Omark: “I Am Really Glad They Sent Me Down”

Jonathan Willis
July 21 2011 08:30AM

Linus Omark’s at an interesting place in his career, and Oilers’ fans seem to have widely varying opinions of him. Some feel he could potentially be an offensive difference maker a the NHL level (I’m in that group), while others see him as a flashy but deeply flawed player crowded out by other options in the system.

Regardless, fans will be interested in an interview he gave to Norbottens’ Kurinen, translated by Yngve Elverhøi, and presented by Lisa McRitchie of the Copper and Blue.

I won’t present the whole interview here (click the link above for that – there are a lot of highlights in the candid discussion with Omark), but I will give one snippet, an expansion of the line in the title:

"I was not at all pleased with being sent to the AHL. I felt I had a great camp and played exactly how I should. It was tough to re-group when I had been cut. I was just angry on the ice, with both referees and opponents. But in hindsight I am really glad they sent me down. I learnt a lot from it. It was going better and better in the AHL and then I got the chance in the NHL."

For everyone who was apoplectic when Omark publicly expressed disappointment earlier this year, those words should be salve to the wound.

Speaking of hindsight, it should be easy to understand where Omark was coming from. The disappointment of not making the Oilers out of camp after lighting up the Kontinental Hockey League (a tougher league in many ways than the AHL) must have been intense. This is particularly true given that Omark is a high-level athlete, with the sort of competitive spirit that implies.

The comment quoted above demonstrates maturity and understanding on Omark’s part, and also should give us more confidence in the importance of an AHL apprenticeship for players entering the NHL – either from junior or Europe. It’s not a bad thing to let a player get his feet wet as a difference-maker in an extremely competitive league just one step down from the majors. It helped Omark, as he realizes now, and its helped a lot of other players along the way.  It's also a good example of why training camp isn't - and shouldn't be - a pure meritocracy, where (strictly speaking) the best players always get the NHL jobs.

74b7cedc5d8bfbe88cf071309e98d2c3
Jonathan Willis is Managing Editor of the Nation Network. He also currently writes for the Edmonton Journal's Cult of Hockey, Grantland, and Hockey Prospectus. His work has appeared at theScore, ESPN and Puck Daddy. He was previously founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue. Contact him at jonathan (dot) willis (at) live (dot) ca.
Avatar
#1 EasyOil
July 21 2011, 08:40AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Really hoping they don't trade the kid. Love his moxy, love his game. Hemsky he is not, I've heard comparisons, but why have one slick euro when you can have two?!

Avatar
#2 Archaeologuy
July 21 2011, 08:42AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I just Read Lisa McRitchie's piece and it really sounds like Omark is not 100% sure how long his NHL career will be, but he wants to stay as long as he can. Good for him, I hope he rounds his game out.

I think you're right, there is a hint of maturity that I originally did not see when he was first sent to OKC.

I am counted in the "dont buy it" category of Oiler fans, but I hope I'm wrong. He has great tenacity and creativity, I just want to see it amount to more. I am also suspect that he will prove to better than the 3RW on the Oilers. Not that he has to be better than that right now, but I think it's a tenuous position for a player that's more style than substance.

Avatar
#3 Oilcruzer
July 21 2011, 08:57AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I really hope Linus took some lessons in English and what phrasing doesn't translate well.

His interviews over the year made him sound like a selfish player, even though we all cut him a bit of slack, and we hope it's more about he's a competitive player, and his English sucks.

It was good he was upset. How he presents that is the key. You can't show disrespect to the coaches, or appear to do so, even if that wasn't what you were trying to show or say.

No one wants someone on their team to sound like they think that they are " the next Dany Heatley all that, and a bag of chips".

If Linus plays and acts with respect and humility, he will win over people. Right now, I am on the fence, crossing my fingers that he isn't a jerk, just a poor interview in English.

If not, then I say dump him. As fast as you can.

The talent is never more important than the chemistry.

Avatar
#4 1983 and This Year
July 21 2011, 09:00AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Oilers fans are fans of creativity. Guys like Omark and Eberle (and I'm sure RNH) will bring that in spades in the next few years.

They're all guys that can put that special play together on every shift. His defensive game will improve. From a pure excitement perspective, Omark needs to remain on this team.

