It definitely depends on how you utilize them so we dont disagree entirely.
Lets use FO% as an example...context matters and for example losing the draw in the D zone on the PK or in the O zone on the PP makes a big difference.
Its all about possession however unlike puck retrieval it doesnt require nearly as much time and energy to win a faceoff. So its very important.
I also didnt come to the 'soft' conclusion just from the hitting stats alone.
The primary reason why I emphasize how soft this team is because I dont think they are gritty enough to beat the teams they will need to beat to win the SC. I see the team getting pushed out of games against big heavy teams. Always being the nail (instead of the hammer) isnt an effective strategy against heavier teams like Florida, Vegas and LA.
Especially in a 7 game series. If the Oilers end up playing LA then Vegas and then Florida again I see that as a problem without (at the very least) having Kane in the lineup.
With respect to faceoffs you are conflating two different things. Yes losing a faceoff impacts immediate possession but the real issue is does it impact the score. People have done very thorough analysis of the impact of faceoffs by looking at tens of thousands of actual instances. Statistically the loss of a faceoff on the pk will result in an additional goal against about one out of 40 or so times. A generic faceoff it is about one in 75.
Derek Ryan for example took an average of 112 short handed faceoffs over the last three years. If you replaced him with a guy who won 10% fewer draws that would be about 11 more lost faceoffs on the pk or statistically that would cost you on average about one goal every 4 years. What a player is capable of doing after the faceoff turns out to be far more impactful than winning or losing a draw. Despite strong evidence to the contrary people place a much higher importance on FO% than it deserves because the very rare instances when a big goal is scored after a lost draw stick in peoples minds to a far greater degree than the events following a generic draw. And in doing so they ignore the fact that generic faceoff wins are close to random events in terms of the two players involved.
I will also add that further studies on faceoffs have shown that assessing a player's value in term of winning draws is far more complicated than raw FO% can capture. How clean is the win and were the puck is directed have a bigger impact on actual goals than simply wins vs losses. Some players have lower winning percentages but are more adept at how the wins are generated.
As far as softness is concerned you are again conflating two different things. Lack of hits are not a sign of softness. Nor are they an indicator of success. Exactly the opposite in fact. There is a fairly strong negative correlation between hits and winning over many years. In fact as I pointed out the Oilers have a 10-2-1 record vs the top ten teams in terms of hitting this year.
If you look at the Oilers losses over the last three playoffs it would be hard to put any on softness and certainly not on hits. Colorado was not a physical team in terms of hits. They were 27th in hits per game the year they won. Vegas beat the Oilers not because of their 4th liners who were very physical but because of the Marchessault-Eichel line picking apart the Oilers man to man defense and a difference in the net. Vegas' 4th line did play very physically and through a ton of hits but the Oilers actually dominated those guys when they were on the ice.
Florida was by far the most physical of the three teams they lost to. But the series did not turn on that. It came down to one goal and in reality it is easy to see a different outcome if Skinner makes the save and if Bouchard's shot goes in.
As I pointed out, many of the Oilers best players have very low hit totals but they are not at all soft. In fact, I don't see this team as being soft where it counts. They will also add Kane if you want another guy who can punish the opposition. Something that can help to turn a game. But like FO's such instances are far more rare than people's perception makes them out to be. The playoffs are also a very different environment. The intensity of the competition tends to up the physical aspect of the game for many players.
