#FIRECHIA

Status
Not open for further replies.

oobga

Tier 2 Fan
Aug 1, 2003
22,936
17,813
This is all just nonsense speculation to absolve Chiarelli of responsibility.

We can make up things the other way too.

MacT would've gotten Hamilton

MacT would've signed Sekera and Letestu and traded for Talbot and nobody would've gotten hurt and the Oilers would've won the Cup.

No Reinhart trade means no Larsson trade which means no trading Hall which means no Lucic anchor contraco. No reason for a moronic 4x4 with a no move clause to Kris Russell.

With Hamilton acquired Schultz would have finally blossomed here and the Oilers would have a very strong defense.

Or we could just drop the bull**** and concentrate on things that actually happened?

Regardless of how poorly other GMs may or may not have done in Chiarelli's shoes or the influence that the OBC may or may not have we have to concentrate on what we do know and what has actually occurred.

So what do we know? We know that Chiarelli has been president and general manager for 3 years and in that time the team has made a number of indefensible trades that have made the team worse, the team has handed out a number of very poor contracts and they've chosen to give out full no move clauses freely. The team has also seen it's drafting look promising at least compared to in the past but it's far too soon to say anything for sure.

Put it all together and what do you have? Management that is below average if you're being kind and that falls on one man: Peter Chiarelli. He's the one in charge of making the decisions. If the OBC is giving him bad advice it's his job to replace them, he's chosen to retain them. I guess you and he disagree on the value of their influence.

I don't think I'm absolving CHia of anything. He is still the guy putting forward the bad moves (although the Reinhart one no doubt had a lot of push from the OBC because they loved him forever). Just saying there was likely no counter point to his moves among geniuses like MacT, Howson and Lowe. Back in 2014 the oilers org leaked to Dreger that Hall was not what they thought he would be in terms of team culture, his time here was coming to an end before CHia came along. It took proper management and coaching to get Hall back on track in his career, something that could never have existed under the OBC.

Basically just saying guys like Lowe, MacT and Howson would have inevitably screwed these last 3 years up. Might have been a different looking screw up, but they would have done it just the same. They all have their blatant weaknesses, lack of understanding of how a team is built in todays NHL, how to built a proper team culture with accountability, value of team grit/character over skill (I'm not actually sure MacT goes for Hamilton because of his character issues Boston was advertising. If Boston still insisted on Nurse, there is no way MacT makes that move). Their weaknesses still would have inevitably tanked this team.
 
Last edited:

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
Those 1st and 2nd rounders could’ve been prospects in our bare cupboard but no it’s always gotta be “BuT 7 GMS MiSseD oN BaRzAL”. All I had was YouTube highlights and stats websites to know Barzal should be drafted in the top 10 at least. Speaks volumes about all the “smart” GMs, that have no sports management experience, whom fans appeal to because they played 25 games in the NHL or something.

So how come you aren't working in the league with your ability to judge talent merely using YouTube highlights and stats websites at a higher level then people making millions to do this stuff for a living?

Frankly I think most people calling it a disaster takes a look at the point totals and draw their conclusion from that. When you factor everything in and and put it in a context the trade is far from a disaster. It's one thing to not like it or don't think it was great value, but calling it a disaster is just dumb and overdramatic IMO.

Overly dramatic is the problem with all the criticism of Chia. No, he's not perfect. But imperfection is not a reason for firing him. People talk about "a number" of bad trades, yet only talk about the Larsson and Reinhart trades.
 

McVirginOil

Registered User
Jun 30, 2014
3,078
1,751
So how come you aren't working in the league with your ability to judge talent merely using YouTube highlights and stats websites at a higher level then people making millions to do this stuff for a living?



Overly dramatic is the problem with all the criticism of Chia. No, he's not perfect. But imperfection is not a reason for firing him. People talk about "a number" of bad trades, yet only talk about the Larsson and Reinhart trades.
You’re missing the point. The point isn’t that I’m some super scout, the point is that GMs in this league are awful and most have their jobs because of their standing as hockey players And by virtue that they’re ‘friends’ with one another. That’s why coaches and GMs just get shuffled around being fired and re-hired elsewhere and no new blood is brought in.

