Rumor: Rumors and Proposals: The Frenzy continues: Still looking for one more RHD

[Young Lions*]

Here is what you posted originally:

You're being disingenuous to yourself if on one hand you think that the team was THAT bad for the past 6 years while on the other hand you also believe that minor changes + organic development would be enough to pull this team from its death spiral.

I genuinely don't see the disconnect you're seeing. The team we'd have going into next year wouldn't be the same team we had over the last six years. Nor did I say anything about pulling the team from its death spiral. I simply said improved, just like they improved in some categories last year from the year before.

 

[guymez]

How about human nature? Why would chia take the lesser deal...

I think he did a deal because he felt he had to do something...anything. This felt like a desperation move to me.

Its possible that it has to do with pressure from ownership. They are moving into a new building and there is a ton of pressure to make changes...to so something!

Katz has already proven that he likes to meddle in hockey affairs.

I have no doubt that there are a lot of behind the scene circumstances playing a role in how things are playing out. I say this because that (internal pressure) is usually when smart people start making bad decisions.

Maybe there was involvement from MacT and Howsen...we will never know that either. The fact that they are both still valuable parts of thre Management group speaks volumes about how Katz feels abouy them. Especially MacT.

Is Lowe involved in some way...who the hell knows.

I hate to pile on guymez, but do you seriously think that statement is a reasonable stance?

I get that Chia is an average at best GM but you seriously think it's possible he passed up the optimal deal for a different one just because?

As I mentioned above...there is almost no rationalizing this deal once you take off the rose colored glasses. Its a bad deal...why did it happen. Good question.

 

[oStealthKiller*]

5m+, he sign for 4.5m, easily could of had him less than 5m.

Agents aren't dumb. If his client gets the same money at 4.5 in Florida as 5.5 in Canada, why would he take 4.5 in Canada???

 

[CupofOil]

There's a difference between expecting one player to do it all himself and acknowledging that one player can have a considerable impact on a team's fortunes. Does Chicago win all those Cups without Hossa or. ane? Does Pittsburgh win this year without Kessel?

You need a well rounded team to compete, but you need elite players to actually win.

You need a defense to win and you need balance. As of today, the Oilers have more balance, a better defense and still have elite talents whereas before Chia came on board, they had elite talent at forward, no balance whatsoever and a horrendous defense.

 

[CaptainSexyPants]

Well the place was my house, but your concerns are justified. It's extremely hard to try and convince anyone to believe you while trying to maintain the sources anonymity, but that's just the way it is. Like I said, I'll PM BBO later, but at this point it's a he said/she said argument and I don't think any of us fans will ever truly know the truth. I'm just extremely sceptical about the attitude rumour given the facts.

Fair enough. And nothing that I've heard is right from the horses mouth (actual teammates of the guy) so that was my mindset as well. Was hoping it was a combo of out right BS, stuff being overblown or misunderstood...whatever the case..
But I can't think that there's nothing to it. It's just been coming from too many different directions for too long, IMO.

 

[oStealthKiller*]

I think he did a deal because he felt he had to do something...anything. This felt like a desperation move to me.

Its possible that it has to do with pressure from ownership. They are moving into a new building and there is a ton of pressure to make changes...to so something!

Katz has already proven that he likes to meddle in hockey affairs.

I have no doubt that there are a lot of behind the scene circumstances playing a role in how things are playing out. I say this because that (internal pressure) is usually when smart people start making bad decisions.

Maybe there was involvement from MacT and Howsen...we will never know that either. The fact that they are both still valuable parts of thre Management group speaks volumes about how Katz feels abouy them. Especially MacT.

Is Lowe involved in some way...who the hell knows.




As I mentioned above...there is almost no rationalizing this deal once you take off the rose colored glasses. Its a bad deal...why did it happen. Good question.

Again, even if that was the mandate u suggest we should have gotten a better deal, I ask again why if it was out there he didn't take it?

 

[Young Lions*]

We still have 3 first overall, four top 5 picks, and a top 7 pick. Plus eberle. We're fine on high be talent

Two of those three first overalls are borderline busts for their draft position (and I say that as an RNH fan). Eberle is one of the most polarizing players here. And the rest are all still unproven commodities.

Sorry, but I've heard this "we have great young talent with so much potential" stuff since the days of Gagner/Nilsson/Cogliano, I'll believe it when I actually see it.

 

[guymez]

What was the potential risk of sitting back and waiting for a better deal though?

