From the blog...



I recognize that many of those deals were made due to cap constraints but the return garnered on those deal were weak, did not give the Hawks any pieces to build on and were a large part of the Hawks being the lottery team they are today.
- freelancer

The main return is cap space. You don't dump large contracts and expect to get a bunch of value in return. Maybe the Oilers could scoop up Yzerman who just included a 2nd round pick to dump Walman. And got zero in return.

As for the Hawks being a lotto team, this is what happens when you go all in with your core, and then your core ages out and moves on. Pittsburgh is headed down that path too. Washington. And it's probably coming for Edmonton in about 7 or 8 years. Just in time for you to blame it all on Bowman. What a joke.

Ekholm and Bouchard were arguably the single best defensive pairing in the league. And I'm not a fan of EDM, that is just objective truth. Suggesting they are inconsequential would be every bit as misleading as ignoring Keith and Seabrook to CHI. EDM will never have the depth CHI had in the SC window. McDavid is also vastly superior to any player Bowman has ever had.
- jfkst1

I completely disagree with your personal assessment of the Ekholm/Slap Shot pairing being the best in the NHL.

It’s absurd to suggest that leaving out Keith and Seabrook (Team Canada/HoF calibre players) is similar to leaving out that pair. Insane. Ekholm is a good dmen absolutely and the best by far on that team but not even close to either one of tide legends.
- Big23Questions

That's because you're making the common mistake of conflating team success with those defensive pairing contributions. Based on your logic, the Hainsey/Dumoulin top pairing of PIT in 2017 (which utterly sucked BTW) is better than Ekholm/Bouchard. The season the Ekholm/Bouchard pairing had together rivaled any Keith and Seabrook provided. I can see an argument for the McDavid effect. But to trivialize their pairing contributions is disingenuous.
https://www.naturalstattr...filt=none&fd=&td=&tgp=410

Hyman was an omission by mistake absolutely.

Bouchard has a shot. On PP. that’s it.

Kane is inconsistent.

Ekholm. Doesn’t move the needle like the others listed do.

I fear you as a fan will never give an unbiased assessment of the teams depth.

Whatever your argument is - the present McPower Plays will never line up depth wise like that team did. Not close.

….etc? Nope. That’s the team.
- Big23Questions

Between the regular season and the playoffs, the Bouchard/Ekholm pairing was a +101 combined, even with the crappy start the Oil had to the season. You do understand that you don't get a + for a PP goal, don't you?

A combined 169 points. Yeah, total jobbers just along for the McRide.

- Marwood

Useless input. Which one was better?

What? How on earth can you omitt these guys but list support pieces like Madden, Bolland, Versteeg and Hjalmarson?

Despite Kane's fault he's 100% comparable to some of the guys listed, same with Ekholm and Bouchard. Even Skinner was really good at times.

Difference between EDM and CHI is that the CHI team was deeper. Also dont forget EDM was just 1 game away from a Stanley cup. EDM lost some depth which will hurt them but nothing they cant add at the deadline.

Ideally they shoiuld move Kane. I dont think he would have any issues waiving as he does not seem happy getting 3rd line minutes and frankly makes too much to be on the 3rd line. His attitude hasnt been great either.
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

Cause Hockey.

Roster composition (depth) wins Cups. Those players you lost were integral in the Cups. From scoring depth, defensive capabilities, physicality, PK and more. Quality of player on position and what they brought game to game consistently. That’s how I can leave them in and not count Kane (who sometimes feels like playing, Perry, Skinner will he let in 5 or get a SO who knows?)

The post I made was to point out the difference - and it’s massive - in depth between the 2 teams. You apparently agree.

Edmonton doesn’t win unless the Jesus gets at least a point or the PP doesn’t contribute at least 2 points. Their PK was definitely a surprise and played really well on the post season so can’t argue there.

No depth. A PP, a superstar, a Jesus, and a rotating player playing well (RNH, Kane, Hyman, and so on). Not deep. They rode Jesus and the PP (and they fit solid PKing). That’s how they got within 2 win.

