Rumor: Oilers among teams with serious interest in Ben Hutton

PettersonHughes

Registered User
Aug 26, 2020
1,535
651
Just another bottom-six-able-to-play-in-the-top-four-for-a-short-time defenseman Benning has thrown away in the last years. Stecher, Hutton, Corrado, Biega, Fantenberg, Schenn. Toss in Tanev and Hamhuis on that list, except you can call them decent-to-good top pairing d.

The only saving grace is the amount of poor defensemen that Benning has also thrown away - Larsen, Clendenning, Pedan, Bartkowski, Weber, Sbisa (exp. draft), Pouliot, and a bunch of even more marginal players. Unfortunately Benning invariably pays some sort of asset to acquire the above.

Sigh. The asset mismanagement is horrific in Vancouver. Benning, in the last five years has managed to acquire three NHL quality d-men - one by overpaying in free agency (Myers) and then Hughes fell in his lap in the draft to due the ineptitude of the teams he has built. Schmidt was forced on him by the Vegas cap crunch and the fact that nobody else would take Schmidt's full salary and/or give any sort of asset.

What a depressing time I just had looking through Canuck rosters of the last five years.

Back on topic - I wouldn't mind Hutton back on a near league minimum contract. He's a capable bottom pair d-man with flashes to do more. Would rather him than Hamonic. Unfortunately, Benning has 24 million in dead and/or replacement level player tied up in cap.

Damn it.

Can hardly blame him for "throwing away" a Ben Hutton at $2.8 million for his qualifying offer, as a bottom pair guy. Quinn Hughes and Alex Edler had the top 2 left-side D spots locked up, just like "throwing away" Stecher came at a time when they were prioritizing re-signing Tanev (ultimately getting Schmidt instead) along with Myers. I doubt that that group of overly-hyphenated-yet-underachieving, undersized-yet-overhyped-depth D-men really had as much value as you're arguing they have (Corrado and Biega were good but undersized depth, Fantenberg had to go since Juolevi is starting to look ready and, while I like Luke Schenn, he's not irreplaceable either). For Troy and Ben, it's about maximizing cap by retaining what's truly important. At this point, neither of them are high enough on the team's hierarchy to demand being put as a primary option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HockeyWooot

MarkusNaslund19

Registered User
Dec 28, 2005
5,410
7,638
Just another bottom-six-able-to-play-in-the-top-four-for-a-short-time defenseman Benning has thrown away in the last years. Stecher, Hutton, Corrado, Biega, Fantenberg, Schenn. Toss in Tanev and Hamhuis on that list, except you can call them decent-to-good top pairing d.

The only saving grace is the amount of poor defensemen that Benning has also thrown away - Larsen, Clendenning, Pedan, Bartkowski, Weber, Sbisa (exp. draft), Pouliot, and a bunch of even more marginal players. Unfortunately Benning invariably pays some sort of asset to acquire the above.

Sigh. The asset mismanagement is horrific in Vancouver. Benning, in the last five years has managed to acquire three NHL quality d-men - one by overpaying in free agency (Myers) and then Hughes fell in his lap in the draft to due the ineptitude of the teams he has built. Schmidt was forced on him by the Vegas cap crunch and the fact that nobody else would take Schmidt's full salary and/or give any sort of asset.

What a depressing time I just had looking through Canuck rosters of the last five years.

Back on topic - I wouldn't mind Hutton back on a near league minimum contract. He's a capable bottom pair d-man with flashes to do more. Would rather him than Hamonic. Unfortunately, Benning has 24 million in dead and/or replacement level player tied up in cap.

Damn it.

What an uncharitable take. It's great when you start with your conclusion and work backwards.
So he doesn't get credit for drafting a potentially franchise D man at 7th overall. And he doesn't get credit for waiting while the hair on fire crowd in Vancouver were freaking out and leveraging our minimal cap space to get a good top pairing D for a 3rd round pick. Got it.
 

User1996

Registered User
Jun 24, 2020
2,743
1,632
Are you aware the Oilers have allowed fewer goals than the Flames in three of the last five seasons, including 2019-20? lol
Are you aware this is factually incorrect? The Oilers haven’t allowed less goals than the Flames since 2016/17. Unless of course you meant GA/G in which case the Oilers allowed a whopping 0.03 less goals/game than Calgary in 2019/20. So close it doesn’t even make sense to bring up. So I could just as easily twist that stat to say “The Flames have allowed fewer goals than the Oilers for the past three years”.

But sure, less stretch our arbitrary timeline back 5 years when these teams looked drastically different because it fits your narrative.

Next
 

Del Preston

Registered User
Mar 8, 2013
63,171
78,954
Are you aware this is factually incorrect? The Oilers haven’t allowed less goals than the Flames since 2016/17. Unless of course you meant GA/G in which case the Oilers allowed a whopping 0.03 less goals/game than Calgary. So close it doesn’t even make sense to bring up.

But sure, less stretch our arbitrary timeline back 5 years when these teams looked drastically different because it fits your narrative.

Next
Funny how that "shattered" d-core has been better than Calgary's over the past five years. I'm sorry this upsets you so much.

