Oilers

[bronco73]

6 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

So he was adding 10 years to your age and not taking it off?  That B..... tar and feather him... burn him at the stake.

. That heretic.   Lol

haha it's just because he's wise beyond his years with hockey knowledge

[cross16]

Ya calling Larson "depth" is revisionist history. he played quite well the season he was traded and started to show why he was drafted and regarded so highly. Devils turned him into their top defensive dman an he performed admirably in the role. It made sense why the Oilers targeted him and it's certainly not like he was an unknown.

 

that being said i still think it was a pretty bad trade if you look at it from an asset management perspective. it filled a hole and I understand the argument there but you don't trade a top line goal scoring winger for a 3/4 defensive dman. It would be the equivalent of the Flames trading Gaudreau for Hamonic and I would certainly hope everyone would understand how poor of a trade that would be. 

 

The Oilers D turned around because Klefboom got healthy, stayed healthy, and played to his top pairing potential and they finally dressed a D core that actually had 6 competent NHL dmen on it. Even after that, the performance was only "OK" so I don't understand the argument that Larsson had this big affect on the Oilers and that really isn't supported by information. 

[jjgallow]

12 minutes ago, cross16 said:

It would be the equivalent of the Flames trading Gaudreau for Hamonic and I would certainly hope everyone would understand how poor of a trade that would be. 

 

That's Literally the comparable....exactly.  I understand there are differences.  But at the end of the day, yeah.   Fair.

 

It makes sense in one regard, and one regard only.  Salary cap.      The deal never would have happened otherwise.

 

We're literally in the midst of watching the Oilers dismantle their last rebuild to make room for their new one.  RNH next.

 

If they don't learn from their past, not even McDavid will be enough to stop them from repeating their history.

[rickross]

On August 27, 2017 at 11:36 PM, bronco73 said:

True... but they would still have been a lotto team regardless of Hall, they proved that for several straight years.  The devils right now are realizing that they are in desperate need of D help,  losing Larsson hurt them.  Larsson wasn't an unknown at all, he went 4'th overall for a reason.

 

This I totally agree with, they do need more than one line.  I think that IF they can move Drai back to his natural center on the second line and give him decent linemates (goodbye soft Eberle and softer RNH hopefully),  Strome has to work out, Jokinen SHOULD work out, Puljujarvi COULD make the team this year.  Lots of ifs, but honestly I don't see this team in the bottom four any more for the forseeable future.

Bronco!...welcome home! A lot of ifs need to happen for both teams to find success this season. Trading for Strome could turn into a bit of a double edged sword for the Oilers, if he underperforms you lost a productive scorer in Ebs for virtually nothing, if he excels he could price himself out of their cap plans next year. Ebs obviously had to go, I remember a HNIC segment where Kelly Hrudey destroyed Ebs for his soft play, likely further driving down his value league wide. 

 

Jokinen was a good signing and if he can regain his form he's a steal at $1M. Oilers need another breakout season of career years and good health to get back to the playoffs. Flames need a lot to go right this year as well but I'd say the Oilers season(s) depends heavily on McScrooge and Talbot. Lose one or both and Oilers are a completely different team. Losing Sekera isn't the end of the world but if Benning/Nurse can't step up or another D man gets injured it'll expose the limited depth Oilers have. 

[bronco73]

55 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

That's Literally the comparable....exactly.  I understand there are differences.  But at the end of the day, yeah.   Fair.

 

It makes sense in one regard, and one regard only.  Salary cap.      The deal never would have happened otherwise.

 

We're literally in the midst of watching the Oilers dismantle their last rebuild to make room for their new one.  RNH next.

 

If they don't learn from their past, not even McDavid will be enough to stop them from repeating their history.

Yup they are doing that exactly... and if you ask me as an Oiler fan it's a good thing.  The last rebuild was an exericise in futility.  They built a lopsided team.  Lowe co. were completely clueless, Too many flashy wingers and no meat.    And yes, I do hope RNH is next to go.

[bronco73]

42 minutes ago, rickross said:

Bronco!...welcome home! A lot of ifs need to happen for both teams to find success this season. Trading for Strome could turn into a bit of a double edged sword for the Oilers, if he underperforms you lost a productive scorer in Ebs for virtually nothing, if he excels he could price himself out of their cap plans next year. Ebs obviously had to go, I remember a HNIC segment where Kelly Hrudey destroyed Ebs for his soft play, likely further driving down his value league wide. 

