Player Discussion Is this the end for Klefbom?

Will Klefbom retire?


  • Total voters
    216

NeverForget06

Here we go again !
Jan 7, 2013
6,572
5,345
Edmonton
Is this a strength issue or an injury-prone issue?

By strength I mean is his shoulder at the point where he can't really handle a puck or make a body check effectively ?

Or is it more that his shoulder could fall apart again at any moment and basically be that way for the rest of his life?
 

Samus44

Enjoy the ride.
Aug 5, 2010
9,317
2,088
This. Losing either Jones or Lagesson isn't a big deal. I dont see either player playing above a bottom pairing role.
Dallas once thought that about a young Matt Niskanen when his progress was uneven. Jones reminds me of him in a lot of ways. I'm not telling you either will be a quality dman but both are young enough and have shown enough that writing them off is very premature IMO. We've seen Nurse take another step this season, something he's done every season since being drafted, so I'm not a big believer of making sweeping judgements on young dmen. We don't know what either player will be yet and both have had strong stretches of play, Jones especially.

I don't think Klefbom factors into expansion as it would be beyond shocking if he gets claimed. That's a foolish risk when they could get the benefit of a young player or a strong asset to take back a deal like Neal instead. Klefbom isn't so good that a GM is likely to take the risk of getting nothing but dead cap back when a more certain asset is available. Personally given his health I wouldn't even be upset if he was claimed, he's too much of a question mark.
 

McOilers97

Registered User
Jan 10, 2012
6,532
6,737
Is this a strength issue or an injury-prone issue?

By strength I mean is his shoulder at the point where he can't really handle a puck or make a body check effectively ?

Or is it more that his shoulder could fall apart again at any moment and basically be that way for the rest of his life?

His shoulder is arthritic, so the cartilage is worn way down and was giving him pain in his day to day life AND hurting his play on the ice. Apparently he had been having shoulder problems going way back to his late-teens before we drafted him, so probably his shoulder has taken quite a beating throughout his hockey career and is really catching up with him now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brentashton

fireantz

Registered User
Mar 15, 2007
708
572
Acquiring Kulikov takes the panic out of the Klefbom situation. He fits ahead of Jones and Russell and should be signable below $3M short term. Klefbom back moves Kulikov to 3rd pair and Russell to waivers. Even losing Jones or Lagesson to Seattle allows patience with the abundance of prospects developing in Bakersfield
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bryanbryoil

GMofOilers

Registered User
Oct 15, 2007
15,807
4,379
Mountains
We don't actually know what was done - Klefbom didn't say what his procedure was when asked. "Shoulder replacement" was not confirmed whatsoever.

I think it's highly likely that he's done though.

They all mentioned it before the surgery. Makes sense to me.
 

McFlyingV

Registered User
Feb 22, 2013
23,123
14,107
Edmonton, Alberta
We don't actually know what was done - Klefbom didn't say what his procedure was when asked. "Shoulder replacement" was not confirmed whatsoever.

I think it's highly likely that he's done though.
He 100% did not get a shoulder replacement lol. That I can promise you. The fact that (I think it was Matheson) who asked if he got a shoulder replacement shows just how out of touch he is with what a joint replacement surgery entails.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McOilers97

McOilers97

Registered User
Jan 10, 2012
6,532
6,737
He 100% did not get a shoulder replacement lol. That I can promise you. The fact that (I think it was Matheson) who asked if he got a shoulder replacement shows just how out of touch he is with what a joint replacement surgery entails.

I was thinking that as well. From all accounts I’ve ever heard, shoulder replacement = retirement, no more contact sports. Whatever they did is something that *might* be able to extend his career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McFlyingV

McFlyingV

Registered User
Feb 22, 2013
23,123
14,107
Edmonton, Alberta
What if game 1 of the opening round of the playoffs, "The Edmonton Oilers have activated Oscar Klefbom from LTIR". Turns out Oscar didn't have any surgery and was just pulling a Kucherov. Nice cap circumvention uncle Kenny!

du3AFAC.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: AddyTheWrath

McDoused

Registered User
Feb 5, 2007
16,323
13,316
Katy <3
Depends. Realistically Klefbom could be hit on opening day and be done forever, or he could play 5 more years where he starts to naturally decline. Let’s just say he’s got 2 years left as that’s his contract. Do you give up a cost controlled young 5-6 d-man (who has top 4 potential) for 2 years of a top pairing guy? Depends how you value klef. Myself personally, I play that game. Seattle is gonna ask why we are leaving him exposed. Not sure what player agents can do in terms of sharing medical info from other teams but if it can’t be shared, the unknown is just too scary from Seattle’s point of view. I like klef but knowing what chronic injuries are like, I pass.

