Are Hall/RNH/Eberle/Yakupov part of the problem?

[guymez]

They really should have signed Jagr like three years ago to help shelter/mentor some of the kids.

And their pro scouting on D has been atrocious.

Ference and Nikitin were poor signings, there were better options.

They should have sold high on Gagner too after the lock out year and gotten a good return on him and moved to sign Grabovski to replace him, instead we waited until his value was garbage to be able to get Purcell (another poor addition).

We could've gotten a decent usable D-Man had we moved Gagner earlier.

Purcell is a fine return for Gagner. He is a smart NHL player who provides secondary scoring. His contract is a bit inflated but that's not the issue with this team.

The issue with this team is a lack of balance in the top 9 which makes Purcell (not a gritty player) a poor fit.

Purcell would be an excellent fit on a team like the Jets or the Blues.

 

[harpoon]

Good lord, this is a mouthful.

<snip>

On a competent team, three (if not four) of these players would be all-stars.
Maybe sit down and watch a few Oilers games before you bash the only decent players on the team.

Awesome post. Perfectly stated from top to bottom.

Purcell would be an excellent fit on a team like the Jets or the Blues.

There's probably some truth to that, but this is the Oilers - a far cry from the Jets or Blues.
That's why Soundwave correctly points out that Purcell was a crap addition.
Gagner absolutely would have made more a difference for this team than Purcell did this season.

 

[Dorian2]

I've really upset you guys with this post. I apologize, I just don't see the same things in these players as everyone else.

I'm not trying to distract the blame away from management. It's that at some point, the players have to be responsible. At the end of the day, they're the ones on the ice losing hockey games.

I agree with this.

To a point.

It's a two way street, especially in the NHL. Coaches rely on the players to bring their game. Players rely on coaches to lead them in the right direction.

Eakins had no direction whatsoever. He basically took a developing team, and set them back a couple years with his systems and his style.

I think more of the onus is on Eakins. I won't carry on as this has been discussed add nauseum in the Eakins thread. (aka: I'm going to have a smoke )

 

[McArthur]

I agree with this.

To a point.

It's a two way street, especially in the NHL. Coaches rely on the players to bring their game. Players rely on coaches to lead them in the right direction.

Eakins had no direction whatsoever. He basically took a developing team, and set them back a couple years with his systems and his style.

I think more of the onus is on Eakins. I won't carry on as this has been discussed add nauseum in the Eakins thread. (aka: I'm going to have a smoke )

I like the initial adjustments that were made.
#1 reduce shift length (Draisaitl would have benefitted from that a ton)
#2 powerplay (got it going again) bumped up the confidence
#3 ozone containment (finally had some)
#4 roll out all 4 lines (Roy/Yakupov was a godsend)

without calling Draisaitl the next Kopitar, or rushing Nurse. We still have a huge goals against problem. If we spend less time in our zone and more time in the neutral zone or ozone, guys like Eberle/Hall/RNH/Yakupov/Draisaitl are going to look like the solution to the goals for category. That said, Purcell is finally starting to get going. Going into this offseason, will have a lot to take with him to build off of with us moving forward. After this season, we have no reason to not take full advantage of Draisaitl's 2 way contract.

As we get bigger, faster, stronger on the blueline... or if Klefbom, Marincin, Davidson, and Schultz added 10-15lbs of lean muscle in the offseason, our puck possession moves 15-30 feet closer to their net and away from ours. At which point speed can take over, and our offense looks twice as offensive.

our goalie situation can sort itself out. but we still need more prospects in net developing.

 

[guymez]

There's probably some truth to that, but this is the Oilers - a far cry from the Jets or Blues.
That's why Soundwave correctly points out that Purcell was a crap addition.
Gagner absolutely would have made more a difference for this team than Purcell did this season.

Disagree. You and Soundwave are entitled to that opinion but clearly it was time for Gagner to move on.

Could they have done better than Purcell...maybe...maybe not. In reality Gagner had little to no value and there was precious little evidence his value was going to move in a positive direction and help the team.

Purcell is a legit NHL player with experience and smarts.
I see him as having some value moving forward especially in the last year of his contract.

