Vande Velde Van Gogh In the FO Circle

Lowetide
April 03 2011 07:30AM

EdmontonOilers2

Chris Vande Velde arrived in pro hockey with a reputation for being a quality performer in the faceoff circle. He's performed well in the discipline in college, the American League and now in a small NHL sample. How valuable is the skill? Will it secure the Dutchman NHL employment?

When he was a junior and then college player, Vande Velde was a go-to guy in the faceoff circle and played the center position with aplomb. His draft day scouting report implied quality, and the earliest glimpse of the type of player we've seen recently in Edmonton:

  • Redline report: He has an incredibly long reach and is uncanny playing in traffic. When he got his skating legs going, he was nearly impossible to push off the puck, in an almost Keith Primeau–like fashion. Like Oshie, North Dakota has VandeVelde slated for the fall of 2006, and until then, he'll skate for the Lincoln Stars.

When Vande Velde turned pro last fall, I felt he'd be the first of the new pro's to emerge (based on age). However, Vande Velde's numbers (62gp, 12-4-16 -17) are not good and the number of minor leaguers recalled ahead of him (Reddox, Omark, O'Marra) suggested there was much to learn.

Doritogrande will be a well known name to Oilogosphere readers and he offered some exceptional insight into Vande Velde in OKC here. Quoting a portion of the post:

  • Chris VandeVelde was pegged as the de-facto checking center tonight, and was given the linemates befitting a player that the coaching staff wants in a defined role. He was able to saw-off the Moose top line of Hodgson-Volpatti-Shirokov with a little help from his friends. He showed good hustle, average speed and good skills in the faceoff dot.

This fits with Todd Nelson's (OKC's coach) viewpoint on the player:

  • His adjustment was learning the pro game. Up until Christmas, he was okay for us. But after Christmas he took it upon himself to play well in his D zone. Along with that, with the more responsibility he got, he began to improve offensively. He's been good for us, he's been excellent in the faceoff circle. He's 1-2 every night, it's either him or O'Marra.  

The entire interview is here. Vande Velde's rookie AHL season has him tied for 105th among rookies in that league, so he's going to have to bring other elements to his game. And that's where we can talk about his size (6.02, 204) and his ability in the faceoff circle.

In a very small sample size (8 games), Vande Velde is 56.7% on the dot (in 97 sorties). He's also gaining the confidence of the coach.

  • Tom Renney: “He’s very reliable. To a point, you expect what he delivers and he does. He’s a little bit predictable in that way, which is a good thing. I’m just tying to give him an opportunity to play in a number of different circumstances and he’s done well.”

The Renney quote (along with more on Vande Velde) is here.

WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?

Vande Velde is building enough of a resume to be "in the mix" for NHL employment in 11-12. A good bet would be more AHL time but perhaps an earlier recall when injuries or slumps force roster moves. I'd estimate he fits this way into the center depth chart at the pro level:

  1. Shawn Horcoff
  2. Sam Gagner
  3. Andrew Cogliano
  4. Colin Fraser
  5. Chris Vande Velde
  6. Ryan O'Marra
  7. Anton Lander (unsigned)
  8. Milan Kytnar

There are all kinds of things that could change (drafting RNH, moving Hall to center) but as it stands that 4line job should be an interesting contest during TC in the fall. Vande Velde's spring audition puts him in the mix, and his faceoff ability--in a small sample size--may make him a favorite.

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 Wes Mantooth
April 03 2011, 04:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Steve Smith

It sounds like English, but I can't understand a word you're saying

Avatar
#52 Steve Smith
April 03 2011, 04:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

@Wes Mantooth

The little dots are periods, intended to indicate the end of a sentence.

Avatar
#53 Wes Mantooth
April 03 2011, 04:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Steve Smith

I like you. You remind me of when I was young and stupid.....

Avatar
#54 Wes Mantooth
April 03 2011, 04:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

I'm not being rude. You're just insignificant.

