the team" ;)

Avatar
#68 Dave Lumley
November 05 2011, 02:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Lowetide - MPS is Ok due to a strong first season???? Cogliano had a great rookie season and went into the sewr from there. Regretfully, I don't see more positive from PRV than Cogliano, and that is too bad.

I can't believe I am agreeing with Tiger, but I think that Omark is a player, but regretfully not with the Oilers, much like Satan or Whitney. What will hurt is that we won't get value for him when he gets traded.

Arch is wrong that Omark is not a player but he is right that the Oilers don't have room for him. Trade both Gagner and Hemsky and we still don't have room for him.

Avatar
#69 Jerk Store
November 05 2011, 02:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Wanyes bastard child

Ha. You said it .... Not me. Point is veterans are far more willing to sit in the PB without a pout on or causing a disruption than a younger player. Plus Hordi sitting a few out in a row out is not seeing his development stalled.

Avatar
#70 BArmstrong
November 05 2011, 03:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Dave Lumley

I too think there's no room for Omark. I like him, I think he has a good upside, and I think he'll stick on an NHL team in a top six/2nd PP unit role - just not here.

I'd like to see the Oil showcase him - then trade him. Play him with Hall and RNH maybe. Throwing Eberle, on a line with Gags, and MPS might be just what the underachievers need. I don't know, but like someone else said earlier, I'd try something like that on NHL 2012 at least:)

Avatar
#71 Archaeologuy
November 05 2011, 03:13PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers

@Captain Obvious

You're only kidding yourself if you think roles dont exist or arent created by coaches for players to fill. Your response to everyone here has been the equivalent of plugging your ears and yelling "no no no no no."

Avatar
#72 Wanyes bastard child
November 05 2011, 03:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Archaeologuy

Those props are from me ;)

Avatar
#73 Dave Lumley
November 05 2011, 03:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
BArmstrong wrote:

I too think there's no room for Omark. I like him, I think he has a good upside, and I think he'll stick on an NHL team in a top six/2nd PP unit role - just not here.

I'd like to see the Oil showcase him - then trade him. Play him with Hall and RNH maybe. Throwing Eberle, on a line with Gags, and MPS might be just what the underachievers need. I don't know, but like someone else said earlier, I'd try something like that on NHL 2012 at least:)

Omark has to play top six, but not here. He would be a nice fit in Detroit for their next cup run. Detroit just has a way of recycling Oilers. Or maybe in Buffalo like Miro.

I wish they could find a way to showcase him, but don't know how that will happen. Too bad.

Someone will blame Tambo for this of course.

Avatar
#74 Quicksilver ballet
November 05 2011, 04:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Before i continue to poke needles in my Steve Tambellini voodoo doll, was he the one that put Stu MacGregor in the position he's in now?

Avatar
#75 Ken
November 05 2011, 05:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I hope he proves me wrong tonight but I think mps needs time in okc to get his confidence back and prove he is an NHL player.

Too my eye I have seen him throwing snow.You don't have to hurt but you have to bump and win puck battles.RNH at about 30 lbs lighter wins way more puck battles.

Avatar
#76 Captain Obvious
November 05 2011, 05:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Archaeologuy wrote:

You're only kidding yourself if you think roles dont exist or arent created by coaches for players to fill. Your response to everyone here has been the equivalent of plugging your ears and yelling "no no no no no."

I'm curious, what do you imagine these roles to be? There is such a thing as positions (center, winger, defense, etc.). What roles do you imagine there would be in addition to this?

Do you think third-line center is a real role? Do you think that it would be a good idea to get trade a first-line center to get a third-line center if you didn't have one? Or are you thinking that every line needs a "guy who tries hard." Is "guy who tries hard," a role.

Honestly, define me a role. Other than the already existing positions, I don't think you can. (PK and powerplay don't count because if these aren't quite positions they also aren't roles in the way you are using the term.

Avatar
#77 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
November 05 2011, 05:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@ Captain Obvious Incapable of an independent thought? What a joke, their were a few of us that knew Omark was a sham right from the begining while the masses were drooling over his u-tube videos and Euro stats.

Avatar
#78 TigerUnderGlass
November 05 2011, 06:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Why do people put so much stock in top 6 vs bottom 6?

Everyone wants to be Detroit, so why can a team like Detroit use a guy like Hudler regularly in their bottom 6?