 

[psowrc]

Awesome post. Perfectly stated from top to bottom.
There's probably some truth to that, but this is the Oilers - a far cry from the Jets or Blues.
That's why Soundwave correctly points out that Purcell was a crap addition.
Gagner absolutely would have made more a difference for this team than Purcell did this season.

What evidence have you based this opinion on? His years in Edmonton? This year in Phoenix? Gagner did nothing as an Oiler to make a difference. I call the trade a wash.

 

[McArthur]

What evidence have you based this opinion on? His years in Edmonton? This year in Phoenix? Gagner did nothing as an Oiler to make a difference. I call the trade a wash.

and if taylor hall, Jordan eberle, and RNH don't see a turn around in E-town, do we call it a wash when they move on to put up similar stats while Edmonton stays in the gutter?

 

[Tarus]

What evidence have you based this opinion on? His years in Edmonton? This year in Phoenix? Gagner did nothing as an Oiler to make a difference. I call the trade a wash.

He would have made a difference by ensuring that the team didn't go into the season with just 2 NHL centers on the roster at the start of the year. Things like Perron's numbers deflating while playing with junior players and AHLers contributed to his ticket out of town for example, and even now the team is forced to play wingers at center due to the crippling lack of organizational depth at the position.

Purcell is a redundant part on a roster overloaded with soft wingers. He produces less offense than Gagner, is just as bad defensively, and plays a softer game than Gagner.

That's as far from a wash as you can get. It's more in the range of Mact got taken to the cleaners, as usual.

 

[McArthur]

He would have made a difference by ensuring that the team didn't go into the season with just 2 NHL centers on the roster at the start of the year. Things like Perron's numbers deflating while playing with junior players and AHLers contributed to his ticket out of town for example, and even now the team is forced to play wingers at center due to the crippling lack of organizational depth at the position.

Purcell is a redundant part on a roster overloaded with soft wingers. He produces less offense than Gagner, is just as bad defensively, and plays a softer game than Gagner.

That's as far from a wash as you can get. It's more in the range of Mact got taken to the cleaners, as usual.

with Eakins at the wheel, we've scratched the surface of what we have to see from Ted Purcell. Its a shame Gagner endured what he had to in Edmonton. but times move on and Purcell will be a big part of it later on. often a .75 ppg guy, if he puts up .5 from the third line, we'll see a lot of weight taken off the top 6.

Its shameful that anyone is compared to Gagner after Edmonton rode him into the ground.

 

[Tarus]

with Eakins at the wheel, we've scratched the surface of what we have to see from Ted Purcell. Its a shame Gagner endured what he had to in Edmonton. but times move on and Purcell will be a big part of it later on. often a .75 ppg guy, if he puts up .5 from the third line, we'll see a lot of weight taken off the top 6.

Its shameful that anyone is compared to Gagner after Edmonton rode him into the ground.

Short of getting Mcdavid, the Oilers don't have any star centers for Purcell to leech off of to inflate his numbers like he did in Tbay. It's exceptionally unlikely he ever has another 50 point year in the NHL, even 40 points is looking like a stretch as this point.

His production is relatively flat from coach to coach as well, so it doesn't look like there is much of an Eakins effect. He certainly doesn't look any better of a player under Nelson, especially compared to turnarounds by guys like Yak.

The only good thing about Purcell is that he's gone at the end of next season.

 

[Fourier]

Short of getting Mcdavid, the Oilers don't have any star centers for Purcell to leech off of to inflate his numbers like he did in Tbay. It's exceptionally unlikely he ever has another 50 point year in the NHL, even 40 points is looking like a stretch as this point.

His production is relatively flat from coach to coach as well, so it doesn't look like there is much of an Eakins effect. He certainly doesn't look any better of a player under Nelson, especially compared to turnarounds by guys like Yak.

The only good thing about Purcell is that he's gone at the end of next season.

I'd say Purcell looks a lot more engaged under Nelson than under Eakins. Under Eakins he was always on the perimeter. He's never going to be a physical player but at least of late he has been working along the boards and going to the tougher areas.

