Earlier today, well-known Oilersphere commenter/writer Dennis gave me a smallish challenge:
"Jon: If you have the time, here's an idea I'd like to see explored and you've been doing a lot of good work lately and I think you might be up for it.
Over at LT's site, someone brought up the idea of dealing away Nilsson for a dman that's strong at evens and then you could move Souray's pact off the books and slot Schremp into Nilsson's spot on the Kids Line.
So, see if you can spy out some teams that have a hard time drafting and developing offensive talent while also possessing a bevy of young D; one of whom has already played top four EV min and might be ready to take the next step.
And then we could have a possible scenario that could support such a move."
I should preface this by saying I'm a really big Robert Nilsson fan. I'm such a big fan that I'm not even sure I'd trade him before Cogliano. The scenario outlined makes a lot of sense, however; the Oilers are chalk full of offensive prospects that will need an opportunity relatively soon (Schremp and Potulny stand out right now) and Nilsson's spot is prime real estate. Nilsson is also insanely moveable, due to his youth, cap hit, and not insignificant talent.
So, hypothetically, our teem needs to meet three criteria:
a) short of offensive talent
b) possesses enough young defenseman to move a legitimate player to us and
c) is plausibly willing to make such a trade with Edmonton
Criteria C automatically removes Anaheim, Buffalo and the Northwest Division, in my opinion. It also gives us a smaller number of teams to work with:
Atlanta - fails b (Enstrom, Exelby and Hainsey might qualify, but none are appealing for various reasons)
Carolina - fails a (have 8 players that could plausibly be top-6 forwards)
Detroit - fails a and b
Florida - fails b (only Bouwmeester would be of interest, and I suspect it would take more than Nilsson to bring him to Edmonton)
Los Angeles - fails c (do they even have 6 defensemen yet? If not for Lombardi's stated opinion on Souray, this would be a possible destination for him)
Montreal - fails a and b
New Jersey - fails a and b
New York Islanders - fails c (they've already given up on Nilsson; wouldn't do to bring him back)
New York Rangers - fails c (only four experienced defenders at this point in time)
Ottawa - fails a (plenty of talented forwards, including some youth)
Philadelphia - fails a (7 guys, by my count, who are in a prime scoring role, plus a few others who could fill in)
Phoenix - fails b (surprisingly bare of young defenders, although I'd love to see the Oilers acquire Derek Morris)
Pittsburgh - fails b (only Whitney and Letang in the 25-and-under club)
St. Louis - fails b (barring an Erik Johnson trade, that is)
San Jose - fails b (finally finished trading away their young defenseman; only Vlasic remains)
Tampa Bay - fails a (by my count, 17 NHL-calibre forwards)
Toronto - fails b (Anton Stralman: an island?)
For those of you following along at home, this leaves us with six teams worth further consideration: Chicago, Columbus, Dallas and Nashville in the West, Boston and Washington in the East.
Let’s start in the East.
Boston has two young blueliners who might fit Dennis’ criteria: Mark Stuart and Dennis Wideman. Stuart played against the 6th toughest competition among regular defenders and was still outscored, while Dennis Wideman is something of a powerplay ace that played tough competition with good teammates and came out ahead. Wideman, however, fits into the Gilbert-model of defender; in other words, his skills would be replicated on the Oilers roster and I can’t see him as a major player of interest to Kevin Lowe.
Washington has an incredible stable of young defensemen and some holes when it comes to secondary scoring up front, so they make an incredibly appealing partner (at least, in Dennis’ hypothetical scenario). Even eliminating Mike Green (big money, duplicated skills, more than Nilsson to acquire) we have Shaone Morrisonn (toughest competition, 2.21 GFON/60 and 2.35 GAON/60), Jeff Schultz (4th toughest competition, 2.82 GFON/60 and 2.29 GAON/60) and Milan Jurcina (5th toughest competition, 2.33 GFON/60 and 2.22 GAON/60). Shultz is huge (6’6”, 225lbs) but not overly physical while Morrisonn brings nice size (6’3”, 205lbs) and a bit of a mean streak. Milan Jurcina plays physically but probably isn’t ready for a shutdown role.
