Rumor: Rumors & Proposals Thread: Cap Gymnastics

[SK13]

It’s called playing the odds. When a player is injured for a pretty significant period time in 90% of his pro seasons you probably shouldn’t be counting on that guy to play 80+ games a year.

Klefbom played 82 games in 16-17, could have played 80 in 17-18 and lost 20 games to an errant stick breaking his hand in 18-19: something that has absolutely nothing to do with being "injury prone" on any level.

He has suffered three major time losses in his career. Two before he ever came to NA like 7 years ago, the other was a freak infection. There is no credibility behind this myth at all.

 

[MessierII]

Klefbom played 82 games in 16-17, could have played 80 in 17-18 and lost 20 games to an errant stick breaking his hand in 18-19: something that has absolutely nothing to do with being "injury prone" on any level.

He has suffered three major time losses in his career. Two before he ever came to NA like 7 years ago, the other was a freak infection. There is no credibility behind this myth at all.

It’s not a myth it’s reality. He simply does not stay healthy. Just because injuries aren’t directly related doesn’t mean they don’t count or whatever it is your trying to say. He does get injured for long periods of time almost all the time. That’s a fact not my opinion.

 

[joestevens29]

You also can't keep injecting rookie defensemen into the team when the goalie couldn't stop a beachball.

I'm all for replacing Benning and Russell, but with actual NHL players.

Especially when our top 4 isn't exactly that great either. Be one thing if we had a legit top pairing, but we don't. We need a bottom pairing that can actually fill in in the top 4 when others are struggling.

 

[SK13]

It’s not a myth it’s reality. He simply does not stay healthy. Just because injuries aren’t directly related doesn’t mean they don’t count or whatever it is your trying to say. He does get injured for long periods of time almost all the time. That’s a fact not my opinion.

You don't get to hide this behind your "opinion" because what you're saying is objectively, demonstrably nonsense.

Explain to me how getting your fingers broken by a player waving his stick around - the only, non-elective thing that has cost Klefbom more than 2 games in three years - is part of any kind of pattern that places Klefbom as injury prone?

Go on: I'll wait.

 

[MessierII]

You don't get to hide this behind your "opinion" because what you're saying is objectively, demonstrably nonsense.

Explain to me how getting your fingers broken by a player waving his stick around - the only, non-elective thing that has cost Klefbom more than 2 games in three years - is part of any kind of pattern that places Klefbom as injury prone.

Go on: I'll wait.

The pattern is irrelevant. The type of injuries are irrelevant. It’s simply a fact that Klefbom has been injured or missed significant time with some sort of physical ailment in just about every season of his pro career going back almost 10 years.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

You also can't keep injecting rookie defensemen into the team when the goalie couldn't stop a beachball.

I'm all for replacing Benning and Russell, but with actual NHL players.

That’s not how the league works. Somewhere at some point you have to give a rookie a shot. We’re not trying to develop AHL players, we’re trying to develop NHL players.

We’ve seen Jones at this level and as long as he wasn’t asked to play 22 minutes a night he was more than fine. Gravel, you’ll note, is also not a rookie. I’d be totally fine with the 5/6/7 slots being Jones/Persson/Gravel.

 

[Hemsky is a gangsta]

The pattern is irrelevant. The type of injuries are irrelevant. It’s simply a fact that Klefbom has been injured or missed significant time with some sort of physical ailment in just about every season of his pro career going back almost 10 years.

I would say the pattern is relevant if you're trying to predict how many games he's going to miss going forward.

 

[SK13]

The pattern is irrelevant. The type of injuries are irrelevant. It’s simply a fact that Klefbom has been injured or missed significant time with some sort of physical ailment in just about every season of his pro career going back almost 10 years.

The only way you could possibly make any kind of point about Klefbom's health in the future is if you're suggesting that his injuries in the past somehow correlate to his future. You have to show that this is a player who has been prone to miss time due to reckless or dangerous play (ala Taylor Hall), or has recurring problem areas (ala Sidney Crosby).

But when the only reason the player has missed any real time in the NHL for years and years is a staph infection and a slashed handful of fingers - the simply fact that he has missed a bit of time in the past doesn't say anything, at all, on any logical level possible, about how likely he is to miss any time in the future.

Which is why he has played 86% of the games the Oilers have played in the last 3 years, and that number could have been 91% by choice.

 

[joestevens29]

That’s not how the league works. Somewhere at some point you have to give a rookie a shot. We’re not trying to develop AHL players, we’re trying to develop NHL players.

We’ve seen Jones at this level and as long as he wasn’t asked to play 22 minutes a night he was more than fine. Gravel, you’ll note, is also not a rookie. I’d be totally fine with the 5/6/7 slots being Jones/Persson/Gravel.

