Addressing Player Development in OKC

[Halibut]

Curtis Hamilton.. Ryan Martindale? These guys are write offs at this point. They can't hack it.

Give Kristians Pelss a spot over those bums.

So should we start questioning our amateur scouting if all those draft picks failed to look like even remote possibilities after a few short years?

 

[McDNicks17]

So should we start questioning our amateur scouting if all those draft picks failed to look like even remote possibilities after a few short years?

Not every pick turns into a player.

Especially in the 2nd, 3rd and beyond.

 

[dem]

So should we start questioning our amateur scouting if all those draft picks failed to look like even remote possibilities after a few short years?

Definitely worthy of questioning. The drop off for Pitlick and Hamilton was like a rock.

Wasn't there a story awhile ago about how the Oilers hit 2010 out of the park?

2010 success rests on Marincin and Davidson at this point. (Outside shot to Pelss and Bunz)

 

[Halibut]

Not every pick turns into a player.

Especially in the 2nd, 3rd and beyond.

No but getting nothing from the draft unless you have the #1 pick is kind of unacceptable isnt it? We need some depth players and we dont seem to be getting them. If how they're being developed isnt the problem then the guys we are choosing doesnt look great.

I wonder about our focus on the WHL, saw an article recently about how many WHL guys we've drafted and how few from the OHL/QMJHL. With the lack of success outside the first round that might not be a good thing.

 

[jukon]

I would rather have our prospects play and OKC suck than have a winning team of AHL vets. What is the point in having OKC as our affiliate if we have most of our prospects playing in the ECHL? The kids need to learn to play and they won't learn by sitting in the pressbox. We need vets to compliment our prospects not to take their place.

 

[joestevens29]

Not every pick turns into a player.

Especially in the 2nd, 3rd and beyond.

Which is fine, but we are getting nothing outside the 1st right now.

 

[Samus44]

I don't want to see Springfield all over again where they play the kids but the team is crap, that's no good either. I do think they need to harmonize the systems played between leagues and a bit more opportunity to the kids MAY be in order. In saying that i don't know if opportunity is the problem, just look at Rajala buddy took what was his. Rajala for my money may have been that teams best player and we all know he wasn't getting an special push, hence the ECHL time. Even Cornet has found opportunity when it's been available. It seems to me Hamilton, Pitlick, Teubert, and Martindale just haven't been good enough. Teubert has his moments and looks like a player at times but i don't know if he can make enough plays to ever be a player at the NHL level. Hamilton and Pitlick are obviously disappointing but when you watch them down there neither is terribly effective, and that can only be on them. Martindale hasn't even been good at the ECHL level so i blame him and him only. The thing is if you can't beat guys like Stafford, Green, or Cheechoo out for spots when you're ready for top of the roster roles are you really a legit NHL prospect? And if you can't beat out guys like Stretch, Hotham, and Deck for middle/end of the roster spots do you even belong in the AHL? We know teams give their own prospects a push it's not like these guys have been producing. A team like the Oilers who have been graduating so many of their 1st rounders is also likely to require some veteran help for the top of the roster. Like i said Rajala is enough for me to see that if you're good then you'll play. Maybe you can give the young guys a little more opportunity but ultimately it's up to the players to deserve it and make good on it.

 

[Samus44]

I would rather have our prospects play and OKC suck than have a winning team of AHL vets. What is the point in having OKC as our affiliate if we have most of our prospects playing in the ECHL? The kids need to learn to play and they won't learn by sitting in the pressbox. We need vets to compliment our prospects not to take their place.

You don't learn much when your getting your ass handed to you every night either. Guys get better by having the opportunity to make plays and having/learning the actual skill to execute them. We saw when the Oilers in Springfield would give the kids the team that the results for both development and winning were poor. If you can't develop skill very well at least develop a winning culture (it's contagious). I hear your argument but guys like Rajala prove if your good enough you'll play. Pitlick is probably the biggest poster boy of wasting development but i watched nearly every game before the lockout and that guy did nothing. Now and then he'd level somebody but his hockey sense seemed to be a big issue.

 

[Samus44]

Not every pick turns into a player.

Especially in the 2nd, 3rd and beyond.

This is very true but i do think one could argue the Oilers have not been getting good value out of their 2nd rounders for some time.

 

[Samus44]

I dont know. Defensemen chasing guys out to the blueline........its like we are playing man to man. Krueger must think he is Phil Jackson.

Teams typically do play man to man in the defensive zone, the only guys playing a loose zone are the wingers on the dmen and the only reason they play zone is because giving up the slot to a guy off the half walls is worse. Teams do rotate coverage but if everybody marks a man everybody is covered, wingers cover the slot as needed. Krueger isn't doing anything out of the ordinary with that.