That's because you're making the common mistake of conflating team success with those defensive pairing contributions. Based on your logic, the Hainsey/Dumoulin top pairing of PIT in 2017 (which utterly sucked BTW) is better than Ekholm/Bouchard. The season the Ekholm/Bouchard pairing had together rivaled any Keith and Seabrook provided. I can see an argument for the McDavid effect. But to trivialize their pairing contributions is disingenuous.
https://www.naturalstattr...filt=none&fd=&td=&tgp=410
- jfkst1

Nope. I’m looking at the calibre of the 4 dmen in question and 2 are worlds ahead. Not confusing anything.

Between the regular season and the playoffs, the Bouchard/Ekholm pairing was a +101 combined, even with the crappy start the Oil had to the season. You do understand that you don't get a + for a PP goal, don't you?

A combined 169 points. Yeah, total jobbers just along for the McRide.
- Beergu

First - why bring playoffs into the relay about the season? Had more opportunities to get more points. Not a fair comparison to a player who’s team never mad playoffs but is a far superior dman. I don’t think Bouchard is a good at defence at all and I don’t think Ekholm is very gifted offensively though he has his years he’s probably an avg 30pt dman (like Brodie McCabe in Toronto who I would argue are nothing special offensively). He doesn’t play PP usually and earns keep on the defensive side. Separately they are not very good. It is a great and really smart pairing (not best in league but definitely a solid pair).

I went through this last season and will say it again. I don’t need to think the McPower Plays are a deep team. I agree stand by opinion (as their own Captain and Coach have stated) they rely on Power Plays to win a lot of hockey games.

You also don’t need to agree with me when I state that Brent Seabrook and Duncan Keith were far superior dmen vs Bouchard and Ekholm. I hate the Hawks but they were unreal Team Canada and HoF players.

Nope. I’m looking at the calibre of the 4 dmen in question and 2 are worlds ahead. Not confusing anything.
- Big23Questions

I'm mostly focusing on their complementary strength as a pairing, but Bouchard is unequivocally a stronger overall player at 24 than Seabrook was at that age. Still a possibility of more upside out of Bouchard too and Seabrook aged quite poorly as well. I'd agree Keith is easily the best of the four at this point.

The main return is cap space. You don't dump large contracts and expect to get a bunch of value in return. Maybe the Oilers could scoop up Yzerman who just included a 2nd round pick to dump Walman. And got zero in return.

As for the Hawks being a lotto team, this is what happens when you go all in with your core, and then your core ages out and moves on. Pittsburgh is headed down that path too. Washington. And it's probably coming for Edmonton in about 7 or 8 years. Just in time for you to blame it all on Bowman. What a joke.
- HockeyBuzzed

I am curious then. What is it that Stan Bowman did specifically with the Blackhawks that make you believe he was the best option for the Oilers GM?

Useless input. Which one was better?
- jfkst1

Thank you for taking on the task of input analysis. Good job.

I'm mostly focusing on their complementary strength as a pairing, but Bouchard is unequivocally a stronger overall player at 24 than Seabrook was at that age. Still a possibility of more upside out of Bouchard too and Seabrook aged quite poorly as well. I'd agree Keith is easily the best of the four at this point.
- jfkst1

Great pairing by the coach.

Cause Hockey.

Roster composition (depth) wins Cups. Those players you lost were integral in the Cups. From scoring depth, defensive capabilities, physicality, PK and more. Quality of player on position and what they brought game to game consistently. That’s how I can leave them in and not count Kane (who sometimes feels like playing, Perry, Skinner will he let in 5 or get a SO who knows?)

The post I made was to point out the difference - and it’s massive - in depth between the 2 teams. You apparently agree.

Edmonton doesn’t win unless the Jesus gets at least a point or the PP doesn’t contribute at least 2 points. Their PK was definitely a surprise and played really well on the post season so can’t argue there.

