ST's Summer: Pass or Fail?

Lowetide
July 28 2011 03:43PM

When it comes to the relationship between an Edmonton Oilers GM and the fanbase, it can be a rocky road. What's that old song? Thin line between love and hate? What if we took all the anger, fury and confusion out of the conversation and looked at each transaction in a detached fashion? What would it look like?

In order to understand the summer of Tambi, we need to agree on a few facts. This is an enormous summer for the GM, as the future is promised to no man. Just as Tambellini felt a need to flush MacT and Quinn in order to get Tom Renney behind the bench, the Oilers need to improve in a lot of areas in the next 12 months or the night of long knives might have a sequel spring 2012. It's a cruel business. He passed the early tests (like not trading next year's first round pick) but there was a long way to go. With the summer almost done and holidays either underway or in full bloom, it's time to see how well Mr. Tambellini did re-working the roster.

We could see the areas of need a mile away. Let's list them:

  1. A veteran winger to help with PK/PP and guide the kids at evens.
  2. Truculence.
  3. One or more NHL veteran defensemen.
  4. A faceoff man to help with PK and to balance the C position.
  5. A legit option for the moment when goaltending becomes an issue.
  6. Make certain OKC is a strong AHL team again in 11-12

STAYING ON TASK

Tambellini addressed some and ignored others. Let's review the moves one at a time:

  • March 8: Oilers sign NCAA defender Taylor Fedun from Princeton. Addresses OKC and possibly helps the club's defensive depth at the NHL level. He's certainly young enough and offensively talented enough to be considered a legit prospect. Qualifies as a solid move for category 6.
  • March 19: Oilers sign NCAA center Tanner House from Maine A very good signing in a couple of areas. He improves the center position at the pro level and has a scouting report that suggests a nice range of skills. Qualifies in category 4 (should he spend time in the NHL) and category 6.
  • March 30: Oilers sign QMJHL goaltender Olivier Roy to an entry level contract. I don't think this qualifies under any category, just the business of an NHL team deciding to give a player the chance to turn pro in their system. He's unlikely to be much better than a replacement level AHL goaltender.
  • March 31: Oilers sign CIS L Hunter Tremblay from UNB. Qualifies under category 6, although he is a bit of a wildcard. Could surprise.
  • April 1: Oilers sign C Mark Arcobello to a contract. He'll be relied on heavily to deliver points in OKC this season. Qualifies under category 6, and should he have another impressive season there's a chance he'll get some NHL time.
  • April 13: Oilers sign R Tyler Pitlick to an entry level deal. This is a high draft pick who when signed looked like a lock for OKC. However, injuries and a slow recovery make it possilble he stays in junior for another year. Therefore, I'm putting him in the same category as Roy: doesn't qualify in any category.
  • April 18: Oilers sign L Curtis Hamilton to an entry level deal. He's the blue chipper likely to be a Baron in 11-12. Blocked on LW at the big league level by Hall, MPS, Smyth, Hartikainen and others, it'll be Hamilton's job to stay healthy, learn to grind against men and chip in enough offense to be a legit callup option. Qualifies under category 6.
  • April 21: Oilers sign R Cameron Abney to an entry level contract. Big man is very raw and I don't think he qualifies under category 6. He'll probably play much of his rookie season in the ECHL. However, Abney does address category 2 and we should remember that the Oilers value his player type.
  • April 25: Oilers sign D Martin Marincin to an entry level contract. This could be one of those signings we look back on and smile about, although I don't know if he'll play pro or junior this year. A quality prospect with a nice range of skills, possibly qualifies under category 6.
  • April 28: Oilers sign C Anton Lander to an entry level contract. Lander is a perfect fit for the Oilers, with the only gap being the time it takes for him to establish himself as an NHL player. Qualifies in categories 4 and 6.
  • May 29: Oilers sign W Ryan Jones to a two-year deal. Jones got a solid payday for an impressive season based on role and playing time. There is some doubt he can repeat it based on underlying numbers but he's got a contract and a job. Addresses categories 1 and 2.
  • June 15: Oilers sign F Lennert Petrell to a contract. Veteran Finn has the reputation of being an impressive checker and aggressive penalty killer. Qualifies under categories 1, 2 and 6.
  • June 15: Oilers sign F Antti Tyrvainen to a contract. Another Finn! This one is smaller and more truculent. Qualifies under categories 2 and 6.
  • June 26: Oilers acquire L Ryan Smyth from Los Angeles. A trade that took some time to finalize (and still isn't completely out of the woods--we're on day 33) is the centerpiece of summer. Ryan Smyth addresses categories 1 and 2 plus offers the possibility of moving over to center should RNH make the team and need faceoff help. And he's an excellent mentor. The best trade of Tambellini's time as Oilers GM.
  • June 30: Oilers sign D Ladislav Smid to a 2-year deal. This is a signing that addresses categories 2 and 3, and we should credit the organization for not sending him away (to Chicago) at the deadline.
  • July 1: Oilers sign L Ben Eager to a three year contract. Signing that effectively ended the Oiler careers and JF Jacques and Zack Stortini. Addresses category 2.
  • July 1: Oilers sign L Darcy Hordichuk. A very similar signing to the Eager deal, in that the incoming player is an upgrade on the previous player (MacIntyre). Hordichuk is a depth signing but he can play well enough to be a clear upgrade on MacIntyre. Addresses category 2.
  • July 1: Oilers sign D Cam Barker. Edmonton took a risk in signing Barker but he has draft pedigree and should he work out the risk should reward the team richly. Addresses category 3.
  • July 1: Oilers sign C Eric Belanger to a three year deal. A strong free agent signing that gives the roster balance, depth and some hope for the future. Addresses categories 1 and 4 plus he helps in the mentor role I talked about in regard to Ryan Smyth.
  • July 1: Acquired D Andy Sutton from Anaheim. Also subtracted Kurtis Foster in this trade. Sutton is a huge defender, and his acquisition addresses categories 2 and 3 plus he has a history of helping out on the penalty kill.
  • July 1: Oilers sign D Corey Potter. This is one of those under the radar signings that often turns out being much larger than it first appears. Potter is a right-hander with experience, he's interesting in that he's mobile and has size. A player to watch in pre-season.
  • July 3: Oilers sign L Josh Green. Strictly an OKC signing, Green helps out in category 6.
  • July 4: Oilers sign D Theo Peckham. A solid young defender who may have enough ability to move up the depth chart as he matures. Qualifies under categories 2 and 3.
  • July 5: Oilers sign G Yann Danis. Signed as OKC's starter, I believe this player may end up playing a much larger role for the organization. Should DD or NK falter or suffer injury, Danis is the only safety valve available to the organization. The chances of Danis playing more than 20 NHL games this season is very high. Qualifies under categories 5 and 6.
  • July 5: Oilers sign R Ryan Keller. A minor league signing but an important one. Big time AHL scorer could help in the NHL if required but was hired to push that Baron team to a playoff position. Qualifies under category 6.
  • July 12: Oilers trade Andrew Cogliano. The return (2nd rd pick in 2013) is reasonable and the contract Cogs signed in Anaheim suggests that the Oilers were unlikely to come to terms with him. When you consider what Belanger cost the Oilers, an outstanding transaction.
  • July 15: Oilers sign D Taylor Chorney. Puck moving defender still on a learning curve defensively, he qualifies under category 6.
  • July 15: Oilers sign C Ryan O'Marra. Young veteran qualifies under categories 4 and 6. He can help in a depth role and does have some NHL experience.

Let's take a quick look at the categories one more time:

  1. A veteran winger to help with PK/PP and guide the kids at evens. I think they addressed this situation ably by dealing for Smyth. You could also give credit for bringing back Jones and hiring the Finn Petrell. Nice additions across the board, plus they added guys like Josh Green who could play the same role (the Cameron Stewart role from a year ago). I think it's reasonable to suggest the GM gets a passing grade here.
  2. Truculence. No less than 9 additions above have a real edge to their game. Eager and Hordichuk are the obvious ones, but Smyth and defender Sutton are solid additions. I'm not including rfa's like Smid and Peckham but signing them (and sending away a Cogliano) sends a clear message about how difficult this team will be to play against next season. Again, I think a passing grade is in order.
  3. One or more NHL veteran defensemen. Oilers added Barker, Sutton and Potter while retaining Smid, Peckham and Chorney. Added to incumbents Whitney, Gilbert and Petry, I think it's reasonable to suggest that the Oilers have come up short in this area. Depth additions like Sutton married to risk signings like Barker and Potter (risky in that he might not be good enough for NHL play) leave the Oilers without enough quality and depth at a very important position. Still time this summer, but this gets a failing grade.
  4. A faceoff man to help with PK and to balance the C position. Big fly here. Eric Belanger replaces Cogliano and gives the team a veteran hand who can help Horcoff in handling the tough opponents and be a big part of the penalty kill. The organization also added Lander which may be more important to adding balance at the position over the long haul. A definite passing grade.
  5. A legit option for the moment when goaltending becomes an issue. Oilers added veteran Yann Danis and signed Olivier Roy to his entry level deal. I believe Danis could be a pleasant surprise but this position is in dire need of help. If they don't plan on improving the NK-DD duo at the NHL level, then surely the team will add an AHL calibre veteran to the minor league depth chart. Another fail, and again at a vital position.
  6. Make certain OKC is a strong AHL team again in 11-12. With the exception of goaltending, I like the OKC Barons. The blue should be Chorney, Potter, Colten Teubert, Alex Plante, Taylor Fedun added to OKC top man Bryan Helmer. Motin, Martin Marincin and guys like Brandon Davidson are also in the mix. The forwards who should have an impact include Keller, Green, Lander, O'Marra, Petrell, Arcobello added to kids like Teemu Hartikainen and Chris Vande Velde. The team will be young but talented and if they can ride Danis in goal all season they should be a contender for the second season. I won't give it a pass (because of the goaltending) but don't think it's a fail either.

Conclusion: In 6 categories, Tambellini gets 3 passing grades, 2 fails and one tie. Has it been good enough? I don't think so. We find out in the fall (or late summer if they decide to address G and D).

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
#101 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 29 2011, 11:03AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mayorpoop wrote:

i don't remember saying i am anti-elite big ticket player...hmmm...hall won't be big ticket one day?

where we are today as a team it doesn't make sense to me...rosters and standings are fluid so my opinion could change. if that's ok?

I don't rember it either, however I do remember you imply that you were anti-adding elite big ticket player.

Avatar
#102 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 29 2011, 11:05AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

I'm confused. What does Savard have to do with the Wings or their cap situation?

As for the idea of a "big money dman" - Hasn't history demonstrated nicely that it's harder with win a cup without one? A few teams have managed, but the bulk of teams winning it all have a high en defender eating minutes.

Here is a question for you - if Klefbom turned into as good a player as Weber would you trade him away, for a deal like the one you suggested the Oilers should turn down, to avoid having to pay so much money to a high end defender?

This exactly sums up what is so intersting about this topic.

"if Klefbom turned into as good a player as Weber would you trade him away, for a deal like the one you suggested the Oilers should turn down, to avoid having to pay so much money to a high end defender?"

It seems we always way over value whats already here vs what we could have.

For example I bet most would hesitate using an RFA offer of 4 x 1st to aquire Tavares, yet those same people would prefer to lock up Hall rather then lose him for 4 x 1st.

Avatar
#103 mayorpoop
July 29 2011, 11:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:
i'm just a guy who LOVES hockey and the OILERS. it't just my opinion and i'm entitled to it.

Nobody has disputed your right to you opinion.

Why do people suddenly jump to "It's my opinion" when people disagree? When you post your opinion in a public forum people have a right to, and will, disagree with it, knowing full well that it is "just your opinion".

It's just a conversation about hockey, please don't take disagreement personally.

sorry. that wasn't meant like that or at least certainly towards you.

that is a statement directed at anyone who gives the ol'~~ about someone else's opinion.

Avatar
#104 mayorpoop
July 29 2011, 11:10AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

I don't rember it either, however I do remember you imply that you were anti-adding elite big ticket player.

you read that i implied such. let's clear this up...i AM anti-weber right now.

Avatar
#105 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 29 2011, 11:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mayorpoop wrote:

sorry. that wasn't meant like that or at least certainly towards you.

that is a statement directed at anyone who gives the ol'~~ about someone else's opinion.

I didn't ~~ your opinion.

I ~~ the notion that we wouldn't be able to afford other talented players because of one, big ticket Dman.

Avatar
#106 mayorpoop
July 29 2011, 11:21AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

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

that is not universal to you. alot of guys get beat up for having opposing view points.

if i mis-understood your use of ~~, sorry.

Avatar
#107 dawgbone
July 29 2011, 11:35AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
book¡e wrote:

Wrong - here is a more accurate portrayal of how you determine who 'wins' the two trades.