Hope against hope that this would be "the year" things turned around magically?

Or worry that in all likelihood given the trends of the past 10 years that it would result in another losing season and further degradation of your asset value?

There was situational risk in waiting, too.

There is no magic involved. This is simply recognizing and knowing not to make a bad deal. Larsson for Hall was a bad deal.

If you are trying to tell me that the bad deals was the only reality in this situation then I guess we shall just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Cloned]

I genuinely don't see the disconnect you're seeing. The team we'd have going into next year wouldn't be the same team we had over the last six years. Nor did I say anything about pulling the team from its death spiral. I simply said improved, just like they improved in some categories last year from the year before.

Your post was a direct response to my concern that another season of near status-quo would result in more losing and further degradation of asset values. If you believe that this improvement would have been enough to prevent that, then your assertion that no individual player could have driven this sad sack team to win over the last 6 years is disingenuous.

Either the team was REALLY bad (like you said later), and organic development wouldn't be enough to stop the losing, OR the team was close enough to winning that organic development would be expected to deliver a winning season.

You can't believe both.

 

[randomrob7]

Fair enough. And nothing that I've heard is right from the horses mouth (actual teammates of the guy) so that was my mindset as well. Was hoping it was a combo of out right BS, stuff being overblown or misunderstood...whatever the case..
But I can't think that there's nothing to it. It's just been coming from too many different directions for too long, IMO.

My belief is that he really did have a bit of a mindset issue his first few years, but really turned it around the last two. How long ago were the people to were talking to connected with the organization? You know if they're still connected and have you heard anything within the last year or two?

 

[McJadeddog]

I was pretty specifically talking about the past 6 years. I stand by the idea that the team would have been better anyway just by getting healthy and had they added a another top 4 D at a lower cost. But that's all water under the bridge now. I think they'll be better next year now too, but I think that's come at a severe cost that could keep the team from really being great.

This is my concern as well. We are likely better next year due to improved balance, but I think we potentially sacrificed the future ability to be GREAT. Great teams have elite players, we just traded one for "team balance", instead of keeping the elite player and working on team balance in other ways.

I honestly think the hall trade might have robbed us of a cup chance, as we don't have enough scoring power now. Additionally, we are likely to not be DFL in the league again anytime soon, so where is that offensive player going to come from? All the great teams have multiple offensive threats, and we essentially have mcdavid and Eberle, and then crickets

 

[guymez]

Again, even if that was the mandate u suggest we should have gotten a better deal, I ask again why if it was out there he didn't take it?

You are using a single moment in time as a reference by suggesting that the only option was a bad deal or no deal.
I am suggesting that a bad deal would not have been the only available option moving forward.
I am suggesting that it would have been smarter to not make a bad deal.

The cost was just too high and now I wonder how that will impact the team moving forward.

 

[Cloned]

There is no magic involved. This is simply recognizing and knowing not to make a bad deal. Larsson for Hall was a bad deal.

If you are trying to tell me that the bad deals was the only reality in this situation then I guess we shall just have to agree to disagree.

Well what would have been the alternative in the reality you are proposing?

I think even you've agreed that there probably wasn't a better deal RIGHT NOW. You've suggested waiting, is this correct?

If so, then you're still not addressing the situational risk of waiting. And it is significant.

 

[guymez]

Well what would have been the alternative in the reality you are proposing?

I think even you've agreed that there probably wasn't a better deal RIGHT NOW. You've suggested waiting, is this correct?

If so, then you're still not addressing the situational risk of waiting. And it is significant.

The cost was too high and the team still has holes to fill. They lost an opportunity to get more value from Hall and now that lack of value impacts the teams ability to really improve. Getting maybes in return for Hall just isnt enough.


Thats my concern.

 

[oStealthKiller*]

Two of those three first overalls are borderline busts for their draft position (and I say that as an RNH fan). Eberle is one of the most polarizing players here. And the rest are all still unproven commodities.

Sorry, but I've heard this "we have great young talent with so much potential" stuff since the days of Gagner/Nilsson/Cogliano, I'll believe it when I actually see it.

I don't even know what to say. Out of 7 top 10 picks we have and eberle, hall is the only one that is worth something?

I want to ask u something, did u watch mcd play in jr?

The reason I ask is you could see his team and systems and where he was on the ice were all made to maximize mcds talent, cuz he was the best.

The oilers did the same with hall. Played to maximize him cuz he was the best. Mcd comes back and the team shifts that and hall no longer produces how he was before. It's because he was put in the same spot our other talent played in while he was top dog.