It depends on how highly you value Jones and Lagesson. To me, neither have proven anything more than a 6/7 or a warm body that can play when needed. I dont see top 4 potential in either guy and think they are easily replaceable. At best they are average bottom pairing defenceman right now. I'd rather protect a proven top pairing guy even I'd his future is uncertain.

Even if you protect Jones and expose Klefbom you are still going to lose one of Klefbom or Lagesson. Is Jones really that much better than Lagesson or vice versa?

The way the expansion draft is setup, Seattle will have a plethora of #4 dmen to pick from. Yes they want to accumulate assets but they can only play so many guys. They just might gamble on something they wont have, a #1 guy. If Klefbom does bounce back it would be a failure of epic proportions.

The issue that this all comes down to, for me at least, isn't whether he can be a good player again - it's a question of for how long? I get that if he returns to top 4 d-man form he'd be an incredible add to our improved blueline, but if there's a pretty significant risk that he can only maintain that for 1 year, or part of 1 year, is it worth losing someone else in order to keep him for 50-100 more games before he potentially is back on the shelf again and has to retire for good this time?

Worst case scenario he retires and we use that cap space to replace him. Best case scenario we have added a top pairing defenceman. And what is the cost? A dime a dozen bottom pairing fringe NHLer?

Acquiring Kulikov takes the panic out of the Klefbom situation. He fits ahead of Jones and Russell and should be signable below $3M short term. Klefbom back moves Kulikov to 3rd pair and Russell to waivers. Even losing Jones or Lagesson to Seattle allows patience with the abundance of prospects developing in Bakersfield

You could argue that not only does Kulikov replace Jones or Lagesson but he would be a significant upgrade on both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AddyTheWrath

McFlyingV

Registered User
Feb 22, 2013
23,123
14,107
Edmonton, Alberta
It depends on how highly you value Jones and Lagesson. To me, neither have proven anything more than a 6/7 or a warm body that can play when needed. I dont see top 4 potential in either guy and think they are easily replaceable. At best they are average bottom pairing defenceman right now. I'd rather protect a proven top pairing guy even I'd his future is uncertain.

Even if you protect Jones and expose Klefbom you are still going to lose one of Klefbom or Lagesson. Is Jones really that much better than Lagesson or vice versa?

The way the expansion draft is setup, Seattle will have a plethora of #4 dmen to pick from. Yes they want to accumulate assets but they can only play so many guys. They just might gamble on something they wont have, a #1 guy. If Klefbom does bounce back it would be a failure of epic proportions.



Worst case scenario he retires and we use that cap space to replace him. Best case scenario we have added a top pairing defenceman. And what is the cost? A dime a dozen bottom pairing fringe NHLer?



You could argue that not only does Kulikov replace Jones or Lagesson but he would be a significant upgrade on both.
With Lagesson, Jones, Samorukov, Bouchard, and Broberg to choose from as ready or soon to be ready NHL options in the coming years I really don't think we should be worried about losing Lagesson or Jones to expansion.

Not at the cost of potentially losing a top 3D at 4M cap hit if Klef can return. You take the gamble that he is going to return and if he doesn't you don't really lose out on anything. You're going to lose one of Lagesson/Jones/Benson/Marody anyways.
 

McOilers97

Registered User
Jan 10, 2012
6,532
6,737
Worst case scenario he retires and we use that cap space to replace him. Best case scenario we have added a top pairing defenceman. And what is the cost? A dime a dozen bottom pairing fringe NHLer.

No I think the actual worst case scenario is that he *appears* healthy to start the season, is pencilled into the lineup, and then gets knocked out for good midway through the season and we didn’t have the ability to sign a comparable quality player to replace him, because Klefbom came off of LTIR, thinking he could play again. So unless we retain Kulikov or a comparable player, our 2LD position may end up having the same problem as this season.

If Klefbom thinks he can play again, the only smart move is to pencil him in at 3LD. That way, if he overachieves, he can move up, but if he ends up back on the shelf injured, he’s not playing in the top 4, so we’ll have enough options to replace him internally (Russell/Lagesson etc). That would mean spending a bit more money than is ideal on D, but it might be worth it. If he comes back, he won’t have played in over a year anyway, so easing him back in on 3rd pairing is the smart move. And maybe in a 15min per game type of role he’ll stand a better chance of holding up for longer. I think he’d be agreeable to anything that allows him to keep playing, even if it means a significantly reduced role.
 