Rookies and guys that are #7/8 cannot make up our bottom pairing. Our top 4 just isn't good enough to shelter them.

 

[Hemsky is a gangsta]

Can we do Lucic for Kesler, a la Clarkson for Horton?

 

[SK13]

Rookies and guys that are #7/8 cannot make up our bottom pairing. Our top 4 just isn't good enough to shelter them.

Don't see much reason to assume Jones or Lagesson are "#7/#8's".

Our top-4 hasn't been good enough to shelter Russell either. I think it's very possible one of these guys is just flat out better than Russell is now.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

Rookies and guys that are #7/8 cannot make up our bottom pairing. Our top 4 just isn't good enough to shelter them.

Then it’s the top four that needs improvement. It’s not sustainable to be pants shittingly terrified to have a rookie in the lineup in a non-key role - and the only way the top four GETS improvement is by developing our own contributing young defencemen.

We’ve seen this song and dance before. Having this much money invested in this defence is not working. We need to overturn at least three of Larsson/Sekera/Russell/Benning/7th D - and it’s probably not going to be Larsson.

Your bottom pairing should only be on the ice 14-15 minutes a night vs other teams 3rd and 4th lines. If that can’t be managed either your coach sucks at line matching or your player development team should be outright canned.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

That’s not how the league works. Somewhere at some point you have to give a rookie a shot. We’re not trying to develop AHL players, we’re trying to develop NHL players.

We’ve seen Jones at this level and as long as he wasn’t asked to play 22 minutes a night he was more than fine. Gravel, you’ll note, is also not a rookie. I’d be totally fine with the 5/6/7 slots being Jones/Persson/Gravel.

You give a rookie a shot when you're confident they can handle NHL duties on a consistent basis and the team won't suffer.

This isn't the Tampa Bay Lightning. This is the Oilers, a team that gets exposed very easily on the back end. Even when the Oilers had their defense completely healthy they weren't even close enough to being good. That's not going to improve with Jones or whoever else. You run the risk of ruining development and confidence by promoting defensemen. While I think over ripening prospects is a bit silly, in the defense's case it's very much a valid strategy.

Just because they're playing in a limited role doesn't mean they can't be exposed. A smart team will put out their best players against rookies.

 

[MessierII]

The only way you could possibly make any kind of point about Klefbom's health in the future is if you're suggesting that his injuries in the past somehow correlate to his future. You have to show that this is a player who has been prone to miss time due to reckless or dangerous play (ala Taylor Hall), or has recurring problem areas (ala Sidney Crosby).

But when the only reason the player has missed any real time in the NHL for years and years is a staph infection and a slashed handful of fingers - the simply fact that he has missed a bit of time in the past doesn't say anything, at all, on any logical level possible, about how likely he is to miss any time in the future.

Which is why he has played 86% of the games the Oilers have played in the last 3 years, and that number could have been 91% by choice.

84.9% sure but again my definition of an injury prone is simply a player who gets injured all the time. Klefbom meets that criteria. Your narrow definition and cherry picked examples don’t change the fact lots of players simply get hurt a lot in a lot of different ways. Gaborik for example has had knee problems, shoulder problems, back problems etc for some players the lost just goes on. Betting on Klefbom to play a full season or close to it is just not a good bet.

 

[joestevens29]

Then it’s the top four that needs improvement. It’s not sustainable to be pants ****tingly terrified to have a rookie in the lineup in a non-key role - and the only way the top four GETS improvement is by developing our own contributing young defencemen.

We’ve seen this song and dance before. Having this much money invested in this defence is not working. We need to overturn at least three of Larsson/Sekera/Russell/Benning/7th D - and it’s probably not going to be Larsson.

Your bottom pairing should only be on the ice 14-15 minutes a night vs other teams 3rd and 4th lines. If that can’t be managed either your coach sucks at line matching or your player development team should be outright canned.

Lot easier to make a stronger bottom pairing then it is to fix that top 4.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

You give a rookie a shot when you're confident they can handle NHL duties on a consistent basis and the team won't suffer.

This isn't the Tampa Bay Lightning. This is the Oilers, a team that gets exposed very easily on the back end. Even when the Oilers had their defense completely healthy they weren't even close enough to being good. That's not going to improve with Jones or whoever else. You run the risk of ruining development and confidence by promoting defensemen. While I think over ripening prospects is a bit silly, in the defense's case it's very much a valid strategy.

Just because they're playing in a limited role doesn't mean they can't be exposed. A smart team will put out their best players against rookies.

