#FIRECHIA

[Jamin]

There's no guarantee that MacT would have closed the deal for Talbot and at that price. Any GM can negotiate, not all can close.

Of course he should get credit for Maroon, he played a key part in getting them to the playoffs and beyond so based on that alone, the deal was a success. It was the right thing to do to trade him when they did, it was either that or overpay him with term which people would complain about anyway.

UFA's don't ever give discounts unless it's re-signing with their previous team or going to a Cup contender. The Oilers were neither of those for Sekera. 5.5M was actually pretty solid for him, pretty much perfect value for a UFA of that stature, maybe a year too long on the term.

Hall for Larsson was an overpay, there's no debating that. The question is if you think the bigger need Larsson filled was worth it. That remains to be seen but yeah, it was an obvious overpay.

I didn't give him a pass for the Reinhart deal. I do believe that the OBC pushed it on him because they had a woody for Reinhart for years but he had the power to not make the ridiculously stupid trade so that's on him.

Agreed completely on Russell. The 1 year deal was very good then he followed it up with a blunder with that ridiculous 4 year contract and even more ridiculous NMC.

I agree with some of what you're saying but you kind of proved my point with all the asterisks you put on his good moves (the Talbot, Maroon and Sekera ones). At least you were honest with your counterpoint and didn't call me a Chia fan boy so thanks for the honest debate without the name calling.

My thinking with the asterisk beside his good moves is that it was nothing skillful to pull off.

For Sekera I agree with you and was happy when he signed, granted like you said a year too long. My issue is I feel like anyone could have been running the Oilers that summer and pulled off the signing.

Its like Talbot. Ill give you its no guarantee Mac T closes but from watching Sather on that Friday years ago it seemed like once a first rounder was out of the question from anyone it was Edmonton's goalie to lose.

My issue is there is so much bad in his time in Edmonton and I feel most of his good could have been accomplished by an average GM.

 

[Zaddy]

This is silly. If you trade a Taylor Hall for far less in return the trade had better result in unmistakable intangible reward for the club. This was a huge disparity in the respective players in the trade. If you lose a trade that badly it had better result in what you said it would.

That trade alone should be firing worthy. It should never have been approved or allowed to even occur.

As low as points have been with the Oilers that was the lowest point that most fans here have experienced in their tenure. What kind of maroon trades a Taylor Hall for a Larsson?

At least it was transformative for one team. Expectedly.

Well it wasn't so transformative for the Devils last year was it? Last year it was Oilers who showed tremendous improvement. But of course in the narrative that's going on in here last year doesn't count, only this year does. And the fact that three of the Oilers top4 d-men were struggling with injuries and the Oilers getting below-average goaltending doesn't matter either. I'm not really sure how keeping Hall would've solved the problems the team had this year either, so the argument doesn't even make sense from that standpoint. This deal can't be judged simply from year to year, that's the only thing that is actually 'silly'. Oilers could easily bounce back next year and the Devils miss. Will it still be a 'transformative' deal for the Devils then? Do you not see how that logic doesn't hold up?

 

[McGoMcD]

Well it wasn't so transformative for the Devils last year was it? Last year it was Oilers who showed tremendous improvement. But of course in the narrative that's going on in here last year doesn't count, only this year does. And the fact that three of the Oilers top4 d-men were struggling with injuries and the Oilers getting below-average goaltending doesn't matter either. I'm not really sure how keeping Hall would've solved the problems the team had this year either, so the argument doesn't even make sense from that standpoint. This deal can't be judged simply from year to year, that's the only thing that is actually 'silly'. Oilers could easily bounce back next year and the Devils miss. Will it still be a 'transformative' deal for the Devils then? Do you not see how that logic doesn't hold up?