Avatar
#55 magisterrex
April 03 2011, 04:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Steve Smith wrote:

This isn't a good place for knowledge; I find that it's a much better one for slamming others' opinions, because there's a high concentration of slamworthy opinions here.

Don't believe me that this isn't a great place for knowledge? I just sorted the comments in this thread by props: the top one is "i SECOND that!", followed by one whose main point is "I'm so happy we beat the Canucks last night." A couple of mine are up next, but mostly because I propped them myself.

Now's the part where you ask me why I bother coming around at all: it's to read Willis and Lowetide (and very occasionally Brownlee or Gregor, if they appear to be imparting knowledge obtained from their press passes). I usually manage to resist the comments sections, but they're right there so sometimes it's hard, especially when procrastinating from papers. Besides that, I figure it's incumbent on all of us to take the occasional shift making fun of the "Do you even watch the games" types in Willis's threads; we've all gotta do our parts.

I gave this comment a prop, just because I actually enjoy someone slamming a slamworthy opinion.

Avatar
#56 Steve Smith
April 03 2011, 04:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

@magisterrex

See, Magister Rex and I, despite getting off on very much the wrong foot, are now tight. Maybe you and I can be friends someday, Wes.

Avatar
#57 Woodguy
April 03 2011, 05:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
Steve Smith wrote:

This isn't a good place for knowledge; I find that it's a much better one for slamming others' opinions, because there's a high concentration of slamworthy opinions here.

Don't believe me that this isn't a great place for knowledge? I just sorted the comments in this thread by props: the top one is "i SECOND that!", followed by one whose main point is "I'm so happy we beat the Canucks last night." A couple of mine are up next, but mostly because I propped them myself.

Now's the part where you ask me why I bother coming around at all: it's to read Willis and Lowetide (and very occasionally Brownlee or Gregor, if they appear to be imparting knowledge obtained from their press passes). I usually manage to resist the comments sections, but they're right there so sometimes it's hard, especially when procrastinating from papers. Besides that, I figure it's incumbent on all of us to take the occasional shift making fun of the "Do you even watch the games" types in Willis's threads; we've all gotta do our parts.

I usually manage to resist the comments sections

No you don't.

Avatar
#59 Woodguy
April 03 2011, 05:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Lowetide wrote:

My eyebrow went askew upon reading that too. :-)

Of course, you should have had a comma after "no."

Ha!

Exactly.

Avatar
#60 Robin Brownlee
April 03 2011, 06:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Lowetide

Al: from everything I've read, you've got a damn good eye for talent and projecting what prospects might become.

I'm not so sure you need to take the edge off your opinion or gut instinct by making three different references to "small sample" sizes in one item when it comes to VandeVelde and face-offs.

Maybe it's just pre-emptive on your part because there's a squadron of smart guys just waiting to throw out terms like that if you don't mention it, but doesn't something like "Through eights games . . . " mean the very same thing?

Avatar
#61 Steve Smith
April 03 2011, 06:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
Lowetide wrote:

My eyebrow went askew upon reading that too. :-)

Of course, you should have had a comma after "no."

The comma's optional, at least according to any style guide I've read. And I actually *am* pretty good at resisting ON's comments sections; with yours, I don't try.

Edit: Now I see that my comment's tied with "i SECOND" for most propped. I attribute this to a shady band of proppers trying to discredit me.

Avatar
#62 Robin Brownlee
April 03 2011, 06:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Steve Smith wrote:

Um, until last night they had lost ten straight.

Despite your obviously vast intellect -- I can see why you wouldn't want to take time out from MENSA meetings to post here often -- it was 11 games, not 10. The Oilers had lost 11 straight games before beating Vancouver.

Avatar
#63 Steve Smith
April 03 2011, 06:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@Robin Brownlee

Depends from when you start counting.

(I know that the "rule" against ending sentences with prepositions is figmentary and the bane of good writing, but I happen to like it.)

Avatar
#64 Robin Brownlee
April 03 2011, 06:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@Steve Smith

You start counting at the same place everybody else does.

