ABC923

Management needs to make some tough calls for sure. We should recognize that trading either JG or SM will make us a weaker team next year. No team is going to trade a top 3 forward for a different top 3 forward. So any trade of those assets either needs to fill a different need (like a high end defender) or the trade will be for futures. The only way we come out ahead in the short term is if we replace the outgoing player through free agency, but after watching Hall flounder this season (plus given his age), I doubt he could truly replace the offensive production of either guy completely. So we should be honest here. Our choices are to stand pat, trade JG for futures (or SM) and sign Hall to hope we improve, or trade one of JG or SM or both and accept a couple years of growth in the hopes that we improve significantly in 2-3 years time.

He mismanaged the biggest game of the season, hard to see him come back. Especially if we can land one of the big fish coaches out there.

Any interest in Shattenkirk? Right D, had a good bounceback this season with Tampa. Currently making only 1.75 Million, will probably be looking to increase that, but given his age and buy-out history he could still be a budget option on RD.

It will be interesting to see what the flames do this offseason. By my eye, Hamonic is on a serious downtrend and would be risky to bring back. With the flat cap, I think a lot of UFAs will have to settle for less than usual this year, so I could see Brodie re-signing for basically the same cap he has right now. We'll get Valimaki back, so I would agree that Hanifin is expendable, probably as part of a package in a larger trade. It would be great if we could trim the cost of our defense moving forward.

I would say my gut feeling extends to all those bonus laden contracts. Players may just be out of luck; after all, those bonuses don't get paid out if players miss significant time with injury or get scratched from the line-up either. I think the legal reading would favor the literal wording of the contracts and trades, so the only reason to pay out would be as a gesture of good faith to the players by the owners, which could happen I suppose. I also wonder if stats recorded in the play-in round count as regular season stats, since they are not technically post-season games.

My gut feeling is we are out of luck on the pick. After all, one could argue that Neal easily could have gone the rest of the season without another goal. He could have been injured if we played out the stretch, etc. I hadn't thought about a compensatory pick from the league though. That might be possible, but my gut still says probably not.

It's great to see. Hopefully he doesn't drop off the way Gilles and Ortio have in the past (and maybe Parsons as well). I don't see it though. With a bit of luck, we'll see Wolf as our starter in 3-4 seasons, and for a long time.

Sad news on the oilers front today as Colby Cave passed away at age 25. Sad to see anyone die so young. I believe he died after a brain operation trying to treat a brain bleed.

I’m beginning to doubt he will score 2 more. Seems to have reverted completely back to 2019 Neal, and is on the fourth line now.

James Neal: Corsi: 51.1%, O-zone Starts: 75.4%, Expected Goals%: 51.65, Actual Goals Percent: 38.8% Milan Lucic: Corsi: 49.9%, O-zone starts: 50.4%, Expected Goals%: 50.5, Actual Goals Percent: 51.8% I know it's incomplete, but these fancy stats tell us: a) Neal is extremely sheltered with a huge skew toward offensive zone starts, Lucic is almost 50-50. b) With Neal on the ice, the Oilers are leaking goals at 5v5, Lucic is holding his own.

The only caveat I would add though is that the cap savings on two of those three years is less than a league minimum contract. So if you were to buy him out, presumably you add another player to the roster to take his place, and even if that player makes league minimum you still wind up paying more in total cap expenditures than just letting the guy play.

Depends on your definition of frequent I suppose. I guess I just wonder if we tend to think the flames are particularly special in their inconsistent effort, or if it's a much broader complaint among fans of all teams. From my perspective, I really don't follow other teams or fan bases, so I don't have a good feel for it.

It's frustrating, but at the same time I think you could probably find similar quotes from coaches from almost every team from some point in the year. What team in the league can we look to this year and honestly say they have not yet pooped the bed at least a couple times this season.

This is why I have come around to the idea of trading Gaudreau as part of a mini-rebuild, and maybe more. There is one consistent over the past few years, and that's the players. At some point we have to come to the conclusion that it's not coaching that's the problem.

Kipper was 25 when he played his first nhl game, and 28 when he suited up for Calgary for the first time. Was never a starter in the nhl until he came here. Ritter is young by comparison.

Hanifin 2018-19: 33 points, +18, 12 PIM, 20:46 TOI, 49.9% Ozone Starts Hamilton 2018-19: 39 points, +0, 54 PIM, 19:40 TOI, 55.6% Ozone Starts This year Dougie is playing out of his mind while Hanifin has been carrying around Hamonic's corpse. I would defintitely still take Hamilton over him, but the difference is not as huge as some make out. Hanifin provides a bit less offense and is used mostly in a defensive role, Dougie has the pop on offense but plays sheltered minutes and hurts you with too many bad penalties.

The PP concerns me. He ran a relatively poor one in NJ I think, and came over to bring it here. We got by last year on high shooting percentages and parking Tkatchuk in front of the net. Still bugs me they moved away from that, given how poor we've been under the current set up. Anyway, still the most logical choice for the moment. Huge task ahead, and I agree with tmac in that I'm not convinced coaching was the problem. Time will tell though, and a fresh start can only help at this point.

Next election isn't until 2021 now. The province changed the terms to be 4 years long instead of 3.

Just read that no deal is actually finalized yet, so maybe there would be no significant penalties. Either way though, agreements should be honored, even if the province won't honor theirs. Besides, wasn't the city's share supposed to be paid for through additional tax shares and the like? It's not like you can just transfer the allotted budget from one project to another.

I've always been a skeptic on providing significant direct funding for an arena, and I get the city needs to cut somewhere. But does anyone really think the flames weren't smart enough to work in significant financial penalties should the city back out? I could easily see the city coughing up 100 million to get out of the deal with nothing to show for it, which ought to be followed by the resignation of every councilor who voted for the deal and then voted to terminate it. We've agreed to this, and for better or worse, we're stuck with it.

Yeah, I always thought it was a lock, but Neal could well wind up with 30+ goals this year.

I didn't realize it had happened already. I skimmed there board last week though, and there was a topic devoted to the inevitable closing of the board. I think it was Bronco who mentioned the flames board would remain. The issue is that the nhl has paid for the server space for the message boards, but no longer will. This leaves it up to the individual teams to foot the bill. Not that it's a lot of money I'm sure. Regardless, it's nice to know the flames are supporting the online community still.

So in nhl/oilers news, it seems most nhl teams are no longer going to support their message boards. The flames are one of the few who are committed to continuing their support. In short, the oilers fans are about to lose their message boards.

I think we have a bit more room, since we can also demote Quinne (who is counted on capfriendly). But we will still have to shed salary unless Tkachuk signs a 2-3 year bridge deal around 5 million per.

I still wish the city’s portion was lower, but I can live with it. My only major problem is that more time should be given for public feedback to council. One week is nothing, should have been at least 2.