 

Jokinen was a good signing and if he can regain his form he's a steal at $1M. Oilers need another breakout season of career years and good health to get back to the playoffs. Flames need a lot to go right this year as well but I'd say the Oilers season(s) depends heavily on McScrooge and Talbot. Lose one or both and Oilers are a completely different team. Losing Sekera isn't the end of the world but if Benning/Nurse can't step up or another D man gets injured it'll expose the limited depth Oilers have. 

Yup... Strome needs to work out for sure.  But, he doesn't need to do a heck of a lot.  If he is better than a pylon in the D end he's already better than Eberle on that side of the ice lol!   I still think that Eberle and RNH were the two expendable players because A: their price tag, B: they were regressing, playing themselves off the team.  and C: there are other names who can now take the reigns.  Like I said earlier, I think the trick is in moving RNH out without retaining salary.

[jjgallow]

20 hours ago, bronco73 said:

Yup they are doing that exactly... and if you ask me as an Oiler fan it's a good thing.  The last rebuild was an exericise in futility.  They built a lopsided team.  Lowe co. were completely clueless, Too many flashy wingers and no meat.    And yes, I do hope RNH is next to go.

 

I think you're aiming too low, and you had it right the first time, imho.    The Oilers improved a lot last year.    So I get the optimism.  But at the end of the day it's a trade no other team would make, other than out of desperation.   And now they have to make another one with RNH.  

 

Doesn't leave you with much.

[bronco73]

3 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I think you're aiming too low, and you had it right the first time, imho.    The Oilers improved a lot last year.    So I get the optimism.  But at the end of the day it's a trade no other team would make, other than out of desperation.   And now they have to make another one with RNH.  

 

Doesn't leave you with much.

Well, I understand your reluctance to give credence to the trade.  But at the risk of appearing to brag it would appear that the trade did work out for the better, considerably.  While Hall again put up a ton of points this time on his new team, it helped catapult them right into last place in the conference.  While the Oilers who lost that point production from him, replaced him with a very reliable defender (who I believe you are giving WAY too little credit to) and a physical forward who doesn't put up a ton of points, and it helped them make the playoffs and into the second round (where I still think if not for some lopsided officiating would have made the conference finals).  You need a balanced team, Larssen (among others) provided that balance.  And he's a far better D-man than you give him credit for.

[jjgallow]

13 hours ago, bronco73 said:

Well, I understand your reluctance to give credence to the trade.  But at the risk of appearing to brag it would appear that the trade did work out for the better, considerably. 

 

There were about a billion other ways of achieving that balance.   And about a billion other reasons why they improved last year other than Larsson.   The reason they made the trade they did is because of their horrible contracts.  They had no choice.

 

Quote

While Hall again put up a ton of points this time on his new team, it helped catapult them right into last place in the conference.  While the Oilers who lost that point production from him, replaced him with a very reliable defender (who I believe you are giving WAY too little credit to) and a physical forward who doesn't put up a ton of points, and it helped them make the playoffs and into the second round

 

It's not that I don't respect his skills.  It's that we're talking about a Taylor Hall trade.

 

Quote

(where I still think if not for some lopsided officiating would have made the conference finals). 

 

Along with every fan of every other team that didn't make the conference finals.   The refs stole a game from the Oilers, but certainly not a series.   To think that the Oilers were better than what they accomplished is exactly what it sounds like, as you know.  

 

Quote

You need a balanced team, Larssen (among others) provided that balance.  And he's a far better D-man than you give him credit for.

 

If a balanced team is needed then I have no idea what the Oilers have been doing for the last 10 years.  It's not That hard to make a balanced team.

 

You don't need to lose Taylor Hall to balance your team. 

 

You lose guys like that when you can't manage your contracts.   My issue with your arguement that they're improving with this stuff, is that they just did the exact same thing with Draisaitl that's going to force them to lose Hall and RNH.   Massive long term overpayment based on hope.  To a player they also messed the development up on (although they corrected their mitstake out of necessity, just in time).

 

And the media's bought in.   The articles now are Just as ridiculous as they were during "Oil Change".

http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/hockey/nhl/cult-of-hockey/over-ripe-dillon-simpson-is-ready-to-make-the-edmonton-oilers-right-now

[bronco73]

21 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

There were about a billion other ways of achieving that balance.   And about a billion other reasons why they improved last year other than Larsson.   The reason they made the trade they did is because of their horrible contracts.  They had no choice.