 

[McArthur]

I'd say Purcell looks a lot more engaged under Nelson than under Eakins. Under Eakins he was always on the perimeter. He's never going to be a physical player but at least of late he has been working along the boards and going to the tougher areas.

Its too bad he didn't make more of his opportunity with Roy and Yakupov, but his game has been solid and that line doesn't have very many holes. Another one of those guys that needs more chances around the net.

 

[Tarus]

I'd say Purcell looks a lot more engaged under Nelson than under Eakins. Under Eakins he was always on the perimeter. He's never going to be a physical player but at least of late he has been working along the boards and going to the tougher areas.

I agree he's more engaged, something that applies to the entire team really.

Unfortunately, unengaged/ineffective and engaged/ineffective amount to exactly the same result; a player that provides no positive impact on the team.

 

[Dorian2]

I agree he's more engaged, something that applies to the entire team really.

Unfortunately, unengaged/ineffective and engaged/ineffective amount to exactly the same result; a player that provides no positive impact on the team.

By positive impact, do you mean points?

Maybe he hasn't done much in that situation. But I see some positive impact to his game.

He's been to the puck in the corners in the Ozone, many times before the opposing D are.

He's allowed Roy and Yak that little bit of extra space needed to create a play.

He's got pretty solid positioning most times. being a key piece on the PK.

He's not the total solution, but I do think he provides positive impact.

Probably in the dressing room as well, considering the interviews I've heard from him.

 

[PKSpecialist]

He would have made a difference by ensuring that the team didn't go into the season with just 2 NHL centers on the roster at the start of the year. Things like Perron's numbers deflating while playing with junior players and AHLers contributed to his ticket out of town for example, and even now the team is forced to play wingers at center due to the crippling lack of organizational depth at the position.

Purcell is a redundant part on a roster overloaded with soft wingers. He produces less offense than Gagner, is just as bad defensively, and plays a softer game than Gagner.

That's as far from a wash as you can get. It's more in the range of Mact got taken to the cleaners, as usual.

MacT got taken to the cleaners????? Are you ****ing kidding me. For a Sam Gagner who everyone knew was no longer a part of what we were trying to build here we were able to deal him for a winger worth similar dollars, but one year less on his contract.

Yet people try to say how great Stevie Y is and he traded Gagner WITH B.J. Crombeen for a 6th round pick. And I believe he paid some of Gagner's salary too, not? Stop bashing MacT for the things he's done well... Trading Gagner was one of them. He's was a below average number two center on a bad hockey team here, and nothing has changed now. He's likely better suited in the East or as a winger.

How would you feel if we had kept Gagner, and this offseason traded him with Rob Klinkhammer and paid half of his salary, for a 6th rounder??? Cuz that's essentially what Yzerman did.

 

[Tarus]

By positive impact, do you mean points?

Maybe he hasn't done much in that situation. But I see some positive impact to his game.

He's been to the puck in the corners in the Ozone, many times before the opposing D are.

He's allowed Roy and Yak that little bit of extra space needed to create a play.

He's got pretty solid positioning most times. being a key piece on the PK.

He's not the total solution, but I do think he provides positive impact.

Probably in the dressing room as well, considering the interviews I've heard from him.

I'm referring more to his overall game. Sub-par defense, offense, physical play etc. Lower offensive production is fine if he can contribute other ways, but he doesn't really.

You can really see why Tbay spent a year trying to dump him. Just not an effective player, especially at 4.5 million per year.

MacT got taken to the cleaners????? Are you ****ing kidding me. For a Sam Gagner who everyone knew was no longer a part of what we were trying to build here we were able to deal him for a winger worth similar dollars, but one year less on his contract.

Yet people try to say how great Stevie Y is and he traded Gagner WITH B.J. Crombeen for a 6th round pick. And I believe he paid some of Gagner's salary too, not? Stop bashing MacT for the things he's done well... Trading Gagner was one of them. He's was a below average number two center on a bad hockey team here, and nothing has changed now. He's likely better suited in the East or as a winger.