Turning our attention to the West, Chicago has an embarrassment of riches on defense, and the two guys who play the toughest minutes, Duncan Keith (0.91 PTS/60, 2.69 GFON/60, 1.98 GAON/60) and Brent Seabrook (0.77 PTS/60, 2.52 GFON/60, 2.18 GAON/60) would both be of serious interest to the Oilers. Both are complete players who emerged last season as legitimate top pairing options. Both block shots, while Seabrook brings a physical game and powerplay prowess (4.01 PTS/60). I can’t imagine either are available, but either would certainly be welcome, with my preference being Seabrook given his physical edge.
Columbus has two younger players playing easy, easy minutes in Kris Russell and Ole-Kristian Tollefsen. Both finished in the red, and neither should be of interest. Rotislav Klesla, on the other hand, is a defenseman I’ve always liked (and can imagine Ladislav Smid turning into). He’s had unfair expectations because of his draft position (Minnesoat grabbed Gaborik- I imagine fans in Columbus imagine what would have happened if the Wild had picked 4th and the Blue Jackets 3rd but honestly, with Doug Maclean in charge, it would only have prolonged the inevitable). Klesla played the 3rd toughest minutes on his team (taking into account the departed Adam Foote) and finished with a 2.02 GFON/60 and 1.80 GAON/60. He’s also a penalty-killing whiz, and may be available.
Dallas has a group of four young defenseman, almost all of whom (with the exception of Matt Niskanen) were hidden behind Zubov/Norsttom/Robidas whenever possible. Niskanen tied with Zubov for 2nd toughest opponents,, and played with very poor teammates. Despite this, he averaged 0.79 PTS/60 and had a 2.98 GFON/60 and a 2.18 GAON/60. Seems like the real thing to me, plus he’s a Finn. He isn’t terribly physical, and his skills are replicated to some extent. Nicklas Grossman played the 5th toughest competition, with poor teammates, and had a 2.71 GFON/60 and 1.91 GAON/60, so he’s undoubtedly ready to move up the depth chart. He’s also relatively physical without taking stupid penalties. Daley played similar minutes to Niskanen, although with a 1.91 GFON/60 and 2.34 GAON/60, and Fistric came in just above even in easy minutes.
Nashville is well-known around the league as a first-rate drafter/developer of young defensemen, and that trend is evident in their roster. In terms of quality of competition, the youngsters were all over the board. Hamhuis (1st), Suter (3rd), Weber (5th) and Koistinen (7th) all played minutes close to or within their ability. Hamhuis finished with a -0.28 goal differential, Suter with a +.30, Weber with a -0.08, while Koistinen finished with a 3.68 GFON/60 and 2.09 GAON/60 playing in extremely favourable situations. Either Hamhuis or Suter would fit in very nicely on the Oilers roster.
My personal favourites in this group, both in terms of ability and price, are Seabrook, the two guys in Washington, and Matt Niskanen. Who do you like?
14 Comments:
I like that Crombie kid in Pittsburgh.
Couldn't we trade Matt Greene for him?
Oh, right.
I like that Crombie kid in Pittsburgh.
Couldn't we trade Matt Greene for him?
No, but I'm confident that between Schremp and Roy we could get a deal done. Maybe they toss in a 7th round pick, to make it even.
[Niskanen] like the real thing to me, plus he’s a Finn.
You would think so, with that surname, but don't forget, his first name is the un-Finnish "Matt." He's actually from Minnesota. He's still very impressive, though.
He's actually from Minnesota. He's still very impressive, though.
Whaddya know. Doens't even speak Finn. Still, his name has that nice Finnish ring to it, and that's enough for me.
Seabrook, please.
They're pretty tight up against the cap with their goalies, Havlat and Campbell to pay, and that's not counting the huge dollars they're going to have to throw at Kane and Toews once they graduate from their entry-levels.
Seabrook iirc is now making about 3.5 mil per season, and would look absolutely fantastic aside Visnovsky or Gilbert on our top-pairing.
