Oilers

[Thebrewcrew]

I think the Oilers match the Broberg offer and let Holloway go.

 

The trade for Savoie likely makes Holloway more expendable than Broberg.

 

 

Edmonton probably didn’t need to spend 10 mill this summer on Henrique/Arvidsson/Skinner. It might cost them one of their better young players, if not both. Nobody else in the league was going to pay Perry, 1.15, but Edmonton did. 

Kane on LTIR, they’re still over the cap. By 2.1m Everyone knows they’re in a pinch. Is anyone dying to acquire Kulak or Ceci? Doubt it. Tough spot to be

[cross16]

36 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I think the Oilers match the Broberg offer and let Holloway go.

 

The trade for Savoie likely makes Holloway more expendable than Broberg.

 

 

Edmonton probably didn’t need to spend 10 mill this summer on Henrique/Arvidsson/Skinner. It might cost them one of their better young players, if not both. Nobody else in the league was going to pay Perry, 1.15, but Edmonton did. 

Kane on LTIR, they’re still over the cap. By 2.1m Everyone knows they’re in a pinch. Is anyone dying to acquire Kulak or Ceci? Doubt it. Tough spot to be

 

I was thinking the opposite. I think they match Holloway and let Broberg go. Broberg looked better in the playoffs but 4 mill for him,, yikes for me. I don't mind the 2nd rounder. 

 

Halloway is a rough contract but not as bad and I think they need his speed. 

[travel_dude]

57 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I was thinking the opposite. I think they match Holloway and let Broberg go. Broberg looked better in the playoffs but 4 mill for him,, yikes for me. I don't mind the 2nd rounder. 

 

Halloway is a rough contract but not as bad and I think they need his speed. 

 

Yeah, I think a young C who has improved is a better value than Broberg.  Two years for Broberg, then what?  Another bloated contract like Nurse?  JK,. that's reserved for Bouchard.  

 

Cost/benefit might suggest that a 2nd rounder and ridding the cap long term is better than keeping getting a 3rd and being stuck with Broberg.  But maybe I just don't see Broberg as being anything more than a 3rd pairing guy.  

[travel_dude]

3 hours ago, robrob74 said:

I'm with Cross, it's more on managers not managing the cap than those that tender offer sheets. It's why I'd love it if Calgary start using the cap more prudently. I get a lot of teams are up against the cap, but if the Flames concentrate on drafting, then this doesn't have to happen. Leave the money for the core bordering elite players. 
 

Edmonton has done a bad job filling the roster, spending to the cap, just as Calgary had in the past. So hoping we change that philosophy.

 

In their case, they looked at the guys they brought in and wanted to bring them back, plus add new guys that can score.  Yeaaa, more scoring.  That was their problem last year, only 25% on the PP.  I am immune to what we did in the past.  It's behind us.  We have Coleman from that era and he's not a bad value.

[Thebrewcrew]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I was thinking the opposite. I think they match Holloway and let Broberg go. Broberg looked better in the playoffs but 4 mill for him,, yikes for me. I don't mind the 2nd rounder. 

 

Halloway is a rough contract but not as bad and I think they need his speed. 

I hope your scenario is what happens. I just think they have a tough  time replacing Broberg. The blueline is an issue and they have nothing in the pipeline. Holloway's ceiling in EDM is a bottom six forward. I think they can rather easily replace Holloway's 18pts in 89 career games.

 

Evander Kane is the tough situation, sure, he's going on LTIR. But he's coming back. They're going to need that 5.1 for when he's healthy. I don't think any teams are lining up to trade for Ceci and Kulak.

 

Welcome to Edmonton, Stan.

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I hope your scenario is what happens. I just think they have a tough  time replacing Broberg. The blueline is an issue and they have nothing in the pipeline. Holloway's ceiling in EDM is a bottom six forward. I think they can rather easily replace Holloway's 18pts in 89 career games.