Also way to dodge the crux of my argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LucicDestroyedHaley

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
You’re missing the point. The point isn’t that I’m some super scout, the point is that GMs in this league are awful and most have their jobs because of their standing as hockey players And by virtue that they’re ‘friends’ with one another. That’s why coaches and GMs just get shuffled around being fired and re-hired elsewhere and no new blood is brought in.

Also way to dodge the crux of my argument.

Experience matters in life. The one 'new blood' head coach the Oilers have had in the past decade, Dallas Eakins, was an unmitigated disaster. It remains to be seen how Dubas does as the new GM in Toronto. Not an ex-player but definitely family connections got his foot in the door with the Leafs in the first place.

As for the part in bold, I was trying to avoid confrontation and not point out the logical fallacy but if you insist. Why are two draft picks 'cost controlled' when a player on his ELC isn't? This is a Chiarelli thread. Wasn't sure what the criticism about the trade was because it was a little incoherent. Two picks for one prospect isn't that big a leap. Do you consider it a fault of Chiarelli's alone, or was he listening to the OBC in that trade?
 

A91

Oilers + Real Madrid
May 21, 2011
6,944
2,221
Edmonton
i'm no chia defender by any means and if the organization thinks they need to fire him then whatever, but please.... it's the same people out with their pitchforks for chia thatwere likely the same people who bi7ched about tambo, then when macT came along bi7ched about him and said tambo was probably better than macT... now chia's supposedly worse than those two... it's always just the flavor of the month for these people. again, not to say that chia has done a good job but just saying if we do ever get a new GM it'll be the same people calling for his head and probably wishing chia was the gm again. there's no rational thought. do people REALLy think there's an available gm out there who will 100% do a better job than chia?.... i mean i'm pretty sure all these people thought chia was going to do a better job than macT when chia got hired in 2015.... but now all of the sudden he's the worst gm in the history of the league.

gimme a break. i stated many times, his boston trades were not bad at all if you break it down. people blow it up. the only poor moves he made here were the reinhart deal and not doing enough additions in the summer of 2017. the hall trade was MUCH needed and he likely did a great job getting back what he did because likely no one really wanted to touch hall with a 10 foot pole back in 2016. overrated player with issues that could hurt your team.

1) To me Tambo was clearly just a puppet for Lowe. He was absolutely useless.
2) I respected MacTs hockey knowledge. From everyone on the OBC I'm the most ok with him. Dallas Eakins was the decision that sunk him. He failed at his job in the end and was received.
3) I gave Chia a fair chance. He f***ed us over at the 2015 draft by acquiring Reinhart and not drafting Barzal/Acquiring Hamilton. I put the blame on Green and the rest of the previous regime and i did give Chia a fair chance. He had an entire year of McDavids ELC to "evaluate" the team and what he came up with was Hall for Larsson. Have been AntiChia since then.

Chia was a move in the right direction. Someone from a completely different organization who had a winning history. He was just the wrong guy.
 

McVirginOil

Registered User
Jun 30, 2014
3,078
1,751
Experience matters in life. The one 'new blood' head coach the Oilers have had in the past decade, Dallas Eakins, was an unmitigated disaster. It remains to be seen how Dubas does as the new GM in Toronto. Not an ex-player but definitely family connections got his foot in the door with the Leafs in the first place.

As for the part in bold, I was trying to avoid confrontation and not point out the logical fallacy but if you insist. Why are two draft picks 'cost controlled' when a player on his ELC isn't? This is a Chiarelli thread. Wasn't sure what the criticism about the trade was because it was a little incoherent. Two picks for one prospect isn't that big a leap. Do you consider it a fault of Chiarelli's alone, or was he listening to the OBC in that trade?
Well I mean Dubas has a degree in sports management, you know, the job he’s taking up right now. He worked as a scout, stick boy, and a GM in the CHL.

