I agree with some of what you're saying for sure. I'd probably keep my centres as is and trade my #4 this year for a solid D acquisition.

Not sure trading Nurse is the answer. Actually, its not the answer.

I'd try and sign 1 or 2 key players, such as maybe a Yandle. I wouldn't trade for Barrie. He's slick, but I would first try and sign Yandle, see if you can get him with less term but more money. Maybe a 4 year deal at 6 mil. The term is what would scare me with any player. The $ figure is nothing. Anyone can be moved with less term.

As for Yakupov, if you keep him, you should be keeping him for two reasons... 1/ to hope he improves and perhaps salvage him or 2/ hope he improves and use him as trade bait mid season. Either way, I would be pumping and dumping him if it were me. Play him carefully with elite players, have your coach talk him up and hope some team bites. Oil aren't far away. Need to be smart with current players and acquisitions.

2. Don't punt Nail Yakupov. No one is paying fair value for him, so instead of wasting him, use him in an offensive role and, if necessary, use the teams amazing offensive depth to shelter him so he can be more effective.

Yet Yzerman made (in your words) "the worst player management decision in history" by not trading Drouin for less than fair value...

I also wonder if the Oilers injury problems for the last few years may be linked to the condition of being one of the weakest teams in the NHL in regards to "team toughness" for quite awhile.
Also size does not always make a team tougher, (ie Purcell, Penner) many large size players play with no toughness at all, while many smaller(5'10 - 6') players play with a burr under their saddle(Marchand, Gallager, even Simmons is only 185lbs and plays like a 220lber)

Edmonton should trade down with Montreal.

4th for 9th + Juulsen and Lindgren.
Draft 1 of Sergachev, Juolevi or Chychrun

Adding 2 very nice d prospects and a nice G as well.

Montreal gets a none smurf who can be an impact player up front.

but certainly full years from Klefbom, McDavid, Yakupov and RNH would have made a huge difference in the standings.

aren't you forgetting a few things?:

If you're removing injuries from the equation, for the effect of showing how much better one particular team would have been, then you also have to remove all injuries from all teams.

So, sure, the Oilers would have been better, but their competition would have been better also, and for all intents and purposes this really waters down most of that argument.

Then there's also the notion that good teams find ways to win, regardless of injuries. Yeah, one could make the argument it's McDavid we're talking about in the case of the Oilers so it's not just your standard injured player.

Well, i guess someone forgot to tell the Lightening that they're not suppose to be winning games because their superstar has been out for their entire playoff run thus far....oh and not just Stamkos, they've been missing one of their better D men also!!

OK.
- Atomic Wedgie

You know, kinda like a coin flip...

What does this have to do with the Coyotes?

Edmonton should trade down with Montreal.

4th for 9th + Juulsen and Lindgren.
Draft 1 of Sergachev, Juolevi or Chychrun

Adding 2 very nice d prospects and a nice G as well.

Montreal gets a none smurf who can be an impact player up front.
- Cooshie

Great, more prospects for the Oil...

Nah, it's a good analogy. Analogies aren't meant to be exact. But last year's 29th place finish has nothing to say about where a healthy Oilers team could finish next year.
- James_Tanner

When your analogy distracts from the point you're trying to make because it doesn't make sense, then it's not a good analogy.

When your analogy distracts from the point you're trying to make because it doesn't make sense, then it's not a good analogy.
- khawk

Honestly, who cares? You guys must be really bored today.

Honestly, who cares? You guys must be really bored today.
- James_Tanner

Wednesday afternoon - what do you expect!!

You're not wrong

And for sure I'd be singing a different tune if he was on my team



It's a pretty fine line though from him dominating physically and just destroying anyone in his path with zero regard. And I've noticed that line has been crossed by him more and more these days.
Or maybe I'm just looking for it more, I dunno

But he's certainly a beast and if he's trying to intimidate, it's working well
- HB77

It is pretty fun to watch him wipe out people

Honestly, who cares? You guys must be really bored today.
- James_Tanner

You're right, why bother trying to make coherent points? Such a waste of time.

Tanner, I like your blogs and often agree with your write ups...
However, your Quarter Flipping comparison is just wrong.
Quarters are inanimate and the past has no effect emotionally on it.

If you don't think that all the negativity of playing for the Oilers doesn't sink in and effect how these guys play in the future, I think you are wrong. Not that it can't change, but it takes time.
- Cooshie

The problem with his reasoning is far more fundamental than that. It presumes that all players/coaches etc. are all equal.