This point has been drug on a little too far I think. I get it, people thought the trade was ok last year. But this isn't last year, its this year. The way opinions should work is you update them with the most information. We know more now than we did last year. Thats how time works, you always know more with time. So it doesn't really matter what people thought last year with less information. Now, with that said, by the same logic it is possible that next year it will again look good. But, I really doubt that. I think the only logical honest reactions is that based on all the info NOW, chia got bent over hard. The Devils are laughing their way to the bank right now. So, sure, didn't look like that last year, but that really doesn't matter right now.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Well it wasn't so transformative for the Devils last year was it? Last year it was Oilers who showed tremendous improvement. But of course in the narrative that's going on in here last year doesn't count, only this year does. And the fact that three of the Oilers top4 d-men were struggling with injuries and the Oilers getting below-average goaltending doesn't matter either. I'm not really sure how keeping Hall would've solved the problems the team had this year either, so the argument doesn't even make sense from that standpoint. This deal can't be judged simply from year to year, that's the only thing that is actually 'silly'. Oilers could easily bounce back next year and the Devils miss. Will it still be a 'transformative' deal for the Devils then? Do you not see how that logic doesn't hold up?

Again we gave up Hall, for Larsson. In the player move itself we lost incredible value there. Hall was also an EXCELLENT contract. That's an immense loss. Even if you want to play that theres been a season to season saw off its still a HUGE loss of asset for the Oilers.

If a team does trade a player of the nature of Hall it should be for an absolute Ringer. Somebody in the OEL stratosphere. Not a D that isn't on a top 50 list of D.

If the best argument you have for this trade is that both teams had one season of success since its not much of an argument. The Oilers, with the talent they HAD ought to have been far ahead of the Devils development curve what with accumulating 4 top picks among several others. The Devils, who reached the cup final as recently as 2012 are on a much more recent rebuild path. We SHOULD be way ahead of them. Especially with the abject luck of drafting Connor McDavid.

I don't know how you could really disagree with what I'm stating here which I think is quite reasonable.

 

[Drivesaitl]

What were your expectations in McDavid's rookie season with him being out for half the year?

My expectation was that the team was obviously going to be better with a full season of McD, with Drai coming into his own, and with Hall already there. All that was required was patience. Not a trigger finger to move out the top player this team had for half a dozen seasons.

That was just about the worst possible thing Chia could do without people declaring that the fix is in..

 

[harpoon]

Yes Chia has squandered assets and ignored his duty to fill holes.

Thank you. And this the opposite of his duty.
He needs to be fired before he can strip this club entirely of assets to flesh out his 'dream team'.

How is that not the same as collecting assets? Unless you're marking words lol.

I believe its you that is mincing words. Obviously the ultimate goal is to win. Chiarelli's team isn't exactly knocking it out of the park by that criteria. I think its entirely reasonable to suggest that stripping the team of five prime assets has a direct correlation to reducing the number of wins for the team. The number of posters who felt the need to post 'its the duty of the GM to win games, not trades' is pretty scary. Kinda like saying 'doh. the goal of a race car driver is not to have four tires, its to win races'.

I really don't know why you're attacking me for being some huge Chia supporter.

I wasn't really attacking, but ... sorry. No offense intended. The thought of Chiarelli bumbling through another season with coach McLellan at the helm is so frustrating to the part of me that still cares how the Oilers play. When I see the repeated excuses made on behalf of this guy ... I dunno, I see no reason this guy shouldn't be fired never mind still be receiving the backing and support of die hard fans.



.

 

[Zaddy]

This point has been drug on a little too far I think. I get it, people thought the trade was ok last year. But this isn't last year, its this year. The way opinions should work is you update them with the most information. We know more now than we did last year. Thats how time works, you always know more with time. So it doesn't really matter what people thought last year with less information. Now, with that said, by the same logic it is possible that next year it will again look good. But, I really doubt that. I think the only logical honest reactions is that based on all the info NOW, chia got bent over hard. The Devils are laughing their way to the bank right now. So, sure, didn't look like that last year, but that really doesn't matter right now.

You're basically arguing my point for me. The optics on the trade can change from year to year, which is exactly why you can't judge this deal on a year-to-year basis. Oilers had a lot of things go against them last year. Regardless of Hall being here or not, Oilers would probably have been bad.