 

[McDNicks17]

I realize the Oilers basically have nothing from outside the 1st round making the NHL right now, but from a developmental standpoint in OKC, I think they're doing alright.

Lander, Harski, Rajala, Marincin and Davidson were taken in the later rounds and, by the sounds of it, have been major contributors in the Baron's season.

The Oilers amateur scouting also brought in Arcobello and Fedun who have been top-notch players for the Barons.

 

[I am the Liquor]

Teams typically do play man to man in the defensive zone, the only guys playing a loose zone are the wingers on the dmen and the only reason they play zone is because giving up the slot to a guy off the half walls is worse. Teams do rotate coverage but if everybody marks a man everybody is covered, wingers cover the slot as needed. Krueger isn't doing anything out of the ordinary with that.

I don't see other team's dmen chasing players out to their own blueline abandoning the danger areas in front of the net. That is what we were doing and its ****ing stupid.

 

[ManByng]

Oiler fans get very attached to their draft picks and expect that most will end up on the NHL roster. it's simply not going to happen. as another poster put it, guys like Pitlick, Hamilton, Martindale and Musil may never make it to the NHL period, let alone the Oilers. and big, tough d-men we could use on the Oiler roster like Plante and Tuebert may get released. oh well ! i haven't givin up on them, but it was mentioned before that there is another batch of prospects coming in, so you keep trying to develop the players you need in the NHL, and hopefully you get a few.

 

[jukon]

You don't learn much when your getting your ass handed to you every night either. Guys get better by having the opportunity to make plays and having/learning the actual skill to execute them. We saw when the Oilers in Springfield would give the kids the team that the results for both development and winning were poor. If you can't develop skill very well at least develop a winning culture (it's contagious). I hear your argument but guys like Rajala prove if your good enough you'll play. Pitlick is probably the biggest poster boy of wasting development but i watched nearly every game before the lockout and that guy did nothing. Now and then he'd level somebody but his hockey sense seemed to be a big issue.

I realize that in the end it's up to the players to peform. But was the support in Springfield the same as it is in OKC? Also if players aren't performing well enough to earn a roster spot is the support there to help them improve their game? I don't have a problem with how things are being run but I would want to make sure that the support is there for the players in the pressbox or assigned to Stockton to improve. If a player needs his hand held to get there but can still turn into an NHL regular, I want to see the Oilers hire people to hold his hand. Surely a multi million dollar organization can hire a dozen people to help these kids when they are struggling.

 

[Samus44]

I don't see other team's dmen chasing players out to their own blueline abandoning the danger areas in front of the net. That is what we were doing and its ****ing stupid.

I can agree that perhaps the dmen can wait in the slot but you can't have guys standing around doing nothing or covering the same guy either. The Oilers problem from what i've seen wasn't standard coverage (well sometimes on the rush) but rather it was an inability to move the puck out of the zone that lead to breakdowns (the guys that win battles can't pass and the guys that can pass can't win battles). The danger in hockey is where the opposition has time and space. If teams can string together multiple passes it creates gaps that can be exploited while defenders try to close passing lanes and rotate coverage, if the Oilers play tight man on man it forces breakdowns to come from the corners which is typically less dangerous. The problem is the Oilers don't win enough battles in the corners and if they do they don't do enough with the puck, that's a talent/ability problem and not coaching IMO. And other teams do follow opposition forwards, perhaps not as high but they certainly mark guys hard. I see your point and saw Potter in particular go pretty high a couple times myself but if he's up there with a forward it means there's only 2 guys down low and that's not a bad thing especially when one guy is probably in the corner. You don't want traffic in front of your net, if a guy isn't there that "danger zone" is less dangerous. I'll say it a third time but i do think you have a point and perhaps they were chasing a little too high but they aren't doing anything crazy.

Also perhaps part of the reason teams are drawing there forwards away is because they know the Oilers have trouble breaking out the puck. If you can have extra support on the half walls by having a forward high it's tough to move it out, especially if a defenseman is still going to defer to the middle of the ice in case of a breakdown. Teams are probably foregoing better chances for greater volume/time spent in the zone (insert Dubnyk's high sv% relative to performance theory here). Because Edmonton isn't too tough in the corners guys can still get quality chances walking off the boards and like you said perhaps they have a little more time in the danger zone. But if a dman just stands in front of the net and doesn't mark a man it also means the other team is going to have a sort of PP. That defenseman becomes a fancy pylon. Ultimately the Oilers are losing the war because they are losing the battles, the problem isn't strategy but execution/ability.

