This was the first season with Chiarelli and the new hockey ops structure. He is a couple of weeks or so from his first anniversary with the club. There is no reason to think he is hoping to coast through this without making any meaningful changes. There is also little reason to expect he is going to be excited about being taken to the cleaners by some other GM that puts him over a barrel. If he was interested in that, he would've already done it. There is probably a long list of guys hoping they can get him to recreate his Tyler Seguin swap.
We should not blow it up and stay the course
- Thread starter McGoMcD
- Start date
This was the first season with Chiarelli and the new hockey ops structure. He is a couple of weeks or so from his first anniversary with the club. There is no reason to think he is hoping to coast through this without making any meaningful changes. There is also little reason to expect he is going to be excited about being taken to the cleaners by some other GM that puts him over a barrel. If he was interested in that, he would've already done it. There is probably a long list of guys hoping they can get him to recreate his Tyler Seguin swap.
Zaddy
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2013
- 13,058
- 5,850
Sorry but I don't consider finishing bottom2 in the league yet again as "a step forward". Frankly I have a hard time understanding how anyone who's an Oilers fan can be content with such a minor improvement. Yay we improved points wise and our goal differential but we're still one of the worst teams in the league.
"Magically trading one guy for another isn't going to solve our problems", well perhaps not but in this league you build your team around your defense. We have a heavy imbalance with too many skilled forwards and too few capable defensemen. That is plain to see. Trading one of the forwards for a defenseman would, as such, be a good idea.
I mean, lets say we magically improve next year even further and even take a playoff spot. Do you seriously think, for even a second, that this team is going anywhere in the playoffs with the makeup of this team? Klefbom (plagued by injuries) and Sekera is our only semi-capable defensemen. Davidson was good this year but who knows how he'll perform next year. This team would get steamrolled by most of the teams in the West in a playoff series.
The goal should be to build a contender, no? If so, it's time to adress some core flaws of this roster and make sure the team is built right.
Beerfish
Registered User
- Apr 14, 2007
- 19,513
- 5,665
Yeah if you ignore the part where Chia actually added, you know, good players.
Like who? Marron has played about 15 games, Sekera has been so so. Talbot has been good most of the season but was dreadful early in the year.
You win in this league with depth and good D and, here's the kicker, not playing players above their level of ability.
Ah...So Chicago, La and alike care winning because of corey crawford, shaw, tanner pearson and not because of keith, doughty, seabrook, kane, etc.
No, you pay the price needed. That price isn't Hall, Nuge etc, though.
The above statement makes zero sense at all. We are going to trade for Vatanen and shattenkirk for Yak and pouliot. eh? Makes sense.
I can't tell if you're not reading my posts or are being obtuse on purpose or what. They need to make meaningful moves. But they don't have to blow things up to do so. How is this so hard to grasp?
I don't know if you understand the basis of what a meaningful move is or not. You do not get meaningful players for garbage players, it simply does not happen and changing the bottom of the roster for the 4th time in five years is not meaningful at all.
Whatever holes are in the top half pale to insignificance compared to the holes elsewhere on the roster.
No they don't we have shuffled the bottom holes endlessly and guys that play 15 mins a night do not have the effect that guys that play 20 plus do.
It's baffling that people can look at this lineup on paper, even when 100% healthy, and determine that the top of the order is what's keeping them from gliory.
It is though, the top of of roster is filled with inconsistent, skilled players who are not physical at all, have a tough time battling for pucks, with no dmen at all that can advance the puck or run a pp. Even the skilled part is up for debate because we contine to be one of the lower scoring teams in the league and often just fold when the going gets tough. If you think the Oilers are once again almost dead last in the league because of anton lander and mark fayne I don;t know what to say.
This was our opening night D-corps:
Klefbom
Sekera
Fayne
Reinhart
Schultz
Gryba
Two top four D, three bottom pairing D, one AHL D. And it got worse from there.
Yes, agreed about the defense, and you are going to fix this by???? Not trading anyone or value but doing a Harry Potter?
The bottom six:
Lander
Hendricks
Korpikoski
Letestu
Gazdic
Yakupov
With the possible exception of Yak, that's basically two fourth lines.
But sure, yeah: it's Hall and co's fault.
We will simply not agree in that case on this issue, you feel to good teams are based on their worst players, I feel they are based on their best ones. And if you think Halls epic fall of the face of the ear5h 2nd half of the season had no bearing on the oilers, well have at it.