How would you feel if we had kept Gagner, and this offseason traded him with Rob Klinkhammer and paid half of his salary, for a 6th rounder??? Cuz that's essentially what Yzerman did.

You've ignored why I stated that the Gagner trade hurt the team(subtracted a center without getting a replacement), and why Tbay was involved in the transactions in the first place(trying to dump Purcell for cap space). So yes, Yzerman did well for his franchise considering he dumped a bad contract(and player) for next to nothing(avoiding having to buy someone out in the process), meanwhile Mact made his team worse by exacerbating an existing problem.

Their contracts also expire at exactly the same time(Gagner signed a 2 year contract, not 3), so Mact didn't manage to save anything there. You can't even really count the 500k he saved on the actual money, because he had to pay a mill or two on Gagner's replacements(Roy/Drai).

Just another example of Mact's complete lack of ability to effectively manage a team.

 

[PKSpecialist]

I'm referring more to his overall game. Sub-par defense, offense, physical play etc. Lower offensive production is fine if he can contribute other ways, but he doesn't really.

You can really see why Tbay spent a year trying to dump him. Just not an effective player, especially at 4.5 million per year.

Yet Gagner at 5 million per was effective???

You've ignored why I stated that the Gagner trade hurt the team(subtracted a center without getting a replacement), and why Tbay was involved in the transactions in the first place(trying to dump Purcell for cap space). So yes, Yzerman did well for his franchise considering he dumped a bad contract(and player) for next to nothing(avoiding having to buy someone out in the process), meanwhile Mact made his team worse by exacerbating an existing problem.

Their contracts also expire at exactly the same time(Gagner signed a 2 year contract, not 3), so Mact didn't manage to save anything there. You can't even really count the 500k he saved on the actual money, because he had to pay a mill or two on Gagner's replacements(Roy/Drai).

Just another example of Mact's complete lack of ability to effectively manage a team.

My bad on the Gagner contract, I was of the impression that it was a 3 year deal, not 2. Double checked on NHL numbers(man I miss capgeek) and you are right.

However, again, for the 1000th time, MacT tried to improve our centre depth by signing Olli Jokinen(and possibly Derek Roy) in the offseason by offering him the most money that any team offered him, but Jokinen chose not to sign. Would have helped with our size down the middle, and our depth, but there is nothing you can do if a player doesn't want to sign with your team. This isn't EA Sports. You have to remember that we also had a window to trade Gagner as his NTC kicked in at midnight that night so we didn't have the luxury of waiting to see if we could add centre depth before trading him.

Sure, Yzerman saved money for his team, but he is also paying $1.6 million for Gagner this year and next and he will never play a game for his team. He saves 2.9 million total, so I guess if you think that Purcell isn't worth $2.9 million per then it is a savings for his team. At the end of the day this doesn't really matter for our team, so I don't care.

Can anyone honestly say that we would have been any stronger a team this year minus Purcell, plus Gagner??? I don't see it. We played ok as it was against Eastern conference teams, but against the bigger western conference teams we struggled, but Gagner wouldn't have changed that IMO. I guess maybe we would have ended up with the 5-7th overall pick instead of 3-4?

 

[KCC]

MacT got taken to the cleaners????? Are you ****ing kidding me. For a Sam Gagner who everyone knew was no longer a part of what we were trying to build here we were able to deal him for a winger worth similar dollars, but one year less on his contract.

Yet people try to say how great Stevie Y is and he traded Gagner WITH B.J. Crombeen for a 6th round pick. And I believe he paid some of Gagner's salary too, not? Stop bashing MacT for the things he's done well... Trading Gagner was one of them. He's was a below average number two center on a bad hockey team here, and nothing has changed now. He's likely better suited in the East or as a winger.

How would you feel if we had kept Gagner, and this offseason traded him with Rob Klinkhammer and paid half of his salary, for a 6th rounder??? Cuz that's essentially what Yzerman did.

MacT has done some stupid boneheaded things, but he's done alot of good as well. He gets the hate because of the Eakins thing which is more than understandable. Should have canned him much earlier.