No depth. A PP, a superstar, a Jesus, and a rotating player playing well (RNH, Kane, Hyman, and so on). Not deep. They rode Jesus and the PP (and they fit solid PKing). That’s how they got within 2 win.
- Big23Questions

Hockey is a team sport. Doesnt matter how good McDavid is. One player cannot carry a team.

You need every other player to play smart and take away chances, you need your goalies to make saves. 13/25 games McDavid had 1 point or less so he wasnt popping out 5 points every game either. Other guys had to chip in.

RNH had 7 goals in the post season. Ekholm 5, Holloway 5, Kane 4, Janmark 4, Mcleod 4, Foegele 3. Is that not depth? Thats 25 goals not from guys named McDavid, Draisaitl, Hyman and Bouchard. Thos goals are the difference between winning and losing games. Edmonton had 7 victories in 1 goal games in the post season. Most of which came in the VAN series where they won 3 One goal games. Do they have the most depth in the world no but they did have decent depth.

You want to take a look at the Panthers?

Verhaghe - 11 goals
Reinhart - 10 goals
Barkov - 8 goals
Rodrigues - 7 goals
Bennett 7 goals
Tkachuck 6 goals
Senko - 5 goals
Forsling - 4 goals
Lundell - 3 goals
Montour - 3 goals
Luostarinen - 2 goals
Mikkola - 2 goals
Lorentz - 2 goals
OEL - 2 goals
Ekblad - 1 goal

Those numbers are fairly comparable to EDM.

South African firefighters have arrived, these people are badass!

https://x.com/FlyYEG/status/1817978389019697358

I am curious then. What is it that Stan Bowman did specifically with the Blackhawks that make you believe he was the best option for the Oilers GM?
- freelancer

Well your Nick Leddy example might be exhibit A. He made a great deal to acquire him as a perfect supporting cast member. Won a couple of Cups with him. But instead of falling in love with him he correctly realized he had sufficient depth on defense and could dump his contract, which worked. They won the Cup that year without him.

So maybe having a GM that can make rational, unemotional decisions will help keep the competitive window open. He had to dump Bickell and the cost to do so was Teravainen. Maybe one day he'll need to dump Nurse and the cost will be Holloway. So this is a GM with experience making those tough decisions.

You can't sign McDavid, Draisaitl, and Bouchard to massive extensions without making a tough call somewhere else on the roster. Some GMs are good at building rosters and amassing talent. Bowman can help manage that and maneuver the supporting cast. But your critique is he inherited a great supporting cast and lost a bunch of trades. Good insight. That was his job. He helped win 3 Cups. But should have done better on that Nick Leddy trade. Yawn.

Hope he trades Connor and Leon for Saad
- ChonDerry

Me too lol go BLUES!

Well your Nick Leddy example might be exhibit A. He made a great deal to acquire him as a perfect supporting cast member. Won a couple of Cups with him. But instead of falling in love with him he correctly realized he had sufficient depth on defense and could dump his contract, which worked. They won the Cup that year without him.

So maybe having a GM that can make rational, unemotional decisions will help keep the competitive window open. He had to dump Bickell and the cost to do so was Teravainen. Maybe one day he'll need to dump Nurse and the cost will be Holloway. So this is a GM with experience making those tough decisions.

You can't sign McDavid, Draisaitl, and Bouchard to massive extensions without making a tough call somewhere else on the roster. Some GMs are good at building rosters and amassing talent. Bowman can help manage that and maneuver the supporting cast. But your critique is he inherited a great supporting cast and lost a bunch of trades. Good insight. That was his job. He helped win 3 Cups. But should have done better on that Nick Leddy trade. Yawn.
- HockeyBuzzed

Leddy was a good acquisition but remained a second pairing player on those teams and in New York grew to be a top pairing player. Bowman has a history of trading players too early and watching them excel elsewhere. Looking purely at Bowman's GM moves and not everything surrounding his suspension by the NHL, his moves have been poor. I would argue Ken Holland did more to improve and help the Oilers compete and that's a fairly low bar.