Again we gave up Hall, for Larsson. In the player move itself we lost incredible value there. Hall was also an EXCELLENT contract. That's an immense loss. Even if you want to play that theres been a season to season saw off its still a HUGE loss of asset for the Oilers.

If a team does trade a player of the nature of Hall it should be for an absolute Ringer. Somebody in the OEL stratosphere. Not a D that isn't on a top 50 list of D.

If the best argument you have for this trade is that both teams had one season of success since its not much of an argument. The Oilers, with the talent they HAD ought to have been far ahead of the Devils development curve what with accumulating 4 top picks among several others. The Devils, who reached the cup final as recently as 2012 are on a much more recent rebuild path. We SHOULD be way ahead of them. Especially with the abject luck of drafting Connor McDavid.

I don't know how you could really disagree with what I'm stating here which I think is quite reasonable.

I've said it many times, Chia lost value in this deal. There should have been more coming back in the deal than just Larsson, I've never disputed that. But Shero didn't want to move Larsson unless he could do it in a 1-for-1 deal. That should show you how much he valued him as a player. And even so, if you look at comparables around the league no high end winger that's been moved have returned very much.

We got a young top pair D on an EXCELLENT () contract coming back. Someone that allowed everyone on the roster to play in their proper roles. I think that's very valuable in itself. I don't buy into the theory that the Oilers D would've been fine with stop-gap solutions like Demers. This team needed urgent help on the blueline and got it.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

You're basically arguing my point for me. The optics on the trade can change from year to year, which is exactly why you can't judge this deal on a year-to-year basis. Oilers had a lot of things go against them last year. Regardless of Hall being here or not, Oilers would probably have been bad.



I've said it many times, Chia lost value in this deal. There should have been more coming back in the deal than just Larsson, I've never disputed that. But Shero didn't want to move Larsson unless he could do it in a 1-for-1 deal. That should show you how much he valued him as a player. And even so, if you look at comparables around the league no high end winger that's been moved have returned very much.

We got a young top pair D on an EXCELLENT () contract coming back. Someone that allowed everyone on the roster to play in their proper roles. I think that's very valuable in itself. I don't buy into the theory that the Oilers D would've been fine with stop-gap solutions like Demers. This team needed urgent help on the blueline and got it.

The problem is that we still need a better defense and have basically no assets to help in that regard.

Not to mention that the top 4, as mediocre as it is, is set for awhile.

 

[shoop]

It really doesn't' matter if I hate Chia, and just hate him so much. Or I am just logically addressing what I see to be the truth. To me I am doing the latter. The major point is you continually seem to do what I just stated. Of course we can always agree to disagree, thats fine. It is just my opinion that over and over agian you make the same two errors. People continually state how much Chia had to work with in Boston, it seems undeniable he had a mound of assets to build on, yet years later he got fired for squandering those assets and handing out bad contracts. People continually point how Hall for Larsson was a terrible deal value wise and that Chia made the playoffs with the Hart trophy winner on his team can't be seen as some great accomplishment.

You aren't doing the first point in bold despite how much you say it.

The second point in bold has been conceded by pretty much everybody. The argument the many people make discussing the trade is there was a team chemistry element to the trade.

If you want to ask other people for perspective, then provide some yourself. Why would you ask people to provide perspective and then refuse to provide any yourself?

If the world is so black and white for you that you can't recognize there is more to building a team than so be it. That means we can't agree to disagree, because agreeing to do so requires the ability to see the world in nuanced terms.

 

[nabob]

My expectation was that the team was obviously going to be better with a full season of McD, with Drai coming into his own, and with Hall already there. All that was required was patience. Not a trigger finger to move out the top player this team had for half a dozen seasons.

That was just about the worst possible thing Chia could do without people declaring that the fix is in..

They didn't have a full season of McDavid.