One year of Smyth, Many years of Teubert, many years of Klefbom, and many years of a 3rd round draft pick in 2012.

need to out perform.

One year of Penner and one year of Fraser.

How have the Oilers historically fared when they give up an established NHL player for picks and prospects?

Here's a hint... it's not pretty. In fact it's down right criminal how horrible they've made out in these types of trades.

Avatar
#108 Quicksilver ballet
July 29 2011, 11:40AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Robin Brownlee wrote:

OK. Now I'm clear on how it actually works.

Yer welcome sir.

Can i borrow your Corvette whilst you bask in the sun next week?

Avatar
#109 SurfacetoAirMissile
July 29 2011, 11:48AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
dawgbone wrote:

How have the Oilers historically fared when they give up an established NHL player for picks and prospects?

Here's a hint... it's not pretty. In fact it's down right criminal how horrible they've made out in these types of trades.

I guess that is why they are called "prospects" and not guarantees.

Avatar
#110 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 29 2011, 11:55AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
dawgbone wrote:

How have the Oilers historically fared when they give up an established NHL player for picks and prospects?

Here's a hint... it's not pretty. In fact it's down right criminal how horrible they've made out in these types of trades.

That's hardly Oiler specific.

in general, unless your hand is forced you are usually better off sticking with the known asset.

Avatar
#111 TigerUnderGlass
July 29 2011, 11:58AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
dawgbone wrote:

How have the Oilers historically fared when they give up an established NHL player for picks and prospects?

Here's a hint... it's not pretty. In fact it's down right criminal how horrible they've made out in these types of trades.

I can't remember if it was Lowetide or someone at CNB but whoever it was looked at every Oiler deal of this type to rate their success.

It wasn't as bad as most would think. I seem to recall historically having great success with these deals but in the second half of our NHL existence having a miserable go of it.

Avatar
#112 SurfacetoAirMissile
July 29 2011, 12:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
RexLibris wrote:

I'm not as concerned about the goaltending or defence as most seemt to be. I think with the team developing it's talent at forward the defense and goalie positions will come with time.

I like the development of Bunz and Roy, and Dubnyk has to be given time and let's face it, Khabibulin isn't going anywhere (prison notwithstanding). I would like, eventually, to move Khabibulin when his value is at it's (relative) peak so the only way to do that is to play him. I think the '12 trade deadline or offseason is the one where a move at goaltending will be made.

As for the defence, barring trade, I think the makeup right now is in the organization's best interests. The defence isn't a terrific shutdown unit but letting the horses run and providing an exciting product while showing front-end improvement and drafting somewhere in the top 10 wouldn't greatly upset many fans. Our defence and goaltending will develop with time, we have a terrific depth of defensive prospects and time needs to be taken with them. Sheltering guys like Petry, Peckham, et al with veterans (Sutton) or expendables (Barker) seems fine for now, because the alternative would be to waste time trying to overpay for a high-end veteran and end up, maybe, with a Brian Campbell-type contract.

Props..... you are ballz on as far as I am concerned. You hit the nail on the head, the team is developing and time is still on their side. Having said this, it is not another free pass and they MUST show improvement across the board with their young squad this year. It is all fine and good to rebuild your team through the farm and the draft but the players at both levels need to show measurable improvement not to mention improvement in the standings this year. Last place is not an option in my opinion, the players and coaching staff need to feel like they are gaining traction with this rebuild or they will be destine to accept losing.

Avatar
#113 mayorpoop
July 29 2011, 12:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@TigerUnderGlass

do you think that weber is a fit we should seek or do you think that our roster fits our current predicament?

Avatar
#114 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 29 2011, 12:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
book¡e wrote:

So Strudwick is a better asset than a 2012 first round pick?

By your logic, every team that trades a player for a pick loses. This suggests that all GMs are irrational actors who overvalue picks and undervalue players, otherwise the market value for picks would drop relative to the market value for players.

~Ya that's what I'm saying~.

Avatar
#115 TigerUnderGlass
July 29 2011, 12:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mayorpoop wrote:

do you think that weber is a fit we should seek or do you think that our roster fits our current predicament?

It depends on the cost. The team should always seek the best players possible at every position. Weber is a significant upgrade over every defenseman we have, so yes...I think he is a good fit.

I doubt he will be worth what it might cost to get him, but that is a different question.