 

Evander Kane is the tough situation, sure, he's going on LTIR. But he's coming back. They're going to need that 5.1 for when he's healthy. I don't think any teams are lining up to trade for Ceci and Kulak.

 

Welcome to Edmonton, Stan.

 

Common theme.

Old boys club hire, Nicholson, Holland.

GM not there for drafting the best players on the team.

GM given creds for building a champion team.

GM give leeway due to previous GM screwing up cap.

GM signs brutal contracts with lesser stars.

GM trades away futures to go for it.

GM signs players with less than stellar reputations after they are bought out.

Then does it again.

GM signs guy who's a buddy of McDavid but who hasn't played much.

GM trades away futures to go for it.

GM screws up cap.

GM decides it's time to hang it up.

Interim GM signs re-signs most expensive trade they made in some time.

Interim GM signs new guys after being bought out or injury riddled seasons.

INterim GM names new Old Club Boy to GM spot.

See a pattern?

 

 

[cross16]

20 hours ago, robrob74 said:

I'm with Cross, it's more on managers not managing the cap than those that tender offer sheets. It's why I'd love it if Calgary start using the cap more prudently. I get a lot of teams are up against the cap, but if the Flames concentrate on drafting, then this doesn't have to happen. Leave the money for the core bordering elite players. 
 

Edmonton has done a bad job filling the roster, spending to the cap, just as Calgary had in the past. So hoping we change that philosophy.

 

Spending to the cap is not the problem IMO. Most teams spend to the cap because the reality is if you are not spending close the cap you probably have a bad roster. Flames are a good example. Tons of cap space cool, but a really bad roster. 

 

Managing your cap well doesn't mean leave a bunch of cap space, that's lost opportunity. Managing your cap well means don't have 3 million tied up buyouts. Don't pay a 2nd pairing dman 9 Million dollars because a year after you weren't prepared to pay him long term. Don't let 2 key RFAs sit unsigned into the middle of August. 

 

And maybe don't miss manage the development of a top 10 pick to the point he asked for a trade this year. 

[Mike_Oxlong]

Who's the second-pairing d-man? Nurse? Y'know, it's actually funny that the cOilers even consider him a d-man, let alone a 3-4. Anyways, I'm feeling incredible schadenfreude at the turn of events up north. Team full of d-bags feels the wrath of karma.

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, Mike_Oxlong said:

Who's the second-pairing d-man? Nurse? Y'know, it's actually funny that the cOilers even consider him a d-man, let alone a 3-4. Anyways, I'm feeling incredible schadenfreude at the turn of events up north. Team full of d-bags feels the wrath of karma.

I'm always ecstatic when Saint Louis (or Anaheim) mess with the Oilers. If Army or Verbeek do it, it fills me with homeboy pride. We are aligned. lol

Now mess with the Leafs.

[robrob74]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Spending to the cap is not the problem IMO. Most teams spend to the cap because the reality is if you are not spending close the cap you probably have a bad roster. Flames are a good example. Tons of cap space cool, but a really bad roster. 

 

Managing your cap well doesn't mean leave a bunch of cap space, that's lost opportunity. Managing your cap well means don't have 3 million tied up buyouts. Don't pay a 2nd pairing dman 9 Million dollars because a year after you weren't prepared to pay him long term. Don't let 2 key RFAs sit unsigned into the middle of August. 

 

And maybe don't miss manage the development of a top 10 pick to the point he asked for a trade this year. 

im saying, managing the cap to the point where you give the good players the money, and then leaving about 2-5 mil in space for flex, and if Conroy is true to his word, which is where I agree, keep guys that want to be in Calgary, want and don't have to overpay to stay. Like Lindholm and Hanifin. 
 

it's like Conundrumed said in the Cup thread, had those guys re-signed, he'd have a different opinion of Conroy.
 

So i don't mean the Cap position Calgary is in right in the ideal going forward into the future, just that it's the ideal for now building the foundation for the future. I don't mind spending on players that get what they're worth, I just don't want to overpay which is where the problems arise if there's too many overpaid, which we see in Edmonton. 
 

we are lucky we are crap now, but in 4 years that Huberdeau contract will kind of suck. It will be like Nurse.