 

[shoop]

This point has been drug on a little too far I think. I get it, people thought the trade was ok last year. But this isn't last year, its this year. The way opinions should work is you update them with the most information. We know more now than we did last year. Thats how time works, you always know more with time. So it doesn't really matter what people thought last year with less information. Now, with that said, by the same logic it is possible that next year it will again look good. But, I really doubt that. I think the only logical honest reactions is that based on all the info NOW, chia got bent over hard. The Devils are laughing their way to the bank right now. So, sure, didn't look like that last year, but that really doesn't matter right now.

So you would agree that it's far too soon to come up with a definitive opinion on the trade? Let's look at it season by season.

2016-17 The Oilers played really well. Larsson had a solid season and stabilized the Oilers defence. Hall pouted and had his worst season in the league since he was a rooke. Oilers suffered from some brutal reffing away from the conference finals. Would the Oilers have had as cohesive a locker room with Hall flaying against his lost status as the alpha dog? Win for the Oilers.

2017-18 Hall had a phenomenal season. Larsson was hurt and played poorly. The Devils scraped into the playoffs, with their new first overall pick, and won a game. Win for the Devils.

So you argue we completely ignore the 2016-17 season and base all the analysis of the trade on the 2017-18 season solely? Aside from confirming your biased view of the trade there is no reason to just look at the most recent season.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

I'm sure the Oilers front office will be pleased to know that failure on even the easiest of gimmes is completely acceptable.

 

[Drivesaitl]

They didn't have a full season of McDavid.

Wasn't it entirely obvious that I meant the subsequent years?

Chia judged a half glass of water team based on half a year of McD. It was a given imo that the team was going to look better any year in which they got a full year out of McD.

If Hall is here this year instead of Larsson I think our playoff chances would have been better. Moot because we'll never get to see what a full year of all of McD, Drai, Hall would look like. I bet it would look damn good.

 

[nabob]

Wasn't it entirely obvious that I meant the subsequent years?

Chia judged a half glass of water team based on half a year of McD. It was a given imo that the team was going to look better any year in which they got a full year out of McD.

If Hall is here this year instead of Larsson I think our playoff chances would have been better. Moot because we'll never get to see what a full year of all of McD, Drai, Hall would look like. I bet it would look damn good.

No it wasn't obvious that you were talking about only years 2&3. You clearly were talking about the expectations for all three years where we had the best player in the world.

"That expectation should be a minimum especially after failing to reach the playoffs 2/3 times while gifted with the best player on the planet."

Are you trying to say you were only talking about two seasons and not three? Did you mean to say 1/2?

 

[Drivesaitl]

No it wasn't obvious that you were talking about only years 2&3. You clearly were talking about the expectations for all three years where we had the best player in the world.

"That expectation should be a minimum especially after failing to reach the playoffs 2/3 times while gifted with the best player on the planet."

Are you trying to say you were only talking about two seasons and not three? Did you mean to say 1/2?

I wasn't aware that time parameters stretch to every post I make. Again I meant what I said in the post you quoted. That the Oilers would be better, automatically, with a full season of McD. Would've loved to have seen what having a couple good lines would look like. I do wonder if Chia kind of misjudged the team and how close it was. imo he misjudged the team and based on the half season of McD and the results that year. lets keep in mind it was not only an injury reduced first year it was a rookie year and Drai was also just finding his way.

I always said the Oilers had the opportunity for the trifecta the Pens were running with Crosby, Malkin, Kessel. We had that. It was pissed away.

 

[nabob]

....

 

[harpoon]

So true. It's impossible to mention any positive he's done without being called a "fan boy" or "delusional" or whatever the groupthink wants to trot out. You have to hate every single thing he's ever done to belong in the club and if you say anything positive, you're kicked off the island.

it's a problem on this board when posters can't mention any positive he's done without being labelled a Chia fan boy. You shouldn't have to walk on egg shells on your own team board when you have a valid opinion that differs from the consensus.

Walking on eggshells ... please. I submit that anyone who can't handle being called a fanboy should close up their account. Altogether too many folks who think they are moderating the thread instead of just contributing their opinions.