Beerfish
Registered User
- Apr 14, 2007
- 19,513
- 5,665
Then Chia is the same as MacT and Tambo then correct? Each of them had their free pass evaluation years, each of them 'tried to make deals' each of them failed to make deals each of them made numerous moves to the bottom part of the roster.
Each year teams by hook or by crook manage to make moves that improve their teams significantly the next year, except the oilers.
Jet Walters
Registered User
- May 15, 2013
- 7,433
- 3,179
You're right. Like it or not the Oilers will have to go through the California teams in the first few rounds of the playoffs for the foreseeable future. Currently this Oilers forward group would have no chance in the playoffs where time/space/PP's become even more limited. Even if we add a few top 4 defensemen I still see the same issue of imbalance up front.
If you aren't willing to have some patience at this point, I suggest you are never going to be happy again. Selling ferociously from a position of weakness is almost never a good idea in anything.
Jet Walters
Registered User
- May 15, 2013
- 7,433
- 3,179
Oh boy. I wouldn't suggest preaching patience at this point, that ship has sailed and the clock is running on McDavid's ELC.
The Oilers are not selling from a position of weakness. They have an excess of a certain type of forward that should be in high demand. They will be trading players who are redundant for players who fill a role. Why do we need 5-6 highly skilled perimeter forwards who all need 1st unit PP time and the puck on their stick a lot?
At this point, after all the futility, it is more important that transactions add net value than simply move pieces around.
If the market perceives that you need to move that player more than they need to acquire it, you're in a position of weakness.
Jet Walters
Registered User
- May 15, 2013
- 7,433
- 3,179
What is net value though? Certain players will have more value to the Oilers than other teams and vice versa. Panarin has more skill and points than Lucic, but who do you think would help the Oilers win more?
The Oilers need to find a trading partner that needs what they have an excess of. There are a lot of teams that could use a highly skilled, PP producer in their top 6. Every team in the league would love to have a top 5 pick in the draft too, especially given the looming expansion draft.
McGoMcD
Registered User
First standings is fine, sure, but other improvements are not minor, our goal differential is more than 40 goals better. Most teams would consider that major. Standings are standings, if all the bottom teams do better than you won't see improvement. If a team gets 100 points one year and is in 5th place but all the top teams suck next year and your in 1st with 98 points did you really get any better?
Rebuilding teams have to be happy with improvement. It is the point. We are so messed up we want to rebuild the rebuild when it is working. Rebuilds are slow, people need to grasp that.
Last edited:
Zaddy
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2013
- 13,058
- 5,850
If we're going to be satisfied with such a minor improvement then Hall and Eberle will be UFA's by the time this team is ready to contend anyway and McDavid, Nurse and Draisaitl will all be signed to big contracts by then.
So if your plan is to stay the course, what exactly does that mean? How are you gonna stabilize the blueline? Is your idea to draft a d-man, develop him for years and then hope he turns into a #1D? Or what does the bigger picture look like for you?
McGoMcD
Registered User
45 goal improvement will lead to competing a lot quicker than that.
rebuilding teams tend to trend up slightly, then suddenly jump up. With a whole year of McDavid and less injuries, this team will improve a lot next year.
and agian, i am not saying don't improve the team. I am saying don't trade Ebs, Halls, or Nuge just because we need a change in the core group.
alphahelix
Registered User
- Feb 15, 2007
- 7,041
- 2,829
I just want to make official public notice and declaration that I hereby guarantee, unequivocally, without conditions or reservations, that the Edmonton Oilers will make the playoffs in the 2016-17 season.
I am willing to bet all the avatars, v-cash, ownership of my profile, whatever else holds value in these unhallowed halls of hfboards.
I don't always make rash predictions, but when I do, they come true. Sometimes.
I have factored together a number of mathematical data, statistical data, CBA-related technobabble, free agency signing probability and available outlets for management dealings...
GUARANTEE. Playoffs, nothing less.
I am willing to bet all the avatars, v-cash, ownership of my profile, whatever else holds value in these unhallowed halls of hfboards.
I don't always make rash predictions, but when I do, they come true. Sometimes.
I have factored together a number of mathematical data, statistical data, CBA-related technobabble, free agency signing probability and available outlets for management dealings...
GUARANTEE. Playoffs, nothing less.
McGoMcD
Registered User
I have been.............???