Last edited:

nabob

Big Daddy Kane
Aug 3, 2005
34,675
21,293
HF boards
I predict we leave him unprotected, Seattle takes him, he never plays a game for them and retires. The NHL then penalizes the Oilers a 1st round pick and awards it to Seattle. Just because it’s something the NHL would do to us.
 

McDoused

Registered User
Feb 5, 2007
16,323
13,316
Katy <3
No I think the actual worst case scenario is that he *appears* healthy to start the season, is pencilled into the lineup, and then gets knocked out for good midway through the season and we didn’t have the ability to sign a comparable quality player to replace him, because Klefbom came off of LTIR, thinking he could play again. So unless we retain Kulikov or a comparable player, our 2LD position may end up having the same problem as this season.

If Klefbom thinks he can play again, the only smart move is to pencil him in at 3LD. That way, if he overachieves, he can move up, but if he ends up back on the shelf injured, he’s not playing in the top 4, so we’ll have enough options to replace him internally (Russell/Lagesson etc). That would mean spending a bit more money than is ideal on D, but it might be worth it. If he comes back, he won’t have played in over a year anyway, so easing him back in on 3rd pairing is the smart move. And maybe in a 15min per game type of role he’ll stand a better chance of holding up for longer. I think he’d be agreeable to anything that allows him to keep playing, even if it means a significantly reduced role.

Thats a valid concern. Honestly it could happen to any of our players though. If he does go to LTIR for the rest of the year it would open up cap at the deadline, so im not too worried. Having said that Edmonton hasn't been great managing its LTIR. Hopefully they can get better at it like other teams but thats a whole other issue.

He might need to come back in a reduced role or maybe he comes back even stronger. We really arent sure at this point. Either way, Nurse is around and playing 25 minutes a night. Klefbom wouldn't have to carry the team on his back and if healthy is a significant upgrade on Russell and Jones.
 

McFlyingV

Registered User
Feb 22, 2013
23,123
14,107
Edmonton, Alberta
Rishaug and Spector talked about it not Matheson

Actually it was Klefbom himself that mentioned shoulder replacement in his first interview this season.
Actually I rewatched it and see it was Reid Wilkins who brought it up that he mentioned replacement surgery might be on the table at an earlier date. I didn't see the original interview, but I can pretty much promise you that it would be unheard of for a player to play pro-sports with a joint replacement surgery. Given that he is trying to return it almost without question is not a shoulder replacement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CycloneSweep

Kranium

Registered User
Mar 9, 2014
251
1
Arvika, Sweden
Seems to do just fine…
Playing Padel in my hometown. Rumors saying he has zero interest playing hockey. Just cash in contract money, playing padel, fishing and hanging with friends.
 

Attachments

  • CF4A494F-2C4A-4CF7-8D90-D2550EAF741B.png
    CF4A494F-2C4A-4CF7-8D90-D2550EAF741B.png
    490.5 KB · Views: 24
  • F83128E1-F239-4733-9375-DF15F859641E.png
    F83128E1-F239-4733-9375-DF15F859641E.png
    954.2 KB · Views: 25

soothsayer

Registered User
Oct 27, 2009
8,761
11,228
I know many of you view my sources as moot--but they tell me that at the NHL level he is done. When his contract is done--he is heading back to Farjestad.

Anyone who questions your sources haven't been paying attention to your posts. Wish the best for Klefbom in his post-NHL life. Once an Oiler, always an Oiler.
 

JordanGalhanth

Registered User
Apr 21, 2012
4,164
4,756
Thank you so much, Oscar. So sorry that your promising career never quite materialized how we wanted it to...but thankful for the few good times that we got to enjoy!
 

Ad

Upcoming events

  • Denmark vs Great Britain
    Denmark vs Great Britain
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $5.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Kazakhstan vs Germany
    Kazakhstan vs Germany
    Wagers: 4
    Staked: $2,335.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Austria vs Czechia
    Austria vs Czechia
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $101.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • USA vs Poland
    USA vs Poland
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $262.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Pittsburgh Pirates @ Chicago Cubs
    Pittsburgh Pirates @ Chicago Cubs
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $94.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:

Ad

Ad