Totally agree.  Horrible contracts, and a trade needed to happen.  Perhaps not Hall, but there was literally nobody else on that roster that the Oilers were willing to move and was worth Larssen.  PC could have held out for a bigger package coming back, but we really don't know which or how many other teams were in on Larssen either.  Defensemen are very highly coveted in the league of late.

21 hours ago, jjgallow said:

It's not that I don't respect his skills.  It's that we're talking about a Taylor Hall trade.

 

Along with every fan of every other team that didn't make the conference finals.   The refs stole a game from the Oilers, but certainly not a series.   To think that the Oilers were better than what they accomplished is exactly what it sounds like, as you know.  

I'm a fanboy, yup... in fact I believe officiating errors and mistakes cost them two games, not one.   My true colors are shining through lol!   Regardless, they undeniably showed vast improvement over the previous year. 

21 hours ago, jjgallow said:

If a balanced team is needed then I have no idea what the Oilers have been doing for the last 10 years.  It's not That hard to make a balanced team.

Lowe and Co didn't have any idea what they were doing for those 10 years either, which is the biggest part of why they were in that predicament.  They didn't have a clue how to build a balanced team and they proved it.  Aside from drafting that fancy new first overall every year they picked nobody of substance despite how high they were in the draft order every year.  Katz and his cronies cost the Oilers almost a decade of redevelopment because of their sheer arrogance and loyalty to one another.

21 hours ago, jjgallow said:

You don't need to lose Taylor Hall to balance your team. 

We did lose him, and they did balance the team, and they are much better because of it.  I honestly don't think there was anybody else on that roster that Chiarelli was willing to move that would get a Larssen back.  Thus, Hall drew the short straw.

21 hours ago, jjgallow said:

You lose guys like that when you can't manage your contracts.   My issue with your arguement that they're improving with this stuff, is that they just did the exact same thing with Draisaitl that's going to force them to lose Hall and RNH.   Massive long term overpayment based on hope.  To a player they also messed the development up on (although they corrected their mitstake out of necessity, just in time).

Again, I totally agree.  It was far too soon to throw the world at Draisaitl.  I wanted a bridge deal.  two years at 5 to 6 million.  Show us what you have on a consistent basis and then when it's time to re-sign we will make you a very happy hockey player for most of, if not the rest of your career.

21 hours ago, jjgallow said:

And the media's bought in.   The articles now are Just as ridiculous as they were during "Oil Change".

http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/hockey/nhl/cult-of-hockey/over-ripe-dillon-simpson-is-ready-to-make-the-edmonton-oilers-right-now

Media shmedia... I don't even bother reading most of it.  Most media know-it-all's have their heads so far up their own checking from behind that they look like a donut.

[cross16]

I think the Larsson acquisition get too much focus and attention. Personally I thought he had very little to no impact on the OIlers success. The Oilers turned it around because McDavid was healthy and elite, Klefboom was healthy and borderline elite and Talbot was elite. Larsson doesn't impact any of those 3 guys. 

 

Maybe there was a locker room issue with Taylor Hall and leadership or whatever. I don't know and I don't really want to speculate. All I know is that if I were PC I would have wanted Hall and his 6 million with McDavid way more than I would want Lucic and his 6 million plus Larsson. 

[travel_dude]

37 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I think the Larsson acquisition get too much focus and attention. Personally I thought he had very little to no impact on the OIlers success. The Oilers turned it around because McDavid was healthy and elite, Klefboom was healthy and borderline elite and Talbot was elite. Larsson doesn't impact any of those 3 guys. 

 

Maybe there was a locker room issue with Taylor Hall and leadership or whatever. I don't know and I don't really want to speculate. All I know is that if I were PC I would have wanted Hall and his 6 million with McDavid way more than I would want Lucic and his 6 million plus Larsson. 

 

100% on the bolded.

 

Instead you have a marginal top line player like Maroon becoming valued at $6m due to playing with McDavid.  Instead of cost-certanty of the forward group, you have two pending UFA/RFA players that will want raises or leave.  Larsson and Russell get praised for solidifying the defense, while it was as much Talbot saving their bacon.  It's a tossup between Klefbom and Larsson on who their best d-man was, but Talbot was key.  