I have been saying this for the last 10 years............so next year I am predicting anything different?..............with a full year of McDavid?
I have been saying this for the last 10 years............so next year I am predicting anything different?..............with a full year of McDavid?
That's three more NHLers in one off season than the previous regime managed in five.
Has nothing to do with what I wrote. But look at it this way: did Chicago trade away Kane, Toews or LA Kopitar or Brown to get where they are?
No idea what you're talking about here.
You just listed three players above (a top six winger, a starting goaltender and a top four D) that were acquired for basically free. So I'm not sure how you can believe what you;re saying here.
I don't know how this hasn't sunk in: shuffling bad hockey players around is going to lead nowhere. However, replacing bad hockey players with good ones will.
Where's the evidence this is the fault of the top of the order?
Counterpoint: do you see a lot of good teams with players like Mark Fayne or Anton Lander or Korpikoski in prominent roles?
Again: are you reading anything I've written? There are ways to improve the team that don't involve massive trades of key players. You yourself gave three examples above.
In future, please refrain from telling me what I beleive when it's clear you don't understand the argument I'm making.
Well I was waiting for "but but but 41 games!" Glad you didn't let me down.
Up the Irons
Registered User
That's it. What they're missing is more important than even an all star winger. They are missing, arguably, the most important piece needed on a good team. That piece is also the most difficult to get.
It's a complete schmozzle, and I don't know if it's even solvable. That the organization treated the problem so flippantly for so long is... Well, it's one of they're bigger failings.
Up the Irons
Registered User
For me, it's not a matter of blowing it up. It's going into to the offseason with almost any and all offers on the table. Unlike previous years, all but one asset is potentially movable if there's a deal there. As early as last year, they still had 6 or more assets that were not even discussable.
It's also operating from a place in which Eberle and Nuge are not necessarily part of the plan and they view them as support players, not pillars.
This is how I think PC goes into the summer. It doesn't mean much will actually happen.
It's also operating from a place in which Eberle and Nuge are not necessarily part of the plan and they view them as support players, not pillars.
This is how I think PC goes into the summer. It doesn't mean much will actually happen.
Mc5RingsAndABeer
5-14-6-1
- May 25, 2011
- 20,184
- 1,385
I think blowing it up is worse than staying the course. But both are bad options. A major acquisition on defense is needed no matter what.
Up the Irons
Registered User
And a shake up in the core. I don't want to go into next season with all of Hall, Nuge and Ebs. I dont know if they are damaged or its just a case of too much finesse in the top 6 or 9 or what. I don't think the reasons even matter anymore.
I really do think one of them needs to go.
Mc5RingsAndABeer
5-14-6-1
- May 25, 2011
- 20,184
- 1,385
Maybe, but if Yak+Pouliot and the 2016 1st can acquire two top 4 dmen then I don't think moving them would accomplish much. It's unlikely that we can get enough defensive help without moving one of those three, though.
McGoMcD
Registered User
Or trade the pick for D. that makes the most sense. I love how some want one of the core gone, but the problem with them is they have been constantly surrounded by other kids. So the answer is trade one of them now that they have matured, and draft another kid? WE don't need to move them, we need to get older.
Trade the pick, keep the core.
You seriously think that pick is gonna get us a franchise defenseman (cuz that's the type of Dman we need if we are going to keep this "core") all by itself?
The return on that pick unless it is Matthews (in which case you don't trade seeing as he is supposedly better than eichel) and one of hall eberle or nuge is the only offer that's gonna get you that #1 defenseman.
But by all means, let's keep trading for pardy's, grybas, and clendenings on the back end and hope for different results.
Insanity.
Up the Irons
Registered User
Trade the pick and one of the core (if it's a good deal). Don't move Ebs or Nuge just for the sake of it, but work real hard at making it happen.
We don't have to get into specifics. There is a very strong argument for the notion of changing the make up of the core on a 30th placed team.
This core has always had question marks around it. Many thought they were too small/soft right from the beginning.
There is nothing wrong with retooling the team if it's doable. They are not obligated to go forward with all of Mcdavid, Draisaitl, Hall, Nuge and Ebs. They are obligated to provide Mcdavid with the support that Hall, Nuge and Ebs were not.
Do whatever it takes to make it happen.
McGoMcD
Registered User
The pick will get a lot. We dont' need the best Dman in the league, we just need a solid top 2 guy. The pick will get that.
