Proposal: Proposals Thread: Fix this broken club

[Paralyzer008]

I wish that MacT would get some ****ing complimentary players for this core group so that those of you that think that they are all garbage will eat your words and realize how foolish you sounded trying to trade them for a song. If we can't land Ekblad or one of the top C's then draft Ritchie, he would completely change the dynamic of our top 6.

Exactly.

Although I disagree that we can just throw Ritchie into the fire.

But a great example is in Dallas. Nichushkin only has 29 points, but ask anyone there, his size is a huge advantage for their first line, it gives Benn and Seguin so much more room on the ice to play around. We could have had him, but we picked Nurse, and that's not terrible but still we could have had that size I guess.

Difference being Nichushkin was ready, I'm not certain about Ritchie. We just need some more depth and complimentary guys.

 

[Raab]

As is Couturier right? If we had Barkov or Couturier instead of RNH we'd be Cup champs already in your eyes.

I think we'd have a better chance of competing in the west going forward. Something like this in two years could be deadly:

Hall-Barkov-Yakupov
Perron-Couturier-Eberle
UFA-Gordon-Hendricks
Gazdic-UFA/Lander-Pitlick

Could definitely play with the big teams out west here and not get our ***** handed to us.

 

[LTIR]

Their top scorer has what 33 points? Pretty hard to put up points with that type of support. Also most of those guys have played about 10 more games then Barkov. Wouldn't have been surprised to see him put up 40+ points tis season as an 18 year old. Kid reminds me of Kopitar when he was younger.

I am not ragging on the kid.. Just saying that we threw our top picks into the fire right away playing on the top line with Horcoff \Hemsky being the only buffers..
FLA has a rock on D in Campbell and some forwards who produce to ease the rookies in..

The 2 rebuilds are not very similar IMO.. I would also swap Barkov one for one for any Oiler not named Hall or RNH

 

[McDNicks17]

Who exactly are the 7 dmen leading there team from the 2012 draft??

I thought the point was NHLers after one year of development after the draft since it's asinine to expect Nurse to lead the defenseman right out of the gate.

Murray, Trouba, Lindholm and Maata are pretty close to leading their D cores.

Rielly, Ceci and Carrick are regulars.

 

[Raab]

Exactly.

Although I disagree that we can just throw Ritchie into the fire.

But a great example is in Dallas. Nichushkin only has 29 points, but ask anyone there, his size is a huge advantage for their first line, it gives Benn and Seguin so much more room on the ice to play around. We could have had him, but we picked Nurse, and that's not terrible but still we could have had that size I guess.

Difference being Nichushkin was ready, I'm not certain about Ritchie. We just need some more depth and complimentary guys.

Ritchies is bigger then Nichuskin was. Same size as David Backes at 18 which is scary. Have heard he doesn't mind fighting, taking the body, or crashing the net. Also had a 5 goal game this season.

 

[BlowbyBlow]

I hate that people are all about tanking, I hate winning unimportant games for moral victories. This team seems to have resentment for the Paajarvi, or Gagner cause they weren't #1's. Ftr i think that Ekblad will be available for the Oilers, but whats really important now is bringing players up and giving them a chance. That is important to the building of a team.

 

[Raab]

I thought the point was NHLers after one year of development after the draft since it's asinine to expect Nurse to lead the defenseman right out of the gate.

Murray, Trouba, Lindholm and Maata are pretty close to leading their D cores.

Rielly, Ceci and Carrick are regulars.

Fair enough, but how many of them are also on a blue line with 2 or 3 other rookies? Also that list is impressive, to bad we couldn't have finished a little bit better and picked up Trouba. He would have been just what the dr. ordered for this club IMO.

 

[Raab]

I would love to see us go on a mad winning streak at the end of the season then end up winning the lottery again. I think the HF servers would actually catch on fire and melt.

 

[Paralyzer008]

Ritchies is bigger then Nichuskin was. Same size as David Backes at 18 which is scary. Have heard he doesn't mind fighting, taking the body, or crashing the net. Also had a 5 goal game this season.

Nichushkin had played against men though, that I think helped him during the transition.

 

[LTIR]

Nichushkin had played against men though, that I think helped him during the transition.

Not that he would have a good shot at the big club but... Yakimov is supposedly excellent on the dot and uses his 6'5" 200lbs+ frame very effectively..

doesnt really belong in this thread but thought I would add that here since we are talking about big players who have played against men.. Ritchie would be good if we traded down... no way he should go before DalColle nor the 3 top Cs..

 

[Slicknitty]

I would love to see us go on a mad winning streak at the end of the season then end up winning the lottery again. I think the HF servers would actually catch on fire and melt.

I was just coming here to post this. Minus the winning part. To see Buffalo lose the first overall after sucking so hard. Takes me down memory lane I tells ya

 

[Bangers]

Seth Jones went 4th last year, so it's definitely possible that the Oilers get Ekblad.

 

[Halibut]

This is dumb. Who's to say Scrivens and Fasth are still available in the offseason? Then the Oilers could be stuck chasing UFA goalies, and the top ones probably don't want to come here.

...and as it's been pointed out we could lose every game and have a team that just missed the playoffs win the lottery and take Ekblad so there is no benefit to tanking the season.

 

[Raab]

Not that he would have a good shot at the big club but... Yakimov is supposedly excellent on the dot and uses his 6'5" 200lbs+ frame very effectively..

doesnt really belong in this thread but thought I would add that here since we are talking about big players who have played against men.. Ritchie would be good if we traded down... no way he should go before DalColle nor the 3 top Cs..

Ritchie's skill set is very rare, wouldn't be surprised if he was taken high. GM's may think he's the next Lucic.

 

[GMofOilers]

Ritchie's skill set is very rare, wouldn't be surprised if he was taken high. GM's may think he's the next Lucic.