Avatar
#5 magisterrex
July 21 2011, 09:05AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I love Omark's fire. The Oilers need more guys like him, who don't accept mediocre play and are looking for more.

Avatar
#7 OILERSORDEATH
July 21 2011, 09:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'm very much so on the Omark wagon and I say he pots 55-60 pts this season. He got his feet wet last year and I think he's gonna be a beast this year. 20 goals 40 assists book it! I think Renney's the perfect coach for a kid like him, shows alot of patients.

Avatar
#8 Ender
July 21 2011, 09:16AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Today I learned that meritocracy is a real word and not just something made-up to support one of Wanye's rambling assertions. ;-)

I'm glad it's a real word, because it means the Oilers have a chance to look it up. Sorry to disagree, Willis, but I honestly believe that the best players should play. Got someone who makes $4M per season and he shows up to camp out of shape? Tough titty; you should sit his ass or put him on a bus and let the kid that outplayed him have a swing until the veteran pulls it together. That's why we have a farm-team and a call-up system. Planes move people pretty effectively today and there's no reason to have an inferior player on the ice unless it's because of unforeseen injury or illlness at the last minute.

I'll concede that there are select exceptions like RNH who get only a handful of games in the show before their future for the rest of the year needs to be decided for good. In those cases, he'd need to be not just better but clearly better to be sure you're spending a year of eligibility correctly. Outside of those situations, the better player should play. Assess week-to-week if you must, but everyone should feel like they're playing for their job every single night. Playing in the NHL should be a priviledge, not a right. The more the players feel like Liam Reddox who was always a plane-ride away from obscurity, the more fire we'd see on the ice. Meritocracy indeed.

Avatar
#9 Oilcruzer
July 21 2011, 09:20AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Jonathan Willis wrote:

@ Oilcruzer:

The talent is never more important than the chemistry.

Sometimes, but that isn't always the case.

Good story.

It appears the rift wasn't at the expense of the focus in the Bruins' case. Rule one is that if everyone learns that not everyone loves you and there is nothing you can do about it, then you can focus on the important items.

Also...

We could also argue that maybe if they traded Esposito for Ratelle or Perreault, the Bruins would have been even better.

(winging this... Not certain the French Connection line was a threat or around in Boston's glory years of early 70s)

Point being... The fresh crop doesn't need bad apples. They get sent to Hershey. That's kinda poetic too.

Edit... %?!'@$ iPad translator... "Impotent"? Really?

Avatar
#10 Kodiak
July 21 2011, 09:35AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Archaeologuy

Did you get a chance to read this article too, Arch?

http://www.coppernblue.com/2011/7/19/2280675/taylor-hall-jordan-eberle-tom-renney-and-qualcomp#storyjump

I take all these numbers with a grain of salt, but there are some positives. As with a lot of stats, things should balance out. If Omark is generating like the numbers suggest, we should see better results, more substance over style. We should also see Jones come down to earth, score less and get lit up more.

Avatar
#11 Souby
July 21 2011, 09:41AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Archaeologuy wrote:

I just Read Lisa McRitchie's piece and it really sounds like Omark is not 100% sure how long his NHL career will be, but he wants to stay as long as he can. Good for him, I hope he rounds his game out.

I think you're right, there is a hint of maturity that I originally did not see when he was first sent to OKC.

I am counted in the "dont buy it" category of Oiler fans, but I hope I'm wrong. He has great tenacity and creativity, I just want to see it amount to more. I am also suspect that he will prove to better than the 3RW on the Oilers. Not that he has to be better than that right now, but I think it's a tenuous position for a player that's more style than substance.

I am with you Arch. For me the jury is still out on Omark. He has shown flashes of what he can do offensively, but it would be nice if he could be more consistent. I know that the Oil are deep at RW, and although I hear people calling for Hemsky to be traded (not me), I don't see Omark as a viable replacement for him on one of the top two lines.

Now if he comes into camp and shows more finish, maturity and willingness to improve (which I think he will), then it may force the Oil to make a decision on who is in the future plans and who might be expendable. Just a thought.

Avatar
#12 knobby
July 21 2011, 09:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Omark's only apparent weakness is his commitment to the defensive zone/faceoff dot.

