Oilers

[cross16]

7 hours ago, robrob74 said:

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. 

 

For sure some didn't want to see Huberdeau signed and some didn't like the move, i was one of them. I don't care if people don't like something or someone, but there is a difference between not liking something or being a little pessimistic and hindsight bias. 

Supporting something a GM did in the moment and the years later, when it doesn't work out, putting down the GM for not seeing it coming is not just being "too negative" it's flat out using hindsight bias.

 

7 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

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.

 

This was not possible no.  You have to have a legitimate injury to go on LTIR. Can you tweak the system sure, but Monahan was healthy at the time of the trade, according to the NHL.

[jjgallow]

8 hours ago, robrob74 said:

 

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. 

 

well maybe I will agree with @cross16 that most applauded the Huberdeau signing.     I won't say that most applauded the trade, except those who understood the alternative.

 

We didn't know that Huberdeau was going to do That bad so it made sense to lock him down considering how many players we hadn't locked down that we were losing for nothing.    

 

But getting to that point....what got us there, is a whole other kettle of fish.   Tkachuk, the Flames should have either traded or signed long term long before any of this, and same with Gaudreau and the rest.   If you ask me, they should have been traded, but whichever way you go, winging it or putting your trust in player agent promises is as dumb as it sounds, so, not the way.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

For sure some didn't want to see Huberdeau signed and some didn't like the move, i was one of them. I don't care if people don't like something or someone, but there is a difference between not liking something or being a little pessimistic and hindsight bias. 

Supporting something a GM did in the moment and the years later, when it doesn't work out, putting down the GM for not seeing it coming is not just being "too negative" it's flat out using hindsight bias.

 

 

This was not possible no.  You have to have a legitimate injury to go on LTIR. Can you tweak the system sure, but Monahan was healthy at the time of the trade, according to the NHL.

I get that about Monahan "not being injured " at the time of the trade. The guy still only played a couple of handful of games for Montreal that year.  Other teams seem to know how to work LTIR in a way that puts a guy like Monahan on for a very long time, I get it's probably circumventing, but teams seem to do it. They have guys on LTIR nearly the whole year and come out for playoffs.

 

maybe the Flames have to learn how to have surgery at the end of summer instead, or like when Kane is about to get his once they know they need his cap space lol

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

well maybe I will agree with @cross16 that most applauded the Huberdeau signing.     I won't say that most applauded the trade, except those who understood the alternative.

 

We didn't know that Huberdeau was going to do That bad so it made sense to lock him down considering how many players we hadn't locked down that we were losing for nothing.    

 

But getting to that point....what got us there, is a whole other kettle of fish.   Tkachuk, the Flames should have either traded or signed long term long before any of this, and same with Gaudreau and the rest.   If you ask me, they should have been traded, but whichever way you go, winging it or putting your trust in player agent promises is as dumb as it sounds, so, not the way.

 

I think we made two mistakes.

One was not signing Gaudreau when he wanted to sign, before he started the "nesting" cycle.

We wanted to pay less due to a down season, so it got put off and he wasn't talking during the season.

The second was caving to Tkachuk with the high final year, instead of just hammering out a deal.

If he was delaying, then we should have traded him then.

If it was cap management, well that went out the window with the $9M actual final year.

 

I only really blame BT for the Johnny Walkie.

I would have been fine signing him long term.

Get that done before the contract year and whatever you get, you get.

Make moves to make it all work.

[sak22]

41 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I get that about Monahan "not being injured " at the time of the trade. The guy still only played a couple of handful of games for Montreal that year.  Other teams seem to know how to work LTIR in a way that puts a guy like Monahan on for a very long time, I get it's probably circumventing, but teams seem to do it. They have guys on LTIR nearly the whole year and come out for playoffs.

 

maybe the Flames have to learn how to have surgery at the end of summer instead, or like when Kane is about to get his once they know they need his cap space lol

Tell a guy that you shut down for the year to wait until the end of summer for surgery so he can miss out on the final year of his contract, that could do more damage to an organization than the trade to get rid of him.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

I get that about Monahan "not being injured " at the time of the trade. The guy still only played a couple of handful of games for Montreal that year.  Other teams seem to know how to work LTIR in a way that puts a guy like Monahan on for a very long time, I get it's probably circumventing, but teams seem to do it. They have guys on LTIR nearly the whole year and come out for playoffs.

 

maybe the Flames have to learn how to have surgery at the end of summer instead, or like when Kane is about to get his once they know they need his cap space lol

 

Monahan walked in to MTL healthy, and played the first half of the season.

What was it, a broken foot and he suffered a groin injury during rehab?

Montreal lost out on trading him that season.

Played the entire next season, split between MTL and WPG.

 

Using LTIR to manage cap is a dangerous game.

You can't hold back a player from being deemed healthy.

And not every player that gets injured can use LTIR.

If you are over the cap and have to use the LTIR to be compliant, you can't replace other players not on LTIR.

