PerreaultForever

It's not surprising. Oilers have never cared about any shall we say "off ice issues". They grabbed onto Perry this past year after he had to leave Chicago. They took in Kane before that. You can go way back and look how they brought in Craig MacTavish after he killed someone. This is just one more example of who they are. I hope they never win a cup again that's all.

Sure, but you're forgiving the guy for getting it wrong. The only reason it was in a "development focus" was because he tore it down and created an undeveloped and leaderless team and when it got close he didn't try to win, he kept "developing" until he saw that was going nowhere. Now he's trying to "win". My point would be you should ALWAYS be trying to win, the whole "development year" thing was total bs. Murray tried to construct the same thing, but he tried to do it too quickly. Both him and Botterill had no choice but to try to build around Eichel. After Eichel and the team fell out he was given a new pathway but he botched goaltending and the team has underperformed. Even now he's still a step behind the competition. There is nothing "natural" about any of this.

Of course they do. Thompson most definitely uses his reach for puck control much more than his bigness for physicality. That's why Granato got it right on him turning him into a center. He was awkward and ineffective as a power forward because he doesn't really like to hit, fight or be a big tough guy. Power is too soft for a D man (so far) but his reach definitely helps him and Tuch plays net front but is also a puck control guy. Size helps all of their games and none of them are "big" guys in the sense people think of as "tough" guys. The word "big" is the problem. It's never as simple as to say speed/skill vs. size. The players are always combinations of all factors and the more of these things they have in one body the better they are. There aren't any bad players who are big, fast and skilled are there.

There's continuity in design though. One guy has been in that management room for all those years and that's Pegula. The "plan" and the design has remained fairly similar all this time. It's not a radical departure with Adams, until maybe now. My feeling is that Pegula has finally somewhat given up on his idea and has turned the key decisions over to a "hockey guy" and that is Ruff. That's why we see a change in roster design. Ruff.

Why just 1 year ago? Why not 13?

What you say makes sense so that Sporting News article is wrong? idk, there's probably some subtle legal ways of phrasing they have to use. It gets ugly though, which is why most teams try to avoid it.

Reasonable deal. Term and money in a range where even if Levi passes him, with an increasing cap it won't be an albatross for back up money and is more likely tandem money. If he's spectacular he can still get a long term rest of his career deal and if he sucks we can manage it. I like it. 5 team NTC is weird. Rarely see a list that small but whatever.

Where are you getting that from? Everything I've read says they can not use other player's salaries. Pretty sure the arbitrator looks at them, but the team and the player can't make comparative monetary arguments.

My only point was people are saying we need a playmaking top 6 forward and they want Zegras when we just traded away our top scorer who was a playmaker. It makes no sense even if you argue Zegras is better than Mitts because you still have to give up assets to get him.

Except they started doing that AFTER they were a top of the division playoff team and got bounced in the first round by a gritty Columbus team. Toronto's trying to do that every year now. Edmonton is trying it now and came close but lost. You add missing pieces when you are close or missing a key piece. We haven't even made the playoffs yet and are trading for mediocre available bottom end talent. Look, I like the new composition of this team better than it was, but this is the structure the team should have had years ago and we should now be trying to upgrade it piece by piece. So it's progress, but it's a pin step.

So I already disliked Edmonton, now I can move them to currently most hated. They already had 2 of my least favourite players in the league (ex Sabres Kane and Skinner - I don't hate Perry, he's a hate him on the other team type of guy and I'm not unhappy to see him lose) and the nauseating star worship really gets grating so now they add this. Definitely now my most hated team.

You guys are saying we need Zegras because he's the type of player we need. Why? Because we traded Mittlestadt right? So wouldn't that move signal proof that this organization is entirely clueless? In broad terms Zegras is Mitts abilities with Skinner's personality. But you want him? Think it over.

Right, and maybe we should have been making moves all along instead of just stocking cupboards. It's a desperation move. I'd rather they had just signed a free agent and kept the pick and used it on a big D man or a future tough guy.

My point was we should already have guys like him in the system pressing to come up. We shouldn't need to use 2nd round picks to get them. If you want success you find Peterkas with 2nd round picks. You find these guys in rounds 3-7.

Nope, they can't do that as I understand it. "The evidence that is allowed to be presented during these hearings included a player's performance/statistics, injury history, length of service, leadership qualities and contribution to the team's results. Teams/players cannot use other players' salaries or the state of the team's cap situation during these discussions. The arbitrator determines what the salary should be for the player, which must come no more than 48 hours after the hearing has concluded." from: https://www.sportingnews.com/ca/nhl/news/nhl-salary-arbitration-explained-restricted-free-agent/z1hcqjbkbgrxyxpptu5snx27

The question would still be why aren't we drafting these guys ourselves in 2nd and lower rounds? They aren't that hard to find.

So in other words Casey Mittlestadt. See where I'm going with that? Probably, but he's still over paid for what he is (but not by a lot and not nearly as much as Girgs was overpaid by obviously)

I just don't want that guy. I can't stand him. If the Sabres send Benson away in a trade for Zegras I might just start actually hating this team. Fie upon you for introducing these summer thoughts into my head.

Tis truly the summer. Sprong to Vancouver didn't even register a blip.

I think that's a reasonable possibility. I tend to think it was Pegula's decision but it may very well have been a difference between Murray and JBot. You could be right about that. In any event a huge mistake. How would Eichel have responded? Well, that speaks to the cultural issues doesn't it? Not having to earn it, not waiting for your time, being the center of all things for any player. You can do a deep analysis here of cultural issues, but the bottom line is the tank left a void and that void wasn't filled properly. We are at a crossroads now. I hope they get it right this time.

This was the crucial mistake of the team choosing the young supertstar who was not ready for that role and alienating the veteran who had all the makings of a leader as we have seen in St. Louis and now Nashville. Huge huge mistake moment for the franchise. Okposo? Nice guy, true professional, definitely can be part of a leadership group, but not captain material. You can't have a fringe player as your captain. That'll never work. He most definitely doesn't have to be your best player, but he has to be an integral part of the team that young guys will look up to and emulate. Listen to. We should have named ROR captain. We haven't had a good one in a long long time.

Seemed like you were. Seemed like you were agreeing with Adams idea of growing your own leaders.

idk why people are talking about having kids and marital status. Off ice life has no bearing on whether or not you are a leader in the locker room. The hockey world is it's own place.

This is most definitely true. Cap floor teams vs. cap ceiling teams and all that. You don't get far by spending less than others and constantly planning for the "future". You do that and that "future" never comes.

You're arguing little points to deflect from the central point which is that Adams intentionally constructed an incredibly young roster lacking in veteran leadership. That is not how you do it and has never worked. Whether or not these guys have reached a level where they can provide good veteran leadership is the question since that's what we are left with. Arguing about how many games it takes to qualify as a "veteran" or if losers can be good veteran leaders or any details like that are deflections and somewhat subjective to say the least.