He may not fit our idea of a classic Canadian player and he is not a WHL/OHL proto-typical skater. This guy has world class talent though and I wouldn't be so quick to judge him. Other recently departed players and current roster players have had up to 4 yrs. of opportunity and Omark at least deserves a chance to play with better players for a couple of seasons to see what he can really do.

It may be best to just hang on to Gagner, Hemsky and Omark and wait to see what develops this season. RNH may end up back in junior so a knee-jerk trade may not be the best move. Those 3 players are a fairly significant percentage of the talent base and should be kept.

Avatar
#13 mayorpoop
July 21 2011, 09:49AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

i would say his upside is par with gagner, as they are both smaller skilled players with a knack for nifty/slick dangles.

i like his moxy, but what i like and what a coach is willing to repress is very different. quotable to be sure.

again, like EVERYONE, on this team he is an asset and we need to eveluate him as such.

Avatar
#14 Kodiak
July 21 2011, 09:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

There is no doubt there are still lots of questions to be answered with Omark and just about everyone else on the team.

Can Omark become a consistant offensive threat and improve the defensive side of his game? Can Hall and Eberle continue to improve? Can Dubnyk show he can be a legitimate #1? Can Horcoff regain any of his past scoring touch? Will Gagner be able to find another level on both sides of the puck? Will Whitney and Hemsky be able to stay healthy?

Man, I can't wait for this season to start. I'm always excited but especially this year. I think a lot of decisions can be made on players by what they are able to accomplish this season. I hope a lot of people are proved wrong (me included). Bring it on.

Avatar
#15 positivebrontefan
July 21 2011, 10:03AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Good to see the kid has some humility in him. Just needs to work on the defensive side of things and he could be a more important piece of this puzzle than we are giving him credit for.

Avatar
#16 Walter Sobchak
July 21 2011, 10:06AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I can see how some people thought of Omark as being difficult or seemingly arrogant, until I heard an interview from Oscar Klefbom and realized it's a language issue.

I'd like to see how Omark does this season before coming to any decision or debate on his future, to me it's no different then the gagner issue on ON.

Avatar
#17 Archaeologuy
July 21 2011, 10:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Kodiak wrote:

Did you get a chance to read this article too, Arch?

http://www.coppernblue.com/2011/7/19/2280675/taylor-hall-jordan-eberle-tom-renney-and-qualcomp#storyjump

I take all these numbers with a grain of salt, but there are some positives. As with a lot of stats, things should balance out. If Omark is generating like the numbers suggest, we should see better results, more substance over style. We should also see Jones come down to earth, score less and get lit up more.

I most definitely saw it. I will hold firm to my beliefs until he proves me wrong, much like you with Gagner. Though, I acknowledge that the player brings certain desireable qualities to the table.

He could be a 2nd/3rd line winger that can create mismatches, but I still question his ability to rise higher than Eberle or Gagner. So I figure that he will likely become the most tradable asset on the team in terms of the Oilers' willingness to move him compared to the possible return.

Is that a reasonable prediction?

Avatar
#18 Sorch
July 21 2011, 10:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I loved it when he got angry about being sent down. Shows he had fire...something Oilers lack, however are slowly getting it back.

Avatar
#19 Walter Sobchak
July 21 2011, 10:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

@Archaeologuy

I agree with most of the post except that he's the most tradable asset compared to the possible return.

If there is one player on the team that is moveable with the highest net return that player would be Hemskey followed by Gagner.

I am a supporter of Gagner but the most likely to be traded out of the three would have to be Gagner. IMO

Avatar
#20 Max Powers - Team HME Evans
July 21 2011, 10:39AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Great article JW.

Avatar
#21 Randy
July 21 2011, 10:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props

I always find it a bit funny that we worry about how something is said more than what was said. Jason Arnott was run out of town 13 or 14 years ago for saying "I couldn't get into it tonight". If he had of said "I just couldn't get it going tonight" like hundreds of other athletes over the years he would have been the Captain here until he got too expensive.

Now we have panties bunched all over Oiler land because Omark didn't chose a softer approach to voice his displeasure over being cut. We want him pissed of that he got cut, we just want him to use the old standard "It's the coaches decision, my job is to go down, work hard, and be ready when the call comes".

Judging by these comments, he is just a guy who answers questions honestly. I'm sure he will learn to use the same tired old rhetoric fans long to hear soon enough.

In the mean time, I will worry more about how he plays the game than what he says.