Any sane individual knows luck is a part of success, but certainly not to the level that Tanner argues it to be.

The problem with his reasoning is far more fundamental than that. It presumes that all players/coaches etc. are all equal.

Any sane individual know luck is a part of success, but certainly not to the level that Tanner argues it to be.
- Aetherial

He literally believes this.

but certainly full years from Klefbom, McDavid, Yakupov and RNH would have made a huge difference in the standings.

aren't you forgetting a few things?:

If you're removing injuries from the equation, for the effect of showing how much better one particular team would have been, then you also have to remove all injuries from all teams.

So, sure, the Oilers would have been better, but their competition would have been better also, and for all intents and purposes this really waters down most of that argument.

Then there's also the notion that good teams find ways to win, regardless of injuries. Yeah, one could make the argument it's McDavid we're talking about in the case of the Oilers so it's not just your standard injured player.

Well, i guess someone forgot to tell the Lightening that they're not suppose to be winning games because their superstar has been out for their entire playoff run thus far....oh and not just Stamkos, they've been missing one of their better D men also!!i
- nikel

I would counter that point saying that no other team had as impactful injuries last year as Edmonton, as we never had our entire core together FOR A SINGLE GAME last year.

Honestly, who cares? You guys must be really bored today.
- James_Tanner

we may be bored, but the more important question is, what's your excuse?

Honestly, who cares? You guys must be really bored today.
- James_Tanner

Seriously? You through out a garbage analogy to base your entire argument on and then when (multiple) people point out the (multiple) holes in it, you blame the others for being too nitpicky? You sound like my 6 year old. And you understand the NHL as well as her too.
Conference & Cup champs, eh? That's as ridiculous as thinking that trading a good, young D-man for a good, middle-aged D-man is what is going to change the Oilers fortunes.
And your right, I must be bored today - I read your blog.

p.s. - you should STILL stick to blogging about music.

Hahahahaha! Thanks for the laugh James. Here let me help you.

As any half-way intelligent person can tell you, if you flip a coin and get heads ten times in a row, you know you will get tails eventually. If you follow this analogy and apply it to the Oilers (who coincidentally have missed the playoffs for ten straight years), what it means is that if you keep guessing this is the year they make the playoffs you will eventually be correct.

Keep hope alive....keep guessing Oilers!

BTW, Nurse is going to be good, if he gets proper coaching.
- yzermaneely

Took my exact comment and I'm pretty positive that is why he used the coin flipping example.

In regards to 4th overall pick - at Trade Deadine GMs throw 1st round picks away,
On Draft Day - GMs lose their minds on the value of a 4th overall pick(this combined with teams having salary cap issues)

Wednesday afternoon - what do you expect!!
- Cooshie

People not to be whiny and pedantic and argue about semantics? Not like I'm shooting that high here.

People not to be whiny and pedantic and argue about semantics? Not like I'm shooting that high here.
- James_Tanner

Why do people always attribute this incorrect definition of insanity to Albert Einstein? It comes from a 1980 narcotics anonymous pamphlet and is not in any way, shape or form the definition of anything.
- James_Tanner

The fact that its that post you answered just proves that you are wrong about alot of stuff but you have some good points.

Oilers did have bad luck this year but there are still alot of IFS.

Talbok shows potential, but he has still not been a #1 goalie for a full season in his career. Nor any playoff experience as well. He may not be a goalie who can take a team to a SC.

Mcdavid is awesome, but there is a reason some players get sophmore slump, and theres a reason that it has become an common expression because it does happen to alot of rookies. I personally dont think it will happen but if he only substains his game and production he will be a hart nominee. If he do improves his play, he will get 95+ points which has happened few times the last five years. Im sure he will get 100+ points eventuelly but not next year.

Alot of players on the backend needs to play in a top lever consistantly. They should absolutely pursue Yandle. If they can get it done for market price or slightly above then that adds some much needed experience on D.

They need to make some sort of move i think just to change things up. Some winning experience is needed.

People not to be whiny and pedantic and argue about semantics? Not like I'm shooting that high here.
- James_Tanner

Actually, you seem plenty high to me!

People not to be whiny and pedantic and argue about semantics? Not like I'm shooting that high here.
- James_Tanner

It's not a matter of semantics when you use an analogy that isn't meaningful or appropriate to your argument. Apparently it's easier just to insult people who actually understand the concept of a coin toss than concede that it maybe wasn't a great choice of analogies.