I believe hall is elite, but he isn't the lynchpin u make him out to be. Other players can be put in his role and succeed. The loss in hall will be neglible for offence. basically what I'm saying is hall was given more opportunity then our other players and the gap between them isn't what u suggest

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

There is no magic involved. This is simply recognizing and knowing not to make a bad deal. Larsson for Hall was a bad deal.

If you are trying to tell me that the bad deals was the only reality in this situation then I guess we shall just have to agree to disagree.

personally I don't see how moving forward with Hall was going to be a long-term thing if last season was any indication.

they should have gotten a better return....but I think Larsson was a legit target.

 

[Seachd]

Did he flat out say that the Oilers were close to trading Taylor Hall for Adam Larsson?

Yep, pretty much. No one wanted to believe it, and he has a complete ***hole way of doing it. But he basically spelled it out.

 

[Halibut]

There is no magic involved. This is simply recognizing and knowing not to make a bad deal. Larsson for Hall was a bad deal.

If you are trying to tell me that the bad deals was the only reality in this situation then I guess we shall just have to agree to disagree.

We're probably going around in circles but it really is hard to see what other deal was out there to get the pieces this team needs. Supposedly the talks for Subban didnt get very far but the rumoured ask was pretty outrageous, costing us at least as much as the Hall-Larsson trade plus whatever we use in a trade for a second d-man. Then you consider that the loss of Hall is going to be at least partly covered by the signing of Lucic and the pill becomes easier to swallow.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

Based on what...innuendo? Maybe thats enough for you but it isnt for me.

The only other reported deal out there was Hall for Hamonic and the Isles said they wouldn't do it.

Again, reality slapping us in the face.

 

[oStealthKiller*]

You are using a single moment in time as a reference by suggesting that the only option was a bad deal or no deal.
I am suggesting that a bad deal would not have been the only available option moving forward.
I am suggesting that it would have been smarter to not make a bad deal.

The cost was just too high and now I wonder how that will impact the team moving forward.

I don't understand this. We've seen what as is produces. Another **** season isn't worth slightly better value to me, and that's if that even happens. The opposite could happen and we may have been looking at hall+first for Larsson. Oh bad value again? Wait anothe year. Suddenly that's 2 years down the drain and hall is 2 from ufa.

 

[guymez]

personally I don't see how moving forward with Hall was going to be a long-term thing if last season was any indication.

they should have gotten a better return....but I think Larsson was a legit target.

They didnt have to move forward with Hall long term. Dealing Hall wasnt the issue.

I am suggesting that they needed to get more value for a player of Halls caliber so that they had a better opportunity to improve this team moving forward.

 

[Cloned]

The cost was too high and the team still has holes to fill. They lost an opportunity to get more value from Hall and now that lack of value impacts the teams ability to really improve.


Thats my concern.

We're not going to agree on this because we can always spin it the other way - i.e. waiting could have resulted in a lost opportunity to get even this value if the team continued to lose.

Like I said I still don't like the trade but I can completely understand the risk management behind it. I hate the optics and I HATE the fact that 10 years of prior ****** management basically forced Chia's hand like this (and I'm sure he hates it too - did he really want to trade Hall for Larsson straight up? Probably not in an ideal world).

But it's a pragmatically painful trade.

 

[CornKicker]

We still have 3 first overall, four top 5 picks, and a top 7 pick. Plus eberle. We're fine on high be talent

are you counting griffen reinhart or nah?

 

[Paralyzer008]

"When I look at the way he plays I don't see a fit with the system they currently play. He plays very aggressively." Woodley on Gustavsson

Was I the only one who didn't like this signing at all?

I think Brossoit might beat him out in training camp.

 

[Young Lions*]

Your post was a direct response to my concern that another season of near status-quo would result in more losing and further degradation of asset values. If you believe that this improvement would have been enough to prevent that, then your assertion that no individual player could have driven this sad sack team to win over the last 6 years is disingenuous.

Except the improvement I expected wasn't predicated on a single player. You're arguing with a straw man of your own making here.

Either the team was REALLY bad (like you said later), and organic development wouldn't be enough to stop the losing, OR the team was close enough to winning that organic development would be expected to deliver a winning season.

You can't believe both.

No, you're peddling a false choice and throwing in a bunch of other stuff to boot. For example, I said nothing of a winning season. I believe that some minor tweaks and good health would have led to an improvement. That's all.