Chia Addresses Media After Purcell, Schultz and Nilsson Trades 2-27-16

[Titsuple]

Why would he want to be warehoused and demoted by an org with zero interest in him and wherein he would have no opportunity.

He got fired from the head coaching spot.

He was an interim head coach who was not extended. He was not fired. There is a huge difference. Sometimes I think you come here just to argue with people. Get a wife man!

 

[Replacement*]

He was an interim head coach who was not extended. He was not fired. There is a huge difference. Sometimes I think you come here just to argue with people. Get a wife man!

I value my wife more.

heh

hey, this team produces the saltiness that is the topic of hfoil.

If we're not salty by now we're probably not paying attention.

Anybody that's been with this team through the last 25yrs and has a better outlook on it can call me out for negativity. But most of the long long standing posters see where I'm coming from, that nothing really changes here.

At this point this team deserves my venting and its healthier leaving it here, about the team, that displacing that frustration elsewhere.

I'm careful to do it in a way that still respects other posters or at least isn't flaming, rude, etc. If I haven't walked that line let me know. I'll apologize for it.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

I don't think this is the hill to die on, Replacement. Players have been the problem for years and management never addressed it.

 

[StoveTopStauffer]

They should really find a consultant or associate coach for the PP, badly. The PP shouldn't be so bad to have had to wait for McDavid and on top of that you don't NEED an amazing shot from the point to have an effective PP.

I kind of hope Chia does something about this very apparent problem in the summer. This team needs the PP to be great (top 6 or 7) or we flounder, simple as that. Fire Woodcroft or find an associate coach for the team with a specialty in PP.


They really need to apologize to Krueger and ask for his input, swallow their damn pride. He did work for team Canada, so obviously Lowe and Nicholson still like him.

 

[Replacement*]

We traded draft picks for real players last year. We traded three picks(and acquired one back) for Talbot. We traded 2 picks for Reinhart. We are barely an NHL team right now. You don't get better and sustain it by trading all of your picks.

You are looking at this rebuild as a beginning to an end. Trade all of our picks and prospects, make the playoffs, have one run at the Cup, and start rebuilding again.

You claim I must have the patience of a Saint because I don't care about making the playoffs, and I guess that is true, but I think you have the patience of a Saint if you are willing to have a one and done team only to tear it down and rebuild again because we don't have the underlying foundation to sustain success.

Yes, the NHL team needs help, but so does the prospect cupboard. Last years draft was a really good start from the defensive side of things considering(Reinhart, Paygin, Marino, Bear, Jones) are all good prospects. We also shored up goaltending at the NHL level for four years by trading picks for Talbot. Very good draft day for the team overall. But what about the forwards? McDavid was a great get, but we have 0 realistic NHL talent not playing in the NHL right now. Slepyshev, Yakimov, Chase, Kessy, Platzer.....these guys are long shots at significant NHL careers at best. You have to have a foundation at some point to be ready to compete.

The reason I went with the patience theme is not my concern alone. Its because I sense that the first rebuild players, Hall, RNH, Eberle, Yak, etc are just done with losing. Completely fed up with it and to the point of being demoralized. This actually happened last season where I, and many posters felt that the team had completely fallen apart under Eakins. that the team morale was on the floor. That it was done, over.

These players need hope now, not years later through development. The help that is required is also closer than is maybe thought. We need one ringer first pairing D (sure hard to get but as mentioned possible to get by going hard to teams also on a rebuild. (Ottawa, Arizona, etc. ) Being that we're a young team stocked with young players and prospects already we're in the best position to throw a ton of picks at such a team (along with select players) to try to acquire a substantial D acquisition. One premium D allows every other D on this team to be able to be slotted into a level that is more their fit. One D could entirely change this roster, what it looks like, and how it performs. We knew that last season, season before, we know it now.

That's the required foundation imo. WE need the foundation now, through trade, or say goodbye to any hope of our first rebuild core being a part of an ongoing core.

hey maybe this is a complete restart and I've suspected the same. Its just too long.

thanks for the patience man, good discussion

 

[Burnt Biscuits]

The bolded is the absolute crux of where I disagree and that makes me feel tht the year long use of Schultz and Purcell as placeholders has wasted development time.

What you state is an inference. It states a belief that players need to work themselves up the lineup to prove themselves. Even #1 pick players. I believe strongly that placeholders like Purcell, rather than help players like Yakupov, Khaira, etc, develop, instead just occupy positions that the others would benefit from. My take is that some players, specifically Yakupov need to be playing against the best and with the best to develop optimally. Give them lesser minutes and it just pisses all over their game. Any coach here that has believed in Yakupov and given him good minutes and topsix minutes has seen results, has seen production during the periods of time he has had it. Purcell put up 30 something pt seasons here while occupying a topsix position almost constantly and for no reason whatsoever imo. Rather than Help a player like Yak develop I feel that has warehoused him out of the role he would do best in. It makes no sense to me because I understand that Yak requires and benefits from a higher, not lesser, level of play.