Hockey is a team sport. Doesnt matter how good McDavid is. One player cannot carry a team.

You need every other player to play smart and take away chances, you need your goalies to make saves. 13/25 games McDavid had 1 point or less so he wasnt popping out 5 points every game either. Other guys had to chip in.

RNH had 7 goals in the post season. Ekholm 5, Holloway 5, Kane 4, Janmark 4, Mcleod 4, Foegele 3. Is that not depth? Thats 25 goals not from guys named McDavid, Draisaitl, Hyman and Bouchard. Thos goals are the difference between winning and losing games. Edmonton had 7 victories in 1 goal games in the post season. Most of which came in the VAN series where they won 3 One goal games. Do they have the most depth in the world no but they did have decent depth.

You want to take a look at the Panthers?

Verhaghe - 11 goals
Reinhart - 10 goals
Barkov - 8 goals
Rodrigues - 7 goals
Bennett 7 goals
Tkachuck 6 goals
Senko - 5 goals
Forsling - 4 goals
Lundell - 3 goals
Montour - 3 goals
Luostarinen - 2 goals
Mikkola - 2 goals
Lorentz - 2 goals
OEL - 2 goals
Ekblad - 1 goal

Those numbers are fairly comparable to EDM.
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

No. That is not comparable.

One player cannot carry the team to the Cup. That’s why they lost. Jesus didn’t do anything game 7. I’m about done here but look up how many games the oilers won during the season and playoffs when Jesus didn’t record a point. They stated it during the playoffs. Hint: it was not a lot.

I’m really just agreeing with McJesus and their head Coach. They rely on PP to win a lot of games for them. 97/29 are keys to that PP.

You missed my personal favorite bowman trade. Patrick sharp and Stephen Johns to Dallas for Trevor Daly. Sharp had a couple of descent seasons for Dallas and Johns looked like a top 4 d man until injuries derailed his career. Meanwhile, Daly was traded a month later by bowman for rob scuderi who was then traded a month later for Christian ehrhoff. He had to retain money on scuderi to facilitate that trade. Ehrhoff had started the year on the hawks on a pto before being released and then he effectively gave up sharp and Johns to get him back. A cap dump obviously but a literal bag of pucks would have been a better return.

Leddy was a good acquisition but remained a second pairing player on those teams and in New York grew to be a top pairing player. Bowman has a history of trading players too early and watching them excel elsewhere. Looking purely at Bowman's GM moves and not everything surrounding his suspension by the NHL, his moves have been poor. I would argue Ken Holland did more to improve and help the Oilers compete and that's a fairly low bar.
- freelancer

Right. Only 1 win away from the Cup. Holland did a horrible job.

(Not towards the end of careers after the Cups - but the roles they played and their level of play at the time)

Kane
Toews
Sharp
Hossa
Versteeg
Saad
Bolland
Ladd
Madden
Keith
Seabrook
Campbell
Big Buff
Hjalmarsaon
Crawford

Vs

McJesus
Drais
RNH


Almost identical roster talent and depth! Basically a mirror image.


…diddlers gonna support diddlers eh
- Big23Questions

What a ridiculous comparison. Oil almost won the Cup with 3 good players? Delete your account.

Well your Nick Leddy example might be exhibit A. He made a great deal to acquire him as a perfect supporting cast member. Won a couple of Cups with him. But instead of falling in love with him he correctly realized he had sufficient depth on defense and could dump his contract, which worked. They won the Cup that year without him.

So maybe having a GM that can make rational, unemotional decisions will help keep the competitive window open. He had to dump Bickell and the cost to do so was Teravainen. Maybe one day he'll need to dump Nurse and the cost will be Holloway. So this is a GM with experience making those tough decisions.

