Defence by Committee

[guymez]

So with the Larsson acquisition in the books (and the shock of the deal that brought him here hopefully fades away soon) we are left to wonder what the defence will look like to start the season.

Despite the strong rumors that Demers will sign here I personally dont think that Demers (or a similar dman) is the right fit at this point...I think they still need a pure offensive dman although I am not very confident that deal is realistic. So a group like this is probably what we will end up settling for come October.

So just to pick a direction (assuming the rumors about Demers are true) then the depth chart on defence for the Oilers looks like this:

Sekera
Klefbom
Larsson
Demers
Davidson
Fayne

Nurse

This defence has 4 legit top 4 defenders and a 4/5 defender in Davidson so in terms of overall depth it is much better than it has been in previous years. I would venture to say that this defence will be a major upgrade in terms of increasing offensive zone time.
The problem as I see it is that this group doesn't have a pure offensive dman among them.

The question I have is....does this defence have enough of an offensive component to it as a group to compensate for that problem?

Granted I haven't dug up any advanced offensive stats on any of these players but in terms of PPG there are 4 players that could possibly reach 0.35 to 0.4 PPG next season. Sekera, Klefbom, Demers and Larsson. If that were to happen then in terms of offensive balance that has to be considered pretty decent. Of course much of that will also be driven by PP time but each player will likely get some time on the PP.

So...strictly in terms of offence is this defensive group as a whole enough to compensate for the lack of a pure offensive dman?

Can a defence by committee approach work here in terms of adding enough offence?

What are your thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[Soundwave]

They need Larsson, Klefbom, and Nurse to get a more offensive edge.

If they can, the group kinda reminds me a little of Vancouver's D that took them to the Finals in 2011 without an Ehrhoff.

 

[guymez]

They need Larsson, Klefbom, and Nurse to get a more offensive edge.

If they can, the group kinda reminds me a little of Vancouver's D that took them to the Finals in 2011 without an Ehrhoff.

Interesting comparison although Ehrhoff had a 50 point season that year with much of that (28 points) on the PP.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Klefbom-Larsson
Sekera-______
Davidson-Fayne
Oesterle

Honestly going for a cheap, but still competent/productive player might be a smarter idea. For example if the Flames are wanting to kick Wideman to the curb, I'd be interested. Going after him for a mid range pick sounds way better than giving up Eberle or RNH for players that have similar warts.

 

[guymez]

Klefbom-Larsson
Sekera-______
Davidson-Fayne
Oesterle

Honestly going for a cheap, but still competent/productive player might be a smarter idea. For example if the Flames are wanting to kick Wideman to the curb, I'd be interested. Going after him for a mid range pick sounds way better than giving up Eberle or RNH for players that have similar warts.

So for you Wideman would be a better option than Demers?

 

[Soundwave]

So for you Wideman would be a better option than Demers?

Given that one will probably require a 6 year contract while the other is just a 1 year deal yes.

Larsson/Klefbom/Nurse have been given all this hype about being good defensive D ... we've now really bled to invest in them ... it's time they show it, you shouldn't need another redundant player in Demers, Klefbom/Larsson should be able to do everything he can going forward.

If not, then Chiarelli should be fired, plain and simple.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

So for you Wideman would be a better option than Demers?

Yes, for a few reasons.

A) Fit and Need. Demers is at best another Sekera. On a defence that already features Andrej, Klefbom, Larsson, Davidson, Fayne, Nurse, and Reinhart, another vanillia guy isn't really needed. Wideman's proven he can be a reliable point producer on the PP.

B) Cost, or rather term. Wideman's only signed for one more season, so that lets us go back to the drawing board when there's potentially more useful options or better fits for the team on the market (Burns, Shattenkirk).
That vs. making a big commitment to an average player, and being locked into that for the next half decade. Demers is going to cost 5.5+ and likely 5+ years with a NMC, not really a commitment I'm interested in.

C) Adding Wideman gets the PP going, and I'd be willing to bet that helps the value of RNH and/or Eberle going into the next offseason. Thus you could truly fix the defence when your movable assets have a better value.

 

[Quality Oil]

If we sign Demers for the right money I think we have a good chance to have a somewhat responsible top 4. This gives Davidson the room to move up or down as he continues to develop, if he surpasses his success from last season we're all dancing.

Our lower pairing guys like Oesterle and Fayne get some breathing room and we have a full season to look at getting after Burns or Shattenkirk assuming they aren't locked up. If we put a trade on top of that we're looking good, again depending on what moves out.

I hate to pencil in Demers, but feel confident enough to do it. I'd like to see:

Klefbom-Larsson
Sekera- Demers
Davidson - ______ (let Davidson move up and down)
Fayne /Oesterle/Nurse/Reinhart/crapshoot

Klef, Davidson and Larsson eating top PP minutes with Sekera and I don't know who else on our 2nd pp.. maybe a forward? I put all 3 in on the top PP line because I'm really not sure who belongs there yet.

 

[McFlyingV]

I'd prefer if we didn't sign Demers, but I could live with it if we did and his contract came in at 5M or less and didn't have a NMC.

I kind of hope we could somehow throw together a Reinhart/Davidson+picks+prospects package for an offensive D, but I'm not sure how likely that is.

