Rumor: Rumors & Proposals Thread | With Klingberg in the Mix Who Are Our 7D After the Deadline?

[Soundwave]

Anahiem was one of the worst teams in the league. It’s ridiculous you don’t factor in that. Yes backups had some success. That’s not the same as playing years and years as the starter on a terrible team.

The funny part of it too is they don't want to admit if you put Stuart Skinner on that team the last three years, he wouldn't even be in the NHL anymore. He'd wash out of the league like Ben Scrivens did here under Eakins.

 

[Jarvi]

Say Savoie comes up and looks good next to drai, and the team thinks Kane will be good to go early in the playoffs, I think I do the following, if these guys are actually available.

Arvidsson+2 1st+O'Reilly for Dobson
+Travis Mitchell. Isles want fwds, this gives them one now and one later, while also being more value than a potential offersheet. It's a lot, but I don't think RV has much value at all, and his cap is better used on the back end. Isles will be able to get a better win now fwd for Dobson, so we need to make up that value with picks. Mitchell gives us a 7/8 LHD as we have none in the system, dunno anything about him tbh, maybe you can put Cholowski there if they value Mitchell more? Idk, just get a depth LHD or a later pick to even it up a tad and use for a lhd elsewhere.

Akey+2nd+4th for Gibson @50%. Gibson's value is hard to gauge, but retaining 3 mil for this and next year will cost. Bringing in Dobson makes Akey expendable. Close to what the Avs paid for Blackwood.

2nd+Wanner+4th for Donato@50%.

It makes the fwds weaker, maybe. Donato is producing a lot more than Arvy, but who knows if that continues here where he gets less touches. I don't want to rely on top 6 Savoie, but I think you can rotate guys into that spot depending on the hot hand. The defense is set for years, until Ek retires.

Nuge-McD-Hyman
Skinner-Drai-Kapanen/Savoie/Perry
Donato-Rico-Brown
Janmark-Philp-Perry/Kap/Savoie
Kane

Ek-Bouch
Nurse-Dobson
Kulak-Emberson
LHD-Stecher

Gibson
Skinner

Maybe you move out Pickard, Klingberg etc to recoup some lesser picks. Maybe you try and swing a late pick for a bottom 6 RHC, but I don't think it's necessary considering we can move Nuge to C and I have liked Philps game for the most part. The amateur scouts will be pissed, but a cup makes it worth it.

 

[belair]

And yet has better numbers than Skinner on a far worse team. Gibson also starts off well before his team is an utter disaster and his play is reflective of that.

And to counter your question- you k ow who is t a starting goaltender…Stuart Skinner. That isn’t opinion, that’s based on actual data

Data doesn't determine a player's role. Playing time does. Data is a tool that helps you measure performance over a chosen sample.

 

[belair]

Gibson has just as good if not better stats on the ducks then skinner does on the Oilers. Ask your self one simple question. Would Gibson stats get better or worse on the Oilers and would skinners get netter or worse on the ducks. Pretty easy answer

There's nothing that can determine whether or not a goalie will succeed in a different environment. As mentioned in a previous post, a vast number of Gibson's successful starts have come against non-playoff teams this season. There's also the likelihood that teams tend to take it easy on the Anaheim Ducks historically considering they've been a pushover opponent for some time.

Pretty easy conclusion for me is that John Gibson is washed. And if he was an easily attainable asset, he would've been in Carolina some time ago. Not worth the likely cost complicated by his contract.

 

[belair]

Anahiem was one of the worst teams in the league. It’s ridiculous you don’t factor in that. Yes backups had some success. That’s not the same as playing years and years as the starter on a terrible team.

Those backups are both starting goalies in the NHL today. You're just assuming that a former starting goalie is somehow better than his actual performance because his team is bad?

 

[McTedi]

Say Savoie comes up and looks good next to drai, and the team thinks Kane will be good to go early in the playoffs, I think I do the following, if these guys are actually available.

Arvidsson+2 1st+O'Reilly for Dobson
+Travis Mitchell. Isles want fwds, this gives them one now and one later, while also being more value than a potential offersheet. It's a lot, but I don't think RV has much value at all, and his cap is better used on the back end. Isles will be able to get a better win now fwd for Dobson, so we need to make up that value with picks. Mitchell gives us a 7/8 LHD as we have none in the system, dunno anything about him tbh, maybe you can put Cholowski there if they value Mitchell more? Idk, just get a depth LHD or a later pick to even it up a tad and use for a lhd elsewhere.

Akey+2nd+4th for Gibson @50%. Gibson's value is hard to gauge, but retaining 3 mil for this and next year will cost. Bringing in Dobson makes Akey expendable. Close to what the Avs paid for Blackwood.

2nd+Wanner+4th for Donato@50%.

It makes the fwds weaker, maybe. Donato is producing a lot more than Arvy, but who knows if that continues here where he gets less touches. I don't want to rely on top 6 Savoie, but I think you can rotate guys into that spot depending on the hot hand. The defense is set for years, until Ek retires.

