Senor Catface
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2006
- 16,032
- 20,076
At least Spec wrote a scathing article of this clown show.
The first I heard about how Coffey acted on the job as well.
Any other sources on that? Hadn't followed it closely.
At least Spec wrote a scathing article of this clown show.
If by year three they've demonstrated they can't get the job done, then sure, criticism is warranted.
"Patience" doesn't solve anything if the GM is showing clear signs of being an idiot. We did that already with Tambellini and even Lowe we had warning signs by the time he was doing dumb crap like offer sheeting Penner, but instead of realizing there was a problem we just defended it.
Same thing is happening all over again. "More time will fix it, it's a genius plan, you just can't see it right now but it'll reveal itself!". Yeah, whatever.
Well, uh, they did have the best regular season since 1986 last year. And this season our offense wasn't a far cry off of what they did that year despite a PP that scored 30 goals all year.
Answering your last post, I think the horses we have right now will continue to improve. McDavid and Draisaitl will get better in their own end and many other teams can't match them. I believe an average special teams paired with a stable Cam Talbot has this roster back in the mix.
I'm trying my hardest to put a pessimistic spin on what we have here and see why you think such a significant turnover is required for improvement.
Your expectations of this roster this season must've been astronomical.
The team--though reliant on Connor McDavid, which will never change--played fairly well down the stretch.
At least Spec wrote a scathing article of this clown show.
queue Ristolainen, Dahlin and Eichel taking off and Buffalo doesnt look back back next year. Meanwhile we are out in the wilderness with Larsson and KlefbumNah, there’s always Buffalo. No matter how much we **** things up, Buffalo’s there to remind us it could be worse.
If it hasn't become evident to you by now, I could give two ****s to what the masses are saying.
The majority of them don't even bother to assess it fully.
If I truly felt the result this season lied solely on the heads of the guy in charge, I'd be more inclined to see that perspective.
But as I've outlined over a number of threads, there's more to the story than just what the GM does.
The Oilers have always been in a position organizationally since the McDavid lottery where significant change was going to be very real and more than likely painful considering their situation at the time. I've explained that countless times.
If we're going to see those moves pay dividends it would take time. If we were going to pull the plug on that plan, Chiarelli simply would've been the guy they got to pull the band-aid off the gangrenous wound the previous management left for him.
queue Ristolainen, Dahlin and Eichel taking off and Buffalo doesnt look back back next year. Meanwhile we are out in the wilderness with Larsson and Klefbum
so is Bobby Nicks and Chia gonna roll out their "plan" at a press conference?
that'd be fun to watch
If the point of your post was to mock the length of time it takes to develop prospects, well I've got news for you--it takes time in every organization. Considering you're one of the more considerate posters, I'm not sure why you'd bother antagonizing me on that point, honestly. But regardless of what happens with the staff beyond this year, it's going to take another few years before any of these young players pay dividends. Of course players like Drake Caggiula and Matthew Benning shouldn't go unmentioned as they are examples of filling depth that wasn't available internally when he took the post.I think you're missing the point of my post. The draft/development side you're lauding is still an unknown. Most of the Chiapicks aren't even in the AHL yet. We can't say one way or another, but it's reasonable to expect more misses than hits.
I've been pretty clear that I think this team is a bubble team when things break right. The roster weak spots are the appalling forward depth, inconsistency in goal and the utter lack of scoring from the back end. Their strong points are Connor McDavid and, uh, who ever plays wing with Connor McDavid.
I don't think significant turnover is required for *improvement*. I think significant turnover is required for the team to be a Cup contender. I expect that process to take, at minimum, two seasons. And my fear is the GM who fails to learn from his mistakes, whose job is potentially on the line, trying to jump start the process again by bleeding out more value instead of marshalling his assets.
I expected them to miss the playoffs, actually.
11 wins and 11 losses in their last 22 games, scoring 59 goals with McDavid going 14-23-37 and producing 62% of the offense The man needs help.
I assumed they had a plan when Nicholson spoke on HNIC weeks back and told us when we saw their plan we’d get behind it. Was he talking about a new plan today or the same one as back then? Bobby is pretty good at talking out of both sides of his mouth.
The one thing I found interesting was when he was asked point blank about whether Mclellan and his assistants were a package deal or not. He wanted no part of answering that question. Makes me wonder if that indeed is why we don’t have the same definitive answer on Mclellan’s future that we do on Chiarelli’s.
Wait, so he gets credit for not fixing the team because it would have been "painful"? Oh please do explain.
Taylor Hall and Matthew Barzal.
Starting to believe he blew the Puljujarvi pick..
The Paul Coffey thing... Is he still employed?
Chia should just quit himself..
If the point of your post was to mock the length of time it takes to develop prospects, well I've got news for you--it takes time in every organization. Considering you're one of the more considerate posters, I'm not sure why you'd bother antagonizing me on that point, honestly.
But regardless of what happens with the staff beyond this year, it's going to take another few years before any of these young players pay dividends. Of course players like Drake Caggiula and Matthew Benning shouldn't go unmentioned as they are examples of filling depth that wasn't available internally when he took the post.