 

[bronco73]

You guys, Larsson by far led every other D on that team in plus minus.  he was a +21 while second was Sekera at +14 and nobody else was even close.  The "elite" guy you mentioned Klefbom (who I agree is emerging as a very good D, MacTavish did do something right it seems) was way back at +7 despite getting double the points that Larsson got.  All that, yet Larsson had on average 2 fewer minutes of TOI per game than Klef or Sekera.  Larsson is a stud defender on the defensive end, he's unquestionably our best at home defenseman.  He isn't flashy and he doesn't put up the points, or have the thunderous slapper from the point, but that's not what he's for.  Hockey is far more than that, and Larsson has the defender skills in spades.

 

Again, EXACTLY what the Oilers were desperate for.  They had the guys who can score, they didn't have the guys who can defend.  Value can be argued and argued, but at that time at that place, for the Edmonton Oilers a defenseman who is great at defending had far more value than a winger who can put up points.

[Fins&FIre15]

I have to agree with bronco on this one, credit where credit is due. I watched all the BoA+all sharks vs oiler games last year. Imo, Larssons defensive game is really good, reminds me of a right handed, poor mans version of vlasic who does not make very many mistakes. Gets in the way of pretty much everything in range.

 

I still believe they could have gotten more or better for hall, but larsson was a great add no doubt.

 

I also still believe the oilers will look like Montreal without Price if Mcdavid or talbot get hurt for an extended time.

[Flyerfan52]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

I think the Larsson acquisition get too much focus and attention. Personally I thought he had very little to no impact on the OIlers success. The Oilers turned it around because McDavid was healthy and elite, Klefboom was healthy and borderline elite and Talbot was elite. Larsson doesn't impact any of those 3 guys. 

 

Maybe there was a locker room issue with Taylor Hall and leadership or whatever. I don't know and I don't really want to speculate. All I know is that if I were PC I would have wanted Hall and his 6 million with McDavid way more than I would want Lucic and his 6 million plus Larsson. 

Look @ the Oilers D with out Larsson. They had Klefbom, Sekera & a couple of  guys they hoped would be good like Nurse & Benning. With out Larsson like would have been a lot harder on Talbot. The Sekera injury is a setback for the Oilers (resulting in the overpay to Russell but earier to survive than if Larsson was the 1 MIA.

 

Lucic is probably a mistake @ that contract & with Hall that 1st like would have been even better. The point is the Oilers had to trade Hall to get Larsson since NJ wasn't going to settle for either of the other KLowe $6 million contracts. They could afford to possibly lose a few GF in favor of fewer GA.

 

[cross16]

So to clarify I am not saying Larsson is a bad player, he isn't. He is a good defender, I don't think great or that good but he's solid. All i'm saying is if you want to look at why the Oilers turned it around he really sin't much of a factor. That isn't an insult as its very difficult for 1 player to really turnaround a team that much unless your elite and Larsson clearly is not that. 

 

If you look at the numbers behind the Oilers, and specifically their ability to "defend" (in the traditional sense) you do not see an improvement from 15-16 to 16-17 so that is why I don't agree that Larsson made it easier on Talbot. If you look at things like shots against, scoring chances against, high danger scoring chance against etc, you see no improvement and in fact in some categorizes you see worse results in 16-17 then the previous 

 

Oilers really turned it around because they went from being a bottom team offensively to one of the top and given that this isn't an area where Larsson is best at I think his impact on the turnaround was minimal. Again though, doesn't mean he is a bad player just that I don't think a conversation about the OIlers success/turnaround should really include him. 

 

 

[jjgallow]

On 01/09/2017 at 3:32 PM, cross16 said:

So to clarify I am not saying Larsson is a bad player, he isn't. He is a good defender, I don't think great or that good but he's solid. All i'm saying is if you want to look at why the Oilers turned it around he really sin't much of a factor. That isn't an insult as its very difficult for 1 player to really turnaround a team that much unless your elite and Larsson clearly is not that. 

 

If you look at the numbers behind the Oilers, and specifically their ability to "defend" (in the traditional sense) you do not see an improvement from 15-16 to 16-17 so that is why I don't agree that Larsson made it easier on Talbot. If you look at things like shots against, scoring chances against, high danger scoring chance against etc, you see no improvement and in fact in some categorizes you see worse results in 16-17 then the previous 

 

Oilers really turned it around because they went from being a bottom team offensively to one of the top and given that this isn't an area where Larsson is best at I think his impact on the turnaround was minimal. Again though, doesn't mean he is a bad player just that I don't think a conversation about the OIlers success/turnaround should really include him. 