You've graced us with a half-dozen or so comments dripping with "I'm so smart" and you whiffed on a simple fact. Then, you shrug that off. One of those guys, eh? Never saw that coming.

Avatar
#65 Steve Smith
April 03 2011, 06:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers

@Robin Brownlee

I see that you have trouble with the subtler forms of self-deprecation.

(How's *that* for dripping?)

Avatar
#66 TigerUnderGlass
April 03 2011, 06:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
Robin Brownlee wrote:

You start counting at the same place everybody else does.

You've graced us with a half-dozen or so comments dripping with "I'm so smart" and you whiffed on a simple fact. Then, you shrug that off. One of those guys, eh? Never saw that coming.

When someone claims the Oilers are playing their best hockey of the season and someone responds with "they have lost 10 in a row" the important part to take away is that the number 10 was off by 1.

That will show you SS...the Oilers ARE playing their best hockey of the season after all.

Avatar
#67 Steve Smith
April 03 2011, 06:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers

@TigerUnderGlass

Well, you're right that my original point stands. But Robin Brownlee's right that calling me out on comparatively minor errors is fair game, given my charming personality. What he's wrong about is his characterization of my reaction to being called out.

Avatar
#68 Robin Brownlee
April 03 2011, 07:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

When someone claims the Oilers are playing their best hockey of the season and someone responds with "they have lost 10 in a row" the important part to take away is that the number 10 was off by 1.

That will show you SS...the Oilers ARE playing their best hockey of the season after all.

No, smart guy, the important part is actually citing the correct number of games the Oilers had lost in a row when you've spent an entire comment thread sounding like a smarmy know-it-all.

Your assertion Steve Smith's point -- that the Oilers have been awful -- shouldn't be lost just because he can't add is fine.

That said, your sarcastic "That will show you . . . " bit falls flat. Now, if somebody had chimed in to point out that the Oilers had only lost nine in a row after Smith said it was 10, like that mitigated the sucking, you'd have something. Pointing out it was 11 games? Not so much. Not at all, actually.

Avatar
#69 Mitch
April 03 2011, 07:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Forward lines next yr could look something like this 1.Hall Horcoff Hemsky 2.Pajarrvi Lander Omark 3.Hartikienen Cogliano Eberle 4.Jacques Vande Velde Jones Defence 1.Whitney Trade 2.Vandermeer Petry 3.Peckham UFA I see 3 centres that are very good in the faceoff circle. I see more balance in the 3 and 4th lines. Gagner is not there because I would use him to acquire a dman. Maybe I'm crazy but I would also move Gilbert and Smid out on the backend.

Avatar
#70 TigerUnderGlass
April 03 2011, 07:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Robin Brownlee wrote:

No, smart guy, the important part is actually citing the correct number of games the Oilers had lost in a row when you've spent an entire comment thread sounding like a smarmy know-it-all.

Your assertion Steve Smith's point -- that the Oilers have been awful -- shouldn't be lost just because he can't add is fine.

That said, your sarcastic "That will show you . . . " bit falls flat. Now, if somebody had chimed in to point out that the Oilers had only lost nine in a row after Smith said it was 10, like that mitigated the sucking, you'd have something. Pointing out it was 11 games? Not so much. Not at all, actually.

True.

I reacted because of how often I've seen you lash out after equally tangential shots are taken at you, but you're right.

Avatar
#71 DSF
April 03 2011, 07:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

LT said:

"When Vande Velde turned pro last fall, I felt he'd be the first of the new pro's to emerge (based on age). However, Vande Velde's numbers (62gp, 12-4-16 -17) are not good and the number of minor leaguers recalled ahead of him (Reddox, Omark, O'Marra) suggested there was much to learn."

Then we add, "very small sample size" to his NHL FO resume (bearing in mind he was 42% in the circle last night against a team missing its best faceoff guy) and we come up with Van Gogh?

How about Mario the Housepainter?