The idea of the Oilers becoming that consistent contender, is again, going to take at least a couple seasons as the Oilers take their lumps and find out what it takes to win in the playoffs. I am fine with your idea of a bubble team if it means we're playing into May because becoming a contender is a process--its not about slapping together a roster loaded top to bottom with your idea of 'good' players. The Oilers as they sit are a good hockey team when they are fully healthy and not cursed with a league worst special teams.
well, Nicholson did say that Chiarelli's scouting and drafting apparatus was extremely good so hopefully that starts paying off for us, and the sooner the better.Honestly there's no antagonism or mockery intended; just showing that we're behind where we could have been thanks to that disastrous Reinhart trade which would be producing NHL-ready players at this point. That's a franchise-altering blunder. (The picks lost just to hire Chia and TMac should be mentioned here as well).
Sure. I think we agree on where things are going more than we don't. My point is the moves they've made so far make the job harder unnecessarily and push the window further out than it needed to be.
I don't think much of players like Caggiula who is a dime a dozen player with little upside, but someone needs to take a shift while McDavid takes a breather.
This is where we part company. You need either high-end franchise talent in spades (Pittsburgh, Chicago before they got old) or elite talent by the bushel (Tampa Bay, Winnipeg, Nashville, Boston, Toronto). A couple of good to great players and a band of happy misfits along for the ride just doesn't work in this league. Basically we need an phenomenal success rate from the draft over the next little while before we can even hope of challenging for anything but a second round speedbump. Oh and we need to fire the GMs security blanket into the sun somehow.
Honestly there's no antagonism or mockery intended; just showing that we're behind where we could have been thanks to that disastrous Reinhart trade which would be producing NHL-ready players at this point. That's a franchise-altering blunder. (The picks lost just to hire Chia and TMac should be mentioned here as well).
Sure. I think we agree on where things are going more than we don't. My point is the moves they've made so far make the job harder unnecessarily and push the window further out than it needed to be.
I don't think much of players like Caggiula who is a dime a dozen player with little upside, but someone needs to take a shift while McDavid takes a breather.
This is where we part company. You need either high-end franchise talent in spades (Pittsburgh, Chicago before they got old) or elite talent by the bushel (Tampa Bay, Winnipeg, Nashville, Boston, Toronto). A couple of good to great players and a band of happy misfits along for the ride just doesn't work in this league. Basically we need an phenomenal success rate from the draft over the next little while before we can even hope of challenging for anything but a second round speedbump. Oh and we need to fire the GMs security blanket into the sun somehow.
That would be the dumbest design ever. With no logical reasoning.Rewatched the presser
Did Bobby Nicks imply the empty cap was left the way it was by design? It almost sounds like they “let” the team fail to “reassess” things once McDavid extension was signed. If they made the playoffs, great; if not, then so be it
Pittsburgh, Chicago, LA and Nashville drafted and developed elite defensemen capable of playing up to 30 minutes a night when the going got tough. I'm sorry but if you're modelling a rebuild after any of those teams with the pieces we'd been given to start with, you were going to fail spectacularly. I know the list of champions doesn't follow my theory, but the Stanley Cup winner isn't always 'the best team' on paper. The NHL playoffs are a tournament and anything can happen when you get in them--last season was a prime example IMO when you see the defense the Penguins brought to the battle. The Oilers have two players on their roster that most other teams can't match--and they're going to get better. Having them in a seven game playoff series is an advantage. We don't necessarily need expensive, high-end talent to compliment them. We just need a defensively responsible roster who can provide a some offensive support and preferably score more goals than they give up.Spot on with your last point especially.
The Oilers went for "balance" before they were even good at anything. Pittsburgh, Chicago, LA, Nashville all had rock solid strengths in terms of being either headed towards an elite offensive team or elite defensive squad.
The Oilers just thought they could skip that step and go right to "balance role players" around McDavid and that would be enough. It's not enough. Now you have a core/team that isn't great offensively OR defensively, they're not good really at anything. The Flames have the same problem.
Once you are actually good at something then you can go look for balance to augment that step, the Oilers just tried to skip that step and now are paying for it. McDavid + Draisaitl + maximum performance from role players is not a good enough core.
I don't even know why they mention this shit. All GMs have 'plans'. I don't think this press conference was a standard Oilers press conference to be quite honest. He was up there to announce the Humboldt services and the press would've likely wanted more considering they hadn't made any decisions on the coaching staff. What is he going to say? 'We're assessing...'I assumed they had a plan when Nicholson spoke on HNIC weeks back and told us when we saw their plan we’d get behind it. Was he talking about a new plan today or the same one as back then? Bobby is pretty good at talking out of both sides of his mouth.
The one thing I found interesting was when he was asked point blank about whether Mclellan and his assistants were a package deal or not. He wanted no part of answering that question. Makes me wonder if that indeed is why we don’t have the same definitive answer on Mclellan’s future that we do on Chiarelli’s.