 

Is the Kane surgery maybe a bit late?  Sure, but he's gonna miss part of the season regardless.

The player has a right to delay it because of their life outside hockey.

They might want to get a 2nd opinion.

The team has a responsibility to do what is best for the player.

With Monahan in Calgary, they got the surgery over as soon as possible.

Had he been deemed healthy sooner, we could have bought him out.

That didn't happen even though it was in our best interests to do it over a trade.

[cross16]

6 hours ago, robrob74 said:

I get that about Monahan "not being injured " at the time of the trade. The guy still only played a couple of handful of games for Montreal that year.  Other teams seem to know how to work LTIR in a way that puts a guy like Monahan on for a very long time, I get it's probably circumventing, but teams seem to do it. They have guys on LTIR nearly the whole year and come out for playoffs.

 

maybe the Flames have to learn how to have surgery at the end of summer instead, or like when Kane is about to get his once they know they need his cap space lol

 

You have to prove injury to place a player on LTIR. Documented in the CBA.

You do not, however, need to document or prove when the player is ready to come off of LTIR nor does the league have a proceed to check in. That is how teams are able to use LTIR and then have players come off for the playoffs.  LTIR is not cap circumvention because it starts with needed to prove, including doctors being interviewed, that the player is in fact unable to play. 

 

"Guys like Monahan" do not go on LTIR. 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

You have to prove injury to place a player on LTIR. Documented in the CBA.

You do not, however, need to document or prove when the player is ready to come off of LTIR nor does the league have a proceed to check in. That is how teams are able to use LTIR and then have players come off for the playoffs.  LTIR is not cap circumvention because it starts with needed to prove, including doctors being interviewed, that the player is in fact unable to play. 

 

"Guys like Monahan" do not go on LTIR. 

 

I was not aware of this.  I thought they needed to have doc cleanance since it's insurance related.

[cross16]

14 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I was not aware of this.  I thought they needed to have doc cleanance since it's insurance related.

 

They have a written policy but the enforcement is challenging. Sure a doctor can say you are "ready" but are you? Doctor can't speak to physical fitness levels, can't speak to game readiness and can't really say that said injury won't re aggravate. So sure you can get medical clearance to work out or play games but that doesn't necessarily mean you are ready to play. 

 

So rather than saying they don't have a policy for it, I should amend to say they don't have a very good enforceable policy because it's hard to. 

[conundrumed]

I don't keep up with Oilers news, but why did they let Holland go?

Seems odd he'd get them to Gm 7 of the SCF, then not be extended. 3-time Cup GM.

Was one set of old boys against this old boy? Then hire Stan Bowman? I mean, Holland definitely has his faults, but Bowman?

Do they blame him for the Nurse contract? I doubt there are many GMs around that can do a contract like that without approvals of owner and PoHO etc.

Lots of rumours that Army never would have stuck Holland like this.

Is this whole charade to jam up the Oilers with a Bouchard OS if they decide to match?

I know the Kulak/Ceci trade rumours are out there, but is everyone trying to jam Edmonton up endlessly, atm?

I'd have assumed those trade(s) would have happened at this stage.

They have until, what, Tuesday morning?

tick, tock, tick, tock.

[Mike_Oxlong]

Oh, did they let him go? I was under the assumption he was suffering from PTSD living in that dump.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, Mike_Oxlong said:

Oh, did they let him go? I was under the assumption he was suffering from PTSD living in that dump.

 

Ha ha.  I think it was a mutual decision, but the official announcement was they were not extending his contract.  

[Thebrewcrew]

Oil acquire Podkolzin from VAN for a 4th.

 

Gotta think this is their Holloway replacement. Pod is only at 1m on the AAV. Can be buried in Bakersfield with no penalty. 
 

 

For VAN, what a miss in the top ten. Five years later they flip him for a 4th.

[Thebrewcrew]

Nice description here.

 

They should let Holloway go. Good luck dumping cap, mid-season. EDM only has a 4, 6, 7 in the 2025 draft. The 3rd could be useful.

[conundrumed]

7 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Nice description here.

 

They should let Holloway go. Good luck dumping cap, mid-season. EDM only has a 4, 6, 7 in the 2025 draft. The 3rd could be useful.

I must be mistaken in my thinking. I thought a player had to finish last season on LTIR to carry over. Otherwise, you have to be cap compliant with said player's value included on day 1?

[cross16]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

I must be mistaken in my thinking. I thought a player had to finish last season on LTIR to carry over. Otherwise, you have to be cap compliant with said player's value included on day 1?

 

No need to finish a season on LTIR to be carry over. 

 

Depend on when you use LTIR changes the calculation but no you don't need to be cap compliant with the LTIR player. You can play a player on LTIR in order to become cap compliant. The difference, and the downside, is you only get credit for that player and the cap space does not accrue. So for example if you are 3 mill over the cap and a player who makes 4 mill was placed on LTIR, you have 1 mill cap space and that's it as long as that player is on LTIR. No gained cap space from accruals. 