Avatar
#72 Steve Smith
April 03 2011, 07:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

@DSF

In fairness, Van Gogh was terrible in his own end.

Avatar
#73 Woodguy
April 03 2011, 07:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
Steve Smith wrote:

In fairness, Van Gogh was terrible in his own end.

He was ok on the right side, but terrible on the left.

Avatar
#74 TigerUnderGlass
April 03 2011, 07:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@Steve Smith

Agreed, but his scoring numbers were affected by bad luck...but what else would you expect from a post-Impressionist?

I regret nothing.

Avatar
#75 Steve Smith
April 03 2011, 07:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers

@TigerUnderGlass

And sometimes in a clutch situation he'd...die of a single self-inflicted gunshot...?

I've got nothing.

Avatar
#76 TigerUnderGlass
April 03 2011, 08:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Steve Smith wrote:

And sometimes in a clutch situation he'd...die of a single self-inflicted gunshot...?

I've got nothing.

I briefly considered trying to do something with that but quickly gave up.

If only he shot himself in the foot instead...

Avatar
#77 Woodguy
April 03 2011, 08:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
3
cheers
Steve Smith wrote:

And sometimes in a clutch situation he'd...die of a single self-inflicted gunshot...?

I've got nothing.

I don't think Van Gogh and any game played with blades mix well.

Avatar
#78 magisterrex
April 03 2011, 08:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers

As long as VandeVelde stays away from the lead-based paint, he should avoid having ear problems.

Avatar
#79 DSF
April 03 2011, 08:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
5
cheers
Steve Smith wrote:

In fairness, Van Gogh was terrible in his own end.

Apparently he was good in Gaugin's end though :)

Avatar
#80 Steve Smith
April 03 2011, 08:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Do you know what really pisses me off? When I make a joke and everybody else runs with it much better than I do.

Avatar
#81 Peterborough
April 03 2011, 09:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Mitch wrote:

Forward lines next yr could look something like this 1.Hall Horcoff Hemsky 2.Pajarrvi Lander Omark 3.Hartikienen Cogliano Eberle 4.Jacques Vande Velde Jones Defence 1.Whitney Trade 2.Vandermeer Petry 3.Peckham UFA I see 3 centres that are very good in the faceoff circle. I see more balance in the 3 and 4th lines. Gagner is not there because I would use him to acquire a dman. Maybe I'm crazy but I would also move Gilbert and Smid out on the backend.

I like Smid and Gilby way more in the second slot. They were excellent at containing the Sedins, who in no way took a night off. You think Lander steps into a 2C role? I like the kid but that would be a miracle. Gagner at 2C Larrson with Whitney. Petry with Peckham.

Avatar
#82 DSF
April 03 2011, 09:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Peterborough wrote:

I like Smid and Gilby way more in the second slot. They were excellent at containing the Sedins, who in no way took a night off. You think Lander steps into a 2C role? I like the kid but that would be a miracle. Gagner at 2C Larrson with Whitney. Petry with Peckham.

The Sedins and the entire Canucks team were in cruise control after clinching the President;s Trophy.

If Lander is your second line centre, he can deal with Kesler.

Good luck with that.

Avatar
#83 Peterborough
April 03 2011, 09:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

@DSF

"If Lander is your second line centre, he can deal with Kesler."

what do you mean by that? Deal with him like a rape victim deals with a 6'4" 260 bls escaped convict?

Avatar
#84 Bucknuck
April 04 2011, 12:39AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Nice Article LT. I wish Vande Velde had bigger potential, but if he can be a fourth line centre with size that wins faceoffs and doesn't give up much I would be a happy camper.

We wouldn't be able to afford a whole team of Superstars anyways. It is good to have a decent plugger or two.

I wonder if Glencross has his name circled on Tambellini's list for this summer (provided he stays as a UFA).

Avatar
#85 Wax Man Riley
April 04 2011, 02:33AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

What is everyone's obsession with "we rushed Gagner and Cogliano?"

