Peter Chiarelli Why Did You Trade Tayor Hall *****fest Bonanza!

[belair]

What do you expect me to post when you are in here excusing and justifying Chiarelli’s big six blunders with gems like ‘Eberle broke the salary cap’, and ‘DK wasn’t really an elite dman’?

Be reasonable? Quote entire sentences--or even paragraphs, not just the part you disagree with. It's not my fault you're so high strung for whatever discussion you seem to take an opposing stance on. If you spoke to people like that in real life they'd make an honest effort to avoid you.

I'm not 'justifying' anything, but it's an alternate perspective that provides a different look at why things might've unfolded the way they did. Things have never been rosy in Edmonton--there have always been massive challenges for whoever was at the helm.

As for Keith, I mentioned in that very sentence I'd be fighting a losing battle. My point is that he just didn't fit into that Karlsson, Subban, Burns, Doughty mold. If you dropped the 26 minute-a-night Duncan Keith on a roster like ours at the time, I don't think you're getting the same player Chicago did. I don't recall him being a guy who could take over a game on his own.

The context of the conversation you pulled that quote out of was talking about established stars being the primary reason for why teams win Championships. This is why pulling portions of sentences in other peoples discussions isn't an effective way to have a conversation.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

Does anyone truly believe Chia isn’t here for the full year regardless of what happens? I still remember the emergency Nicholson press conference to announce that chia isn’t going anywhere and to be patient because there’s a plan and we will all be happy once we see it. What are the odds we get one of the best players of all time and worst management group of all time, at the exact same time.....

The coach will be fired first. Unless the team truly spirals into the depths of the standings he'll survive at least the season, but if the Oilers don't make the playoffs he should absolutely be fired, along with most of the front office.

 

[Little Fury]

Does anyone truly believe Chia isn’t here for the full year regardless of what happens? I still remember the emergency Nicholson press conference to announce that chia isn’t going anywhere and to be patient because there’s a plan and we will all be happy once we see it. What are the odds we get one of the best players of all time and worst management group of all time, at the exact same time.....

I'd love to know what their plan is to shed their bad contracts (notably Lucic, Sekera and Russell), develop the next wave of youth to be above average contributors when they can't even do that with a top 5 pick here and generally fill the talent gap.

 

[belair]

Yeah because their winger depth was so great?

No one held a gun to their head to make them play LD with McDavid and artificially inflate his counting numbers and second contract.

No disagreements there. Another reason why Draisaitl's contract got inflated, as I mentioned previously. Completely different conversation to be had there regarding the disconnect between GM and coach that's been noted for some time.

The point still stands though--none of these guys were lining up next to McDavid until they actually clued in with RNH.

 

[Why]

I agree Mclellan is the first to go and he absolutely should, but he’s not the only one who needs to go. He’s a huge problem but at the same time, chia has gutted this team and gave him absolutely nothing to work with. Not sure he’d make the right decisions with the right pieces either mind you

 

[Little Fury]

No disagreements there. Another reason why Draisaitl's contract got inflated, as I mentioned previously. Completely different conversation to be had there regarding the disconnect between GM and coach that's been noted for some time.

The point still stands though--none of these guys were lining up next to McDavid until they actually clued in with RNH.

Oh I think that's part of the same convo. Why is the GM sticking with a guy when they can't get on the same page? Is it the Boys on the Bottle that have Todd's back or is Katz too broke to want to pay out another severance package?

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

I agree Mclellan is the first to go and he absolutely should, but he’s not the only one who needs to go. He’s a huge problem but at the same time, chia has gutted this team and gave him absolutely nothing to work with. Not sure he’d make the right decisions with the right pieces either mind you

You'll find no argument from me. Chiarelli is the real problem with this organization and he's far from alone either.

 

[Weitz]

The Oilers have been leading in a game for 7% of their TOI.

That is dead last by an astounding 5% less than the Red Wings who have yet to win a game.

If you needed another reason this team likely isn't going anywhere this season..

 

[Stoneman89]

Adam Larsson is a rock.

He sure skates like one.

 

[harpoon]

Be reasonable? Quote entire sentences--or even paragraphs, not just the part you disagree with. It's not my fault you're so high strung for whatever discussion you seem to take an opposing stance on. If you spoke to people like that in real life they'd make an honest effort to avoid you.

I'm not 'justifying' anything, but it's an alternate perspective that provides a different look at why things might've unfolded the way they did. Things have never been rosy in Edmonton--there have always been massive challenges for whoever was at the helm.

