Pre-Game Talk: Series Discussion: WC Qualifier - Edmonton Oilers (5) vs. Chicago Blackhawks (12)

Who wins the series?


  • Total voters
    289
Status
Not open for further replies.

Draiskull

Registered User
Oct 26, 2005
23,320
2,160
I don't necessarily agree with this.

Jones looked to be our best defenceman in the last 10 games of the year.

Klefbom-Bear
Jones-Larsson
Nurse-Bouchard/Benning/Green
Yeah, No.
Jones barely held his own in NHL where Nurse, Bear etc had to play close to 30 mins per night while Jones was playing less than 15.
No way Jones gets top 4 minutes in playoffs unless Klefbom injures himself again.
 

duul

Registered User
Jun 21, 2010
10,462
5,083
I don't really agree. Larsson was showing some signs of life by the end of the season. From January on, he and Klef had better metrics than Jones while playing 5+ more minutes of 5v5 per night.

I think you almost have to play them together too when you look at metrics. They have solid metrics together and terrible metrics when apart.

1508f640daa81e286e1ecbaef4323372.png
Not sure which metrics in here are most important, but I assume CF% is what most people regard as most impactful.

Our team on average does better in CF% without either of Klefbom or Larsson on the ice, lol. Where are you getting these stats? I'd love for you to post a few other combinations. The Nurse-Bear combo, the Klefbom-Bear combo, and Jones with his various partners. I know that's a lot to ask for but damn it'd be much appreciated.

Isn't this information sort of damning against these guys?
 

Draiskull

Registered User
Oct 26, 2005
23,320
2,160
Not sure which metrics in here are most important, but I assume CF% is what most people regard as most impactful.

Our team on average does better in CF% without either of Klefbom or Larsson on the ice, lol. Where are you getting these stats? I'd love for you to post a few other combinations. The Nurse-Bear combo, the Klefbom-Bear combo, and Jones with his various partners. I know that's a lot to ask for but damn it'd be much appreciated.

Isn't this information sort of damning against these guys?
CF% = shot attempt differential for the most part.
Combine it with quality of opponents and your own forwards and you will get a more complete picture.

Edit: Zone starts would factor as well.
 

McDNicks17

Moderator
Jul 1, 2010
41,587
29,947
Ontario
Not sure which metrics in here are most important, but I assume CF% is what most people regard as most impactful.

Our team on average does better in CF% without either of Klefbom or Larsson on the ice, lol. Where are you getting these stats? I'd love for you to post a few other combinations. The Nurse-Bear combo, the Klefbom-Bear combo, and Jones with his various partners. I know that's a lot to ask for but damn it'd be much appreciated.

Isn't this information sort of damning against these guys?

I tend to look more at expected goals(xGF%) since that basically just sums up all the possession metrics and takes the puck luck out of it. CF% can be kind of sketchy just because I think Tipp has them allowing shots from the outside on purpose hence the lower CF/SCF%, but good high danger chances.

The numbers are from: Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick
 

duul

Registered User
Jun 21, 2010
10,462
5,083
I tend to look more at xGF% numbers since that basically just sums up all the possession metrics and takes the puck luck out of it. CF% can be kind of sketchy just because I think Tipp has them allowing shots from the outside on purpose hence the lower CF/SCF%, but good high danger chances.

This is from: Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick
Interesting, thanks.

What becomes apparently scrolling through these combinations is that Kris Russell is a brutal hindrance to this team.

Worth noting that in limited minutes with Bear and Nurse, those pairings have had 58-60% xGF.

I think what you noticed is true as well, Jones has been brought down significantly while playing with Larsson, Klefbom, and Russell. When he has been paired with Nurse, Bear, and Benning, he has looked very good statistically.
 

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
25,437
19,569
Waterloo Ontario
Not sure which metrics in here are most important, but I assume CF% is what most people regard as most impactful.

Our team on average does better in CF% without either of Klefbom or Larsson on the ice, lol. Where are you getting these stats? I'd love for you to post a few other combinations. The Nurse-Bear combo, the Klefbom-Bear combo, and Jones with his various partners. I know that's a lot to ask for but damn it'd be much appreciated.

Isn't this information sort of damning against these guys?

These CF stats are not really individual stats and there are a lot of things that add context to those numbers. For example, if a defenseman tends to play against the oppositions best forwards it's a lot harder to win the shot battle than if you are playing against third and fourth line competition on a team with competent bottom sixers.