I think Klefbom will show he's a 40 point D next year if he gets some PP time and stays healthy and I think Sekera and Larsson could both be in the 25-30 point range. If you ignore my above deal I'd also say that Davidson has a bit more offence to give and he was starting to show it before he got injured.

 

[oilinblood]

Yes, for a few reasons.

A) Fit and Need. Demers is at best another Sekera. On a defence that already features Andrej, Klefbom, Larsson, Davidson, Fayne, Nurse, and Reinhart, another vanillia guy isn't really needed. Wideman's proven he can be a reliable point producer on the PP.

B) Cost, or rather term. Wideman's only signed for one more season, so that lets us go back to the drawing board when there's potentially more useful options or better fits for the team on the market (Burns, Shattenkirk).
That vs. making a big commitment to an average player, and being locked into that for the next half decade. Demers is going to cost 5.5+ and likely 5+ years with a NMC, not really a commitment I'm interested in.

C) Adding Wideman gets the PP going, and I'd be willing to bet that helps the value of RNH and/or Eberle going into the next offseason. Thus you could truly fix the defence when your movable assets have a better value.

Does Wideman help take some D zones from Larsson so that Larsson can progress more evenly? I see Demers as helping Larsson taake more O zone chances.
Larsson, from watching him, i believe his Offensive game was stunted in NJ but those skills are completely visible. That whole fact just drives me mad.
I believe in edmonton he will STILL be relied heavily on defence...but he will also be given the green light now to show what he can do offensively. ALso his hard work will be rewarded with some marquee time here.

The guy gets 20-25pts relying on only 5on 5 and basically starting in his own zone. He also plays toughest comp, a plus player, and has about 1/3 of a turnover a game.
its quite incredible really

signed for 5 years so he cant even take advantage of the mcdavid effect for five years.

 

[joestevens29]

I like the defense by committee right now. We are a club that has had a lot of injuries in the past. At least when you have 4 guys that are kinda as valuable as the next if they go down it's not as hard to make up for that difference.

Say we did get Subban or even Weber. You are spending more to get them, not just in assets but cap space as well. This probably would result in no other changes to the defense or a very blah one. So Subban goes down what are you left with?

everyone seems to want to make a move that makes a contender over night, but acquiring solid top 4's also gives us time to let Klef, Nurse, Davidson and now Larsson grow and potentially become a lot better impact d-men.

 

[Young Lions*]

That's a playoff D, probably, but that's as far as it gets us.

 

[joestevens29]

That's a playoff D, probably, but that's as far as it gets us.

Which is quite an improvement

 

[Young Lions*]

Which is quite an improvement

I know '90s nostalgia is hot right now, but I was hoping for more than a return to the days of one-and-done.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

I know '90s nostalgia is hot right now, but I was hoping for more than a return to the days of one-and-done.

After years of last place finishes you wouldn't be happy with a playoff spot? There isn't a single team in the past 20 years that went from last to Cup in a year.

 

[CupofOil]

That's a playoff D, probably, but that's as far as it gets us.

A playoff D with McDavid, Draisaitl, RNH, Lucic (maybe), Eberle, Puljujarvi, Maroon, Pouliot etc. up front isn't good enough for you?

 

[Young Lions*]

A playoff D with McDavid, Draisaitl, RNH, Lucic (maybe), Eberle, Puljujarvi, Maroon, Pouliot etc. up front isn't good enough for you?

One elite talent up front, no elite talent on the backline. Slow as molasses in January too.

Basically it all comes down to whether Puljujarvi replaces the Hall element, but it's pure wishing and hoping at this point.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

One elite talent up front, no elite talent on the backline. Slow as molasses in January too.

Basically it all comes down to whether Puljujarvi replaces the Hall element, but it's pure wishing and hoping at this point.

The only way the Oilers are going to get an elite talent on the back end is to draft and develop.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Does Wideman help take some D zones from Larsson so that Larsson can progress more evenly? I see Demers as helping Larsson taake more O zone chances.
Larsson, from watching him, i believe his Offensive game was stunted in NJ but those skills are completely visible. That whole fact just drives me mad.
I believe in edmonton he will STILL be relied heavily on defence...but he will also be given the green light now to show what he can do offensively. ALso his hard work will be rewarded with some marquee time here.

The guy gets 20-25pts relying on only 5on 5 and basically starting in his own zone. He also plays toughest comp, a plus player, and has about 1/3 of a turnover a game.
its quite incredible really

signed for 5 years so he cant even take advantage of the mcdavid effect for five years.

No Wideman doesn't shelter Larsson, but it would be a massive mistake to walk into the season looking to Larsson to be the main offencive catalyst with the other pairings purely being defencive to allow him more offencive time.

Fayne will still be around, so he's going to soak up a lot of defencive minutes. He's the one that's going to take some of the load off Larsson, but if Larsson and Demers are your only/best offencive options than this team isn't going to go far.

Although Larsson, Wideman, Fayne wouldn't great, it'd at least still be serviceable. You've got a proven 40 point defenceman, a young up and comers, and a guys who's generally solid so long as he's not asked to do too much.


You don't have to fit the long term defence all at once. If you can get a cheap patch take advantage of it. Especially if it allows your other assets to rebound in value.

Wideman sucks defensively, but so do Barrie, Shattenkirk, and Dumba; and he's not going to have a pricetag demanding RNH or Eberle.