As for Keith, I mentioned in that very sentence I'd be fighting a losing battle. My point is that he just didn't it into that Karlsson, Subban, Burns, Doughty mold. If you dropped the 26 minute-a-night Duncan Keith on a roster like ours, I don't think you're getting the same player Chicago did. I don't recall him being a guy who could take over a game on his own.

The context of the conversation you pulled that quote out of was talking about established stars being the primary reason for why teams win Championships. This is why pulling portions of sentences in other peoples discussions isn't an effective way to have a conversation.

Face it man, you are in here as an apologist for Chiarelli and the organization. As such, when I read your posts in this thread I tend to scan cause I’ve heard your tune before. While scanning I come across gems like the two I mentioned (there were more like that abut I didn’t have time). Obviously I always back up and read the whole post when I see something outlandish like ‘Eberle broke the cap’, posted in a teaching tone. So please be clear, I have read your entire post, and when I post a small snippet I do so out of courtesy to other posters who may dislike scrolling through unnecessary full quotes. I understand the context very clearly.

Instead of taking such disapproval with my tone why not acknowledge that you are going out onto some pretty thin branches in order to ‘provide an alternate perspective’ on Chiarelli’s decisions - a perspective mind you in which Eberle broke the salary cap, and DK wasn’t really that elite ... and in conclusion, Peter Chiarelli is a competent executive.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Be reasonable? Quote entire sentences--or even paragraphs, not just the part you disagree with. It's not my fault you're so high strung for whatever discussion you seem to take an opposing stance on. If you spoke to people like that in real life they'd make an honest effort to avoid you.

I'm not 'justifying' anything, but it's an alternate perspective that provides a different look at why things might've unfolded the way they did. Things have never been rosy in Edmonton--there have always been massive challenges for whoever was at the helm.

As for Keith, I mentioned in that very sentence I'd be fighting a losing battle. My point is that he just didn't fit into that Karlsson, Subban, Burns, Doughty mold. If you dropped the 26 minute-a-night Duncan Keith on a roster like ours, I don't think you're getting the same player Chicago did. I don't recall him being a guy who could take over a game on his own.

The context of the conversation you pulled that quote out of was talking about established stars being the primary reason for why teams win Championships. This is why pulling portions of sentences in other peoples discussions isn't an effective way to have a conversation.

Sorry to wade in here but your take on Duncan Keith is way out in left field. It just is. Theres no reason to even discuss it. Sometimes a take is so bizarre its not worth engaging in but I only do it to try to illuminate why your suggestion on Keith is being challenged as it is. State ridiculous things and its pretty hard for anybody to resist. Maybe you don't understand Keiths game, maybe not flashy enough. But lb/lb he's been gold in his career and the reason why a Hawks club that even has lacked stellar goaltending had been on such a Stanley Cup zenith.

 

[oXo Cube]

Duncan Keith was the cornerstone piece on the best team of this decade.

Not a top D lol

 

[belair]

Sorry to wade in here but your take on Duncan Keith is way out in left field. It just is. Theres no reason to even discuss it. Sometimes a take is so bizarre its not worth engaging in but I only do it to try to illuminate why your suggestion on Keith is being challenged as it is. State ridiculous things and its pretty hard for anybody to resist. Maybe you don't understand Keiths game, maybe not flashy enough. But lb/lb he's been gold in his career and the reason why a Hawks club that even has lacked stellar goaltending had been on such a Stanley Cup zenith.

Duncan Keith has been in an enviable situation in Chicago. He's had one of the league most potent offenses in league history in front of him and a complete defensive rock as a partner throughout the whole thing. I'm not sure if this is being misinterpreted as a shot, but I'm simply stating this is a player Chicago turned into a 'star' player, due to his surroundings. It was an example of why a team who has any aspirations of winning a championship shouldn't feel inclined to drop everything to acquire an elite defenseman.

 

[belair]

Face it man, you are in here as an apologist for Chiarelli and the organization. As such, when I read your posts in this thread I tend to scan cause I’ve heard your tune before. While scanning I come across gems like the two I mentioned (there were more like that abut I didn’t have time). Obviously I always back up and read the whole post when I see something outlandish like ‘Eberle broke the cap’, posted in a teaching tone. So please be clear, I have read your entire post, and when I post a small snippet I do so out of courtesy to other posters who may dislike scrolling through unnecessary full quotes. I understand the context very clearly.