You can't sign McDavid, Draisaitl, and Bouchard to massive extensions without making a tough call somewhere else on the roster. Some GMs are good at building rosters and amassing talent. Bowman can help manage that and maneuver the supporting cast. But your critique is he inherited a great supporting cast and lost a bunch of trades. Good insight. That was his job. He helped win 3 Cups. But should have done better on that Nick Leddy trade. Yawn.
- HockeyBuzzed

Just out of curiosity, what is his history of signing the core players to team friendly deals to keep the compete window open? Cuz that's where we are with Drai and Bouchard after this year, and McD and Ekholm after next.

Right. Only 1 win away from the Cup. Holland did a horrible job.
- Oildrum

It took Holland 5 years to get a team with McDavid and Draisaitl into the Cup Finals. There were successful moves, the Hyman signing and Ekholm trade at the top of that list. But there were plenty of opportunities wasted, bad signings, and moves that stunted those teams. Using the money that was being wasted on Jack Campbell could have helped the Oilers I’m sure.

Leddy was a good acquisition but remained a second pairing player on those teams and in New York grew to be a top pairing player. Bowman has a history of trading players too early and watching them excel elsewhere. Looking purely at Bowman's GM moves and not everything surrounding his suspension by the NHL, his moves have been poor. I would argue Ken Holland did more to improve and help the Oilers compete and that's a fairly low bar.
- freelancer

You don't seem to get it. So I give up. Nick Leddy served his purpose. But in a cap world was a luxury. Also don't think too many people, besides those with a slant against Bowman would label him a top pairing dman. But I guess on those great NYI teams he did get more minutes than Travis Hamonic, Johnny Boychuk, and Calvin deHaan. What a stud!

And this history of young players thriving elsewhere? Again, Panarin had to move on. Teravainen was needed to dump Bickell. But two can play this game. He dumped Cam Barker (3rd overall) for Leddy. Did Barker thrive elsewhere? Did he give up too soon on Hugh Jessiman? He got a 1st round pick for Troy Brouwer...how did his career do in the years to follow? Young Tomas Kopecky was moved after winning a Cup- too soon? How did Dave Boland do after Stan dumped him? He used Klas Dahlbeck to add Antoine Vermette. Vermette helped win another Cup while Dahlbeck ended up being a bust. So plenty of examples of Bowman correctly evaluating his own talent and moving on. You seem stuck on Panarin and Teravainen without recognizing the cap reality of the time.

But OK. Bowman is a terrible GM. I guess that makes Jackson a moron for hiring him. So who then? Pick your hire and tell us why? Might be more interesting than your childish Bowman articles.

First - why bring playoffs into the relay about the season? Had more opportunities to get more points. Not a fair comparison to a player who’s team never mad playoffs but is a far superior dman. I don’t think Bouchard is a good at defence at all and I don’t think Ekholm is very gifted offensively though he has his years he’s probably an avg 30pt dman (like Brodie McCabe in Toronto who I would argue are nothing special offensively). He doesn’t play PP usually and earns keep on the defensive side. Separately they are not very good. It is a great and really smart pairing (not best in league but definitely a solid pair).

I went through this last season and will say it again. I don’t need to think the McPower Plays are a deep team. I agree stand by opinion (as their own Captain and Coach have stated) they rely on Power Plays to win a lot of hockey games.

You also don’t need to agree with me when I state that Brent Seabrook and Duncan Keith were far superior dmen vs Bouchard and Ekholm. I hate the Hawks but they were unreal Team Canada and HoF players.
- Big23Questions

Just a paltry +78 combined, with only 127 points. I see your logic then, my bad.

You point out Ekholm's offensive stats to quantify him, which is odd when talking about the defensive conscience of a D pairing. Also say that the team is only as good as the PP, then point out how Ekholm doesn't even play on the PP much. Say that the team is only 3 players deep, then acknowledge that the PK was also real good, but those 3 players spend essentially no time on the PK. I find most of your posts perplexing is all. At least they are more hockey based than most of the Nuck fan's input though.