You don’t get to do that on home ice - line matching is much easier. On the road, maybe a bit more of an issue, but half this board was calling for Russell and Benning’s heads all season long - you among the loudest - and now you somehow have an issue with replacing them with a top three prospect and a guy that’s played pro hockey vs men for two years? Come on. No, we aren’t the Lightning, but we also aren’t the Devils with 30+ million in cap space. We need to manufacture some. A six million dollar bottom pairing is every bit the anchor that Lucic is.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

Lot easier to make a stronger bottom pairing then it is to fix that top 4.

We aren’t paying Holland 5 million dollars a year for easy solutions.

Look, sacrifice is going to have to come somewhere. We tried “three NHL forwards and a bunch of scraps but hey how about that bottom pairing” to completely unspectacular results. It didn’t work. Russell out, Jones in, Benning for Brown, Persson in, and Connolly/Donskoi up front leaves us much better off than before. JMO, but hand wringing over the bottom pairing being slightly downgraded (though I do not believe it is) won’t get us anywhere.

 

[joestevens29]

We aren’t paying Holland 5 million dollars a year for easy solutions.

Look, sacrifice is going to have to come somewhere. We tried “three NHL forwards and a bunch of scraps but hey how about that bottom pairing” to completely unspectacular results. It didn’t work. Russell out, Jones in, Benning for Brown, Persson in, and Connolly/Donskoi up front leaves us much better off than before. JMO, but hand wringing over the bottom pairing being slightly downgraded (though I do not believe it is) won’t get us anywhere.

We can't downgrade our defense. We should be trying to run 3 even pairs until someone steps up or someone becomes available.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

You don’t get to do that on home ice - line matching is much easier. On the road, maybe a bit more of an issue, but half this board was calling for Russell and Benning’s heads all season long - you among the loudest - and now you somehow have an issue with replacing them with a top three prospect and a guy that’s played pro hockey vs men for two years? Come on. No, we aren’t the Lightning, but we also aren’t the Devils with 30+ million in cap space. We need to manufacture some. A six million dollar bottom pairing is every bit the anchor that Lucic is.

Of course, but half the games aren't at home. And icings are still a thing. And then there's the goalie... And the weakness of the defense as a whole.

I want capable replacements for Russell and Benning. The Oilers aren't in a position to take unnecessary gambles on rookies. You wait until the AHL simply cannot contain them.

 

[Fourier]

The pattern is irrelevant. The type of injuries are irrelevant. It’s simply a fact that Klefbom has been injured or missed significant time with some sort of physical ailment in just about every season of his pro career going back almost 10 years.

It does matter what sort of injuries we are talking about if the issue is trying to predict the future. Most of the time he has missed has been due to very random events. If the injuries are not a threat to reoccur then mathematically your argument is analogous to saying that if I toss a fair coin three times and it comes up tails all three times then the next flip is again more likely to be tails.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

We can't downgrade our defense. We should be trying to run 3 even pairs until someone steps up or someone becomes available.

Jones played ~20 games and largely did quite well until he was asked to play top pairing. That’s what stepping up looks like.

And I don’t agree he’s a downgrade, either.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

Of course, but half the games aren't at home. And icings are still a thing. And then there's the goalie... And the weakness of the defense as a whole.

I want capable replacements for Russell and Benning. The Oilers aren't in a position to take unnecessary gambles on rookies. You wait until the AHL simply cannot contain them.

Again; Jones stepped in, played 20 ish games, averaged 20 minutes a night, largely looked good until he was thrown on the top pairing. That’s what stepping up looks like. There is no such thing as “the AHL can’t contain this guy!!!”

 

[Raab]

If you're good, you don't need any experience. Look at Makar for example. Came in and look like a top 4 right off the bat. We are not asking Jones/Lagesson to do that either. Patrolling the bottom pairing is enough while providing cap relief so we can get some help on forward

Makar looks good because he’s sheltered behind some vets. You don’t throw rookies into prime roles when you want to make the playoffs. If they come in and earn a spot fine, move Russell in season. But they have to earn the spot, no more gift wrapped spots.

 

[SK13]

Again; Jones stepped in, played 20 ish games, averaged 20 minutes a night, largely looked good until he was thrown on the top pairing. That’s what stepping up looks like. There is no such thing as “the AHL can’t contain this guy!!!”

Agreed.

It's also fair to point out that he would be the #6, has 2 years of pro experience, has coverage in the form of other emerging prospects like Lagesson, Persson, Bear, Samurokov and Bouchard. This is the exact right situation to go young and shed salary.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

Again; Jones stepped in, played 20 ish games, averaged 20 minutes a night, largely looked good until he was thrown on the top pairing. That’s what stepping up looks like. There is no such thing as “the AHL can’t contain this guy!!!”

There's also no such thing as a 20 NHL game season. He was just okay. Nothing amazing. Why do we need to rush this player all of a sudden?