Rumor: Rumors & Proposals Thread | The Oilers Biggest Roster Need Is?

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

914 in 2 playoff series. One of the worst goaltenders in playoff history the other 4. That’s nothing to parade around.

So as I've said numerous times, this is HFOil. If the Oilers win the game Skinner had absolutely nothing to do with it, and if the Oilers lose he's solely to blame. He gets blamed for almost blowing it vs. the Canucks but gets no credit for beating the Stars and performing reasonably well against the Panthers. What a fanbase, no wonder why we can't develop goaltending here. Four decades and counting of being unable to develop even ONE goalie.

 

[iCanada]

And he had a .914 sv% the rest of the way. Wow, f***ing terrible right?

Except he literally wasn't fine the rest of the way, he was hot and cold.

He was pretty good against Dallas. But even against Dallas - he was dead even playoff average in game 1, he was .810 in game 3, and below average in games 2 and 4 posting a .900 and .906 respectively.

He was really good in game 7, but that just evens out him being just as bad in game 3. He was above average in game 5 too, but again, he was below average in games 2 and 4.

And then he was objectively a coinflip between bad and good in the Florida series. First three games he was several standard deviations below .900. Then he was good in games 4 and 6, but he really wasn't tested at all and we had so much run support we could have dressed David Ayres. Game 5 he was below average, but did his job. Game 7 he was the reason we lost, letting in an atrocious goal that wasn't even a scoring chance by xGF.

I posted this before - but again - the Reinhart goal in game 7 had the same xGF on it at Draisaitl's goal on Fluery from the other side of the red line.

 

[brentashton]

914 in 2 playoff series. One of the worst goaltenders in playoff history the other 4. That’s nothing that will result in a parade around.

Or this…

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

So as I've said numerous times, this is HFOil. If the Oilers win the game Skinner had absolutely nothing to do with it, and if the Oilers lose he's solely to blame. He gets blamed for almost blowing it vs. the Canucks but gets no credit for beating the Stars and performing reasonably well against the Panthers. What a fanbase, no wonder why we can't develop goaltending here.

You don’t even respond to other peoples points. You just reply with moving the goalposts and non sense.

The no credit for not beating the stars is bullshit. He got all the credit in the world because it was the only playoff series he was actually good in.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

Except he literally wasn't fine the rest of the way, he was hot and cold.

He was pretty good against Dallas. But even against Dallas - he was dead even playoff average in game 1, he was .810 in game 3, and below average in games 2 and 4 posting a .900 and .906 respectively.

He was really good in game 7, but that just evens out him being just as bad in game 3. He was above average in game 5 too, but again, he was below average in games 2 and 4.

And then he was objectively a coinflip between bad and good in the Florida series. First three games he was several standard deviations below .900. Then he was good in games 4 and 6, but he really wasn't tested at all and we had so much run support we could have dressed David Ayres. Game 5 he was below average, but did his job. Game 7 he was the reason we lost, letting in an atrocious goal that wasn't even a scoring chance by xGF.

View attachment 935425
View attachment 935426

I posted this before - but again - the Reinhart goal in game 7 had the same xGF on it at Draisaitl's goal on Fluery from the other side of the red line.

View attachment 935429View attachment 935430

Oh I thought we only cared about his sv%? Now it's another stat, I see.

And the fact that those two goals carry the same "Weight" or whatever you want to call it is extremely laughable. This is the concern I have with these advanced stats. Who's recording these? Is it subjective? What are they based on? How is a shot from the opposing blue line worth the same as a snipe? Should he have saved it? Sure, but how are those goals even remotely the same? What was this goal worth on the scale?

You don’t even respond to other peoples points. You just reply with moving the goalposts and non sense.

The no credit for not beating the stars is bullshit. He got all the credit in the world because it was the only playoff series he was actually good in.

Speaking of moving the goalposts, now it's xGF. I guess sv% doesn't matter anymore... People would rather castrate themselves than admit he was pretty decent after the bad Vancouver series.

 

[Soundwave]

If you want to cry about "Skinner gets no respect!", maybe don't have the majority of your playoff rounds with Dan Cloutier tier numbers, maybe don't come into the second start of the season in a row and shit the bed.