Defensemen that play a lot while defending a lead will tend to have worse Corsi numbers relative to guys who are more offensive minded and who are playing whenever offense is most needed. Similarly, guys who tend to start in the defensive zone more that the offensive zone could see their Corsi numbers impacted.

If you want to see more combinations on the Natural Stats Trick site go to the tab titled: Line Tool under the Players tab in the top LH-corner.

Natural Stat Trick

Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick

If you want Oiler players you need to select Edmonton on the first tab currently listed as ALL Teams.

Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick
 

Fourier

Registered User
Dec 29, 2006
25,437
19,569
Waterloo Ontario
Interesting, thanks.

What becomes apparently scrolling through these combinations is that Kris Russell is a brutal hindrance to this team.

Worth noting that in limited minutes with Bear and Nurse, those pairings have had 58-60% xGF.

I think what you noticed is true as well, Jones has been brought down significantly while playing with Larsson, Klefbom, and Russell. When he has been paired with Nurse, Bear, and Benning, he has looked very good statistically.
Russell is one of the top Corsi killers in the League right now. His MO is to block shots and keep the play to the outside. That is a recipe for bad Corsi numbers.
 
Last edited:

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,527
29,143
Edmonton
Yeah, No.
Jones barely held his own in NHL where Nurse, Bear etc had to play close to 30 mins per night while Jones was playing less than 15.
No way Jones gets top 4 minutes in playoffs unless Klefbom injures himself again.

I think you're suffering from recency bias a bit.

Jones saw limited icetime for the last couple games, but in the last 10 games its a different story

13:08
13:49
16:24
14:31
21:48
18:50
18:12
18:18
20:51
18:40

That's not "barely holding his own". That's progression. The real limiting of Jones' icetime occurred from early Dec to mid Jan.
 

CupofOil

Knob Flavored Coffey
Aug 20, 2009
46,254
39,476
NYC
Well here's to hoping, because Klefbom-Larsson is a debacle of a pairing, and there's no way Klefbom is going to be playing bottom pairing minutes in place of Jones.

What? Larsson was the best Oiler Dman during that horrendous last 6 or 7 games before the pause when the Oilers were getting trounced by everybody until the last game against Winnipeg. He was the only Dman pretty much holding his own while the Nurse-Bear pairing started sinking and Jones started to struggle. Klefbom had some issues coming back from his 50th career injury but Larsson was stabilizing that pairing.
Edit: I also posted this in response to your "Jones was the Oilers best Dman of the last 10 games" comment.

I like Jones and he certainly showed flashes of high level play but he still makes a lot of "inexperienced player" mistakes. He's not ready for top 4 minutes and, even though I'm not a big fan, Russell should still get some bottom pairing reps due to experience. He and Benning form a solid bottom pairing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MessierII

Draiskull

Registered User
Oct 26, 2005
23,320
2,160
I think you're suffering from recency bias a bit.

Jones saw limited icetime for the last couple games, but in the last 10 games its a different story

13:08
13:49
16:24
14:31
21:48
18:50
18:12
18:18
20:51
18:40

That's not "barely holding his own". That's progression. The real limiting of Jones' icetime occurred from early Dec to mid Jan.
Its not progression. He got thrown to the wolves once Klefbom went out with injury but held his own.
Between the last 2 games where he played 13 mins he was a healthy scratch. The game where he got 14 mins Nurse had to play over 30.
Putting him into top 4 for playoffs is nothing but shiny toy syndrome IMO. Jones is #6\#7 Dman at this point.
 

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,527
29,143
Edmonton
Its not progression. He got thrown to the wolves once Klefbom went out with injury but held his own.
Between the last 2 games where he played 13 mins he was a healthy scratch. The game where he got 14 mins Nurse had to play over 30.
Putting him into top 4 for playoffs is nothing but shiny toy syndrome IMO. Jones is #6\#7 Dman at this point.

So playing well in a top four role for ten games while the best defenceman on the team is out doesn't matter, but reduced icetime/a seat upstairs for four games matters deeply?

Pretty easy to see what side of the bread you've buttered here. Young defencemen don't develop linearly. He's a huge upgrade on Russell in puckmoving ability and everything that's not downhome Caroline Cowboy-ness.
 