Nuge-McD-Hyman
Skinner-Drai-Kapanen/Savoie/Perry
Donato-Rico-Brown
Janmark-Philp-Perry/Kap/Savoie
Kane

Ek-Bouch
Nurse-Dobson
Kulak-Emberson
LHD-Stecher

Gibson
Skinner

Maybe you move out Pickard, Klingberg etc to recoup some lesser picks. Maybe you try and swing a late pick for a bottom 6 RHC, but I don't think it's necessary considering we can move Nuge to C and I have liked Philps game for the most part. The amateur scouts will be pissed, but a cup makes it worth it.

Holy f***ing over pay!!! Its Noah Dobson not Cale Makar. Dobson is good and legit top 4, maybe even top tier but not worth all that.

 

[CanadasTeam99]

.900 on a bad team actually is pretty good, Skinner being .900 on like one of the best teams in the league is really poor.

Gibson is not going to be playing behind a rebuilding team here if we buy on him, there's a fair chance his numbers stay where they are or even rise a bit if he were brought here.

Skinner wouldn't even be in the league if you took him and put him on the last three years versions of the Ducks. Can you imagine this dude playing on a Dallas Eakins team? He would completely wash out of the league period.

Stuart Skinner is a starting goalie the same way Kailer Yamamoto is a top 6 forward ... they're not and the longer the charade goes on the more clear it becomes they're not.

Some people choose to put their head into the sand when it comes to this.

Throw Skinner in ANA and woof. Imagine how much more his #'s would tank? He has #'s right now like he plays for a tanking team.

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

@tardigrade81 is a good goalie but I don’t see any of you clowns lobbying for him to get a chance.

 

[belair]

Some people choose to put their head into the sand when it comes to this.

Throw Skinner in ANA and woof. Imagine how much more his #'s would tank? He has #'s right now like he plays for a tanking team.

Which part? The part where he posted the 0.888 last season in a year where his partner posted the 0.902 playing the same number of games? Or the last time he was a 0.900 goalie in 2022, where his Sv% was third on the team?

This has nothing to do with Stuart Skinner. This is a comment specifically about John Gibson, who is a player who's going to cost you something similar to what you'd have to pay for an A+ rental to acquire because of the necessary cap considerations.

Are we just imagining that he'll do better on the better team because of the goalie he was in 2017?

 

[Burnt Biscuits]

On my phone but heres the numbers from hockey reference for the stanley champions save % in the regular season vs the Oilers current numbers.

View attachment 975156

NHL Stanley Cup Winners | Hockey-Reference.com

Stanley Cup winners from 1918 to today on Hockey-Reference.com.

www.hockey-reference.com

The 2009 Chicago blachawks had a 0.901 sv% and then when the hurricanes won with a .897 sv%. The hurricanes won that series because Roloson was injured. Niemi was the only one to win a cup and it was in spite of him not because of it.

The goal isn't to be good or average. It's to be the best and win a cup.

I'll just say taking the average of those and being like that's the level of goaltending we need is an unrealistic expectation, the league average save percentage has been dropping rapidly in that time frame.

The current league average save percentage is 0.902 and the league average for those years is 0.910, meaning your Stanley Cup teams had sv%'s 0.006 above the average, so in the current era that would be a 0.908 sv% goalie. I'll also say those first 5 you used in your sample skewed the results to be more extreme, if you take them out the gap needed is even smaller.

 

[Soundwave]

There's nothing that can determine whether or not a goalie will succeed in a different environment. As mentioned in a previous post, a vast number of Gibson's successful starts have come against non-playoff teams this season. There's also the likelihood that teams tend to take it easy on the Anaheim Ducks historically considering they've been a pushover opponent for some time.

Pretty easy conclusion for me is that John Gibson is washed. And if he was an easily attainable asset, he would've been in Carolina some time ago. Not worth the likely cost complicated by his contract.

This is largely nonsense. Goaltenders tend to have better numbers on a better team.

If the Oilers acquire a goalie from a bad team, it’s a fairly good bet their numbers will rise here. Our defensive system is elite and capable of choking the life out of other teams when we dial in. You put a higher talent goalie behind that and let their confidence grow and the combo would be very formidable.

 

[CanadasTeam99]

Anahiem was one of the worst teams in the league. It’s ridiculous you don’t factor in that. Yes backups had some success. That’s not the same as playing years and years as the starter on a terrible team.

What we know is that ANA had 3 better goalies than SKinner. Their "worst" one is better than he is.

Which part? The part where he posted the 0.888 last season in a year where his partner posted the 0.902 playing the same number of games? Or the last time he was a 0.900 goalie in 2022, where his Sv% was third on the team?

This has nothing to do with Stuart Skinner. This is a comment specifically about John Gibson, who is a player who's going to cost you something similar to what you'd have to pay for an A+ rental to acquire because of the necessary cap considerations.

Are we just imagining that he'll do better on the better team because of the goalie he was in 2017?

The part where he plays for a garbage team who allow a ton more chances against?

Skinner throws up #'s like he plays for a bottom 5 team.