Sure he gets some top 6 minutes, but when they have been healthy he has slotted onto the 3rd or 4th line more often than not. Is Hudler secretly some sort of gritty defensive dynamo?

Why is it ok for successful franchises to use players like that in the bottom 6 but not Edmonton? Are we that desperate to see "thunderous bodychecks"?

Avatar
#79 Archaeologuy
November 05 2011, 06:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Captain Obvious

What are you talking about? Being a penalty killer is certainly a role a player can have. So is being the guy who will be taking the bulk of the faceoffs in the D-Zone. Being a shutdown D man. Being a shadow is a role. Being a fighter is a role.

Jesus. The Oilers' Jo Shmo line knows that every game their role is to shut down the opposition's best line. Horcoff and Belanger know their roles include winning faceoffs. Eager knows his role is to be physical and stand up or his linemates. Jones knows that his role moving forward will be largely on the PK. As long as Jones can be an effective PKer he will be an NHLer because that's his role.

And if players start to fail at fulfilling their roles they will be replaced. That is what winning teams do.

Avatar
#80 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
November 05 2011, 06:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Captain Obvious wrote:

I'm curious, what do you imagine these roles to be? There is such a thing as positions (center, winger, defense, etc.). What roles do you imagine there would be in addition to this?

Do you think third-line center is a real role? Do you think that it would be a good idea to get trade a first-line center to get a third-line center if you didn't have one? Or are you thinking that every line needs a "guy who tries hard." Is "guy who tries hard," a role.

Honestly, define me a role. Other than the already existing positions, I don't think you can. (PK and powerplay don't count because if these aren't quite positions they also aren't roles in the way you are using the term.

Just so we're clear here, when Renney is discussing with say Belanger and RNH what he expects out of them (ie what their roles are)... do you think he tells them the exact same thing?

Avatar
#81 Captain Obvious
November 05 2011, 06:56PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Archaeologuy wrote:

What are you talking about? Being a penalty killer is certainly a role a player can have. So is being the guy who will be taking the bulk of the faceoffs in the D-Zone. Being a shutdown D man. Being a shadow is a role. Being a fighter is a role.

Jesus. The Oilers' Jo Shmo line knows that every game their role is to shut down the opposition's best line. Horcoff and Belanger know their roles include winning faceoffs. Eager knows his role is to be physical and stand up or his linemates. Jones knows that his role moving forward will be largely on the PK. As long as Jones can be an effective PKer he will be an NHLer because that's his role.

And if players start to fail at fulfilling their roles they will be replaced. That is what winning teams do.

You should be smart enough to know that these statements don't mean anything.

It isn't a "role" to shut down the opposing best line. First, "shut down" is an euphemism for "play better than," and second, that is everyone's "role." Is there anyone's role that is "play worse than the other team's players?" It can't be a role if everyone is expected to do it.

Similarly it isn't Horcoff or Belanger's "role" to win faceoffs. That is the job of every center. Is there such thing as a center that isn't expected to win faceoffs?

You are right that being a fighter is a role which is all you need to know about the importance of roles. Someone who's "role" is defined by fighting is the definition of a useless hockey player.

You could try again but my arguments here can't be refuted. You were better off when you were arguing that Omark wasn't one of the Oilers best 12 players. You'd be wrong but that is at least possible. As a matter of logical necessity it is impossible for there to be such things as roles.

Avatar
#82 Captain Obvious
November 05 2011, 07:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

Just so we're clear here, when Renney is discussing with say Belanger and RNH what he expects out of them (ie what their roles are)... do you think he tells them the exact same thing?

His expectations of all players are the same. Play as well as they can. If his instructions are different it is only with regard to maximizing their abilities (i.e. Jones should play a simple game). This isn't because playing a simple game is a role but because players shouldn't try and do things they aren't capable of.

The funny thing is that my beef isn't with you guys. You think Omark is a bad hockey player. That's wrongheaded but coherent. If Omark is a bad hockey player he shouldn't be on the team.

My beef is with those that believe that Omark is a good hockey player but that somehow the Oilers don't have room for good hockey players because of a misguided notion concerning roles. That's incoherent.