McDNicks17

Moderator
Jul 1, 2010
41,587
29,947
Ontario
I think Jones and Green are very easily the best potential third pairing, but I wonder if Tipp shies away from that because then you've got the top4 playing 100% of the PK minutes.

Green will likely be healthy, right?
 

duul

Registered User
Jun 21, 2010
10,462
5,083
I think Jones and Green are very easily the best potential third pairing, but I wonder if Tipp shies away from that because then you've the top4 playing 100% of the PK minutes.

Green will likely be healthy, right?
I agree, that pairing would be ideal. Tippett has gone on record saying he is going to re-evaluate the pairings and defencemen in general through the training camp they're about to have and mentioned ALL the players will 'probably' get some action in the play-in series.

That leads me to believe even a guy like Bouchard is going to get at least a game. Broberg is supposedly making the trip over too, but I think he would be the lone exception to getting game action. Way too risky. I'd LOVE to see a pairing of Klefbom/Nurse-Bouchard. Bouchard easily has the best pass of all our D, followed by Bear. I know he probably wouldn't slot in, but if a guy like Green falters...do you give Bouchard a game to see what he has before bringing Benning in as the safe bet?
 

ujju2

Registered User
Apr 9, 2016
9,626
6,467
Edmonton, AB
Hawks are a 1 player team on offence. Shadow Kane and you shut them down. We could put together a RNH-Mcdavid-Kassian line as our shutdown line and have RNH shadow Kane. Neal/AA-Draisiatl-KY will end up getting the Toews line.

I'd rather keep RNH-Draisaitl-Yamamoto together and have that line matchup against Kane whenever possible. RNH can shadow Kane, but Drai and Yama are also solid defensively. That would match the McDavid line against Toews.
 

Tobias Kahun

Registered User
Oct 3, 2017
41,649
50,486
So playing well in a top four role for ten games while the best defenceman on the team is out doesn't matter, but reduced icetime/a seat upstairs for four games matters deeply?

Pretty easy to see what side of the bread you've buttered here. Young defencemen don't develop linearly. He's a huge upgrade on Russell in puckmoving ability and everything that's not downhome Caroline Cowboy-ness.
I dont disagree with you there that he's definitely better than Russell or that he's still progressing.

I think everyone's issue was when a poster claimed he had been our best D for the last 10 games.

and a small thing to note when looking at all these stats.

Mike Green put up some incredibly good stats in the 2 games he was here.

xGF% of 76.6
HDCF% 64
SCF% 72.41

Judging by the advanced stats, AA was also better than Ennis.
 

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,527
29,143
Edmonton
I dont disagree with you there that he's definitely better than Russell or that he's still progressing.

I think everyone's issue was when a poster claimed he had been our best D for the last 10 games.

and a small thing to note when looking at all these stats.

Mike Green put up some incredibly good stats in the 2 games he was here.

xGF% of 76.6
HDCF% 64
SCF% 72.41

Judging by the advanced stats, AA was also better than Ennis.

You don't fix an argument going overboard one way by going overboard the other way. He wasn't the best defenceman, no, but he is in no way a 6/7 either.
 

MessierII

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
27,644
16,187
You don't fix an argument going overboard one way by going overboard the other way. He wasn't the best defenceman, no, but he is in no way a 6/7 either.
Personally I think that’s exactly what he is. Jones was making some pretty glaring errors at times. He did a lot of good things as well but he had his warts. I would play Russell there every time especially in the playoffs.
 

MessierII

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
27,644
16,187
I agree, that pairing would be ideal. Tippett has gone on record saying he is going to re-evaluate the pairings and defencemen in general through the training camp they're about to have and mentioned ALL the players will 'probably' get some action in the play-in series.

That leads me to believe even a guy like Bouchard is going to get at least a game. Broberg is supposedly making the trip over too, but I think he would be the lone exception to getting game action. Way too risky. I'd LOVE to see a pairing of Klefbom/Nurse-Bouchard. Bouchard easily has the best pass of all our D, followed by Bear. I know he probably wouldn't slot in, but if a guy like Green falters...do you give Bouchard a game to see what he has before bringing Benning in as the safe bet?
Probably depends if they’re winning or losing.
 

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,527
29,143
Edmonton
Personally I think that’s exactly what he is. Jones was making some pretty glaring errors at times. He did a lot of good things as well but he had his warts. I would play Russell there every time especially in the playoffs.