I don't care if Gibson "lost his job". That guy will still outperform Skinner in Edmonton

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

Those backups are both starting goalies in the NHL today. You're just assuming that a former starting goalie is somehow better than his actual performance because his team is bad?

and?

Yes I’m assuming that plays a big factor. Again it’s ridiculous to think it doesn’t. Expecting solid numbers as a starter on a last place / close to last place team for years and years is just not reasonable.

 

[Zerotonine]

Is there a trade freeze during 4 nations?

I mean we don't play another game for 2 fking weeks

 

[CanadasTeam99]

John Gibson over his last 10 games

0.925%

His wins

Dallas - 0.963
Florida - 0.955
PIT - 0.969
NSH - 0.900
Tampa - 0.973

Yup, I took a gander at some of his wins in the last 10 games like Belair said lol

He has played 22 games on a SH** team and has a 0.914% and 2.69 GAA

Skinner is at 0.900 and 2.74 GAA with 37 games played

Call ANA and go get this guy

 

[Soundwave]

The .900 Skinner has here is inflated too. Put him on almost any other team and that number goes down. There’s not many teams on our level.

 

[belair]

This is largely nonsense. Goaltenders tend to have better numbers on a better team.

If the Oilers acquire a goalie from a bad team, it’s a fairly good bet their numbers will rise here. Our defensive system is elite and capable of choking the life out of other teams when we dial in. You put a higher talent goalie behind that and let their confidence grow and the combo would be very formidable.

Why didn't that work for Jack Campbell though? Projecting goalie performance is harder than you're suggesting here. But if it was really that simple, why would a team ever pay a premium to acquire a goalie? There are plenty of goalies playing on bad teams in the league.

You label John Gibson as a 'higher talent' goaltender when that hasn't been the case in about seven years. I'm just just giving you the reality of the player he's been in that period of time, because we seem to be glossing over it because our own goalie is currently struggling.

 

[McDoused]

Any love for Mark Kastelic?

Hes 6'4, right shot center and 56% in the dlt. He's fast with an 87% in top speed and 93% in speed bursts over 20 mph. He leads the bruins in hits and is extended on a 1.57M contract until 2028.

If he's available, he's someone I would have a lot of interest in.

 

[CanadasTeam99]

Why didn't that work for Jack Campbell though? Projecting goalie performance is harder than you're suggesting here. But if it was really that simple, why would a team ever pay a premium to acquire a goalie? There are plenty of goalies playing on bad teams in the league.

You label John Gibson as a 'higher talent' goaltender when that hasn't been the case in about seven years. I'm just just giving you the reality of the player he's been in that period of time, because we seem to be floating over it because our own goalie is currently struggling.

Jack came from a good Toronto team who was not even close to as bad as Anaheim and didn't allow close to as many SC and HDC against. Completely different.

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

Why didn't that work for Jack Campbell though? Projecting goalie performance is harder than you're suggesting here. But if it was really that simple, why would a team ever pay a premium to acquire a goalie? There are plenty of goalies playing on bad teams in the league.

You label John Gibson as a 'higher talent' goaltender when that hasn't been the case in about seven years. I'm just just giving you the reality of the player he's been in that period of time, because we seem to be floating over it because our own goalie is currently struggling.

Because Jack Campbell was a mental midget…

 

[Mcnotloilersfan]

Rantanen (extended)
Gibson (retained)
Depth Defenseman

I'm going to keep saying it until it comes true by the deadline

 

[FlameChampion]

Sometimes I wonder with McDavid if the injuries are starting to pile up?

I could be wrong but it doesn’t seem like he has had many surgeries. I think he had one for the collarbone injury but not sure hes had any others. Even the bad knee injury he just rehabilitated it. I wonder if hes trying to just play through things rather than going the surgery route.

Hes been off all year (for him). And was times he looked off last year.

 

[belair]

and?

Yes I’m assuming that plays a big factor. Again it’s ridiculous to think it doesn’t. Expecting solid numbers as a starter on a last place / close to last place team for years and years is just not reasonable.

And it's a really poor way to measure performance. I'd be really concerned if that was the way our team made their organizational decisions.

It's possible to be a good goalie on a bad team. John Gibson has been a bad goalie on a bad team for a while now. Certainly not worth the risk.

 

[Messrules11]

And it's a really poor way to measure performance. I'd be really concerned if that was the way our team made their organizational decisions.

It's possible to be a good goalie on a bad team. John Gibson has been a bad goalie on a bad team for a while now. Certainly not worth the risk.

So what is your suggestion then, to run with Skinner?

 

[TopShelfGloveSide]

And it's a really poor way to measure performance. I'd be really concerned if that was the way our team made their organizational decisions.

It's possible to be a good goalie on a bad team. John Gibson has been a bad goalie on a bad team for a while now. Certainly not worth the risk.

I’m saying it’s a big factor when measuring his performance… I’m flabbergasted you think it’s not a factor.

How many starting goalies have maintained solid numbers for years on a close to last place team?