Instead of taking such disapproval with my tone why not acknowledge that you are going out onto some pretty thin branches in order to ‘provide an alternate perspective’ on Chiarelli’s decisions - a perspective mind you in which Eberle broke the salary cap, and DK wasn’t really that elite ... and in conclusion, Peter Chiarelli is a competent executive.

Yawn.

You're scanning for arguments. It's your MO. Always has been. I'm not having it.

Peace.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Duncan Keith has been in an enviable situation in Chicago. He's had one of the league most potent offenses in league history in front of him and a complete defensive rock as a partner throughout the whole thing. I'm not sure if this is being misinterpreted as a shot, but I'm simply stating this is a player Chicago turned into a 'star' player, due to his surroundings. It was an example of why a team who has any aspirations of winning a championship shouldn't feel inclined to drop everything to acquire an elite defenseman.

Duncan was the complete rock. he was the cornerstone of that franchise and cup wins. Duncan Keith is certainly an elite D. He's a hall of fame D. You may not like him, his style, his penchant for dirty play, but I don't know how one can not see how effective he has been. Duncan Keith is good at everything there is to be good at in D. I won't even quantify it because your take on the player is too ridiculous to even warrant a discussion on this particular topic.

Anyway, like people say to me, don't die on this hill. you're wrong on Duncan Keith. Which is fine, it has next to nothing to do with anything here.

 

[Little Fury]

Duncan Keith has been in an enviable situation in Chicago. He's had one of the league most potent offenses in league history in front of him and a complete defensive rock as a partner throughout the whole thing. I'm not sure if this is being misinterpreted as a shot, but I'm simply stating this is a player Chicago turned into a 'star' player, due to his surroundings. It was an example of why a team who has any aspirations of winning a championship shouldn't feel inclined to drop everything to acquire an elite defenseman.

I don't really understand the connection TBH. Can you elaborate?

 

[Aerrol]

Duncan was the complete rock. he was the cornerstone of that franchise and cup wins. Duncan Keith is certainly an elite D. He's a hall of fame D. You may not like him, his style, his penchant for dirty play, but I don't know how one can not see how effective he has been. Duncan Keith is good at everything there is to be good at in D. I won't even quantify it because your take on the player is too ridiculous to even warrant a discussion on this particular topic.

Anyway, like people say to me, don't die on this hill. you're wrong on Duncan Keith. Which is fine, it has next to nothing to do with anything here.

No kidding. His Conn Smythe year he averaged 31 minutes a night! OVER HALF THE GAME!!! That was the second most impressive display by a dman I've ever had the pleasure of watching over the course of a playoff run. The most impressive was Karlsson the year Ottawa took Pittsburgh to Game 7 of the Conference Finals in 2017.

Anyways, I'll also throw my voice behind the thread title being unhelpful and frankly just fanning the flames by forcing all anti-Chiarelli talk into a thread that's literally mocking said posters. And I'm sick of the Hall discussion too.

 

[Drivesaitl]

No kidding. His Conn Smythe year he averaged 31 minutes a night! OVER HALF THE GAME!!! That was the second most impressive display by a dman I've ever had the pleasure of watching over the course of a playoff run. The most impressive was Karlsson the year Ottawa took Pittsburgh to Game 7 of the Conference Finals in 2017.

Anyways, I'll also throw my voice behind the thread title being unhelpful and frankly just fanning the flames by forcing all anti-Chiarelli talk into a thread that's literally mocking said posters. And I'm sick of the Hall discussion too.

I'm sick of the people being sick about the sick Hall topic.

Then I go outside and the sun is shining.

just want to inject some levity.

The reality is we all have differing reactions and wants. Some have a need to ignore what has occurred, move on. Some feel the past offers portent and guides to present. Some people like Girl guide cookies.

 

[Aerrol]

Duncan Keith has been in an enviable situation in Chicago. He's had one of the league most potent offenses in league history in front of him and a complete defensive rock as a partner throughout the whole thing. I'm not sure if this is being misinterpreted as a shot, but I'm simply stating this is a player Chicago turned into a 'star' player, due to his surroundings. It was an example of why a team who has any aspirations of winning a championship shouldn't feel inclined to drop everything to acquire an elite defenseman.