Next, Khaira, in brief stints with Hall and Drai looked awesome in a support banger role to those guys using his body effectively to get to loose pucks and giving time for the more talented players to setup. What I would do is bring this player up earlier and reintroduce him to NHL play. Really I think this player could surpise people and is closer to being able to play a 2nd/3rd line mix than people think. But Purcell has prevented that body of development. Simply by being a placeholder. I fear Kassian is now going to be used constantly in that topsix role and that the club dealt Purcell to be replaced in topsix rotation by the more aggressive Kassian. Which again leaves our own young developing players out of that crucial mix.

As for Schultz and D my opinion is more that he has just cost the team severely on the ice and that almost any other options and even org options at D were better. Playing Schultz was just a lose proposition that hurt the team on the ice.

My saltiness went through the roof when the org confirmed yesterday that they had absolutely no ongoing plans for Schultz and Purcell going forward. They were just using them in a placeholding way that greatly diminished development potential and progress of this season. I really feel like this is yet another season lost. I bet most of the players on the team would feel pretty similarly. The young players on this team didn't get what they needed dearly imo. Opportunities to advance org players were limited because the org kept players it didn't believe in, in those roles. The org did this for another whole season.

My reference of placeholders only applied to Purcell, Schultz was "supposed" to be the solution and the organization considered him to be the solution until the point they didn't, I'm not sure at what point the org came to the conclusion they had more turd than gold in Schultz, but the conclusion was definitely something that was arrived at somewhere in the middle of this season.

Purcell was different in that I don't think he was ever part of the long term plans, which is why I think the term placeholder is applicable to him. In the absence of placeholders, what you are describing is trial by fire which is something we've had ample experience with and had a lot of player failure and team failure as result. It is good to challenge players, but it also important to put them in positions to succeed, you want to nurture their confidence and have them grow as players, there is a breaking point where it goes from challenging a player with just a little more then they are presently capable of and straight up drowning them at the deep end of the pool. The Oilers have done a lot of drowning in years past and I think we have scarred players and stunted their development as a result, I think if we had a 2 year placeholder instead of Gagner and kept Gagner in juniors, he would be a much better player as a result and possibly still on our team. Where I think we went wrong on our placeholder Purcell and the couple other placeholders we've had (we haven't had many) is that unlike Pittsburgh who knew Recchi and Guerin weren't part of the future of their core and would inevitably be replaced by younger players, they served as important mentors for their young core along the way.

With respect to Yak I really don't know what's best for him, he performed well under Krueger from an offensive perspective, but he was allowed near complete freedom out there and his defensive game didn't progress at all, his teammates also resented him for the double standard that was imposed with respects to how he was treated compared to the rest of the team. He also performed well under Nelson, but I'm not sure if that was cause of Nelson or just Yak playing well because he was happy to be free of Eakins. Yak really hasn't demonstrated that he is ready to take on a top 6 spot and there is a reason the org & coaches gave all the other young stars their spots with nary a hint of trepidation, but Yak has always been kept just outside of that spot. McLellan has given Yak a chance at that spot a couple of times and aside from his short stint with Connor he has dropped the ball, it wasn't long ago Pouliot found himself benched for taking stupid penalties and it was a great opportunity for Yak to show he was worthy of stepping up and he completely flopped on his face when given the role.

 

[Replacement*]

My reference of placeholders only applied to Purcell, Schultz was "supposed" to be the solution and the organization considered him to be the solution until the point they didn't, I'm not sure at what point the org came to the conclusion they had more turd than gold in Schultz, but the conclusion was definitely something that was arrived at somewhere in the middle of this season.

Purcell was different in that I don't think he was ever part of the long term plans, which is why I think the term placeholder is applicable to him. In the absence of placeholders, what you are describing is trial by fire which is something we've had ample experience with and had a lot of player failure and team failure as result. It is good to challenge players, but it also important to put them in positions to succeed, you want to nurture their confidence and have them grow as players, there is a breaking point where it goes from challenging a player with just a little more then they are presently capable of and straight up drowning them at the deep end of the pool. The Oilers have done a lot of drowning in years past and I think we have scarred players and stunted their development as a result, I think if we had a 2 year placeholder instead of Gagner and kept Gagner in juniors, he would be a much better player as a result and possibly still on our team. Where I think we went wrong on our placeholder Purcell and the couple other placeholders we've had (we haven't had many) is that unlike Pittsburgh who knew Recchi and Guerin weren't part of the future of their core and would inevitably be replaced by younger players, they served as important mentors for their young core along the way.