 

What you're saying is exactly what I agree and mean, I think because you said it I felt I didn't have to repeat it. 
 

I think overpaying Hanifin and  Lindholm to try staying relevant was a mistake and scared me. 

[cross16]

24 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

im saying, managing the cap to the point where you give the good players the money, and then leaving about 2-5 mil in space for flex, and if Conroy is true to his word, which is where I agree, keep guys that want to be in Calgary, want and don't have to overpay to stay. Like Lindholm and Hanifin. 
 

it's like Conundrumed said in the Cup thread, had those guys re-signed, he'd have a different opinion of Conroy.
 

So i don't mean the Cap position Calgary is in right in the ideal going forward into the future, just that it's the ideal for now building the foundation for the future. I don't mind spending on players that get what they're worth, I just don't want to overpay which is where the problems arise if there's too many overpaid, which we see in Edmonton. 
 

we are lucky we are crap now, but in 4 years that Huberdeau contract will kind of suck. It will be like Nurse.

 

What you're saying is exactly what I agree and mean, I think because you said it I felt I didn't have to repeat it. 
 

I think overpaying Hanifin and  Lindholm to try staying relevant was a mistake and scared me. 

 

All fair, I just think that Calgary under Treliving, and now under Conroy, do a really good job of cap management so I would dispute the "hopefully they get better" part. The Huberdeau part does suck but there was also some extenuating circumstances there. 

 

Oilers and Flames have been very different in how they manage their cap, that was the main point I was making. 

[sak22]

Thing with Edmonton is I'd say they have more bargains than bad deals.  Draisaitl for 8.5 is a steal, Bouchard at 3.9 , Hyman at 5.5 and Nuge at 5.125.  I point more to issues in drafting, drafting and developing players of Kulak and Ceci calibre shouldn't be difficult and it avoids spending assets to acquire or going the UFA route on a contract that you know would age badly.  It was mentioned how Ekholm was impressed with Broberg, but maybe if the guy you draft top 10 4 years early progresses better you don't need to give up 2 first round picks to get Ekholm.  

[jjgallow]

59 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

All fair, I just think that Calgary under Treliving, and now under Conroy, do a really good job of cap management so I would dispute the "hopefully they get better" part. The Huberdeau part does suck but there was also some extenuating circumstances there. 

 

Oilers and Flames have been very different in how they manage their cap, that was the main point I was making. 

 

Huberdeau situation was voted the worst situation in the NHL, to be exact, and the extenuating circumstance was BT, or the owners directing BT.    He had every opportunity to avoid it and it could be seen happening years in advance.

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

I think overpaying Hanifin and  Lindholm to try staying relevant was a mistake and scared me. 

 

Pretty much.  Which is why I don't have much hope for this rebuild.  It's going to be rushed.  Flames want to be back in the playoffs as quickly as possible instead of being patient accumulating high end assets at the basement.

[cross16]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

Huberdeau situation was voted the worst situation in the NHL, to be exact, and the extenuating circumstance was BT, or the owners directing BT.    He had every opportunity to avoid it and it could be seen happening years in advance.

 

Always great to use hindsight bias to continue to grind away at your axe. This is a funny post from someone who supported the contract when it was signed. 

[jjgallow]

19 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Always great to use hindsight bias to continue to grind away at your axe. This is a funny post from someone who supported the contract when it was signed. 

 

I don't remember supporting the contract.   Maybe if it came down to that versus getting nothing, but damage was already done by then.

 

I'm actually making a concerted effort to not bring up BT, quite contrary to your claims.  I didn't bring him up.  But inevitably he will be brought up for how badly he steered the organisation and to defend the actions at that time was delusional then and is delusional now.    I'm willing to accept the possibility that he wasn't the actual mastermind.   But even that, he is creating serious doubts in the East right now.