 

I second this.   With full respect to Larsson's plus/minus, but that just means he was playing good hockey.  It doesn't mean he was an elite difference maker.

 

I can't fault Bronco for having faith in his team, Especially after their huge improvement.   

 

But I would caution that many of their problems still exist.   I totally get, as a fan, wanting to assume that last year was a "turning point".   But the reality is that it was likely a "blip" on the screen where just enough right things went right (especially with McDavid) for them to turn in a better year.   The same plagues will still wear on this team, and likely prevent last year from being labelled a "turning" point when we look back years from now.

[travel_dude]

10 hours ago, jjgallow said:

But I would caution that many of their problems still exist.   I totally get, as a fan, wanting to assume that last year was a "turning point".   But the reality is that it was likely a "blip" on the screen where just enough right things went right (especially with McDavid) for them to turn in a better year.   The same plagues will still wear on this team, and likely prevent last year from being labelled a "turning" point when we look back years from now.

 

Flames fans know what it's like to have a goalie play for over 70 games at a high level.  It masks the problems that still exist.  Without Talbot, the team is probably a lotto team.  Without McDavid, the team doesn't score more than it lets in. The small amount of success has fans believing that things can only look up.  As a result, Chia now believes that the team will get better, so he can give huge raises to the best and sacrifice elsewhere.  Internal growth does not always follow that timeline.  Replacing Eberle is fine from a cap savings view, but not if you expect to score as many goals.  The defense has not gotten better.  They are the same, minus Sekera for a few months.  Russell was fine playing with a guy that could move the puck.  Now he has to start with a young guy or Gryba.  Nuge will likely be trade fodder.  Maroon will likely walk for a big raise.

 

I wouldn't say things are dire.  They have one season to try to improve internally before things get dicey.  The prospects have to take huge steps.  A relaible backup option needs to develop or be brought in.  

[Cowtownguy]

Do you watch many Flames games Bronco? If so, do you believe that we have generally received fair officiating?

[Flyerfan52]

7 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Flames fans know what it's like to have a goalie play for over 70 games at a high level.  It masks the problems that still exist.  Without Talbot, the team is probably a lotto team.  Without McDavid, the team doesn't score more than it lets in. The small amount of success has fans believing that things can only look up.  As a result, Chia now believes that the team will get better, so he can give huge raises to the best and sacrifice elsewhere.  Internal growth does not always follow that timeline.  Replacing Eberle is fine from a cap savings view, but not if you expect to score as many goals.  The defense has not gotten better.  They are the same, minus Sekera for a few months.  Russell was fine playing with a guy that could move the puck.  Now he has to start with a young guy or Gryba.  Nuge will likely be trade fodder.  Maroon will likely walk for a big raise.

 

I wouldn't say things are dire.  They have one season to try to improve internally before things get dicey.  The prospects have to take huge steps.  A relaible backup option needs to develop or be brought in.  

Chia inherited a team KLowe/MacTavish built. Most of those drafted were probably deserving of the 1st OA designation but after 3 gunners (Eberle was a later pick but counts) they didn't understand that there is more to the game than offence (they rode Gretzky, Kurri, etc. tails to SC rings) so rather than get extra assets by moving down for D they just kept doing that even though it didn't budge them from the bottom. Seeing good players desert & players refuse trades to the Oilers got them so paranoid they paid their top enders for what they hoped for rather than what was deserved.

Chia inherited that mess. Along with having overpaid players there was dislike for former management & combined with the fact other GMs didn't like him much either was in a tough spot. He did shed 2 of the 3 $6 million contracts for what consider under value & another 1st OA for nothing leaving just 1 of the $6 million to dump. All those were smart moves in a vacuum but adding the untradable Lucic contract & then repeating the mistake of overpaying kids with little resume in hopes they are what projected because of fear of losing them puts them in the same cap jackpot.

This year is the last on McDavid's ELC & if the players with him have career years again they'll want more also as most will be either form of FA.

Then there is that problem of only having 1 NHL goalie.