If you look at the roster moves it isn't like he sits on his butt and does nothing. The guy is trying. The problem is there isn't much out there and trades can work, but it has to make sense. He's said many times since he took over that there are many players that have slipped through the cracks, but not for a lack of trying. Many players don't want to play in EDM, so he is really handcuffed.

 

[Soundwave]

I'm not saying they should have kept Gagner ... they should have moved him earlier when he actually had value. Especially after the lockout year when his value was decent and Grabovski was an easy signing to replace him.

Instead we waited until his value was crap to trade him for nothing of note. Purcell will be traded probably by the deadline next year for peanuts.

We traded Gagner, Cogliano, Petry, and Dubnyk (three 1st rounders and a 2nd) and got nothing of real note for any of them.

No wonder we have no team depth, we screw up so many of our draft picks and then get nothing of value for them.

 

[Tarus]

My bad on the Gagner contract, I was of the impression that it was a 3 year deal, not 2. Double checked on NHL numbers(man I miss capgeek) and you are right.

However, again, for the 1000th time, MacT tried to improve our centre depth by signing Olli Jokinen(and possibly Derek Roy) in the offseason by offering him the most money that any team offered him, but Jokinen chose not to sign. Would have helped with our size down the middle, and our depth, but there is nothing you can do if a player doesn't want to sign with your team. This isn't EA Sports. You have to remember that we also had a window to trade Gagner as his NTC kicked in at midnight that night so we didn't have the luxury of waiting to see if we could add centre depth before trading him.

Bringing up that he tried to sign Jokinen is not a positive, the guy is on his last legs in the NHL. All you're doing is emphasizing that Mact has zero ability to assess effective NHL talent, a lack of understanding that age does effect player performance, along with a complete inability to close deals and sell NHL players on the team. Mentioning Roy isn't great either, because if the rumors are true; Mact could have had Roy in September, but decline because Eakins didn't want him on the team. I am also aware that Gagner had a NTC, because I remember the day Mactavish gave it to him while gleefully boasting that he had locked up part of the core when he gave Gagner the contract.

In a nutshell - Mactavish dumped a player with a bad contract(that Mact gave him), at the player's rock bottom value(due to a situation Mact created), traded the player for a redundant part(another soft winger) while creating a gaping hole in the roster that he bet that he could fill in free agency(which he couldn't do, and had no backup plans to compensate), and didn't even attempt to address the problem until the season was half over while wasting a year of Drai's entry contract despite the fact the player clearly wasn't ready for the NHL

This is how you manage a team if your goal is to lose games and compete with teams that are intentionally tanking. Job successful, 3rd last in the league, season tanked before November started(again), and just as bad as Tambo's intentional tank years - all done on a cap max team while not actually trying to intentionally lose games.

Worst. GM. in. Oiler. History.

Sure, Yzerman saved money for his team, but he is also paying $1.6 million for Gagner this year and next and he will never play a game for his team. He saves 2.9 million total, so I guess if you think that Purcell isn't worth $2.9 million per then it is a savings for his team. At the end of the day this doesn't really matter for our team, so I don't care.

I only mentioned it because you stated that there was a double standard in claiming that Yzerman did well in trading Gagner, while Mact did poorly. I was merely pointing out that the GMs made those trades to accomplish very different objectives for their teams.

Can anyone honestly say that we would have been any stronger a team this year minus Purcell, plus Gagner??? I don't see it. We played ok as it was against Eastern conference teams, but against the bigger western conference teams we struggled, but Gagner wouldn't have changed that IMO. I guess maybe we would have ended up with the 5-7th overall pick instead of 3-4?

Finishing with the 5th - 7th pick would be a significant improvement over where they are now, you're talking about a 75 - 80 point team instead of a 61 point team; that would be a spectacular accomplishment by any one player. Considering you don't have much respect for Gagner going by your posts, I sincerely doubt you consider him to be that good . I won't try to convince you of his worth, but I'll just state that he's been a 40+ point center in the western conference his entire career before Eakins came on the scene, and is actually already back at that level one year removed from the team. He has his limitations, and always will, but he's still an NHL player who can contribute from the center ice position.