[cross16]

55 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

I don't remember supporting the contract.   Maybe if it came down to that versus getting nothing, but damage was already done by then.

 

I'm actually making a concerted effort to not bring up BT, quite contrary to your claims.  I didn't bring him up.  But inevitably he will be brought up for how badly he steered the organisation and to defend the actions at that time was delusional then and is delusional now.    I'm willing to accept the possibility that he wasn't the actual mastermind.   But even that, he is creating serious doubts in the East right now.

 

Not only did you defend the contract you defended the player. Said there was little chance he wasn't going to continue to produce. 

 

That's that piece that bugs me. Many, many people loved the Huberdeau trade and liked the contract but now Treliving is an idiot for doing it and should have known how it was going to go. So guy does something people liked at the time and supported but now he's an idiot for doing it because it didn't work out. I don't care about right vs wrong but the flip flopping and turning it against a person just bothers me. 

 

Dislike the guy all you want, there are reasons for it. You can dislike what he did, you can dislike the state he left the team and you can disagree with how he went about building the team. The hindsight bias with added hyperbole I just think is silly. 

[travel_dude]

4 hours ago, sak22 said:

Thing with Edmonton is I'd say they have more bargains than bad deals.  Draisaitl for 8.5 is a steal, Bouchard at 3.9 , Hyman at 5.5 and Nuge at 5.125.  I point more to issues in drafting, drafting and developing players of Kulak and Ceci calibre shouldn't be difficult and it avoids spending assets to acquire or going the UFA route on a contract that you know would age badly.  It was mentioned how Ekholm was impressed with Broberg, but maybe if the guy you draft top 10 4 years early progresses better you don't need to give up 2 first round picks to get Ekholm.  

 

Draisaitl turned out to be a steal but at the time there were big questions about him.  They gambled on the contract and were paying him on what they hoped he would be worth.  Hyman was a UFA that was getting paid for the first time at his value and signed max term.  The cap was kept low enough because they start and end lower.  He was going to be worth that contract at least until age 33.  Nuge had one good year out of 3 in this contract.  He is getting most of his points through assisting one of the big 2.  22 of his 49 assists this year came on the PP.  

 

Bouchard is following the Nurse tradition.  Bridge deal to up his value and his next deal is an arbitration RFA year.  

 

While none of this can be considered a failure, I wouldn't say they have done a good job in managing their cap.  They usually have to part with a good player because they are going in on another one.  

[jjgallow]

6 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Not only did you defend the contract you defended the player. Said there was little chance he wasn't going to continue to produce. 

 

That's that piece that bugs me. Many, many people loved the Huberdeau trade and liked the contract but now Treliving is an idiot for doing it and should have known how it was going to go. So guy does something people liked at the time and supported but now he's an idiot for doing it because it didn't work out. I don't care about right vs wrong but the flip flopping and turning it against a person just bothers me. 

 

Dislike the guy all you want, there are reasons for it. You can dislike what he did, you can dislike the state he left the team and you can disagree with how he went about building the team. The hindsight bias with added hyperbole I just think is silly. 

 

you are accusing me of being positive.

 

I'm okay with that.  But I feel this to be unlikely lol

[robrob74]

12 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

All fair, I just think that Calgary under Treliving, and now under Conroy, do a really good job of cap management so I would dispute the "hopefully they get better" part. The Huberdeau part does suck but there was also some extenuating circumstances there. 

 

Oilers and Flames have been very different in how they manage their cap, that was the main point I was making. 

ya, I get that that would be your opinion and that mine differs. Sometimes I found them to be too close to the cap and it limited options. So my idea is more they didn't have space to do things they possibly wanted at times and thus limited by their cap management. You think that's fine, I would like a bit extra cap to be able to have options. But that is cap philosophy.
 

In life I tend to spend my whole pay cheque on car payments, rent and utilities, and so on, so who am I to talk lol. 😆 

[robrob74]

11 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Huberdeau situation was voted the worst situation in the NHL, to be exact, and the extenuating circumstance was BT, or the owners directing BT.    He had every opportunity to avoid it and it could be seen happening years in advance.