Nobody has any idea if they would have developed differently or not. Why don't people rant about rushing Hall?

I didn't realize that was an obsessive rant.

Maybe I should have said "I feel that a final year in junior would have been of benefit to both Gagner and Cogliano."

I just think that it is a big jump from playing against primarily 16-19 year old players to playing against 25-35 year old players.

I know it may be a challenge for both the player and the AHL affiliate, but I think it would help the player to play in the AHL before the NHL. Even Hall.

Avatar
#86 OILERSORDEATH
April 04 2011, 07:51AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Wax Man Riley wrote:

I didn't realize that was an obsessive rant.

Maybe I should have said "I feel that a final year in junior would have been of benefit to both Gagner and Cogliano."

I just think that it is a big jump from playing against primarily 16-19 year old players to playing against 25-35 year old players.

I know it may be a challenge for both the player and the AHL affiliate, but I think it would help the player to play in the AHL before the NHL. Even Hall.

I think its safe to say Hall didn't need to go to the AHL.

Avatar
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Lowetide wrote:

I read something similar, although my google translate has been known to smoke the drapes.

Say what? Doesn't he have to be signed by June 1st? Or did he just want to play out the junior season in the SEL?

Avatar
#88 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 04 2011, 08:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Wax Man Riley wrote:

I didn't realize that was an obsessive rant.

Maybe I should have said "I feel that a final year in junior would have been of benefit to both Gagner and Cogliano."

I just think that it is a big jump from playing against primarily 16-19 year old players to playing against 25-35 year old players.

I know it may be a challenge for both the player and the AHL affiliate, but I think it would help the player to play in the AHL before the NHL. Even Hall.

Cogs was 20 when he stared so he was playing against 18 - 22 year olds (for the most part), I guess he probably could have used a year in the AHL, but I don't really think he was rushed.

Avatar
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

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

Sending him down when he was struggling wouldn't have hurt.

Avatar
#90 madjam
April 04 2011, 08:40AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

ARE WE HEADED IN THE WRONG DIRECTION TRYING TO REBUILD AROUND THE DRAFT ? If this year is any indicator of the future we may be headed down a path to perpetual bottom feeder . All the older veteran squads are running atop the Eastern and Western divisions , while those clubs trying more along the draft line occupy the basements of both . Are our eggs in to few baskets of the marketplace to help our club become competitive any time soon ?

Maybe we should be looking at adding more valuable veteran talent this year by way of giving up so many draftees that we keep accumulating ? I see we gave up Penner and Souray will also be gone , can we really afford to let any more go when we have little veteran talent to begn with ?

Three years ago it seemed as though the young talent was taking over the landscape of the future of the NHL , but that has taken a huge reversal for whatever reasons , and veteran presence now seems the way to build a contender ?

Maybe we should see, by sacrificing some of our youth and this years draft, what it would take to get a Malkin or Thornton , etc.? Those clubs relying heavily on the draft no longer seem to be making any ground on the more veteran squads that occupy almost exclusively the playoff spots in both divisions !

Avatar
#91 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
April 04 2011, 09:02AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Ogden Brother Jr. - Team Strudwick for coach wrote:

Sending him down when he was struggling wouldn't have hurt.

He didn't really struggle until year three, I think by that time it was too late to send him down without risking losing him. (160 games I believe)

Avatar
#92 Quicksilver ballet
April 04 2011, 09:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

one dot.

Avatar
#93 rickithebear
April 04 2011, 09:50AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
madjam wrote:

ARE WE HEADED IN THE WRONG DIRECTION TRYING TO REBUILD AROUND THE DRAFT ? If this year is any indicator of the future we may be headed down a path to perpetual bottom feeder . All the older veteran squads are running atop the Eastern and Western divisions , while those clubs trying more along the draft line occupy the basements of both . Are our eggs in to few baskets of the marketplace to help our club become competitive any time soon ?