If we finish out of the race to get Ekblad, then Ritchie is my guy.

 

[Draiskull]

Ritchie's skill set is very rare, wouldn't be surprised if he was taken high. GM's may think he's the next Lucic.

Who knows how it will translate when he starts playing against players his own size.. DalColle is a tier above him offensively and has room to grow physically and possibly still be the next Lucic..

 

[McDNicks17]

Who knows how it will translate when he starts playing against players his own size.. DalColle is a tier above him offensively and has room to grow physically and possibly still be the next Lucic..

Ritchie has better offensive tools and Dal Colle doesn't have a mean bone in his body. There's no Lucic potential there.

 

[Beerz]

He's not very good and hasn't shown much at the NHL level.

You might "want" to see him as a 20-20 guy, but he's not doing that now and he's NOT PLAYING IN THE TOP-6 of the Sabres RIGHT NOW. Think about it seriously, could they have a more shallow Top-6 group? Yet he can't crack it? Maybe he's actually not good, that's most likely.

As for Local Radio and it being issue, it's partly true, because it's obvious. However with how much Gregor whines about it, it's more likely he has a bet with someone like Rob Kerr about being able to convince the fans to convince the team to trade one of the kids sooner rather then later.

Actually he has been playing in the top six...and playing quite well since paired with Hodgson.

 

[Roof Daddy]

Fair enough, but how many of them are also on a blue line with 2 or 3 other rookies? Also that list is impressive, to bad we couldn't have finished a little bit better and picked up Trouba. He would have been just what the dr. ordered for this club IMO.

Lindholm (Vatanen) and Maatta (Despres/Samuelsson at times due to injury). But seriously, why does it matter if the rookies are never paired together? What secret rule book are you reading that says the second you have 2 rookie D on your roster your team is a failure?

Is it possible Ekblad could succeed if paired with a quality veteran? I think most people would say yes.

Is it possible Nurse could succeed if paired with a quality veteran? I think most people would say yes.

So if those two theories have nothing to do with one another, why connect them in a blanket statement like "two rookie defenceman on the roster means our D is bad," when their individual success is clearly independent of the other?

 

[Seachd]

Seth Jones went 4th last year, so it's definitely possible that the Oilers get Ekblad.

Not really sure how a certain poster came to the conclusion that the Oilers "blew the opportunity" to draft Ekblad.

 

[Up the Irons]

I wish that MacT would get some ****ing complimentary players for this core group so that those of you that think that they are all garbage will eat your words and realize how foolish you sounded trying to trade them for a song. If we can't land Ekblad or one of the top C's then draft Ritchie, he would completely change the dynamic of our top 6.

a two-way, physical 2C, a 1&2D, and a power, physical top 6 W are not complimentary players; they are core players on good teams. The only way to get said players it to draft them (which we chose not to do) or trade for them, which will require giving up something of quality. See the conundrum, here?

On a good team, Eberle (and Yak until he proves otherwise) is the complimentary player.

 

[5 14 6 1]

Not exactly sure how people are pissed about our goalies no longer being terrible.

14 games left, other teams around us in the standings have games in hand. We could still end up with a top 3 pick pretty easily. If we win 7/14 games which is probably being generous we will only end with 69 points which would still be good for top 4 and no matter what we add a very nice piece either a talented C to help our anemic center depth or defense stud we need(Reinhart, drasaitl, Bennett, Ekblad) then we go into the offseason knowing we have one more hole filled along with the goal tending which finally seems to be fixed.

 

[Up the Irons]

Not exactly sure how people are pissed about our goalies no longer being terrible.

14 games left, other teams around us in the standings have games in hand. We could still end up with a top 3 pick pretty easily. If we win 7/14 games which is probably being generous we will only end with 69 points which would still be good for top 4 and no matter what we add a very nice piece either a talented C to help our anemic center depth or defense stud we need(Reinhart, drasaitl, Bennett, Ekblad) then we go into the offseason knowing we have one more hole filled along with the goal tending which finally seems to be fixed.

a hole filled by an 18 year old. how has that worked for us, heretofore?

if not Ekblad, trade it for a real player.

 

[rosemount289]

Where did..........???

I'm glad that the team's finances are being hit. I think this affects the morale of the team. Colorado's financial stability was extremely shaky and then all of sudden they became good. It seems like players notice these factors and this gives them an extra push. The Leafs and Rangers suffered for decades because there was never a fan consequence for failure. It's time that the team realizes that there are real world consequences for this piss poor product.

Where did Colorado finish in the standings last season.......??? They were worst than Edmonton and drafted 1st overall and they have a new coach.........so the Oilers have no excuse for finishing where they are. I have always stated that you have to gave MacT and Eakins at least a couple of years to do their jobs before any firing.

 

[Raab]

Lindholm (Vatanen) and Maatta (Despres/Samuelsson at times due to injury). But seriously, why does it matter if the rookies are never paired together? What secret rule book are you reading that says the second you have 2 rookie D on your roster your team is a failure?

Is it possible Ekblad could succeed if paired with a quality veteran? I think most people would say yes.

Is it possible Nurse could succeed if paired with a quality veteran? I think most people would say yes.

So if those two theories have nothing to do with one another, why connect them in a blanket statement like "two rookie defenceman on the roster means our D is bad," when their individual success is clearly independent of the other?

The problem is most rookies have a hard time with penalties, especially d men. If we have 3 rookie dmen our PK better be damn good because they'll be in the box ALOT. On top of that theres nothing like having the option of moving a guy with more experience up the lineup if the rookie is getting owned, pretty much all our guys would be LHD. Also there is always injuries, you need depth and having rookies playing in OKC provides that. I think schultz would need to be moved, no way I want him paired with a rookie.