Also, to hone in on an actual point of yours here - due to his surroundings my ass. Keith has looked elite despite carrying the corpse of Brent Seabrook around and worse depth behind him than the 2015-16 Oilers defence. There were times when their defence has been Keith - Aging Seabrook, Hjalmarlsson - nobody, ECHL Dman - AHL Dman and Keith still looked like he controlled the defensive zone better than Subban did at the time. You're taking crazy pills here man.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Also, to hone in on an actual point of yours here - due to his surroundings my ass. Keith has looked elite despite carrying the corpse of Brent Seabrook around and worse depth behind him than the 2015-16 Oilers defence. There were times when their defence has been Keith - Aging Seabrook, Hjalmarlsson - nobody, ECHL Dman - AHL Dman and Keith still looked like he controlled the defensive zone better than Subban did at the time. You're taking crazy pills here man.

Yep. Just to add I'm the biggest Doughty fan around but what has he looked like in post Voynov/Mitchell years? How strong have the Kings been with depleted D depth and cap problems? To me Doughty has been very guilty, often, of trying to over function and compensate. He creates GA by overhandling the puck. Its painful enough to see.

Its not always easily understood in the viewing (as defense can be tough to read) but Keith players a quieter game that survives idiots a bit better than Doughty who gets more credit. During the Kings zenith they had top rank goaltending, Hawks didn't at all times, so Keith has to be even more the rock.

 

[Aerrol]

Yep. Just to add I'm the biggest Doughty fan around but what has he looked like in post Voynov/Mitchell years? How strong have the Kings been with depleted D depth and cap problems? To me Doughty has been very guilty, often, of trying to over function and compensate. He creates GA by overhandling the puck. Its painful enough to see.

Its not always easily understood in the viewing (as defense can be tough to read) but Keith players a quieter game that survives idiots a bit better than Doughty who gets more credit. During the Kings zenith they had top rank goaltending, Hawks didn't at all times, so Keith has to be even more the rock.

And I'm sure you're aware that I'm one of Karlsson's biggest fans, but ditto. All the dmen @belair cited as "more elite" thrive, in their own ways, on getting really actively involved in the play. Burns loves to drive the net and fires endless shots. Subban is constantly looking for big hits and huge shots. Karlsson and Doughty are always at their best with the puck on their stick and on the move. My sense is that belair is confusing star defencemen who play actively with being the only elite defenders.

Keith on the other hand plays a calm game that kind of reminds me of a much, much dirtier and less skilled Lidstrom. Most of the time he's just calmly redirecting play and then out of nowhere he sees his opening and goes for the kill - whether that's a big hit, a quick rush in for a shot, or a beautiful stretch pass. Other elite defencemen who play quieter games that belair didn't mention include Suter, Josi and Pietrangelo.

I'm rambling now but it's nice to just talk about the attributes of good players instead of just ranting about the Oilers for once here .

 

[rambo97]

The thread title should be changed back to firing Chiarelli.

The NHL has changed in the last 5-10 years and this bozo hasn't kept up. The Athletic has an article about how the salary cap has brought a bunch of changes to an NHL GM's job: "Now teams have capologists and analytics departments and different assistants for different areas, and there’s a flood of information both good and bad that can be plugged into any scenario." Down Goes Brown: NHL GMs don't get second chances anymore,...

Chia either can't decipher the information he receives or doesn't know what information is important. Either way that means he needs to go before he ruins this team further.

 

[oobga]

I think the OBC were all afraid McDavid was going to pick up some bad, addictive habits from he who shall not be named. Who would know better than the OBC right?

 

[LaGu]

I used to wander past the Chis thread in the past thinking to find info about Chia such as interviews etc. and of course a bit of healthy discussion. But all I always saw was page after page brining up Hall, Eberle, ... etc etc etc. and bashing of posters and opinions (from both sides).

So I definitely think a name change of this thread is justified, posters should be able to understand to a certain extent what a thread is about by reading its title.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

I used to wander past the Chis thread in the past thinking to find info about Chia such as interviews etc. and of course a bit of healthy discussion. But all I always saw was page after page brining up Hall, Eberle, ... etc etc etc. and bashing of posters and opinions (from both sides).

So I definitely think a name change of this thread is justified, posters should be able to understand to a certain extent what a thread is about by reading its title.

I have barely addressed the Hall trade in this thread. I'm more concerned about the shitty defense, crappy wingers, and questionable goaltending.

The name change undermines what the topic is about. It's about the many, many mistakes of Peter Chiarelli and why he deserves the pinkest slip, not about one trade he made years ago.

If you don't like my opinion, that's fine, I don't really care. But it's not fair when a mod changes a thread title to alter the context of an entire conversation.