 

[Samus44]

I realize that in the end it's up to the players to peform. But was the support in Springfield the same as it is in OKC? Also if players aren't performing well enough to earn a roster spot is the support there to help them improve their game? I don't have a problem with how things are being run but I would want to make sure that the support is there for the players in the pressbox or assigned to Stockton to improve. If a player needs his hand held to get there but can still turn into an NHL regular, I want to see the Oilers hire people to hold his hand. Surely a multi million dollar organization can hire a dozen people to help these kids when they are struggling.

You make an interesting point. Perhaps the support system in Springfield was lacking enough that it was a big reason in the dismal performance of the Falcons. My point is more that we need to be careful that we don't go too far the other way. Really right now i'd say the problem in OKC is far less serious than the one in Springfield so i'd be careful in how much the Oilers are willing to sacrafice winning for development. I can see an argument for more key time for prospects, but it's important that they earn it and i do think it's important for the AHL club to be competitive. I also think things have seemed worse because of the lack of 1st round picks down there, and the ones down there were not great ones. Teubert was moved for a reason even if he still did have value his stock had fallen, Plante wasn't a great 1st rounder but even then they got an All Star season from him last year. The second rounders were drafted with the hope that they'd have enough skill to complement the size, it shouldn't be too shocking that some guys haven't made good on the bet. I do agree it would have been nice for at least one of Pitlick/Hamilton/Martindale to have shown some life but it's tough to put that on a philosophy issue when a guy like Pitlick has had ample opportunity.

 

[tiger_80]

Definitely worthy of questioning. The drop off for Pitlick and Hamilton was like a rock.

Wasn't there a story awhile ago about how the Oilers hit 2010 out of the park?

2010 success rests on Marincin and Davidson at this point. (Outside shot to Pelss and Bunz)

If Marincin turns into a regular NHLer (definitely a possibility), it will have to be considered a decent draft. If Marincin becomes a top 4 defenseman and they get some NHL games from Davidson, Pelss and Pitlick, the draft will have to be judged a success.

 

[Roof Daddy]

Wtf does he know about winning in the AHL or developing NHL prospects?

That's like hiring Willy Loman to be your Director of Sales.

gotta say, wasn't expecting to see a DOAS reference, but I think it fits.

As for those in favour of entitlement vs a more competitive AHL team, how can you possibly expect a prospect to win a job from an everyday NHLer if they can't win one from an everyday AHLer. I would much rather have 4-6 contributing prospects gain great experience from a deep AHL playoff run than 12+ prospects all remain question marks on a crappy AHL team. It is also important in analyzing current team needs. At this point I think you write off Hamilton and look to replace his expected role with a player from this draft. But if MacT wants to gift wrap playing time then it totally contradicts his so called "impatience." If a prospect has shown you nothing in 2 years, time to look elsewhere.

 

[Hockey Buddha]

If the rumours about the hiring of Eakins are true, I'm wondering what impact the Eakins hiring will have on player development in OKC. As head coach of the Oilers, he's likely going to have signicant influence over the coaching staff in OKC, in establishing a consistent playing system and player development.

Eakins excellence in developing young talent for the Toronto Marlies (primarily exemplified by the likes of Gardiner and Kadri) is really what the Oilers needed more of in OKC this past season imo. I read some of Eakins' comments in the Edmonton Sun today about how coaching in the AHL is different than coaching in the NHL. He said--I'm paraphrasing here--that in the NHL it's all about points, whereas in the AHL its about player development first. He also talked about the importance of giving young players valuable playing time in the playoffs and relying on veterans more to gain entry into the playoffs. It's certainly a philosophy that I agree with and would like to see more of in OKC. He seemed to excel at getting the most out of his young talent on the Marlies.

Don't get me wrong, I think that Todd Nelson and the rest of our OKC coaching staff has done a superb job in putting together a quality team and in developing a winning atmosphere, however, I think the emphasis has to be more about player development. I hope that Eakins' philosophy as head coach impacts on how this is emphasized in OKC going forward.

 

[AlowlyMcOilersfan]

We now have a AHL coach on both teams.

That should help with development.

 

[Alberta]

So should we start questioning our amateur scouting if all those draft picks failed to look like even remote possibilities after a few short years?

YES.

Take a good hard look at the scouting. It's not good. Musil in the AHL next year will be another indication of that.

If they're hell bent on putting guys like Martindale, Hamilton, Pitlick in top 6/9 roles, that's a mistake because these players are not good and they won't be in the NHL. All it will accomplish is your farm team will suck and the losing culture will be perpetuated.

At least as it is right now the guys who go from OKC to the Oilers don't have that same losing attitude that a lot of the Oilers have.

 

[Spawn]

Want to have better player development? Draft better players. It's that simple.