I don’t know how much more I have to explain for you to get that 2 assets that would still be in the organization now, protected from Vegas expansion, is better than a player who played 23 games with the Oilers over 2 years and was picked up by the Knights for nothing (and a LHD despite our leftorium, he absolutely filled no need at the time of the trade). You’re focusing on all the nitpicks and still avoiding the point.
 

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
Well I mean Dubas has a degree in sports management, you know, the job he’s taking up right now. He worked as a scout, stick boy, and a GM in the CHL.

Dubas got his foot in the door with the Soo Greyhounds because his Gramps was a long-time coach there and his father also worked for the organization. Favourtism isn't just for former players.

I don’t know how much more I have to explain for you to get that 2 assets that would still be in the organization now, protected from Vegas expansion, is better than a player who played 23 games with the Oilers over 2 years and was picked up by the Knights for nothing (and a LHD despite our leftorium, he absolutely filled no need at the time of the trade). You’re focusing on all the nitpicks and still avoiding the point.

Maybe/probably those assets are in the organization. The cost-controlled part of your original argument still doesn't make sense. Nobody thinks it was a good trade. You are correct on that front and I hope that makes you feel happy. Who are you blaming for the Reinhart pick?

Leftorium? Sigh? 63 percent of NHLers are LHS.

Have I addressed the crux of your argument to your satisfaction?
 

McShogun99

Registered User
Aug 30, 2009
17,790
13,182
Edmonton
If you go with a strategy of development from within then the team should try and develop players. Last season was critical for a few players. Brossoit, Klefa and Nurse. Hindsight is great but was everybody really sure Brossoit would be as weak as he was? Chia has attempted to remedy that with Koskinen. Time will tell.

Klefa's injury is the one that is most interesting. I have asked repeatedly when Klefa got hurt and when the team knew about it. Chiarelli really counted on Klefa being able to team with Larsson on the top pairing like they did in the playoffs.

Nurse was a pleasant suprise. He looked like he was trending to be a first pairing guy up to the all-star game. Now he looks like a solid 4D on a potentially very good second pairing.

I get how a RHS, power play specialist is the flavour of the offseason. I think Bear has the potential to be that guy, but not in 2018-19. What do the Oilers do as a stop gap for a season?

It was obvious what they thought of Brossoit as a backup the season previous when Talbot had to play over 70 games. If that’s not a lack of confidence in your backup then I don’t know what is.
 

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
It was obvious what they thought of Brossoit as a backup the season previous when Talbot had to play over 70 games. If that’s not a lack of confidence in your backup then I don’t know what is.

He was still young and developing. Still is, I guess. That's the thing with developing players, you put them in a position to succeed, but if they don't then at least you know what you have.

That seven game stretch Brossoit started end of November/early December really sunk the team. He got lucky to go 3-4 because he almost blew that Flames game. 5-2 over that stretch was definitely possible. The last game in there is likely the last game Brossoit will ever play for the Oilers.

It's easy to say in hindsight, but player development isn't perfect. I really hope Koskinen is better.
 

A91

Oilers + Real Madrid
May 21, 2011
6,944
2,221
Edmonton
He was still young and developing. Still is, I guess. That's the thing with developing players, you put them in a position to succeed, but if they don't then at least you know what you have.

That seven game stretch Brossoit started end of November/early December really sunk the team. He got lucky to go 3-4 because he almost blew that Flames game. 5-2 over that stretch was definitely possible. The last game in there is likely the last game Brossoit will ever play for the Oilers.

It's easy to say in hindsight, but player development isn't perfect. I really hope Koskinen is better.

I agree that's the only way you really know.
A team with aspirations of contending has to correct the mistake early on. Niemi only lasted 3 games in Pittsburgh before they got rid of him. LB played 14 games last season or 17% of the season. You have to have a back-up (for lack of better word) plan. Instead that was when we completely lost the season.
 

Little Fury

Registered User
Jun 21, 2006
17,831
6,800
Where do you draw the line between big trades and lower level chips?

Chia definitely has to make the playoffs next season to keep his job. No way this team makes the playoffs as currently constructed. Although it might be achieved with smaller trades.

That's the problem. What's best for the team in the long run and what's best for the GM's career in the short term are two different things.