This thread is clearly labeled. Its a thread summarizing the many many ways Chiarelli has f***ed this team over. Its no wonder then that most of the contributions to the thread would be giving him a negative rating on the job performance. Nor should it come as a surprise that most posters in this thread have very little sympathy for the flimsy excuses being repeated over and over and over by posters who have some sort of inexplicable attachment to Chiarelli.

I happen to think that Chia has done more bad than good and finishing bottom 10 two out of three seasons with the best player on the planet, regardless of how young he is, is inexcusable

There you go. There is no 'but ...' There are no excuses. No need to parse out the few small decent moves he has made. They are mostly irrelevant because his bad moves were so gigantic. Fire Chiarelli.

 

[shoop]

So true. It's impossible to mention any positive he's done without being called a "fan boy" or "delusional" or whatever the groupthink wants to trot out. You have to hate every single thing he's ever done to belong in the club and if you say anything positive, you're kicked off the island.

If you bring up the Talbot trade, it was a gift from Sather but in the same token, you're not allowed to use the OBC excuse for Reinhart (I put the blame on Chia for this deal btw). If you mention the Sekera signing, they say that any GM would have done that and apparently it's an overpay even though it was market value for him at the time.

I happen to think that Chia has done more bad than good and finishing bottom 10 two out of three seasons with the best player on the planet, regardless of how young he is, is inexcusable but it's a problem on this board when posters can't mention any positive he's done without being labelled a Chia fan boy. You shouldn't have to walk on egg shells on your own team board when you have a valid opinion that differs from the consensus.

Excellent post with the glaring exception of the part in bold.

There are so many haters here who point to the title of the thread to excuse obnoxious, ignorant and childish behaviour. You can't find one poster here who 100% supports everything Chia has done.

On the flip side HFOil is full of people who will attack every single move he has made. If it's an unquestionably good move it was because Chia was 'gifted' something. Other than that it's attack, attack, attack all the time.

The finishing bottom 10 two out of three seasons line is stale, sad and misleading.

 

[McGoMcD]

You're basically arguing my point for me. The optics on the trade can change from year to year, which is exactly why you can't judge this deal on a year-to-year basis. Oilers had a lot of things go against them last year. Regardless of Hall being here or not, Oilers would probably have been bad.

No, i mean I agree and I don't. I get what your saying. The problem is even last year many weren't hard core won over, they were more like, ok, I'll give it time. When the trade happened 99% of oilers fans hated it. Last year, quite a few were luke warm, like sure maybe it made sense. THis year people hate it with a passion again. So the point is your saying it flips from year to year, well not really, it flips from accepting what we thought was a bad deal, to full out hating the bad deal. There really isn't that much flip flop, and quite frankly, the odds next year it will look good are slim to none, but, ok, it is possible.

 

[McGoMcD]

So you would agree that it's far too soon to come up with a definitive opinion on the trade? Let's look at it season by season.

2016-17 The Oilers played really well. Larsson had a solid season and stabilized the Oilers defence. Hall pouted and had his worst season in the league since he was a rooke. Oilers suffered from some brutal reffing away from the conference finals. Would the Oilers have had as cohesive a locker room with Hall flaying against his lost status as the alpha dog? Win for the Oilers.

2017-18 Hall had a phenomenal season. Larsson was hurt and played poorly. The Devils scraped into the playoffs, with their new first overall pick, and won a game. Win for the Devils.

So you argue we completely ignore the 2016-17 season and base all the analysis of the trade on the 2017-18 season solely? Aside from confirming your biased view of the trade there is no reason to just look at the most recent season.

No, I don't agree with this at all. First off for all we know we win the cup in 16-17 with Hall. Your just making up the Alpha dog stuff so who knows. Hall is legit a superstar in the league now. Maybe him on that team gets them the cup.

Second, what you are ignoring is that last year it wasn't like every one was suddenly great with the deal. It was more a begrudged acceptance. People were like, ok, maybe it wasn't horrible.

This year people want Chia's head on a pike. So no, it isn't the same, it isn't just one year we loved it, next year we didn't. its one year we might just tolerate it, the next year we hate it with a passion. For a deal that was hated from the second it happned.