Avatar
#22 Archaeologuy
July 21 2011, 11:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
3
props

@Walter Sobchak

Out of Hemsky, Gagner, and Omark you think Gagner is the one the team is most willing to trade?

Here's my reasoning behind why it's Omark, for anyone who cares to know.

Hemsky is by far the most productive Oiler, and, while it's a contract year and he's due for a bit of a raise, he's still the best offensive weapon on the team (at least until Hall reaches potential). Mixed with an injury history that could lower a trade return, I figure the Oil would prefer to keep him locked up for a while.

Gagner is 21 years old and still on a very cheap contract for the offense he provides. The club just spent 4 seasons developing him at the NHL level and his pedigree is highest out of all of the names we're talking about. He is also the defacto #1 offensive option at C on the Oilers until RNH proves otherwise. He can net the Oil somebody in return, but if the best the hopeful fans can "reasonably" muster up is Bogosian then we are likely downgrading with the trade. The depth chart at C is looking better these days, but the top 3 Cs under 25 in the system are RNH, Gagner, and Lander; only 1 has ever played a game in the NHL.

Omark is 24 years old, comes with lots of hype, is creative and tenacious, but has question marks about the maturity of his game. He is entering the prime years of his career and scored goals at a pace of about 1 per 10 games played. He did pretty well on the PP but on a healthy team he might see his PP time decrease given his place on the depth chart, however he clearly showed an aptitude for it. Out of the three players he represents the lowest pedigree and active development from the Oilers organization. Ie, they have invested in him the least. He also has the least amount of offense, is the smallest (if that matters to you), and given his age probably is less prospect and more finished product.

That's why I see him as the most tradable guy. He has some hype, some flash, but also he delivers given certain situations, additionally he's low on the depth chart at RW and unlikely to move up. So he might be more valuable on a different club than he is here.

Just the way I see it.

Avatar
#23 FastOil
July 21 2011, 11:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I was not on the Omark bandwagon. However, I think the guys who get it done in the playoffs are the guys with the extra drive and extra hunger to score. He seems to have that.

If he wants to contribute a more full game, I think he might be a game breaker type player. Because he has so much jam and skill, his size isn't a factor.

I think he may also be able to shift on to any line, which could be useful as injuries happen, our version of Marchand.

He needs to really show his stuff this year or I'm pretty sure he'll fall out of the ST masterplan.

Avatar
#24 OilerLand
July 21 2011, 11:35AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

A Johnny Willis article with no numbers or stats? "I don't wanna see Maurice tonight, I WANT THE ROCKET!"

Avatar
#25 D-Man
July 21 2011, 11:39AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Archaeologuy wrote:

Out of Hemsky, Gagner, and Omark you think Gagner is the one the team is most willing to trade?

Here's my reasoning behind why it's Omark, for anyone who cares to know.

Hemsky is by far the most productive Oiler, and, while it's a contract year and he's due for a bit of a raise, he's still the best offensive weapon on the team (at least until Hall reaches potential). Mixed with an injury history that could lower a trade return, I figure the Oil would prefer to keep him locked up for a while.

Gagner is 21 years old and still on a very cheap contract for the offense he provides. The club just spent 4 seasons developing him at the NHL level and his pedigree is highest out of all of the names we're talking about. He is also the defacto #1 offensive option at C on the Oilers until RNH proves otherwise. He can net the Oil somebody in return, but if the best the hopeful fans can "reasonably" muster up is Bogosian then we are likely downgrading with the trade. The depth chart at C is looking better these days, but the top 3 Cs under 25 in the system are RNH, Gagner, and Lander; only 1 has ever played a game in the NHL.

Omark is 24 years old, comes with lots of hype, is creative and tenacious, but has question marks about the maturity of his game. He is entering the prime years of his career and scored goals at a pace of about 1 per 10 games played. He did pretty well on the PP but on a healthy team he might see his PP time decrease given his place on the depth chart, however he clearly showed an aptitude for it. Out of the three players he represents the lowest pedigree and active development from the Oilers organization. Ie, they have invested in him the least. He also has the least amount of offense, is the smallest (if that matters to you), and given his age probably is less prospect and more finished product.