All that being said, I'd rather keep a cheap scoring swede for the next three seasons.
Great job answering Dennis' bell Jonathan.
I think Niskanen is a little soft for me. I'm not saying that he doesn't battle but I'm looking for a guy that keeps to the puck out by using throwback skills rather than the new NHL skills. I'm looking for Hatcher with mobility.
Fistric would be nice but by the time he is ready to take big assignments so will Peckham.
I still think that Volchenkov could be had, especially with Gator bringing a lot of the same skills. They have no depth and they have no forwards coming through the pipeline. They could desperately use a guy like Nilsson on their 2nd PP unit.
Stillman was 4th in average PP time and he is gone and hasn't been replaced.
Fisher was 5th (now 4th) and sadly Randy Robitaille was 6th (now 5th)
They never replaced Corvo on the PP and they also lost and haven't replaced Redden
The Sens 2nd PP unit feature BOTH Nycholat and Schubert! How pathetic is that?
Pretty bad considering they have a 21 year old Brian Lee on the first unit.
A deal in there to be made with the Sens. If Grebs gets offered 5 mill in Russia next year does he stay in Canada? With Schremp, Brule, Pouliot waiting in the wings and Nash, Eberle and Trukhno 2 or 3 years away we could lose Nilsson and not even feel it. They're both pretty much house money anyway.
If not Volchenkov, Suter is my guy.
Another vote for Volchenkov
I still think that Volchenkov could be had, especially with Gator bringing a lot of the same skills. They have no depth and they have no forwards coming through the pipeline. They could desperately use a guy like Nilsson on their 2nd PP unit.
I dunno, the first line is dynamite, obviously, but Vermette, Fisher and Kelly can all score to some extent. Plus rumour has it that Ottawa is hot after Jason Williams, who would go a long way towards shoring up secondary scoring. As far as youth goes, Foligno has decent hands, but you're right, the pipeline isn't as deep as I thought.
It looks like a team that might like a Rob Schremp type ;)
A deal in there to be made with the Sens. If Grebs gets offered 5 mill in Russia next year does he stay in Canada? With Schremp, Brule, Pouliot waiting in the wings and Nash, Eberle and Trukhno 2 or 3 years away we could lose Nilsson and not even feel it. They're both pretty much house money anyway.
The only problem with filling the possible Grebeshkov hole with Volchenkov is that I'd imagine Volchenkov is equally susceptible to the lure of the ruble in the motherland.
Maybe it's just that I'm a big Robert Nilsson fan; a part of me sees filling Schremp in for him on the second line as a smart move; trade the highly valued asset and plug a similar player-type into the same role.
On the other hand, when I watch Nilsson, especially as the season moved on, I could envision him as a responsible, even first-line player, by the end of his contract, and I hate to sell stock in the middle of its rise- especially when I'm confident in Nilsson, and much less so in Schremp.
I won't cement myself to a firm opinion unless a trade actually occurs- but I do need to agree with one thing: Volchenkov's an excellent player, and he'd be a big asset to the team.
I was once told by a fella - yesterday I believe - that you shouldn't tell people what they should or shouldn't write...either way - nice article.
You know I'm a big Nilsson fan too.
Couple comments:
1) Nilssons value should be a lot higher next year once he outperforms his contract this years (I think he will). Of the players you listed I think only Oilers fans think its a fair trade. Nilsson doesnt have that much cachet (yet).
2) The Oilers are going to need outperformming contracts because of the Sourray contract.
3) The Oilers tend to draft and develop D better than they do forwards.
4) The Oilers roster is fairly balanced right now. If we lose Nilsson, we need a top 6 forward. Can Schremp be that guy? I dunno.
I like your proposals, especially Seabrook or Weber. Both Chicago and Nashville have a decent set of forwards so I doubt they'd make such a move. The teams that need forwards the most are Calgary and Vancouver, but like you said arent viable trade partners.
To steal from Lowetide, I'd rather see the Oilers "pluck from the Staois, Hedja tree" than use a valuable asset like Nilsson to do so.