 

[McGoMcD]

I wasn't aware that time parameters stretch to every post I make. Again I meant what I said in the post you quoted. That the Oilers would be better, automatically, with a full season of McD. Would've loved to have seen what having a couple good lines would look like. I do wonder if Chia kind of misjudged the team and how close it was. imo he misjudged the team and based on the half season of McD and the results that year. lets keep in mind it was not only an injury reduced first year it was a rookie year and Drai was also just finding his way.

I always said the Oilers had the opportunity for the trifecta the Pens were running with Crosby, Malkin, Kessel. We had that. It was pissed away.

Sigh, this hurts me the most. People are giving credit for Chia making it to the second round last year, but for all they know with Hall on the team last year we win the cup. Chia pissed away so much, he never has like star talented players. He cleary didn't in Boston cuase he shiped out Sequin ect. He destorys cup winning teams. Boston might have won another cup if not for Chia. Chia is the most gifted GM, meaning gifted in what he gets to start with. But, he pisses it all way. Any way, sadly we might already have 2 cups with a competent GM, meaning one more cup this year.

I don't think many can rap their head around what Chia has cost us. Imagine the team this year with Hall and Barzal..... we don't just make the playoffs, we probably take the cup. Chia costs us so much.

 

[shoop]

This year people want Chia's head on a pike. So no, it isn't the same, it isn't just one year we loved it, next year we didn't. its one year we might just tolerate it, the next year we hate it with a passion. For a deal that was hated from the second it happned.

That's absolutely the view of people who despised the deal and dislike Chia. 2016-17 was such a clear win for the Oilers that even you had to admit you 'tolerated' the trade in 2016-17.

For those of use who got the reason for the trade and don't hate Chia the 2016-17 vidnicated our viewpoint and showed how irrational those people were who still complained about it. In 2017-18 it was shocking how well Hall rebounded. The odds of him having an even better season next year are pretty low.

So how much does Hall regress? And why would people want to put Chia's head on a fish?

 

[GMofOilers]

The good news is, Oiler fans are more often wrong then right on this site.

 

[Drivesaitl]

You're basically arguing my point for me. The optics on the trade can change from year to year, which is exactly why you can't judge this deal on a year-to-year basis. Oilers had a lot of things go against them last year. Regardless of Hall being here or not, Oilers would probably have been bad.



I've said it many times, Chia lost value in this deal. There should have been more coming back in the deal than just Larsson, I've never disputed that. But Shero didn't want to move Larsson unless he could do it in a 1-for-1 deal. That should show you how much he valued him as a player. And even so, if you look at comparables around the league no high end winger that's been moved have returned very much.

We got a young top pair D on an EXCELLENT () contract coming back. Someone that allowed everyone on the roster to play in their proper roles. I think that's very valuable in itself. I don't buy into the theory that the Oilers D would've been fine with stop-gap solutions like Demers. This team needed urgent help on the blueline and got it.

I don't agree that Larssons contract is excellent. Maybe on value a 1M saving and I wonder if even Nurse will turn out to be a better D in time. I think so. Looking at Jersey in the playoffs its still apparent how much Andy Green does back there to stabilize. Really like his smart play. I think Larsson never looked better than with Green. For a player the stature of Hall we should have been getting both Larsson and Green in trade or with a throw in.

In anycase a distinction needs to be made. Larsson was only a contributor to the oilers making the playoffs last season. McD, Drai, Talbot were easily the teams most important contributions that made huge difference to team results. Whereas in Jersey Hall was the best player and made the biggest contribution to leading that team to the playoffs. So that the player Chia got played a part, the player Shero got was the reason for the playoff push. The playoffs don't happen without Hall in Jersey. That can't necessarily be said regarding Larsson here. I still think if we never made the trade we still would have made the playoffs last season or this, or both.

edit; I was mistakenly going on 5.1M salary instead of caphit which is 1M less on the Larsson contract. So pretty good contract, I stand correcting myself...

 

[Jamin]

They didn't have a full season of McDavid.

He clearly meant the season after mcdavid was injured...