That's why I see him as the most tradable guy. He has some hype, some flash, but also he delivers given certain situations, additionally he's low on the depth chart at RW and unlikely to move up. So he might be more valuable on a different club than he is here.

Just the way I see it.

You're right - Omark would be the player out of the three that Tambo would want to trade, but the underlying issue is what would you get for him? He's only shown glimpses of what he's capable of and hasn't played a full season in the NHL. Considering Cogs gave us a 2nd round pick - I'd assume the same (or less) for Omark.. Would a 2nd or 3rd round pick fulfill the need for some of the holes we still have on the back end?? Unlikely... Omark would need to be included in some sort of package...

That's why Gagner and Hemsky would be a more likely target for a trade.. Both have more of what a trading partner would want. Personally, I wouldn't trade any of the three, unless Hemsky has made it clear that he doesn't want to stay...

Avatar
#26 Love Monkey
July 21 2011, 11:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Our team needs guys with moxy and creativity. He's got that. And if the talent continues to develop, he'll be a sick player.

And also, as a paying customer, aside from Eberle's opening night goal and Hall's hattie, Omark's shootout spin-o-rama goal was the most electric the building felt this year.

That's got to count for something... He's fun to watch and hopefully, continues to be increasingly effective.

Avatar
#27 Dman09
July 21 2011, 11:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I must say I gained a lot of respect for this guy. I must be one of the few that didn't find him comments last year bad. I thought he just said exactly how he felt and I don't think there is anything wrong with that. Again I think he did the same thing with this comment. No many players period would admit that they were wrong and actually admit that it improved them.

I would love to see him on a line with MPS and Lander. Any many have suggested that MPS and Lander would be the start of a good energy checking line why not through Omark in there to. He may not be big and physical but the puck possession and work they guy does along the boards is amazing. That could be a really tough 3rd line that also packs a lot of offensive punch in it. That and i think Omark has the ability to move up and down the lines maybe not a 4th right now but if he becomes a better defensive player, he could easily play anywhere on the wings.

I don't think we have see anything near what he is capable of, a full season in the NHL could reveal a lot. Hopefully he realizes now how important conditioning is when playing as many games in a season.

Avatar
#28 Pizzy
July 21 2011, 12:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props

Great Article! Especially for providing a link to another Oilers Website. Now I will have all afternoon to see what there site is like! No work for me today!

In regards to Omark, I have been a fan of his since day 1! Everytime he touches the puck, he seems to do something special that you dont see very many players do. His confidence and stickhandling in tight situations is phenomenal! Reminds me a lot of Pavel Bure, but without the blazing speed! I would give him another year for sure before even thinking of trading him. Im surprised that he gets a lot of flack in the media and amongst some fans. Everyone last year was always talking about the big 3 (Hall, Magnus, Ebs), but Il go out on a limb here and say that based on last year, I see more potential in Omark, than I do out of Ebs and Magnus. (Taylor of course will be a guaranteed SuperStar). Dont get me wrong, ebs and Magnus will be great too, but there is something in Omarks game that is unique. Just my two cents.

Avatar
#29 French Toast Mafia
July 21 2011, 12:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Jonathan Willis

JW. Who would you take if you could only have one? Gagner or Omark?

Avatar
#30 In the Grease
July 21 2011, 12:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I, too, am of the mindset that we cannot risk trading Omark at this point.

As mentioned already, he is clearly extremely skilled, competitive and tenacious on the puck. Confidence/"cockiness" is also key for a player of his ilk - and after now having a partial season under his belt, his fortitude should be rock solid for next season, and the jump-off point to potentially do some very special things on the ice.

I don't think his age should be an argument for trading him - "given his age is probably less prospect and more finished product" -he does not have a full season of NHL experience. NHL experience is widely used as a sticking point for the anti-Sam camp ("he already has 4 seasons of NHL experience, he is what he is..."), so why can't it be used for making the pro-Linus argument?

I'm also a Gagner supporter, and don't want to see him traded at this juncture either.

Give them both at least another season to better evaluate what we have on our hands. Again, I think we can all agree we are not fine-tuning for a Stanley Cup run this upcoming season.

Avatar
#31 SurfacetoAirMissile
July 21 2011, 12:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

The largest reason Omark stays with the Oil MPS. They were pretty dinamic together and it seemed like MPS gained huge amounts of confidence when Omark was called up. I also think Omark is unique on the Oil with his creativity with the puck. He does the unexpected which is refreshing after watching the squads Mac-T iced every year. I think you couln't have a whole team of Omark's but one is just right! He, along with Hall have the ability to get you off your seat every time he touches the puck.