We had the 31st, 31st and 32nd pick. We took:

Pitlick: Looks like a bust, maybe a 4th liner
Musil: Looks like he could be a bottom pairing defensive d-man
Moroz: Maybe a 4th liner.

Three of the highest second rounders you are going to get and we will be lucky to get 1 or 2 bottom 6/bottom pairing guys out of it. That is simply inexcusable. And keep in mind that Musil and Moroz haven't reached OKC yet so you can't put that on the AHL development staff.

And now you can go with dnicks point and say that not every pick turns into a player, but certainly some of them should at some point.

Other teams get gems every once in awhile. Not every year by any means, but at least once in a while.

Since the 2003, players drafted by the Oilers outside of the first round who are every day NHLers:
2003: Kyle Brodziak
2006: Jeff Petry

That's it. In 10 years of drafting from rounds 2-7(9) the Oilers have drafted exactly 2 guys who are every day players. Now I have not looked at every team in the league, but I imagine you would be hard pressed to find someone with a worse track record than that....

Absolutely unacceptable and inexcusable. We ditched Pendergast and brought in McGregor, but his record at this point frankly looks no more promising.

 

[Sheikyerbouti]

Want to have better player development? Draft better players. It's that simple.

We had the 31st, 31st and 32nd pick. We took:

Pitlick: Looks like a bust, maybe a 4th liner
Musil: Looks like he could be a bottom pairing defensive d-man
Moroz: Maybe a 4th liner.

Three of the highest second rounders you are going to get and we will be lucky to get 1 or 2 bottom 6/bottom pairing guys out of it. That is simply inexcusable. And keep in mind that Musil and Moroz haven't reached OKC yet so you can't put that on the AHL development staff.

And now you can go with dnicks point and say that not every pick turns into a player, but certainly some of them should at some point.

Other teams get gems every once in awhile. Not every year by any means, but at least once in a while.

Since the 2003, players drafted by the Oilers outside of the first round who are every day NHLers:
2003: Kyle Brodziak
2006: Jeff Petry

That's it. In 10 years of drafting from rounds 2-7(9) the Oilers have drafted exactly 2 guys who are every day players. Now I have not looked at every team in the league, but I imagine you would be hard pressed to find someone with a worse track record than that....

Absolutely unacceptable and inexcusable. We ditched Pendergast and brought in McGregor, but his record at this point frankly looks no more promising.

Absolutely agree but I question whether or not since Pendergast, who was entirely over his head, Stu's picks have been tainted by our managements utter insistence in picking needs.

The Oilers have never struck me as a team that has picked straight from a ranking list. There has been a lot of 'types' drafting. A lot of the poor drafting record could previously be blamed on poor player development, but OKC has been successful ( which MacT seems to want and fix)

On the other hand looking at Stu's career, he hasn't been very successful. He was a disaster in Kamloops, at best he's been average in Edmonton.

 

[Sheikyerbouti]

Brodziak and Eberle, arguably two of our more astute draft picks, were Lorne Davis' too iirc

 

[Hockey Buddha]

Want to have better player development? Draft better players. It's that simple.

We had the 31st, 31st and 32nd pick. We took:

Pitlick: Looks like a bust, maybe a 4th liner
Musil: Looks like he could be a bottom pairing defensive d-man
Moroz: Maybe a 4th liner.

Three of the highest second rounders you are going to get and we will be lucky to get 1 or 2 bottom 6/bottom pairing guys out of it. That is simply inexcusable. And keep in mind that Musil and Moroz haven't reached OKC yet so you can't put that on the AHL development staff.

And now you can go with dnicks point and say that not every pick turns into a player, but certainly some of them should at some point.

Other teams get gems every once in awhile. Not every year by any means, but at least once in a while.

Since the 2003, players drafted by the Oilers outside of the first round who are every day NHLers:
2003: Kyle Brodziak
2006: Jeff Petry

That's it. In 10 years of drafting from rounds 2-7(9) the Oilers have drafted exactly 2 guys who are every day players. Now I have not looked at every team in the league, but I imagine you would be hard pressed to find someone with a worse track record than that....

Absolutely unacceptable and inexcusable. We ditched Pendergast and brought in McGregor, but his record at this point frankly looks no more promising.

In my mind it is as much, if not more, of a development issue than a drafting issue. Young players need to be played and trusted in key situations in order to develop; they need to be properly mentored, supported, and adequately motivated with proper coaching to progress in their development. Playing veteran, former NHL players over young players who require the valuable playing experience to develop is an issue that is detrimental to the organization, particularly if it's ignored. Success and development have to be properly balanced. I'm glad that MacTavish has made this clear within the organization.