 

it is partially how I feel. They didn't plan ahead well enough. And a part of that is drafting "better." Should they have signed Huberdeau right away? 
 

I agree with Sak, the drafting is important , especially in the smaller market. There were about 3-4 of us regularly suggesting to trade the core before it was too late, but they kept spending assets to try build on them. 

[robrob74]

10 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Always great to use hindsight bias to continue to grind away at your axe. This is a funny post from someone who supported the contract when it was signed. 

thing is. You can never win with many. We suggest stuff like this and we are too negative and then we mention it now and hindsight is 20-20. 

[robrob74]

8 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Not only did you defend the contract you defended the player. Said there was little chance he wasn't going to continue to produce. 

 

That's that piece that bugs me. Many, many people loved the Huberdeau trade and liked the contract but now Treliving is an idiot for doing it and should have known how it was going to go. So guy does something people liked at the time and supported but now he's an idiot for doing it because it didn't work out. I don't care about right vs wrong but the flip flopping and turning it against a person just bothers me. 

 

Dislike the guy all you want, there are reasons for it. You can dislike what he did, you can dislike the state he left the team and you can disagree with how he went about building the team. The hindsight bias with added hyperbole I just think is silly. 

 

I think we liked that he got something out of nothing. Many were more pissed he didn't trade Johnny. I was happy to do that trade as he got Weegar and Hubie... I think many shrugged their shoulders at the signing because it was what they offered Gaudreau. Many may have shrugged at Lindholm too? Who knows... 

 

It sucks. And maybe it wasn't his choice to try sign Johnny, but the mismanagement there is what many were miffed at. I thought Monahan could have been an LTIR guy, but that isn't who the Flames are, they're not Edm or Vegas... so they traded a first to get rid of a player to sign Kadri... cap management.

[robrob74]

7 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Draisaitl turned out to be a steal but at the time there were big questions about him.  They gambled on the contract and were paying him on what they hoped he would be worth.  Hyman was a UFA that was getting paid for the first time at his value and signed max term.  The cap was kept low enough because they start and end lower.  He was going to be worth that contract at least until age 33.  Nuge had one good year out of 3 in this contract.  He is getting most of his points through assisting one of the big 2.  22 of his 49 assists this year came on the PP.  

 

Bouchard is following the Nurse tradition.  Bridge deal to up his value and his next deal is an arbitration RFA year.  

 

While none of this can be considered a failure, I wouldn't say they have done a good job in managing their cap.  They usually have to part with a good player because they are going in on another one.  

many also make Hyman out to be a great player. He was average before playing with McDavid and I don't think Toronto fans cared much when he left. 41 points was his highest as a leaf along with 21 goals twice, but some shorter seasons... he wasn't the 70+ points guy until playing with McD.

[travel_dude]

25 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

many also make Hyman out to be a great player. He was average before playing with McDavid and I don't think Toronto fans cared much when he left. 41 points was his highest as a leaf along with 21 goals twice, but some shorter seasons... he wasn't the 70+ points guy until playing with McD.

 

I get that, but he also scores pretty key goals.  I got the sense that TOR was not okay once he left.  He kinda priced himself out there.  They could not afford what he was being offered in FA.  A Kadri type player; didn't score a ton but fans loved his attitude.  He was more like secondary scoring in TOR than what he looks like in EDM.  He found a niche there and he's making it work.  TBH, most players without McD and Drai look average.  Nuge is nothing without them.  Douche-bomb would not be scoring as many goals or colecting as many PP points without playing on a stacked PP.  Compare this past year where he played most on the top PP unit.  35 PP ponts, whereas last year he had 13.

 

When you do a comp between Bouchard and Nurse, you wonder how Nurse ever got $9M+.  It's like looking at Andersson vs Makar.  Nurse's best season is no better than Bouchard's rookie season.  Mind you, when you don't need to play defense, you get lots of points.