Maybe we should be looking at adding more valuable veteran talent this year by way of giving up so many draftees that we keep accumulating ? I see we gave up Penner and Souray will also be gone , can we really afford to let any more go when we have little veteran talent to begn with ?

Three years ago it seemed as though the young talent was taking over the landscape of the future of the NHL , but that has taken a huge reversal for whatever reasons , and veteran presence now seems the way to build a contender ?

Maybe we should see, by sacrificing some of our youth and this years draft, what it would take to get a Malkin or Thornton , etc.? Those clubs relying heavily on the draft no longer seem to be making any ground on the more veteran squads that occupy almost exclusively the playoff spots in both divisions !

ARE WE HEADED IN THE WRONG DIRECTION TRYING TO REBUILD AROUND THE DRAFT ? ....

Madjam: We do lack veteran Presence. However, that is result of the draft.Your veteran core should be ages 25-32. Prime physical and mental development period for atheletes. This core group should have come from drafts 8(2003) to 14 (1997) years ago.

Of those drafts 16 players would be have played more than 2 years game totals. Of these 5 (horcoff, hemsky, Comrie, Stoll, Greene) could be considered top 6 FWD, top 4D, starting-Platoon Goalie. So we have 2 veterans and whitney (trade) from those drafts.

Dumping youth for veterans at ahigher cost does not cut it. we sadly have to wait for the draft to build a vetern core.

Luckily we have Stu the Magn....... to get us that core since 2007.

Picks rolling to age 25 (not with ORG): 2011: Dubnyk, (Schremp), Reddox 2012: Cogliano, Chorney, Vande Velde, Omark 2013: Petry, Peckham 2014: Gagner, (Nash) 2015: Eberle, Hartikainen 2016: Pajarvi, Lander, Rajala, Roy 2017: Hall, Pitlick, Marincin, hamilton, Martindle, Blain, Bunz. 2018: .................

It will be about 5 years from now we will have the Organization depth to start dumping replaceable veterans and prospects.

Ps. Think how Calgary's future is. They better dump Iginla and Kiper for good prospect depth so the next 10 years are not misery.

Avatar
#94 madjam
April 04 2011, 11:15AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Calgary remains competitive every season despite the draft and one cannot count them out just yet for this season . Their chances are slim , but like most veteran squads need little to get them back in contention for next season . Oilers on the other hand have a huge gap in player imbalance and quality between good NHL veterans and youngsters . Erixon -teammate of Larsson , looks like he'll be a good one for Flames as early as next season . Flames shouldn't have to worry about gutting their team to remain competitive in other words . The quality of our veterans is also not very high or even acceptable by last two seasons finishes .

I wouldn't be worried about the veteran squads as they have far less to worry about the draft than we do . There comes a point where we have to many youngsters and little space left for veteran balance . I am beginning to wonder if we are to oversaturated with youth already ? Veteran AHL talent is not helping an awful lot in comparison to clubs with a solid NHL caliber squad core .

We found more what doesn't work , but when are we headed toward a balance that seems to be working every where else ?

Avatar
#95 ricky p
April 04 2011, 11:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

The draft is only on component. Trades were always important to the Oilers in the past and still remain so. (Roulston, etc.) Adding veterans from free agency are also good moves. If building a team from the draft was so easy we would have 30 stanley cup winning teams every year.

We fail to forget that Klowe has been terrible (Perry, etc.) and I doubt he will become a remarkable manager any time soon. Tambelli has duffed more than he has won (Habbi, etc.) and I doubt he is going to become a good GM anytime soon.

So while you all drool over Stu, you still have to have a clue how to build a winner. Klowe and Tambo will fail to manage, and as always our future stars will be traded away for more draft choices.

We are screwed until we get some hockey sense running this show. We are even back to unsettled times with a new arena and the threat to get it done yesterday or trouble is coming. What a sad state of affairs the leadership has created.

and mantain a team going forward.