Versus if you could get under the cap and then place the player on LTIR you could get their full salary credit plus cap space as you accrue, so there is a downside to needing LTIR to become cap compliant. 

 

[cross16]

On 8/18/2024 at 4:37 AM, conundrumed said:

I don't keep up with Oilers news, but why did they let Holland go?

Seems odd he'd get them to Gm 7 of the SCF, then not be extended. 3-time Cup GM.

Was one set of old boys against this old boy? Then hire Stan Bowman? I mean, Holland definitely has his faults, but Bowman?

Do they blame him for the Nurse contract? I doubt there are many GMs around that can do a contract like that without approvals of owner and PoHO etc.

Lots of rumours that Army never would have stuck Holland like this.

Is this whole charade to jam up the Oilers with a Bouchard OS if they decide to match?

I know the Kulak/Ceci trade rumours are out there, but is everyone trying to jam Edmonton up endlessly, atm?

I'd have assumed those trade(s) would have happened at this stage.

They have until, what, Tuesday morning?

tick, tock, tick, tock.

 

Guess it depends on who you believe. I don't think Oilers brass were happy with Holland, good reason IMO, but I've also heard Holland wasn't that keen on staying.  As i've said for a while I don't think both McDavid and Draisaitl want to stay and I've heard it whispered that Holland knew this and got out before he had to deal with it. 

[travel_dude]

Ceci + 3rd rounder to SJS for Ty Emberson.

In the space of a weekend they traded a 3rd, a 4th and Ceci for Pod and a replacement D.

Sent out $3.1M for close to $1.95M coming back.

 

I get the sense from these two trades that they are not matching either Broberg or Holloway.

 

So, the trade tree is Bourgault (22nd overall) + Chaisson (116 overall) + Ceci + 3rd for Podkolzin + Emberson.  Did I miss anything?

[cross16]

11 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

Ceci + 3rd rounder to SJS for Ty Emberson.

In the space of a weekend they traded a 3rd, a 4th and Ceci for Pod and a replacement D.

Sent out $3.1M for close to $1.95M coming back.

 

I get the sense from these two trades that they are not matching either Broberg or Holloway.

 

So, the trade tree is Bourgault (22nd overall) + Chaisson (116 overall) + Ceci + 3rd for Podkolzin + Emberson.  Did I miss anything?

 

I don't think the Oilers move Ceci if the plan was not to match at least 1 of the offers. 

[Mike_Oxlong]

Hard to say. That leaves them with ~$1.9m in cap space and with Kane on LTIR they could possibly still match. My schadenfreude remains intact regardless.

[JTech780]

I really hope the Oilers match both. It would make it really difficult for them going into next year when they have to find money to keep Draisaitl and Bouchard. 
 

 

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I don't think the Oilers move Ceci if the plan was not to match at least 1 of the offers. 

 

Even with moving Kane to LTIR, the projected return date is end of September, or at least I had seen that date bandied about.  Ceci would be a necessary move regardless, would he not?

 

I'm seeing different cap numbers for EDM even without the OS matching.

-$2.3M in one case without the OS players and -$5.9M on another site with OS players signed.

 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Even with moving Kane to LTIR, the projected return date is end of September, or at least I had seen that date bandied about.  Ceci would be a necessary move regardless, would he not?

 

I'm seeing different cap numbers for EDM even without the OS matching.

-$2.3M in one case without the OS players and -$5.9M on another site with OS players signed.

 

 

2.3 sounds about right with neither player matched and Ceci on the roster. Right now Puckpedi has them at 5.9 with both OS counting and no Ceci but keep in mind that's a 24 player roster. 

 

Oilers, with some roster movement, would have been able to get under the cap from 2.3 and keep Ceci. 

 

They love Ceci in Edm so I don't think there is anyway they trade him unless they had to and I think the did. To me it really looks like they are aiming to keep Broberg and will let Holloway go. 

[robrob74]

11 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

2.3 sounds about right with neither player matched and Ceci on the roster. Right now Puckpedi has them at 5.9 with both OS counting and no Ceci but keep in mind that's a 24 player roster. 

 

Oilers, with some roster movement, would have been able to get under the cap from 2.3 and keep Ceci. 

 

They love Ceci in Edm so I don't think there is anyway they trade him unless they had to and I think the did. To me it really looks like they are aiming to keep Broberg and will let Holloway go. 

they'll probably throw Podkolzin on McD's line and say look at us. We know what we are doing!!!! Yay us!

[travel_dude]

10 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

they'll probably throw Podkolzin on McD's line and say look at us. We know what we are doing!!!! Yay us!

 

He can keep Connor Brown company on the "haven't scored a single goal yet" list.  They can blame it on the water.  The water sucks here, but it comes from a river, so what do you expect.