Next season should be about developing a pile of prospects on the farm, seeing what we have in players like Puljujarvi and Yamomoto and trying to build some kind of market for players like Sekera, Lucic and Russell whose contracts will need to be shifted sooner than later. If the playoffs happen, great, but making a trade to force the issue at a point when the team simply isn't ready to seriously contend is counterproductive.
 

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
I agree that's the only way you really know.
A team with aspirations of contending has to correct the mistake early on. Niemi only lasted 3 games in Pittsburgh before they got rid of him. LB played 14 games last season or 17% of the season. You have to have a back-up (for lack of better word) plan. Instead that was when we completely lost the season.

The season wasn't completely lost when the Oilers lost all faith in Brossoit. The Oilers were still 13-17-2 after Brossoit's last game. The Oilers went 23-23-4 after Brossoit's last game which was the last 50 games of the season.

They went 32-14-4 over the last 50 games of 2016-17.

If they went 32-14-4 over the last 50 games last season they would have finished 45-31-6 and snuck into the playoffs.

Maybe a better backup earlier in the season would have helped things along.
 

harpoon

Registered User
Dec 23, 2005
14,194
11,344
People talk about "a number" of bad trades, yet only talk about the Larsson and Reinhart trades.
Well how many do you need? The two trades you mention cost the team a former FOA, a first and a second round pick. You may not think much of Eberle, but that was a bad trade too.
So in three seasons Chiarelli has managed to strip the team of a four prime assets. And brought in an albatross contract in Lucic. That's five major blunders in three seasons.

I think you don't know what 'overly dramatic' means.
Fans have every right to be critical of brutal management like that. :eyeroll:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Supermassive

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
I think you don't know what 'overly dramatic' means.
Fans have every right to be critical of brutal management like that. :eyeroll:

Thank you for pointing out how much more intelligent you think you are. :laugh:

Hall trade is still up for debate. Reinhart trade was on the OBC. Eberle was bad? OK you stick with that.
 

SK13

non torsii subligarium
Jul 23, 2007
32,758
6,367
Edmonton
Thank you for pointing out how much more intelligent you think you are. :laugh:

Hall trade is still up for debate. Reinhart trade was on the OBC. Eberle was bad? OK you stick with that.

There's no debate on the Hall trade. A few apologists twisting themselves into knots to defend that online do not eliminate the sheer consensus around the league on that trade. Reinhart was traded by Peter Chiarelli. It's on him. Bob Green and Craig MacTavish may have pushed for it, but there was on one man in charge and it was him. Eberle trade was abysmal. Less damaging than the Hall trade by far, but the Oilers downgraded on talent and did nothing with the cap space.
 
  • Like
Reactions: harpoon

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
There's no debate on the Hall trade. A few apologists twisting themselves into knots to defend that online do not eliminate the sheer consensus around the league on that trade.

You keep saying that. There wasn't much of a market for Hall in 2016. Last off-season, after Hall's season-long pouting act, there was no consensus on the trade.
 

redgrant

Registered User
Nov 2, 2013
6,306
3,688
When did Klefa get hurt? When did the team know he was hurt?

Not sure why no one in the anti-Chia crowd wants to answer that question.

It was rumored he was hurt since around November. In fact hurt since the playoffs.

Later confirmed he's been playing not at 100% the entire year.
 

shoop

Registered User
Jul 6, 2008
8,333
1,911
Edmonton
It was rumored he was hurt since around November. In fact hurt since the playoffs.

Later confirmed he's been playing not at 100% the entire year.

That's a big question. Hurt since November and no additions on D is understandable nothing was done on D in the off-season. If he was hurt since the playoffs and the team knew then that's a big deal.
 
Last edited:

Weitz

Registered User
Sep 23, 2014
2,786
1,162
Thank you for pointing out how much more intelligent you think you are. :laugh:

Hall trade is still up for debate. Reinhart trade was on the OBC. Eberle was bad? OK you stick with that.

Haha you still think the Hall trade is up for debate??

Who was GM of the Reinhart trade? He wears that, which might be the worst trade of the last 10 years.
 