Avatar
#96 Peterborough
April 04 2011, 11:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
madjam wrote:

Calgary remains competitive every season despite the draft and one cannot count them out just yet for this season . Their chances are slim , but like most veteran squads need little to get them back in contention for next season . Oilers on the other hand have a huge gap in player imbalance and quality between good NHL veterans and youngsters . Erixon -teammate of Larsson , looks like he'll be a good one for Flames as early as next season . Flames shouldn't have to worry about gutting their team to remain competitive in other words . The quality of our veterans is also not very high or even acceptable by last two seasons finishes .

I wouldn't be worried about the veteran squads as they have far less to worry about the draft than we do . There comes a point where we have to many youngsters and little space left for veteran balance . I am beginning to wonder if we are to oversaturated with youth already ? Veteran AHL talent is not helping an awful lot in comparison to clubs with a solid NHL caliber squad core .

We found more what doesn't work , but when are we headed toward a balance that seems to be working every where else ?

Remember when we started this tear down and everybody said we had to rebuild the farm first and get a stock of prospects??? Well after this draft we will have the deepest propect pool and Well stocked AHL club. Thats phaze one and its almost done.

IE WORKING

We have never tried to build though the draft before, now you want to give up after one year???

Do me a favour sell me your Oilers gear and go buy some flames stuff. You sound like a flames fan already!!!

Or be patient and build a winner like Chicago did like Pittburge did like. . . or we could say $%#* it and be Columbus. . .

Thank God its not up to you!!!!

Avatar
#97 Peterborough
April 04 2011, 11:51AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
2
cheers
ricky p wrote:

The draft is only on component. Trades were always important to the Oilers in the past and still remain so. (Roulston, etc.) Adding veterans from free agency are also good moves. If building a team from the draft was so easy we would have 30 stanley cup winning teams every year.

We fail to forget that Klowe has been terrible (Perry, etc.) and I doubt he will become a remarkable manager any time soon. Tambelli has duffed more than he has won (Habbi, etc.) and I doubt he is going to become a good GM anytime soon.

So while you all drool over Stu, you still have to have a clue how to build a winner. Klowe and Tambo will fail to manage, and as always our future stars will be traded away for more draft choices.

We are screwed until we get some hockey sense running this show. We are even back to unsettled times with a new arena and the threat to get it done yesterday or trouble is coming. What a sad state of affairs the leadership has created.

and mantain a team going forward.

No one had Perry becoming what he became with his kating comming out of Junior. Do you feel the same way about the Pronger trade with ST. Louis???

You tweak with trades you don't build with them. And you lose again next year and get another stud. Thats how you build a winner.

It not about next year. This isn't the NFL its about the year after and going forward from there.

If your too old and can't wait that long hurry up and die.

. . .

no one loves you anyways

Avatar
#98 Smokey
April 04 2011, 12:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers

Peter-b, keep preachin the truth brudda.

Avatar
#99 ricky p
April 04 2011, 12:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Peterborough wrote:

No one had Perry becoming what he became with his kating comming out of Junior. Do you feel the same way about the Pronger trade with ST. Louis???

You tweak with trades you don't build with them. And you lose again next year and get another stud. Thats how you build a winner.

It not about next year. This isn't the NFL its about the year after and going forward from there.

If your too old and can't wait that long hurry up and die.

. . .

no one loves you anyways

Are you stupid? So no one knows Perry's upside, yet you think all the Oiler drafts are gold. Lose for another stud, give me a break. It's stupid people like you that got this draft thing as our future. Your future buddy is to pull your head out of your a$$.

Avatar
#100 Quicksilver ballet
April 04 2011, 12:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
1
cheers
Peterborough wrote:

No one had Perry becoming what he became with his kating comming out of Junior. Do you feel the same way about the Pronger trade with ST. Louis???

You tweak with trades you don't build with them. And you lose again next year and get another stud. Thats how you build a winner.

It not about next year. This isn't the NFL its about the year after and going forward from there.

If your too old and can't wait that long hurry up and die.

. . .

no one loves you anyways

.....orders a Cola and popcorn.

Comments are closed for this article.