Avatar
#32 Lochenzo
July 21 2011, 12:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

I hope that we don't have a 'Flames' moment when we trade away Marty St.Louis who then went on to win the Hart trophy in 2004 and score the game winner in Game 6 of the Final against the said Flames.

I like Omark, but like St Louis, he needs the opportunity. And just like St Louis, it would help to have a goal scoring centre that can convert all of his sweet feeds.

Avatar
#33 Archaeologuy
July 21 2011, 12:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Omark comparisons to St Louis or Datsyuk are the miracle cases for how Omark develops. We're talking about 2 of the best players in the last decade. Let's not get carried away here.

Avatar
#34 In the Grease
July 21 2011, 12:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Recent talk about trading Omark or Gagner has had me thinking about some "regrettable" trades in the past involving some young, skilled players who had yet to reach their full potential (and, yes, I do think both Omark and Gagner could end up in this bracket).

Call me gun-shy, but I'm still scarred by:

-Miro Satan: Traded by the Oilers in March'97 at age 22 to Buffalo for Craig Millar and Barrie Moore. At age 25 Satan posts 40 g and 26 a, and goes on to average 30g/season for the next 7 seasons. (He also missed I think a total of 6 games over those 7 seasons...)

-Ray Whitney: Put on waivers by the Oilers in Nov'97 at age 25, and claimed by Florida where he would go on to post 32 g, 29 a in 68 to finish the season. Has been nothing but productive since then (including 57 p in 75 games this past season as a 38 y.o.)

-Marc Savard: I live in New York. I remember Savard made his debut and was clearly extremely talented - coming off of a 130 point season (in 64 games with Oshawa) in his final junior season, and 74 pts in 58 games with Hartford in his AHL debut - but was considered too "cocky"(sound familiar?).

Traded to Calgary less than a month before his 22nd birthday along with the Ranger's 1st round in '99(Oleg Saprykin) for Jan Hlavac, the Flames' 1st rounder in '99 (Jamie Lundmark), and 3rd rounder in '99 (Patrick Aufiero).

After posting some decent numbers in Calgary, Savard is eventually traded to Atlanta for Ruslan Zainullan. Savard goes on to post 97 points in 82 games.

Poor Calgary.

-Brett Hull (at age 23 essentially traded for Rob Ramage), Martin St. Louis (allowed to walk as a free agent...), Dion Phaneuf (don't think that was a good trade, do you?)...

Also:

-Patrick Sharp. Philly trades him right before his 24th birthday along with along with Eric Meloche for Matt Ellison and 3rd rounder in 2006.

[Any other "regrettable" trades anyone else want to add?]

Anyway, all of this to say that trading skilled, young players at this point in their development can be very risky. Often the right call is made, but of course I get stuck on the nightmares.

As opposed to Cogliano - where arguably we'd seen enough to make a reasonable judgement call - I don't think all of the evidence is in on Omark and Gagner. Don't trade either one. Yet.

Edit: I'm a slow typer, and I didn't realize others were on the St. Louis theme already... sorry to be redundant. lol

Avatar
#35 Kodiak
July 21 2011, 01:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Archaeologuy wrote:

I most definitely saw it. I will hold firm to my beliefs until he proves me wrong, much like you with Gagner. Though, I acknowledge that the player brings certain desireable qualities to the table.

He could be a 2nd/3rd line winger that can create mismatches, but I still question his ability to rise higher than Eberle or Gagner. So I figure that he will likely become the most tradable asset on the team in terms of the Oilers' willingness to move him compared to the possible return.

Is that a reasonable prediction?

I think that's fair prediction. I think he could have enough game to be a solid 2nd line winger but sometimes guys like that just don't deliver, so we will see. He reminds me of Samsonov a bit and I could see him having that type of career if he puts it all together. The proof is in the pudding. I really hope he is able to change your opinion and Gagner change mine. If that happens we would have a pretty decent looking top 6 I think.