CupofOil

Knob Flavored Coffey
Aug 20, 2009
46,279
39,510
NYC
There's no debate on the Hall trade. A few apologists twisting themselves into knots to defend that online do not eliminate the sheer consensus around the league on that trade. Reinhart was traded by Peter Chiarelli. It's on him. Bob Green and Craig MacTavish may have pushed for it, but there was on one man in charge and it was him. Eberle trade was abysmal. Less damaging than the Hall trade by far, but the Oilers downgraded on talent and did nothing with the cap space.

Yeah and the "consensus" after last season was that it was a win win for both teams so just like some of the fanatics on this board, the "media consensus" flip flops every year or hell, every month for that matter depending on flavor of the month so I would take the consensus with a grain of salt.

I'm still failing to see why the Hall trade was a "disaster". Why is it assumed that he would have been a Hart level player here playing a completely different role than he is in Jersey? Why is it assumed that somebody like Demers would have filled the role that Larsson has adequately?

I feel like we're going in circles with this debate and I don't know why I keep getting sucked in but I still maintain that they need a Larsson more than a Hall long term as Drai develops into a premier 2nd line driver and the young wingers develop into top 6 players. The only reason why this trade looks like a supposed disaster at the moment is because of the success Hall and the Devils had THIS season and the struggles of Larsson and the Oilers THIS season. Opinions will change once again next season if the Devils regress and the Oilers improve.
Just to clarify, the Oilers obviously lost the better talent in the trade and they should have gotten an addition from the Devils but from a needs perspective, I'm still fine with the trade and won't waiver on that until I see a much larger sample size over many years to make a proper evaluation.

The Reinhart trade was the real disaster. It cost them an entire draft, a draft with tons of impact players to choose from deep into the 2nd round, and they got zippo out of it. This will be remembered as one of the worst all time sports trades.
 

Little Fury

Registered User
Jun 21, 2006
17,831
6,800
I'm still failing to see why the Hall trade was a "disaster". Why is it assumed that he would have been a Hart level player here playing a completely different role than he is in Jersey? Why is it assumed that somebody like Demers would have filled the role that Larsson has adequately?

No one is assuming Hall would be a Hart level player here. We assume he would be what he was his entire time in Edmonton: an elite LW who tilts the ice at 5v5, a rare commodity in this league and not one to part with lightly over a one-dimensional defensive D.

I feel like we're going in circles with this debate and I don't know why I keep getting sucked in but I still maintain that they need a Larsson more than a Hall long term as Drai develops into a premier 2nd line driver and the young wingers develop into top 6 players.The only reason why this trade looks like a supposed disaster at the moment is because of the success Hall and the Devils had THIS season and the struggles of Larsson and the Oilers THIS season.

No the trade looks like a disaster because Hall is a vastly more impactful player than Larsson and those things that you say made the Hall trade possible haven't happened yet and might never will (and are independent of the trade regardless; they could have had Hall ad Drai as a dominant second line).

Opinions will change once again next season if the Devils regress and the Oilers improve.
Just to clarify, the Oilers obviously lost the better talent in the trade and they should have gotten an addition from the Devils but from a needs perspective, I'm still fine with the trade and won't waiver on that until I see a much larger sample size over many years to make a proper evaluation.

What else is there to evaluating a trade?
 

CupofOil

Knob Flavored Coffey
Aug 20, 2009
46,279
39,510
NYC
No one is assuming Hall would be a Hart level player here. We assume he would be what he was his entire time in Edmonton: an elite LW who tilts the ice at 5v5, a rare commodity in this league and not one to part with lightly over a one-dimensional defensive D.

Hall wasn't elite his last 2 seasons here and the team was still teetering in the basement even with McDavid, small sample size of course but small sample size is all we have to go by.


No the trade looks like a disaster because Hall is a vastly more impactful player than Larsson and those things that you say made the Hall trade possible haven't happened yet and might never will (and are independent of the trade regardless; they could have had Hall ad Drai as a dominant second line).