With respect to Yak I really don't know what's best for him, he performed well under Krueger from an offensive perspective, but he was allowed near complete freedom out there and his defensive game didn't progress at all, his teammates also resented him for the double standard that was imposed with respects to how he was treated compared to the rest of the team. He also performed well under Nelson, but I'm not sure if that was cause of Nelson or just Yak playing well because he was happy to be free of Eakins. Yak really hasn't demonstrated that he is ready to take on a top 6 spot and there is a reason the org & coaches gave all the other young stars their spots with nary a hint of trepidation, but Yak has always been kept just outside of that spot. McLellan has given Yak a chance at that spot a couple of times and aside from his short stint with Connor he has dropped the ball, it wasn't long ago Pouliot found himself benched for taking stupid penalties and it was a great opportunity for Yak to show he was worthy of stepping up and he completely flopped on his face when given the role.

Thanks as well for the well thought out responses, sorry for being more in full rant mode yesterday.

Regarding Purcell specifically and rotating players in and out of topsix I think that would have been preferable in a development year rather than KEEPING Purcell in topsix almost all the time and not giving much opportunity for other players to have some of that development time. I think a lot of players benefit from a multiple game segment of top rotation followed by a game off or lower rotation or lesser minutes and keep changing it up allowing them to get the tastes and also time to work on what they need to work on.

Rather, as used this season we largely gifted Purcell this plum role almost continuously while denying our own developmental players much of that topsix option. I think this is clearly stated.

As for Schultz I can't really subscribe that more assessment time was required. I don't buy that. Schultz at no point since rookie season exhibited play and application that suggested he was earnestly interested in improving at this level. Some improvements would have been noted.
Chia kindly left it at "Shultz is bad at D because he's struggling with confidence'

My own take is that SChultz was bad at NHL D because he was uncomfortable with WC level physical play. Can you really teach somebody to be comfortable or to accept that level of physical play required?

McLellan even hinted at it earlier in the season when he said we're determining which players have difficulty accepting all that is required in their roles. I thought that was an interesting statement and that Schultz was one of those guys. But I feel strongly that the answer was already there.

ps Regarding the "double standard" for Yak I'm not sure what you are getting at. Several core players on this team have lacked the all round, all zone, solid game.

 

[PKSpecialist]

The reason I went with the patience theme is not my concern alone. Its because I sense that the first rebuild players, Hall, RNH, Eberle, Yak, etc are just done with losing. Completely fed up with it and to the point of being demoralized. This actually happened last season where I, and many posters felt that the team had completely fallen apart under Eakins. that the team morale was on the floor. That it was done, over.

These players need hope now, not years later through development. The help that is required is also closer than is maybe thought. We need one ringer first pairing D (sure hard to get but as mentioned possible to get by going hard to teams also on a rebuild. (Ottawa, Arizona, etc. ) Being that we're a young team stocked with young players and prospects already we're in the best position to throw a ton of picks at such a team (along with select players) to try to acquire a substantial D acquisition. One premium D allows every other D on this team to be able to be slotted into a level that is more their fit. One D could entirely change this roster, what it looks like, and how it performs. We knew that last season, season before, we know it now.

That's the required foundation imo. WE need the foundation now, through trade, or say goodbye to any hope of our first rebuild core being a part of an ongoing core.

hey maybe this is a complete restart and I've suspected the same. Its just too long.

thanks for the patience man, good discussion

I agree that this NHL team is not as far away as some might think. I also think one bonafide top defender would completely change the landscape of the team. I also think that MacT knew it, and I think that Chiarelli knows it, and I think 29 other GM's know it. I just don't think there has been a viable offer out there. Call them incompetent all you want, but there is no doubt that both of our past two GM's had the same vision for the team....Improve the D, find a number one goaltender.....get bigger/heavier and tougher to play against. MacT was unable to find the D and G, but certainly tried, but more with reclamation projects than actual NHL guys. That is not to say he didn't try for the big fish, because I think its obvious that he did, but as he stated many times, despite wanting to be bold, making trades is not easy. Chiarelli is finding it tough too no doubt. At least he managed to sign Sekera, and Nurse and Klefbom are close in their development to manage some minutes now. We now have the depth up front with Hall/Nuge/Eberle/McDavid/Yakupov/Draisaitl/Pouliot and another high 1st round pick that we can probably move one of these guys to get a solid top 4 defender. I personally think Eberle goes leaving us with:

Pouliot McDavid Yakupov
Hall RNH Draisaitl

If that's our top 6 next year, AND we have added a top 4 defender with Eberle and another solid D via free agency or dealing our #1, we should be happy. Long term though, we need to stat thinking of replenishing the cupboard for when guys leave.

 

[shoop]

He was an interim head coach who was not extended. He was not fired. There is a huge difference. Sometimes I think you come here just to argue with people. Get a wife man!

Todd Nelson is a knowledgeable hockey guy. He gets that McDavid was a game changer for this organization. He is appreciative of the organization that gave him his first shot to be an AHL head coach and an NHL head coach.

No need to bang your head against the wall. It is so much easier for certain Comic Book Guy-esque type posters to hurl their invective safely hidden in whatever basement the computer screen they hide behind is located.

After thousands of "I'm almost (swear) done with this (swear)ing organization." You realize that it will never end. Really just a cry for attention.

It's quite sad. Sucks up all the oxygen. Guess it boosts the number of posts.