Avatar
#116 SurfacetoAirMissile
July 29 2011, 12:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

~Ya that's what I'm saying~.

Sure that makes tons of sense.... in a vacum. Trades are made for multiple reasons. A team could need cap room for a free agent signing or to retain existing players. They could have the same type of player through their roster and the trade is made to gain an asset only. A player may demand a trade and force a GM's hand. Perhaps a team is replenishing their farm system and needs to aquire more picks. Sometimes it is as simple as "addition by subtraction" for some trades. Point is there are a thousand reasons a trade is made and you need to consider the reason as well as the actual players and picks involved. Did it accomplish the goal of the trade?

Edit: somehow I think I replied to the wrong guy... sorry

Avatar
#117 mayorpoop
July 29 2011, 12:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
TigerUnderGlass wrote:

It depends on the cost. The team should always seek the best players possible at every position. Weber is a significant upgrade over every defenseman we have, so yes...I think he is a good fit.

I doubt he will be worth what it might cost to get him, but that is a different question.

my concern is going to be the explosion of talent off of their entry deals, i think this should affect that decision based on where we are today as a team and the realism of our goals.

i would rather another ryan whitney type player now and see where we are at when are ready to contend.

what cost is too great?

Avatar
#118 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 29 2011, 12:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mayorpoop wrote:

my concern is going to be the explosion of talent off of their entry deals, i think this should affect that decision based on where we are today as a team and the realism of our goals.

i would rather another ryan whitney type player now and see where we are at when are ready to contend.

what cost is too great?

Here's my issue with that line of thinking:

Say "worst case" comes to fruition and we have an explosion of talent in 2-3 years and have already added Webber.

We are now dealing from a position of power where we would have *too many* valuable assets, this is a good thing... not a bad thing.

If all (or even most) of what we have pans out, you pick 1-2 and deal them off for what will be a good return... and we'd still have Weber.

However, with current direction, if we don't have an explosion of talent... we are now sitting with a team with average or worse talent ... and no Webber.

Situation 1 looks alot better to me then situation 2.

Avatar
#119 mayorpoop
July 29 2011, 12:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

Here's my issue with that line of thinking:

Say "worst case" comes to fruition and we have an explosion of talent in 2-3 years and have already added Webber.

We are now dealing from a position of power where we would have *too many* valuable assets, this is a good thing... not a bad thing.

If all (or even most) of what we have pans out, you pick 1-2 and deal them off for what will be a good return... and we'd still have Weber.

However, with current direction, if we don't have an explosion of talent... we are now sitting with a team with average or worse talent ... and no Webber.

Situation 1 looks alot better to me then situation 2.

situation 1 does sound nice and has merit.

situation 2, should it come to fruition would be a black smear on MBS, and thus far i have entrusted in him to build with good quality talent.

i don't disagree with your line of thought but what if we could get sutter for less money and give up less, wouldn't that be better than weber?

Avatar
#120 TigerUnderGlass
July 29 2011, 01:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mayorpoop wrote:

my concern is going to be the explosion of talent off of their entry deals, i think this should affect that decision based on where we are today as a team and the realism of our goals.

i would rather another ryan whitney type player now and see where we are at when are ready to contend.

what cost is too great?

I think the idea that we should avoid acquiring talent just in case every young player in the system reaches maximum potential and we can't afford to pay everyone is a bit misguided and cannot possibly lead to a winning franchise.

I haven't really decided what cost is too great, I'd need to think it over. I'm talking theoretically here anyways, because I don't see Weber as a realistic target.

The point is this - players will get what they are worth. If we are going to pay a lot to any player we just need to decide if they are worth it.

The best example is Campbell in Chicago. People complained about his boat anchor contract forcing them to let players go. If it was Keith with that contract instead nobody would have said a word about it.

This is the difference. Big contracts are fine if the player earns his keep.

Avatar
#121 TigerUnderGlass
July 29 2011, 01:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

@mayorpoop

situation 2, should it come to fruition would be a black smear on MBS, and thus far i have entrusted in him to build with good quality talent.

This is the problem. The most successful scouts of all time have not had the success rate that many people are assuming from MBS.

Avatar
#122 D-Man
July 29 2011, 01:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

Here's my issue with that line of thinking:

Say "worst case" comes to fruition and we have an explosion of talent in 2-3 years and have already added Webber.

We are now dealing from a position of power where we would have *too many* valuable assets, this is a good thing... not a bad thing.