 

That's a dang good team with little depth right now on paper. Imagine what happens if 1 or 2 of Talbot/McDavid/Draisaitl does cold or is injured. There is really nobody to put on his big boy knickers to replace any of them. The D is already starting 1 man short so an off year/injury to Klefbom/Larsson decimates a defense that isn't all that strong.

 

If all the stars align & the Oilers get through the year without slumps from/injuries to major players they could go very deep this season but then the birds come home to roost. 1 year is a very short window but better than no window.

 

I can't even blame the fans that delude themselves they have a dynasty in the making. After 10 years of what ever BS the organization fed them they finally got to think playoffs rather than who to take 1st OA. In their happiness reality in the form of the salary cap has escaped them. Much like TML fans they see their team as a destination where top UFAs play for a pitance (ever notice how seldom that comes true in the real world?).

[travel_dude]

16 hours ago, Flyerfan52 said:

That's a dang good team with little depth right now on paper. Imagine what happens if 1 or 2 of Talbot/McDavid/Draisaitl does cold or is injured. There is really nobody to put on his big boy knickers to replace any of them. The D is already starting 1 man short so an off year/injury to Klefbom/Larsson decimates a defense that isn't all that strong.

 

If all the stars align & the Oilers get through the year without slumps from/injuries to major players they could go very deep this season but then the birds come home to roost. 1 year is a very short window but better than no window.

 

 

There are quite a few teams that are very good if all the stars align.  Last year it happened for the Oilers.  This year is all about expecting the team to duplicate the same with one or two less players.  Pouliot and Eberle are gone with the scoring and their shoddy defensive play.  Davidson was traded.  Some depth has moved on, or plucked before they could show they are a NHL player.

 

I know the season hasn't started yet, but what the heck?  $8m in cap space and they haven't even signed a NHL D-man as a possible replacement for Sekera?  Many on here suggested the Flames pick up Franson as a cheap 5/6 guy, but Chia decides Russell is all he needs?  Even though he was already on the team and not a new signing.  Klefbom had one season where he could put his foot/feet inside hockey skates.  That has to be a worrisome condition to manage.  What remains is Benning, Nurse and Gryba.  Not exactly depth. 

[robrob74]

I don't know, if it were me drafting, how do I not take 1st overall every time I get it?

 

i don't think we have anything to scoff at. It's not like we made the playoffs much more than them. Sure we drafted a bit better, but I think we are being homers and not wanting to believe they're better. 

 

We would love drafting first overall if we got the chance. We just didn't fully lose on purpose 100%. 

 

Their biggest flaw was not drafting depth, and maybe not having veteran leadership. They handed the young the keys to Edmonton too early. 

[travel_dude]

18 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I don't know, if it were me drafting, how do I not take 1st overall every time I get it?

 

i don't think we have anything to scoff at. It's not like we made the playoffs much more than them. Sure we drafted a bit better, but I think we are being homers and not wanting to believe they're better. 

 

We would love drafting first overall if we got the chance. We just didn't fully lose on purpose 100%. 

 

Their biggest flaw was not drafting depth, and maybe not having veteran leadership. They handed the young the keys to Edmonton too early. 

 

Depends how you scout players.  If you only look at who was projected as #1, then I guess you draft that guy.  They draft a bit of a lightweight for center then follow it up with a winger.  No thought to a high rated bigger center or one of many d-men?  It's not like the choices were between McDavid and Griffin Reinhart; there were decent players available, or you trade the top spot for something + a little lower spot.  

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Depends how you scout players.  If you only look at who was projected as #1, then I guess you draft that guy.  They draft a bit of a lightweight for center then follow it up with a winger.  No thought to a high rated bigger center or one of many d-men?  It's not like the choices were between McDavid and Griffin Reinhart; there were decent players available, or you trade the top spot for something + a little lower spot.  

 

 

Thats the thing, when they didn't get the 1st overall, they were forced to draft other players like Nurse. Can Nurse turn into a Top4? He is still really young for a D. 

[bronco73]

On 9/3/2017 at 11:02 AM, Cowtownguy said:

Do you watch many Flames games Bronco? If so, do you believe that we have generally received fair officiating?

Yup I do, and no I don't.  Up until last season I thought the Flames had gotten the benefit of calls far more often than the other teams did, but last year (possibly due to Wideman) it did seem like things evened up or even other teams getting benefits of calls... especially in the playoffs.