The fact is he isn't respected here because he has the strong stench of a fraud.

 

[Old Boys Club]

Would've done that Tomasino deal, ah well.

 

[ManofSteel55]

If you want to cry about "Skinner gets no respect!", maybe don't have the majority of your playoff rounds with Dan Cloutier tier numbers, maybe don't come into the start of the season in a row and shit the bed.

The fact is he isn't respected here because he has the strong stench of a fraud.

The Dan Cloutier comparison might be the best one. Cloutier piled up wins as an awful goalie on a star-studded, cup contending team. If the Canucks had a good goalie instead of Cloutier, they may have won a cup with that core.

 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

Except he literally wasn't fine the rest of the way, he was hot and cold.

He was pretty good against Dallas. But even against Dallas - he was dead even playoff average in game 1, he was .810 in game 3, and below average in games 2 and 4 posting a .900 and .906 respectively.

He was really good in game 7, but that just evens out him being just as bad in game 3. He was above average in game 5 too, but again, he was below average in games 2 and 4.

And then he was objectively a coinflip between bad and good in the Florida series. First three games he was several standard deviations below .900. Then he was good in games 4 and 6, but he really wasn't tested at all and we had so much run support we could have dressed David Ayres. Game 5 he was below average, but did his job. Game 7 he was the reason we lost, letting in an atrocious goal that wasn't even a scoring chance by xGF.

View attachment 935425
View attachment 935426

I posted this before - but again - the Reinhart goal in game 7 had the same xGF on it at Draisaitl's goal on Fluery from the other side of the red line.

View attachment 935429View attachment 935430

The Reinhart goal was stoppable. But using a ridiculous xg comparison here is stretching credibility.

Last season Reinhart was a 57 goal scorer; 13 regular season mid-range goals NHL 96 percentile on 21% ninety-four percentile. Playoffs he added another 10 goals; 3 mid-range goals 98 percentile on 15.8% shooting 76 percentile. 69 total goals last year.

The Oilers need a goaltender upgrade. Unfortunately the big money veteran guy they paid imploded under the pressure. Get a quality veteran who can drive a tandem to push Skinner into a competitive back-up role where he should be within the organization's original window strategy.

 

[ManofSteel55]

This season is reminding me a bit of 05/06. Good team being sunk by awful goaltending. When they traded for an average starter (Roloson), we went to game 7 of the finals.

 

[iCanada]

Oh I thought we only cared about his sv%? Now it's another stat, I see.

And the fact that those two goals carry the same "Weight" or whatever you want to call it is extremely laughable. This is the concern I have with these advanced stats. Who's recording these? Is it subjective? What are they based on? How is a shot from the opposing blue line worth the same as a snipe? Should he have saved it? Sure, but how are those goals even remotely the same? What was this goal worth on the scale?




Speaking of moving the goalposts, now it's xGF. I guess sv% doesn't matter anymore... People would rather castrate themselves than admit he was pretty decent after the bad Vancouver series.

Well, I suspect 0.01 is a rounding error and both are likely less that that.

For the Anderson goal - They didn't have the display for back then.

But if you go back and you look at the xGF change from shot to shot it's about 0.003 xGF on that Anderson goal - meaning you'd have to do that 1000 times to score.

But even at .01 xGF, you should make the save 99 times out of 100.

 

[belair]

Would've done that Tomasino deal, ah well.

Loved his game in the OHL. Wouldn't be surprised to see him figure it out in Pittsburgh.

 

[K1984]

Stunning to me that people still think there's no concern with Skinner.

Does he have the potential and/or to be the guy? Yes.

Has he proven in isolation that he has the talent level to play on a SC contender? Yes.

Has he shown the consistency to be someone that we can 100% rely on to play well through the playoffs? No.

Has he shown the ability to narrow the size of the swings in his game? No.