Avatar
#36 In the Grease
July 21 2011, 01:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Lochenzo wrote:

I hope that we don't have a 'Flames' moment when we trade away Marty St.Louis who then went on to win the Hart trophy in 2004 and score the game winner in Game 6 of the Final against the said Flames.

I like Omark, but like St Louis, he needs the opportunity. And just like St Louis, it would help to have a goal scoring centre that can convert all of his sweet feeds.

Was St. Louis in fact traded, or just not re-signed by Calgary?

Avatar
#37 Walter Sobchak
July 21 2011, 01:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@D-Man

Exactly my thought as well, I just failed to explain that those players garner more value for an opposing GM.

@ Arch

also my argument can also be made that while Hemsky is injury pron maybe it would be beneficial for the Oilers to deal him while at a position of strength as oppose to trying to deal him at the dead line. Trading Gagner although I would hate to see it, you mentioned that the Oilers are now becoming deeper at center, my worry is that if RNH is as good as people say this year and Lander can step in then it makes sense to deal Gagner. Provided both Lander can play and Belanger can move up.

Avatar
#38 In the Grease
July 21 2011, 01:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
In the Grease wrote:

Was St. Louis in fact traded, or just not re-signed by Calgary?

I'll answer my own question, "When Craig Button was appointed general manager of the Flames in 2000, he released St. Louis who then signed with the Tampa Bay Lightning." - Wikipedia.

More Craig Button awesomeness. I like it.

Avatar
#39 Archaeologuy
July 21 2011, 01:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props
Kodiak wrote:

I think that's fair prediction. I think he could have enough game to be a solid 2nd line winger but sometimes guys like that just don't deliver, so we will see. He reminds me of Samsonov a bit and I could see him having that type of career if he puts it all together. The proof is in the pudding. I really hope he is able to change your opinion and Gagner change mine. If that happens we would have a pretty decent looking top 6 I think.

We're in for a treat this year if Gagner changes your mind and Omark changes mine! What a season that would be!!

Avatar
#40 Walter Sobchak
July 21 2011, 01:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Also, Omark has only been in the league a year his development still need to continue, at 24 years of age i would not classify that as being in the prime of his career, that's more like 27 or 28.

Avatar
#41 Oilers4ever
July 21 2011, 01:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I definately like the kid's creative ability and his tenacity to stay on the puck when someone is banging him around. But I still question his dedication to Oilers org. He should not be worried about what happened with Cogs. He has boat load of more talent that Cogs will ever have. The words he should be using are more along the lines of looking forward to playing with all the youth coming, the team getting better through the years and winning a cup with all these young guys in a few years. The type of words that make a mgmt team believe he wants to be here... personally.. I sign Hemmer to a 6 or 7 year deal and trade Omark's arse out of town for what you can get... good player, but I really question his attitude and commitment. Reminds me a lot of Jason Arnott's attitude when he was young.

Avatar
#42 Dman09
July 21 2011, 01:20PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Oilers4ever wrote:

I definately like the kid's creative ability and his tenacity to stay on the puck when someone is banging him around. But I still question his dedication to Oilers org. He should not be worried about what happened with Cogs. He has boat load of more talent that Cogs will ever have. The words he should be using are more along the lines of looking forward to playing with all the youth coming, the team getting better through the years and winning a cup with all these young guys in a few years. The type of words that make a mgmt team believe he wants to be here... personally.. I sign Hemmer to a 6 or 7 year deal and trade Omark's arse out of town for what you can get... good player, but I really question his attitude and commitment. Reminds me a lot of Jason Arnott's attitude when he was young.

Disagree, if you want players that have no passion, desire, and are not willing to express their own opinions you end up with the same team we had a few years ago. You need those personalities to fire up the team and challenge them to be better.

Avatar
#43 Ender
July 21 2011, 01:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Oilers4ever wrote:

I definately like the kid's creative ability and his tenacity to stay on the puck when someone is banging him around. But I still question his dedication to Oilers org. He should not be worried about what happened with Cogs. He has boat load of more talent that Cogs will ever have. The words he should be using are more along the lines of looking forward to playing with all the youth coming, the team getting better through the years and winning a cup with all these young guys in a few years. The type of words that make a mgmt team believe he wants to be here... personally.. I sign Hemmer to a 6 or 7 year deal and trade Omark's arse out of town for what you can get... good player, but I really question his attitude and commitment. Reminds me a lot of Jason Arnott's attitude when he was young.