This isn't be all end all, but if we're talking warts, Russell is covered in them. Jones has a few, sure, but Russell is 90% wart at this point.

JonesRussell.png
 

LTIR

Registered User
Nov 8, 2013
25,851
12,806
So playing well in a top four role for ten games while the best defenceman on the team is out doesn't matter, but reduced icetime/a seat upstairs for four games matters deeply?

Pretty easy to see what side of the bread you've buttered here. Young defencemen don't develop linearly. He's a huge upgrade on Russell in puckmoving ability and everything that's not downhome Caroline Cowboy-ness.
Compare his TOI in the games he played as a top 4 Dman to the other 3 Dmen. He wasn't a top 4 Dman but a clear #4 with the other 3 regularly playing 3min+ than him. He is a top 4 if Lagesson and Benning are #5 and #6.
With Klefbom, Russell and Green back he is #6/7 at best. There is no indication from coaches that he is starting the playoffs ahead of a Healthy Russell. He is not at that level yet. 0 chance he will be top 4.
 

LTIR

Registered User
Nov 8, 2013
25,851
12,806
You don't fix an argument going overboard one way by going overboard the other way. He wasn't the best defenceman, no, but he is in no way a 6/7 either.
Klefbom, Nurse, Bear, Larsson, Russell, (Jones/Green), Benning, Bouchard, Lagesson

He is 6/7 this year depending upon coaches faith in Green for playoffs.
 

Dazed and Confused

Ludicrous speed, GO!
Aug 10, 2007
5,994
2,259
Berlin, Germany
Saw this one, and I admit I like the idea.

Should Edmonton Oilers ice the fastest line in hockey history against Chicago Blackhawks? | Edmonton Journal

Perhaps not as a permanent thing, but it would be a fantastic change of pace in the middle of games. So what other lineup choices would you need to make to have it work?

First off, if McDavid's rotating wingers, then the Draisaitl line needs to be as settled in stone for some degree of stability, so RNH-Draisaitl-Yamamoto is locked in.

Next up is solidifying the defensive minutes/checking line, anchored by Sheahan and Archibald. The team has a bit of depth here, and tossing any of Nygard, Kassian, or Ennis on this line wouldn't compromise it. That works well, as I thought Khaira and Neal played well together, and I'm not really a fan of either of them (or AA) on an even strength defensive line.

So that leaves you with McDavid's line, and a group you can set out for softer match-ups. Personally, I really like the idea of the "hot wheels" line being complemented by a heavy grind line of Neal-Khaira-Kassian. Haas could also get into the lineup, but with Chiasson out for Nygard, I think Khaira's needed as a big body.


So that leaves you with Hot Wheels lineup (bolded highlights the combos that shouldn't be broken up)

AA-McDavid-Nygard
RNH-Draisaitl-Yamamoto
Ennis-Sheahan-Archibad
Neal-Khaira
-Kassian

And one of these two as the standard lineup, depending on which one of AA or Ennis meshes better with McDavid.

AA-McDavid-Kassian
RNH-Draisaitl-Yamamoto

Ennis/Nygard-Khaira-Neal
Ennis/Nygard-Sheahan-Archibald

Ennis-McDavid-Kassian
RNH-Draisaitl-Yamamoto
AA-Khaira-Neal
Nygard-Sheahan-Archibald
 

Stud Muffin

Registered User
Jan 2, 2014
5,356
921
Manitoba
Personally I think that’s exactly what he is. Jones was making some pretty glaring errors at times. He did a lot of good things as well but he had his warts. I would play Russell there every time especially in the playoffs.
Russell? He’d be about 9th on my depth chart of guys I’d play.
 

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,527
29,143
Edmonton
Compare his TOI in the games he played as a top 4 Dman to the other 3 Dmen. He wasn't a top 4 Dman but a clear #4 with the other 3 regularly playing 3min+ than him. He is a top 4 if Lagesson and Benning are #5 and #6.
With Klefbom, Russell and Green back he is #6/7 at best. There is no indication from coaches that he is starting the playoffs ahead of a Healthy Russell. He is not at that level yet. 0 chance he will be top 4.

Tippet ratcheted Russell's icetime down by 20% this year and played him over 18 minutes exactly twice in 2019. Over the same stretch he played Jones over 18 minutes six times.

I really don't think it's that cut and dried.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->