Trading Nilsson and replacing him with Schremp is still a very very tempting idea. I'd personally rather wait for Nilssons value to go up and the Oilers to have a good indication of how much Schremp actually improved this summer. RS seems to get talked up every year.
Great analysis btw!
Nilssons value should be a lot higher next year once he outperforms his contract this years (I think he will). Of the players you listed I think only Oilers fans think its a fair trade. Nilsson doesnt have that much cachet (yet).
This is a great point. We really don't know how opposing GMs view Nilsson, but there's reason to believe that isn't as highly as his actual value.
I've heard the same argument many times -- that most of the time all the guys on the ice are responsible for a goal for and a goal against. With all due respect, I now believe this argument is nothing more than an unproven assertion.
I mean, how does anyone know this to be true? Have they looked closely?
I did a brief survey of this issue this past year, where I looked at five games and the even strength goals scored against the Oilers.
In total, there were 15 goals scored against the Oil at even strength in those games. Based on my definitions and observation, I found that 40 per cent of the time, players who got a plus or a minus were simply not involved in any significant way in the goal going into the net.
That's four out of ten players on the average goal.
Now, this was just a quick preliminary survey, (though it took a heckuva lot of work, much more difficult than simply scoring errors, for instance.)
What we really need is a bigger, more organized study done by a number of people on plus/minus.
Many, many hockey coaches, players, commentators and fandits have expressed discomfort with plus/minus, but it would be nice to try to do more to quantify exactly how useful it is.
But, again, the early evidence I've seen makes me think that plus/minus isn't an entirely useful stat and can be extremely misleading.
It has the advantage in that it is a traditional stat, and it is assigned mechanically, so people have some comfort with it. It's a tried and true conservative method of rating a player.
It simply wasn't possible to assign goal-causing Errors in the 1950s, when plus/minus was first developed, as there was no TV replays and VCRs back then. The only way to properly assign Errors is to study a replay repeatedly.
BTW, when there was no TV replay, it's worth noting how often the officials assigned the established counting stats -- goals and assists -- incorrectly.
We now know from reviewing the 1972 Canadian Russian series that many mistakes were made. For instance, Brad Park was given 1 goal and 4 assists for the tournament, but really had 1 goal and 8 assists.
Anyway, that's great if you want to shadow the Error stat. As I've said in the past, I'm thinking of organizing a more formal survey on it with interested parties. Before I can do that, I have to work again on coming up with a definitive description of how errors are assigned, and that's a work in progress.
I had such a F.A.Q. on the Error done this past season, but my thinking has changed somewhat, in terms of both assigning errors and categorizing them, so I've got to get that done before moving ahead with anything more formal.
At this point, after every Oilers game, I've taken to publishing my error assignments on my blog, so that people can comment and correct me, if so necessary. This has led me to go back and review the tapes and has helped me uncover a few errors on my part.
At this point I'm not trying to prove the theoretical value of counting Errors -- I've made my own conclusions on that, believe it has value so I'll be forging ahead. At this point, I'm simply trying to get it right, to execute the idea so the Errors can be assigned as accurately as possible, and I'm handing out minus marks on goals against to those who truly deserve them, and no one else.
If you're thinking of shadowing the Error assignments, that would be very helpful in figuring out not only who rightly deserves an Error, but whether the process of assigning Errors is working well.
I've encouraged others to do the same, and Bruce McCurdy provided valuable assistance over a stretch of games last year.
Nice job, Jon! I thought it was a topic worth exploring and you fleshed it out in a noteworthy manner.
The Preds are an easy target because they've got D-men for days and with Radulov possibly out of continent, they could use some skill up front and fuck knows they're gonna need it on the cheap.
Hawks also look to be good bets with so much money tied up and, yes, we're not too far away from Toews and Kane getting their first big bump.
The Dal D is an interesting call, too. He gets a lot of love from the Dal papers and Stars players alike and I think he'd be a tough lift given that one of these days, Zubov will have to retire.
Once again, nice job.
OM: I think what I meant to say was people shouldn't whine when they don't like what they hear.
Giving people ideas and suggestions is alright, though;)
Post a Comment