I remember watching Arnott here when he was young. He to Omark is apples to oranges. People might decide to hack on Omark for his off-ice comments and attitudes but I haven't seen anyone knock his on-ice performance. Arnott didn't look good on the ice many nights. Away from the puck, he was often the slowest guy on the ice. The last guy back on a turnover. The last guy off on the change. Some nights he looked 90 years old - a great sprint when he had the puck and then as soon as it was off his stick he skated straight into quicksand.

Omark is good where it matters - on the ice. I'm not concerned about the things he's said off it so far. When he starts bashing the management, then I'll worry.

Avatar
#44 D-Man
July 21 2011, 01:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Oilers4ever wrote:

I definately like the kid's creative ability and his tenacity to stay on the puck when someone is banging him around. But I still question his dedication to Oilers org. He should not be worried about what happened with Cogs. He has boat load of more talent that Cogs will ever have. The words he should be using are more along the lines of looking forward to playing with all the youth coming, the team getting better through the years and winning a cup with all these young guys in a few years. The type of words that make a mgmt team believe he wants to be here... personally.. I sign Hemmer to a 6 or 7 year deal and trade Omark's arse out of town for what you can get... good player, but I really question his attitude and commitment. Reminds me a lot of Jason Arnott's attitude when he was young.

Yes - but we all know how Jason Arnott ended up.. Ends up winning a Stanley Cup and ends up being a solid 1st/2nd line center for many years in New Jersey and Nashville... Way too soon to even consider trading him... Give him another year and see how Pitlick, Hamilton and co develop.. If Omark doesn't show promise for this year - fine, then we can package him up and get another role player or 2nd/3rd round draft pick..

Hemsky is going to be 28 this year, right? Why would you want him for seven years?? I'm all for signing Hemmer for an extension - but let's be smart... We should be looking at a 3 to 4 year deal with a $5 to $5.5 million/year cap hit.

Avatar
#45 Archaeologuy
July 21 2011, 01:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Walter Sobchak wrote:

Also, Omark has only been in the league a year his development still need to continue, at 24 years of age i would not classify that as being in the prime of his career, that's more like 27 or 28.

I said "Entering" the prime of his career. I think that the mid 20's are fair to be labelled as the Prime years of a hockey Career, though I agree 27/28 would be the peak.

Avatar
#46 CanaDave
July 21 2011, 01:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I would really like for Omark to wind up being a very productive 7th forward for the Oilers for years to come. I mean that in a complimentary way because I think that going up against 3rd pairing Defensemen would allow him to put up some really good numbers and if 1 of Hemsky, Eberle, Hall or Paajarvi (my top 4 W) get injured he has the offensive game to slide into a top 6 role.

I don't think that Omark will ever be a standard 3rd line player and he hasn't proven to me that he's ever going to be an elite scorer in the NHL but I do think that he's an asset that deserves every chance to succeed in this upcoming season. Since the shootout isn't going away, he might be worth having on your team for that alone since every point counts and he's certainly got the knack for it.

Avatar
#47 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 21 2011, 02:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Archaeologuy wrote:

I said "Entering" the prime of his career. I think that the mid 20's are fair to be labelled as the Prime years of a hockey Career, though I agree 27/28 would be the peak.

on average players actually put up their best numbers at 24/25/26 and then begin to drop (relatively) quickly after that.

Avatar
#48 Archaeologuy
July 21 2011, 02:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

on average players actually put up their best numbers at 24/25/26 and then begin to drop (relatively) quickly after that.

There you have it. I shouldnt question my own rightness. It just happens so rarely that I'm wrong that people should take my word at face value and never question it.*

*I couldnt come up with a witty sub-note because everything I wrote is Gospel truth.

Avatar
#49 @Oilanderp
July 21 2011, 03:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Just to add some statistics to this strangely mathematically bereft article, 100% of ~S~K~'s believe pairing Omark with a finisher will result in good things.

Avatar
#50 Jordan Nugent-Hallkins
July 21 2011, 03:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'm firmly in Omark's corner. The flashes of brilliance he showed last year, coupled with the chemistry he found with MPS, were among the highlights of the season.

If Lander can spark something with Omark and Magnum PS, I think we'll have a great Swedish line for years to come.

Comments are closed for this article.