logo

Monday Mailbag – February 9th

baggedmilk
9 years ago
The weekend is over, you’re back at work, and you need a way to kill some time. As always, I introduce another edition of the Monday Mailbag. The mailbag only works because of you guys, and if you have a question you can email it to me at baggedmilk@oilersnation.com or hit me up on Twitter at @jsbmbaggedmilk. Enjoy the break from productivity, friends.  There’s an Oilers game coming up tonight, and chances are you’ll be angry in a few hours. 
1) Backup Bob asks – There are not enough trades in the NHL these days, in my opinion. What can the league due to make it easier for teams to make trades?
Lowetide:
They have already relaxed the cap pressure by allowing teams to retain salary. The only thing I can think of at this point is allowing teams to pay ‘cap penalties’ to rid themselves of money. Say you want to burn off $5 million in cap dollars for next year. Maybe you would have to pay a $10 million penalty—in cash—to be paid to the league for paint and glue. 
Jason Strudwick:
Good question. Trades are exciting. Even as a player it was always interesting to see the moves other team would make. You would grade them and figure out who the winner or loser was. The best way to get more trades would be to take out the salary cap. I am sure they are up for it!
Jason Gregor:
I’d like to see a limit of only three NMC per team. That would free up more players to be moved.
Robin Brownlee:
First step is to limit teams to the number of NTC and NMC they are allowed. A limit of about three sounds right to me.
Jeanshorts:
I think at this point the only thing you can do is get rid of the salary cap. If there were no cap I firmly believe someone would have traded a 27th round draft pick for Mike Richards. Although, in a non-cap world someone would also probably be paying Mike Richards $15 million a year, due to how exceedingly knowledgable he is when it comes to winning all the trophies/medals. 
Baggedmilk:
I think if a guy asks to be traded then his no trade clause to be waived.  There are too many of these dumb trades like the Ryan Kessler trade where the player only gives the team one option.  More trades would be a good thing for the league.
2) Will Allen asks – Can someone explain what the rift is between the MSM and bloggers?  
Lowetide:
A long long time ago some really smart people came up with a different way to look at the sport. By adding specific measurements to the game we see, some analytics allowed predictive power to the reader. The idea was presented and adopted or not adopted and the factions of each side were most unkind. 
We are here. I am extremely tired of the whole damn thing.
Jason Strudwick:
Who cares.
Jason Gregor:
I’ll pass. No point bringing it up again. No clue why people expect everyone to get along.
Robin Brownlee:
Maybe somebody. Not me. 
Jeanshorts:

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Baggedmilk:
It’s easy. Morons like me can start a blog and give an opinion regardless of how moronic or pointless it may be.  I get it.  To look at it another way, imagine being able to become a doctor just because there was an app that let you do it. But whether a person is a blogger or journalist the best ones will get the readers. At the end of the day, bloggers aren’t going anywhere and we had may as well try to get along.  This is getting ridiculous.
3) Oilfan1991 asks – I think the Oilers need a mascot and I want you to design it.  If the Oilers were to have a mascot, what should it be?
Lowetide:
Wild Bill Hunter, the roughest toughest rig worker on the planet. He can lift the zamboni with his left ear and he eats only pretzels!
Jason Strudwick:
The Stark logo from Game of Thrones
Jason Gregor:
I can’t draw a straight line with a ruler, so I’m not the guy to ask. I think Struds could be a great mascot.
Robin Brownlee:
A groundhog. He can come out in early January and if he sees his shadow it means six more weeks of losing.
Jeanshorts:
It would be a dumpster with fire shooting out the top, but it would have giant googly eyes and a comically large smile so people would think it was CUTE! 
Baggedmilk:
I posted my vision as the picture above.  I think it reflects the state of the team nicely… I just wish the guy’s shirt was a little bit dirtier.
4) Barry W. asks – Have Ben Scrivens and Viktor Fasth been as bad as everyone says or is that also a product of how bad the team is? 
Lowetide:
Hmmm. they were bad, I think that’s a fact. If they had been playing in front of a better defense? No doubt Edmonton has more wins. But they’ve been bad.
Jason Strudwick:
Blaming the goalie is the easy way out. It lets the players in front of them off the hook.
Jason Gregor:
They haven’t been great, but the team in front of them allows a lot of quality chances and the Oilers aren’t known for being strong in front of net and clearing guys out. The goalies could have been better early in the year.
Robin Brownlee:
Both. Goaltenders who have played for the Oilers in recent seasons have consistently seen their GAA rise and their save percentage drop. Goaltenders in Edmonton face too many shots and, it follows, too many quality shots. To my eye, the biggest problem is clear-cut chances off giveaways and second and third chances on rebounds as everybody stands around.
Jeanshorts:
I think it’s a bit of both. There’s been a real healthy mix of backhanders going in from the corner and five Oilers covering one guy behind the net while the opposing team rattles off 900 shots unimpeded. But I’m of the opinion that the goalies were more to blame at the beginning of the season than the porous defence. 
Baggedmilk:
Of course they could have played better than they did.  I’m sure if you asked the goalies themselves they would tell you they’ve wanted to play better all year.  But let’s be honest here, it’s not like Scrivens and Fasth are playing behind the Chicago Blackhawks.  The Oilers defensive game looks like trying to drink soup from a colander.
5) Darrick Breindl asks – I have a daughter that turns 18 in August and she wants me to let her get a tattoo.  I think it’s an awful idea but don’t know how to tell her.  What would the esteemed panel do in this situation?
Lowetide:
My daughter was 15 when she wanted a tattoo. We asked her to decide on her tattoo and then to live with that decision for a year, even encouraging her to get a temporary one so she could get a very good idea about its impact. 
THEN we talked her into using the money on a Seattle shopping trip instead. Counter trey baby. It works!
Jason Strudwick:
I would take her to a tattoo removal place and have her see how much pain is involved in taking it off. She will run screaming home wanting to buy a nice broach instead
Jason Gregor:
I’d show her pictures of women in their 50s with tattoos. Or  tell her she can get one, but only if you and her get matching tattoos. And you get to pick what tattoo she gets. 
Robin Brownlee:
Depends on the location and the type of tattoo. If she wants the name of her current boyfriend inked where everybody can see it, it’s probably a bad idea. And if she’s 18, why should you “get her a tattoo?” If she wants a tattoo let her pay for it. It is, after all, kind of an adult thing, no? As for how to tell her, saying “I think it’s a bad idea” is a good place to start.
Jeanshorts:
I’d do a Scared Straight style lesson. Take her to a laser tattoo removal place and let her talk to all the girls in there getting Lance Bass themed tramp stamps burned out of their skin by a machine that I can only assume will soon become sentient and enslave us all (I don’t trust lasers). 
Baggedmilk: 
I have a bunch of tattoos and I’m sorry to say that you may as well be into it or she’s just going to get more of them.  By the way, once you get a tattoo you instantly feel like it wouldn’t be a big deal to get another one.  Sorry.

Check out these posts...