The trade looks like a disaster based solely on team results this season and what drove those team results (Hall's Hart level season and Larsson's down season). Nobody was calling this a disaster last offseason, funny how that works.



What else is there to evaluating a trade?

As I mentioned above, role, need and salary as well all play factors when evaluating trades.
Hall wasn't the face of the Oilers franchise anymore, McDavid was. Draisaitl was going to be the long term 2nd line driver, the strength of their prospect pool is on wing.
The Oilers had nothing on right side D, nobody capable of handling even strength top pairing tough minute matchups (Sekera failed at this the previous season). Larsson's caphit was nearly 2M less and he was signed a year longer.

This was a trade made for short term need of course but also with the long term in mind as Draisaitl, Puljujarvi etc. grow into their roles as top 6 contributors with Drai being a premier 2nd line driver.

I'm not expecting many to agree with my rationale especially after the way this season unfolded (although the majority of the board was ok with it just last offseason) but I refuse to believe that this trade is a disaster. It would have been a disaster if they didn't have the 1-2 punch of McDavid and Draisaitl anchoring the offense for the next decade. I take issue with people calling it a disaster because of what transpired in one year. Conversely, I didn't understand why people called it an Oiler win last offseason because of one season of results and a lot were if you dig up old threads.
 

Little Fury

Registered User
Jun 21, 2006
17,831
6,800
Hall wasn't elite his last 2 seasons here and the team was still teetering in the basement even with McDavid, small sample size of course but small sample size is all we have to go by.

He was 25th in the league in 5v6 P/60 between 2014-16, tied with Malkin, Thornton, Carter and Pacioretty.

As for the team results, that's a different question altogether. This season is ample evidence that elite performances and team results don't always go hand in hand.

The trade looks like a disaster based solely on team results this season and what drove those team results (Hall's Hart level season and Larsson's down season).

Nope. It was and is a disaster based on the quality of the players involved.

Nobody was calling this a disaster last offseason, funny how that works.

Lots of people were if you knew where to look.

As I mentioned above, role, need and salary as well all play factors when evaluating trades.
Hall wasn't the face of the Oilers franchise anymore, McDavid was. Draisaitl was going to be the long term 2nd line driver, the strength of their prospect pool is on wing.

This may come as a shock to you but you are allowed to have multiple elite players at forward. Most contenders do.

BTW not a single one of the Oilers wing prospects is on the same level as Taylor Hall. The only way to find players like that is by drafting them in the top of the class or by trading with Chia.

The Oilers had nothing on right side D, nobody capable of handling even strength top pairing tough minute matchups (Sekera failed at this the previous season). Larsson's caphit was nearly 2M less and he was signed a year longer.

I understand the need and the salary rationale for the trade. I don't think they outweigh the staggering loss in value.

This was a trade made for short term need of course but also with the long term in mind as Draisaitl, Puljujarvi etc. grow into their roles as top 6 contributors with Drai being a premier 2nd line driver.

Three years in and we're still waiting on that.

I'm not expecting many to agree with my rationale especially after the way this season unfolded (although the majority of the board was ok with it just last offseason) but I refuse to believe that this trade is a disaster. It would have been a disaster if they didn't have the 1-2 punch of McDavid and Draisaitl anchoring the offense for the next decade.

Well, hopefully that becomes a thing, because the Oilers this past season showed they were incapable of doing much of anything when McDavid wasn't on the ice and Drai has yet to show he can produce offense and outscore the opposition away from 97.

This is the heart of the issue with the Hall trade. The bet was improved defence, Lucic and the development of young players would be enough to cover for the drop off in talent from trading Hall (and later Eberle). They lost the bet.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PGW

Aceboogie

Registered User
Aug 25, 2012
32,649
3,896
You keep saying that. There wasn't much of a market for Hall in 2016. Last off-season, after Hall's season-long pouting act, there was no consensus on the trade.

wtf? season long pouting act? You are living in a different world.

Hell Matt Duchene had a legitimate 2 season long pouting act and SKIPPED training camp and had worse stats than Hall and still returned MORE in a trade. That is the most embarrassing thing ive ever seen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PGW
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->