And yes, 0.03 is still better. Weird that you would be taking shots at another team that outperformed your own again just a few months ago. Something something glass houses.

And they, with this core, finally have a good goalie.
Uh huh. I'll believe it when I see it. It's always the goalie's fault in Calgary.
 
Last edited:

User1996

Registered User
Jun 24, 2020
2,743
1,632
Can you read?
Thanks for taking interest in my reading ability.

I’m not the one trying to manipulate stats (and give fake ones that I’ve already disproven) to measure pp size when I didn’t even bring up the Flames in the first place.

The Oilers D isn’t good. The fact you had to bring up Calgary just serves to prove you have an inferiority complex.
 

Del Preston

Registered User
Mar 8, 2013
63,171
78,954
Thanks for taking interest in my reading ability.

I’m not the one trying to manipulate stats (and give fake ones that I’ve already disproven) to measure pp size when I didn’t even bring up the Flames in the first place.
Pointing out that the Oilers had a lower GA/G average than the Flames last season and have been better in three of the past five seasons is not "manipulating statistics". It's what happened and can be looked up quite easily, which you should have done before making a stupid post.

The Oilers D isn’t good. The fact you had to bring up Calgary just serves to prove you have an inferiority complex.
You're a Flames troll who wandered into a thread about the Oilers to criticize their defensive group because they are interested in signing a #6 or #7 defenseman. And I'm the one with the "inferiority complex"... Hmm. Next time make sure you have some facts on your side before making an ass of yourself.
 

Snipes45

Registered User
May 26, 2020
14,035
13,334
Edmonton
Thanks for taking interest in my reading ability.

I’m not the one trying to manipulate stats (and give fake ones that I’ve already disproven) to measure pp size when I didn’t even bring up the Flames in the first place.

The Oilers D isn’t good. The fact you had to bring up Calgary just serves to prove you have an inferiority complex.
If the Oilers D isn't good, then yours is in the shi**er lol

How a fanbase brags so much about their D, yet Edm can beat them there.....

There is absolutely zilch about Calgarys D that makes you think "Man they are defensively good". They have never been great. Just average. Gio has a crazy year then falls back down as he is old. Never show up at the top for defensive stats.

Yet, all I always hear about is how good their D is. It's not.
 

User1996

Registered User
Jun 24, 2020
2,743
1,632
Pointing out that the Oilers had a lower GA/G average than the Flames last season and have been better in three of the past five seasons is not "manipulating statistics".


You're a Flames troll who wandered into a thread about the Oilers to criticize their defensive group. And I'm the one with the "inferiority complex"... Hmm. Next time make sure you have some facts on your side before making an ass of yourself.
Dude, first off you literally said goals, not GA/G. How else am I supposed to interpret it?
Secondly, how are 2015/16 and 2016/17 at all relevant to the discussion?

The bottom line: Flames have allowed essentially the same (0.03 difference) or less GA/G over the last three years. If you gotta reach back 5 years for something that fits your narrative chances are your narrative is incorrect

Peace out. Best of luck this season.
 

User1996

Registered User
Jun 24, 2020
2,743
1,632
If the Oilers D isn't good, then yours is in the shi**er lol

How a fanbase brags so much about their D, yet Edm can beat them there.....

There is absolutely zilch about Calgarys D that makes you think "Man they are defensively good". They have never been great. Just average. Gio has a crazy year then falls back down as he is old. Never show up at the top for defensive stats.

Yet, all I always hear about is how good their D is. It's not.
This isn’t going to age well...
 

Del Preston

Registered User
Mar 8, 2013
63,171
78,954
Dude, first off you literally said goals, not GA/G. How else am I supposed to interpret it?
Secondly, how are 2015/16 and 2016/17 at all relevant to the discussion?

The bottom line: Flames have allowed essentially the same (0.03 difference) or less GA/G over the last three years. If you gotta reach back 5 years for something that fits your narrative chances are your narrative is incorrect
You're right, five years ago is not relevant. It's just funny to see you come in and make a useless, off-topic post for no reason at all and then raise a big stink because I said GA instead of GA/G to point out the "shattered" defensive group actually outperformed your own team's again last season.

The thread is about Hutton. Have you made a single post about him or are you just here to cause a stir?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DingDongCharlie

Snipes45

Registered User
May 26, 2020
14,035
13,334
Edmonton
This isn’t going to age well...
We have to wait and see. Was ahead of yours last year. If Markstrom holds the fort and stays healthy, because he will be bombarded, I could see CGY finishing better in terms of team D numbers. If he gets injured..Just like if Koskinen gets injured (Who had almost identical #'s to marky).
 

Snipes45

Registered User
May 26, 2020
14,035
13,334
Edmonton
You're right, five years ago is not relevant. It's just funny to see you come in and make a useless, off-topic post for no reason at all and then raise a big stink because I said GA instead of GA/G to point out the "shattered" defensive group actually outperformed your own team's again last season.

The thread is about Hutton. Have you made a single post about him or are you just here to cause a stir?
I think BlondLooch is going to become GreyLooch watching his team play D lol
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->