It really isn't that complicated. He's a guy with some talent that can either give you good enough goaltending or be the sole reason we lose and it is never apparent how or when these instances will occur. This is not conducive to winning in the playoffs. It's not like he has one bad or underwhelming performance and then can jump right back and turn it around, it always drags for games at a time and you never know when it will happen. Just look at the playoffs last year:

Kings series - brutal for Games 1-3, then a stud in Game 4, then back to being mediocre at best in Game 5.

Nucks series - complete joke through games 1-3, then pretty steady for games 6 and 7 with the major caveat that the Oilers were on their game and dominated 6 and 7 severely limiting chances against. If anything, goaltending was why Game 7 in particular wasn't an easy multi goal win.

Stars series - Definitely good enough in Game 1 and 2 (but not without some hiccups), dog shit in games 3 and 4. Then good again in 5 and 6 (again, not without some hiccups in 5).

Finals - not objectively terrible in any of the games really, but struggled to make the "big save" that teams need at certain times to win the Stanley Cup when it really mattered. Missing that next step in his game.

I don't know how anyone could look at his playoff record last year and determine that he's definitely the guy. If anything we're very lucky to have gotten as far as we did with circus up and down net minding basically every series. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind we win the Stanley Cup last year with a different goalie even if everything else was exactly the same.

 

[GOilers88]

Agree with you here.

Skinner is a very solid positional goalie who doesn't make a lot of big bonehead mistakes or miscues. He's predictable.

What he is not is (IMO) a true A+ #1 goalie because he simply doesn't have the elite physical skills to make too many game-saving, unbelievable saves... a lot around here expect that from a true #1... I get it... but those guys are so rare and when you can't get one, you can do pretty well with a solid tactician-type goalie. That's what Skinner is.

Skinner is great when the puck is in the zone and he can set himself.

Off the rush is where he struggles hard.

We won despite him. We also almost beat the Carolina Hurricanes the in the 2006 Cup Final with Jussi Markkanen and handicapped a 0-1 start ... that doesn't mean Markkanen was a starter.

Skinner has 1/3 good regular seasons under his belt and that was a year he could do nothing wrong because Campbell was crapping the bed quite probably dealing with a substance abuse issue (from what we know now).

This is now the 2nd poor start for him in as many years.

Playoffs, he's been mediocre.

2nd poor start from the entire team. That's the more concerning thing to me.

 

[K1984]

Skinner is great when the puck is in the zone and he can set himself.

Off the rush is where he struggles hard.

2nd poor start from the entire team. That's the more concerning thing to me.

Other than point shots. He is terrible at seeing/reacting to point shots and often gets beat because he can't see them or track deflections. Also has a very hard time managing rebounds off point shots and gets beat in the subsequent scramble.

My asshole puckers every time I see the opposition wind up from above the circles with time to shoot. I know it's about 30-50% likely that shot is going in either directly or on rebound.

 

[VeteranPresence]

If Nashville is just going to give players away for micropennies on the dollar, can Bowman please wake from his coma at some point over the next six days and find a way to acquire Saros (or Josi)?

 

[GOilers88]

Stunning to me that people still think there's no concern with Skinner.

Does he have the potential and/or to be the guy? Yes.

Has he proven in isolation that he has the talent level to play on a SC contender? Yes.

Has he shown the consistency to be someone that we can 100% rely on to play well through the playoffs? No.

Has he shown the ability to narrow the size of the swings in his game? No.

It really isn't that complicated. He's a guy with some talent that can either give you good enough goaltending or be the sole reason we lose and it is never apparent how or when these instances will occur. This is not conducive to winning in the playoffs. It's not like he has one bad or underwhelming performance and then can jump right back and turn it around, it always drags for games at a time and you never know when it will happen. Just look at the playoffs last year:

Kings series - brutal for Games 1-3, then a stud in Game 4, then back to being mediocre at best in Game 5.

Nucks series - complete joke through games 1-3, then pretty steady for games 6 and 7 with the major caveat that the Oilers were on their game and dominated 6 and 7 severely limiting chances against. If anything, goaltending was why Game 7 in particular wasn't an easy multi goal win.

Stars series - Definitely good enough in Game 1 and 2 (but not without some hiccups), dog shit in games 3 and 4. Then good again in 5 and 6 (again, not without some hiccups in 5).