Avatar
#83 Jerk Store
November 05 2011, 07:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@TigerUnderGlass

You are right in the sense that as teams evolve they develop into a top 9 structure. Chicago certainly had that two years ago. But you still have room for specialists on the 4th line. Namely a couple of PK specialists, physical "energy" guys, face off specialists, pests even a few (gasp) fighters in the league, some all rolled into one. To be honest the 4th line can give you your identity. And you do need a physical presence - though not necessarily fighters. Hockey is a great game, but it is not a nice game. The notion that you can just roll four "even" skilled lines, while laudable, is not practical or sustainable. In my opinion.

Avatar
#84 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
November 05 2011, 07:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Captain Obvious wrote:

His expectations of all players are the same. Play as well as they can. If his instructions are different it is only with regard to maximizing their abilities (i.e. Jones should play a simple game). This isn't because playing a simple game is a role but because players shouldn't try and do things they aren't capable of.

The funny thing is that my beef isn't with you guys. You think Omark is a bad hockey player. That's wrongheaded but coherent. If Omark is a bad hockey player he shouldn't be on the team.

My beef is with those that believe that Omark is a good hockey player but that somehow the Oilers don't have room for good hockey players because of a misguided notion concerning roles. That's incoherent.

I agree to an extent regarding roles (ie it's non-sense that people say Omark is top 6 or nothing).

However theirs clearly something to bringing differing skill sets to an NHL team, otherwise guys like Robert Nilsson and Nik Zherdev would be in the league instead of guys like Justin Abdelkader and Dan Paille.

Avatar
#85 TigerUnderGlass
November 05 2011, 07:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Jerk Store

The notion that you can just roll four "even" skilled lines, while laudable, is not practical or sustainable. In my opinion.

Luckily this notion has never been suggested as far as I know. It's a straw man.

Avatar
#86 Captain Obvious
November 05 2011, 07:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

I agree to an extent regarding roles (ie it's non-sense that people say Omark is top 6 or nothing).

However theirs clearly something to bringing differing skill sets to an NHL team, otherwise guys like Robert Nilsson and Nik Zherdev would be in the league instead of guys like Justin Abdelkader and Dan Paille.

Well I think Abdelkader and Paille are quite good hockey players while Nilsson is not. I'd certainly rather have Abdelkader or Paille than Nilsson whether or not I had a role for them.

I don't think Omark is anything like Nilsson or Zherdev. Those guys are both lazy. Omark isn't lazy and he isn't a bad defensive player. He's not a dominant physical force but you don't have to be to be effective. Dominant physical force isn't a role either.

Avatar
#87 Romulus' Apotheosis
November 05 2011, 08:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Wow... you take the wife to the Bay for a few hours to return a busted Kettle and everything goes to pot on here...

On "roles" I think I get what the good captain is getting at. But not sure how important this semantic debate is. If I follow right Captain is explaining away the attributes people usually cobble together under various "roles" and either taking them individually or simply calling them the necessary things teams need to win. If that is all this debate is about, then whatever. People will keep referring to "energy" guys and "grind lines" and "power play specialists" and "locker room guys/talkers" etc. etc. etc. and Coaches will continue to line match and so forth... and Captain will continue to object to this classification. fine. I'm not clear on what the real problem is or why it matters. happy to let it rest.

The question with Omark is more interesting... room on the team is interesting. There is lots of room on the team. The question is why has Renney chosen to fill all those spots without Omark? Here I think several things come into play: how good is he? how good is he playing right now? and repeat these question regarding how the OIlers perceive him? who does he potentially play with? who comes out? which line? what would be expected of him? checking? hitting? scoring? two-way? etc..? whatever bundle of attributes he has and can be maximized by the team (his role if you will) is that already filled by someone who is better, or who the team thinks is better, or who the team thinks for a variety of reasons deserves a spot more (ie. draft pedigree, youth, size, etc)

anyway... game time boys... put your oil-family hats on and lets dance!

Avatar
#88 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
November 05 2011, 08:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Captain Obvious wrote:

Well I think Abdelkader and Paille are quite good hockey players while Nilsson is not. I'd certainly rather have Abdelkader or Paille than Nilsson whether or not I had a role for them.

I don't think Omark is anything like Nilsson or Zherdev. Those guys are both lazy. Omark isn't lazy and he isn't a bad defensive player. He's not a dominant physical force but you don't have to be to be effective. Dominant physical force isn't a role either.

Well that's where we disagree I guess, I see Omark as a slightly better version of Nilsson who was a slightly better version of Schremp.

So far the numbers support my claim, and it from what we can tell it looks like the coach is in agreement as well.