Simply put, Mact made the team worse by sacrificing center depth to improve winger depth. Would the team have been all that much better? Probably not, the defense is a significantly worse issue that outright laughs in the face of any "Mact is doing well" arguments. It's likely however that they wouldn't have wasted half a year of Drai's development time by forcing him to play under an idiot like Eakins when he wasn't ready(not that anyone can really be ready for that kind of thing), and we might have not lost a guy like Perron who went off a cliff in effectiveness when his center went from NHL quality to AHL tweener.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

The question shouldn't be if they're part of the problem. It should be if they are part of the solution.

 

[Replacement*]

MacT got taken to the cleaners????? Are you ****ing kidding me. For a Sam Gagner who everyone knew was no longer a part of what we were trying to build here we were able to deal him for a winger worth similar dollars, but one year less on his contract.

Yet people try to say how great Stevie Y is and he traded Gagner WITH B.J. Crombeen for a 6th round pick. And I believe he paid some of Gagner's salary too, not? Stop bashing MacT for the things he's done well... Trading Gagner was one of them. He's was a below average number two center on a bad hockey team here, and nothing has changed now. He's likely better suited in the East or as a winger.

How would you feel if we had kept Gagner, and this offseason traded him with Rob Klinkhammer and paid half of his salary, for a 6th rounder??? Cuz that's essentially what Yzerman did.

Your argument is silly. First of all MacT and Tambo devalued a perfectly good player. All Sam has needed is to play with one experienced winger with size or at least a capable winger. The oilers have forcefed him garbage much of his time here. Somebody as ordinary as Hanzal was looking good playing with Gagner and getting higher rate of production than ever before prior to his unfortunate injury.

Next, you with an apparently straight face cite "What we're trying to build here" without any apparent awareness that nothing is being built here and that this org is a ****show that would devalue either a Gagner or a Purcell.

At least with Gagner the player wanted to be here and showed some heart and a lot of professionately through a long stint with a very trying organization.

 

[Replacement*]

My bad on the Gagner contract, I was of the impression that it was a 3 year deal, not 2. Double checked on NHL numbers(man I miss capgeek) and you are right.

However, again, for the 1000th time, MacT tried to improve our centre depth by signing Olli Jokinen(and possibly Derek Roy) in the offseason by offering him the most money that any team offered him, but Jokinen chose not to sign. Would have helped with our size down the middle, and our depth, but there is nothing you can do if a player doesn't want to sign with your team. This isn't EA Sports. You have to remember that we also had a window to trade Gagner as his NTC kicked in at midnight that night so we didn't have the luxury of waiting to see if we could add centre depth before trading him.

Sure, Yzerman saved money for his team, but he is also paying $1.6 million for Gagner this year and next and he will never play a game for his team. He saves 2.9 million total, so I guess if you think that Purcell isn't worth $2.9 million per then it is a savings for his team. At the end of the day this doesn't really matter for our team, so I don't care.

Can anyone honestly say that we would have been any stronger a team this year minus Purcell, plus Gagner??? I don't see it. We played ok as it was against Eastern conference teams, but against the bigger western conference teams we struggled, but Gagner wouldn't have changed that IMO. I guess maybe we would have ended up with the 5-7th overall pick instead of 3-4?

From a production pov Gagner roughly equals Roy. With Gagner being much younger than either Roy or Purcell which actually matters to clubs that actually develop their talent instead of endlessly recycling it.

For a normal org its better to retain the still developing player than obtain the near finished player. You get more years of service from the younger player and more probability of improvement in game.

As for the team being stronger the Oilers with GAgner typically had a second line that produced. This year, until Roy, they didn't have that, and not too curiously it was the worst stint in Yaks career. So yeah, the Oilers would have been better having 3 NHL centers, what a concept. I can't believe you're arguing this.

 

[McDeepika]

The question shouldn't be if they're part of the problem. It should be if they are part of the solution.

That's kind of what I was getting at. Poor wording on my part. Curious to hear your thoughts though.

 

[harpoon]

Really solid post Tarus. Sums up the facts about as well as I've seen it done.
People arguing with you are Gagner haters, MacT apologists, or both.