Finals - not objectively terrible in any of the games really, but struggled to make the "big save" that teams need at certain times to win the Stanley Cup when it really mattered. Missing that next step in his game.

I don't know how anyone could look at his playoff record last year and determine that he's definitely the guy. If anything we're very lucky to have gotten as far as we did with circus up and down net minding basically every series. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind we win the Stanley Cup last year with a different goalie even if everything else was exactly the same.

I won't argue there isn't concern. There's a lot of legit criticisms for Stu, and if there's a deal to be made for a legitimate upgrade I'm all for it. But that likely means a much bigger contract and more risk long term. I think the smart play would be to have another Skinner like guy instead of Picks.

 

[Messrules11]

Good grief this thread, imagine going to bat for Stuart f***ing Skinner. LMAO

 

[ChaoticOrange]

I like Skinner and I think he's excellent when he's on his game. The unfortunate part is he's off his game frequently and there's a pretty sizable book on him now. Get him moving side to side and a goal is almost automatic.

 

[K1984]

I won't argue there isn't concern. There's a lot of legit criticisms for Stu, and if there's a deal to be made for a legitimate upgrade I'm all for it. But that likely means a much bigger contract and more risk long term. I think the smart play would be to have another Skinner like guy instead of Picks.

I'm with you. I'm fundamentally against making huge swings for unfamiliar goalies because bad goalie deals burn you harder than any other contractual mistake.

We just need another option that we can theoretically turn to permanently or for a longer run of games if/when Skinner fails. Pickard can come in and make saves in a snapshot, but he is nowhere near the goalie that can take over mid-stream in the playoffs and be the guy the rest of the way. He's competitive and battles, but is fundamentally not a good goalie.

 

[McTonyBrar]

I think Trotz smoked too many joints today

 

[CanadasTeam99]

“He wasn’t great vs the Canucks” is the understatement of the century. He blew that series and then when Pickard came in and saved his ass, he tried as best as he could to blow game 7 as well in the dying minutes of that game.

And to be clear, people wouldn’t be as worried about his shit history as a goalie if he wasn’t repeating that shit performance every other game now.

He’s literally been a bottom 2 or 3 goalie in the NHL this year. It’s preposterous that he has defenders.

I swear that TJ Miller shot with a few seconds left...Thank god one of our dmen blocked it lol

 

[North]

I think Trotz smoked too many joints today

Trotz is really bad at asset management.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

Well, I suspect 0.01 is a rounding error and both are likely less that that.

For the Anderson goal - They didn't have the display for back then.

But if you go back and you look at the xGF change from shot to shot it's about 0.003 xGF on that Anderson goal - meaning you'd have to do that 1000 times to score.

But even at .01 xGF, you should make the save 99 times out of 100.

It's still not a fair comparison. I also have to question how these things are determined. Like the first goal that Skinner allowed vs. the Rangers was ranked a 0.03 even though Skinner deflected the puck behind him. Had he not touched it the puck doesn't go in. None of the goals allowed in that Rangers game rank above McDavid deking Quick out of his jockstrap to the tune of 0.09 xGF even though he's... well, McDavid. This puts all the goals at a very low value even though Quick was hardly at fault for many of them (maybe the Nurse goal he'd like back).

What's more, the "deserve-to-win" meter puts the Oilers winning in the low to mid 50s for winning. Anyone watching that game knows the Oilers were by far the better team. Moneypuck has the xGF as 2.92 to 2.62 for the Oilers while Natural Stat Trick actually has it 3.23 to 2.85 in favour of the Rangers. Likely these numbers are to do with score effects and the Rangers making a push when behind.

Advanced stats have their place but they shouldn't be the bible. The advanced stats paint the last game as a close one while the eye test says the Oilers ran the Rangers right out of the building. And in this case the eye test is correct. It's important to use both to judge.

 

[McTonyBrar]

This season is reminding me a bit of 05/06. Good team being sunk by awful goaltending. When they traded for an average starter (Roloson), we went to game 7 of the finals.

They also had that random guy named Chris pronger. Do we have someone like him lol?