Avatar
#89 Dave Lumley
November 05 2011, 09:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

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

(ie it's non-sense that people say Omark is top 6 or nothing)

I guess its all up to the way you count. In most cases the "top 6" are more of your skill guys, you know the guys who can score, the guys you put on the power play. That means if you are counting the way most people do, the "bottom 6" is left to the checkers, Pk specialists, the grinders, and the bangers. I can't beleive that even the most ardent Omark fan can see him in any of those above mentioned role.

Omark is a top 6 or he doesn't really fit and should be sent down to OKC. Hang on, thats just what Renney did.

Avatar
#90 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
November 06 2011, 01:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Dave Lumley wrote:

(ie it's non-sense that people say Omark is top 6 or nothing)

I guess its all up to the way you count. In most cases the "top 6" are more of your skill guys, you know the guys who can score, the guys you put on the power play. That means if you are counting the way most people do, the "bottom 6" is left to the checkers, Pk specialists, the grinders, and the bangers. I can't beleive that even the most ardent Omark fan can see him in any of those above mentioned role.

Omark is a top 6 or he doesn't really fit and should be sent down to OKC. Hang on, thats just what Renney did.

Well he was "bottom 6" for most of last year too.

Avatar
#91 Saytalk
November 06 2011, 07:22AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

If you are approaching an opposing player with the puck and he passes the puck away a split second before you reach him, are you supposed to finish your check, staple him to the boards and then skate hard to your own end, or are you supposed to peel away from the player and lackadaisically skate towards where the puck is now in play?

I can't count how many skill players light up the scoreboard in the CHL, SEL, AHL and KHL every year. Some of them finish their checks; plenty more just peel away.

If Omark goes back to Europe, then good riddance.

Avatar
#92 TigerUnderGlass
November 06 2011, 07:49AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

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

So far the numbers support my claim

Hate him all you want, but the numbers do not support your claim.

Avatar
#93 TigerUnderGlass
November 06 2011, 07:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Saytalk wrote:

If you are approaching an opposing player with the puck and he passes the puck away a split second before you reach him, are you supposed to finish your check, staple him to the boards and then skate hard to your own end, or are you supposed to peel away from the player and lackadaisically skate towards where the puck is now in play?

I can't count how many skill players light up the scoreboard in the CHL, SEL, AHL and KHL every year. Some of them finish their checks; plenty more just peel away.

If Omark goes back to Europe, then good riddance.

FFS.

This topic just hit a new low.

Avatar
#94 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
November 06 2011, 09:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:
So far the numbers support my claim

Hate him all you want, but the numbers do not support your claim.

I suggest you look a little closer at his and Nilsson's numbers in various leagues then.

Avatar
#95 Dave Lumley
November 06 2011, 11:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

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

But last year we did not have a real team.

Avatar
#96 TigerUnderGlass
November 06 2011, 01:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

I suggest you look a little closer at his and Nilsson's numbers in various leagues then.

What are you talking about? Their careers look nothing alike. You don't get to keep harping on age and then ignore it when comparing their 1 season each in the KHL. Omark has had less than 30 games in the AHL and Nilsson never accomplished anything in Sweden.

The numbers before coming here suggested he is a 40+ point player with some determination behind his game, and his play since getting here shows the exact same thing.

Your personal distaste for him is evident, but the numbers do not support you.

Avatar
#97 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
November 06 2011, 04:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

What are you talking about? Their careers look nothing alike. You don't get to keep harping on age and then ignore it when comparing their 1 season each in the KHL. Omark has had less than 30 games in the AHL and Nilsson never accomplished anything in Sweden.

The numbers before coming here suggested he is a 40+ point player with some determination behind his game, and his play since getting here shows the exact same thing.

Your personal distaste for him is evident, but the numbers do not support you.

Your Omark googles must be extra snug today.

Omark

SEL .59PPG (18/19/20/21/22)

KHL .64PPG (22/23)

AHL 1.16PPG (23/24)

NHL .53PPG (23/24)

Nilsson

SEL .34PPG (17/18/19)

KHL .66PPG (26)

AHL .95PPG (20/21/22)

NHL .47PPG (20/21/22/23/24/25)

~Ya, no similarities there.~

Don't worry Tiger, he'll be out of the league soon and I'm sure you'll have lots of time to tell us it's a league wide conspiracy and that his underlying numbers are good.

Comments are closed for this article.