If all (or even most) of what we have pans out, you pick 1-2 and deal them off for what will be a good return... and we'd still have Weber.

However, with current direction, if we don't have an explosion of talent... we are now sitting with a team with average or worse talent ... and no Webber.

Situation 1 looks alot better to me then situation 2.

Your logic is sound; the only issue is how close to the cap we become in those 2 to 3 years... Should we run into an issue of having all of our talent exceed expectations (where we have multiple $5 or $6 million/year players); we could have problems getting fair value on a trade.

Should the Oilers be in a situation where there total cap includes all of that talent, but exceeds the limit by $5 to $10 million - now fair value becomes a huge issue. Teams know each others' cap space and if we run into the issue where we have to dump salary, you lose a ton of negotiating power. That's why watching the cap now and having that space is so crucial to a rebuilding team like us.

Either way, that problem would be spectacular to see (even if there's not a snowball's chance that Weber comes here)... If we're in a situation where Hall and/or Eberle and/or RNH requires a contract of $5 million plus (after their ELC is up), we're all winning...

Avatar
#123 Quicksilver ballet
July 29 2011, 02:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

Here's my issue with that line of thinking:

Say "worst case" comes to fruition and we have an explosion of talent in 2-3 years and have already added Webber.

We are now dealing from a position of power where we would have *too many* valuable assets, this is a good thing... not a bad thing.

If all (or even most) of what we have pans out, you pick 1-2 and deal them off for what will be a good return... and we'd still have Weber.

However, with current direction, if we don't have an explosion of talent... we are now sitting with a team with average or worse talent ... and no Webber.

Situation 1 looks alot better to me then situation 2.

Amen to that.

Most of the kids we're counting on to be stars may end up being role players.

Avatar
#124 mayorpoop
July 29 2011, 02:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
Quicksilver ballet wrote:

Amen to that.

Most of the kids we're counting on to be stars may end up being role players.

maybe....

...maybe not.

Avatar
#125 David S
July 29 2011, 02:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

Detroit has a pretty good collection of ice hockey players and they all seem to fit nicely into their cap structure.

Alot of guys here are making the assumption every one of our young guys is going to command huge salaries. I just don't think that's a wise bet. And if perchance they do, well there's always the old tried and true Oilers "Trade 'em for picks and prospects" approach.

Avatar
#126 Chris.
July 29 2011, 03:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers

When ST traded Cogliano it was the Oilers who insisted the second round pick would be from 2013...

Assuming there is an actual plan; is this a clue as to the timeline? Does ST plan to switch gears and start dealing picks for players in the summer of 2013?

Avatar
#127 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 29 2011, 05:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
mayorpoop wrote:

situation 1 does sound nice and has merit.

situation 2, should it come to fruition would be a black smear on MBS, and thus far i have entrusted in him to build with good quality talent.

i don't disagree with your line of thought but what if we could get sutter for less money and give up less, wouldn't that be better than weber?

I'm not really concerned with who will be smeared, I'm concerned about building the best posible team. If you can get Weber for the package proposed, you would have improved your team.

Avatar
#128 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
July 29 2011, 05:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
D-Man wrote:

Your logic is sound; the only issue is how close to the cap we become in those 2 to 3 years... Should we run into an issue of having all of our talent exceed expectations (where we have multiple $5 or $6 million/year players); we could have problems getting fair value on a trade.

Should the Oilers be in a situation where there total cap includes all of that talent, but exceeds the limit by $5 to $10 million - now fair value becomes a huge issue. Teams know each others' cap space and if we run into the issue where we have to dump salary, you lose a ton of negotiating power. That's why watching the cap now and having that space is so crucial to a rebuilding team like us.

Either way, that problem would be spectacular to see (even if there's not a snowball's chance that Weber comes here)... If we're in a situation where Hall and/or Eberle and/or RNH requires a contract of $5 million plus (after their ELC is up), we're all winning...

Again, I'm not the least bit concerned about that.

Having more talent is better then having less talent... whether you can keep it or not.

Avatar
#129 Hemmertime
July 29 2011, 07:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Cheers
0
cheers
dawgbone wrote:

How have the Oilers historically fared when they give up an established NHL player for picks and prospects?

Here's a hint... it's not pretty. In fact it's down right criminal how horrible they've made out in these types of trades.

Eberle. Nuff said

Comments are closed for this article.