• About

    36 Responses to Who had Nov. 3 in the pool?

    1. November 3, 2008 at

      Anyone know offhand where the Oilers sit in terms of waiver priority? Too lazy to check if we have the cap room, but Ouellet is a player. And it would ding a divisional rival, to boot.

    2. November 3, 2008 at

      Yeah, he doesn’t really fill a need, but if the Oilers could grab him, they should. Even on the fourth line he would be worthwhile.

    3. November 3, 2008 at

      Yeah, does anyone know off the top of their head what the pecking order is for waived players? I know that early on it’s based on the previous season’s standings, and that at some point it moves to this year’s points per game, just not sure when.

    4. mc79hockey
      November 3, 2008 at

      November 1, coincidentally enough. Before that date, it’s last year’s standings. After, it’s this year’s point percentages. By waiting until Monday to put him on waivers, he’s exposed for only 24 hours instead of 48. I’m going to look and see if there’s someone who moved dramatically down the waiver priority list to whom Ouellet would have been attractive who the Canucks might have wanted to keep him away from.

    5. November 3, 2008 at

      Man, I’m far too excited to see what happens with this.

    6. slipper
      November 3, 2008 at

      But do you have a stat handy that can tell us how SOFT Ouellet is?

    7. November 3, 2008 at

      Ya, what’s his Value Over Alex Tanguay (VOAT)?

    8. Scott
      November 3, 2008 at

      VOAT shall be determined using Alex Tanguay as a bench mark using the following formula:

      (EVGF/60-EVGA/60)+((PPPts/3)/60)

      This would make Michel Ouellet’s VOAT +34(/60) for last season. In other words Alex Tanguay is at 1.96, while Ouellet scores 2.30

      So get out there and VOAT!

      The Soft Quotient is yet to be determined.

    9. November 3, 2008 at

      The Soft Quotient is yet to be determined.

      I can tell just by looking at a player’s haircut.

    10. November 3, 2008 at

      He’s soft soft soft!!!

      He’s no Tie Domi for example.

      Now there was a hockey player.

    11. lowetide
      November 3, 2008 at

      I don’t think he’ll clear.

    12. mc79hockey
      November 3, 2008 at

      I can’t see it either LT. I can’t fathom that a team could acquire a guy with the third best PP goal scoring rate (500 min+) since the lockout for less than the price of Zach Stortini and that nobody would do it.

      For those wondering, I looked at the waiver order and don’t see anything that specifically favours the Canucks in waiting a day or two. Mirtle suggested to me that they might just be doing this because of injury to Jannik Hanssen; maybe he’s right.

    13. November 3, 2008 at

      If he clears then a lot of guys asleep at the switch for sure.

      Quality player that can be had for nothing does not come along that often.

    14. slipper
      November 3, 2008 at

      VOAT is an index that values an NHL player’s softness in relation to that of Alex Tanguay and is calibrated by using various dairy and cream products.

      The zero value, that being the product used to express the softness of Tanguay, Alex, is cream cheese.

      By this index Michel Ouellet expresses the value of Kefir. Somewhat under the softness of Tanguay, but well above players like Kristian Huselius (Yop!), and Kyle Wellwood (gerbil spunk).

      The highest VOAT rating ever recorded for an entire team went to the 2003-04 Toronto Maple Leafs who demonstrated a high level of grit, determination and hardness. The roster of composed of many great hard talents such as Joe Nieuwendyk (skim milk mozzarella), Gary Robert (whale blubber), Tie Domi (Babybel), Darcy Tucker (Babybel light) and a young Wade Belak (white chocolate).

    15. November 4, 2008 at

      I can’t fathom that a team could acquire a guy with the third best PP goal scoring rate (500 min+) since the lockout for less than the price of Zach Stortini and that nobody would do it.

      Okay, but doesn’t this assume some GM out there sees what you, we and LT see? And doesn’t this mean that Ouellet is an amazing Litmus test?

    16. lowetide
      November 4, 2008 at

      Andy: I think that’s why this is such an interesting waiver situation.

      In 1969, Jesus Alou had 419AB’s, a 23/9 kw ratio, 15 doubles, 4 tripes, 0 home runs. He played the OF, hit .263 with a .278OBO and an SP of .317 and the most amazing stat for that season isn’t even in there (THREE of his 9 bases on balls were intentional!) and he was 20% in the SB department (1/5).

      San Fransisco left him off their protected list and Montreal claimed him. The Expos traded him to Houston (with a veteran 1b named Donn Clendenon) for Rusty Staub who was a Bill James freak when Bill James was a college kid.

      Seems like there’s always a Houston out there, what we’re looking for is a GM who is as smart as Roger Neilson was in 1972.

    17. November 4, 2008 at

      Well, Dallas just signed Mark Parrish, so presumably the brilliant GM isn’t Brett Hull :0

      You know, I like to think that GM’s as a whole are bright guys, but then you hear Milbury/MacLean talk and it just disappears. The problem, I think, is that too many guys come from a strictly hockey background – there isn’t enough variation there. I can’t remember who it was, but one of THN’s writers mentioned this as a factor in those crazy salary negotiations; and it makes sense to me here too.

    18. lowetide
      November 4, 2008 at

      I think you can pick out the smart fellas, though. I don’t follow Buffalo at all but they have all kinds of guys who have terrific value (Lydman, Hecht) but never make it to a list of sought after players. Plus of course they have a very good scouting department.

      Anyway, point being if we made a list of the 20 best off-season moves every summer the same GMs would probably show up on it.

      That’s the group of men I’d expect might look at this player. Risebrough, Regier, Poile, Rutherford, Gainey, McPhee, Howson, Holland, Wilson. When something interesting happens it’s usually these guys, and by interesting I don’t mean screwing the rules (Lou in NJ) or being a megalomaniac (Burke).

      I think Mike Gillis will make it on that list and we don’t have much to go on with our guy.

    19. November 4, 2008 at

      There are a tonne of younger guys who are MLB GM’s and look at things from a newer angle but there aren’t a whole lot of those cats holding down NHL GM jobs.

      I’d take a guess at who’ll claim him but there’s so many teams who SHOULD be able to use this guy that I wouldn’t know where to start.

      I’ll say it’s a team that isn’t wrapped up in giving a lot of time to their kids and/or a team that’s close to and/or project to be close to the playoff cut line all year.

      Or, fuck, maybe the Sharks take him because he can play and Torrey Mitchell’s gonna be out for awhile

    20. November 4, 2008 at

      LT: Yeah, Car’s never been afraid of having a lot of guys who look like their offense first and with Williams and Walker out and looking at who they iced last Sat vs the Oil, Rutherford might jump.

      I am doing this without looking too hard into cap and/or budget situations and I’ll guess Car picks him up given their proclivity for three lines of offense and his ~600K ticket on the recall.

      Who else wants to take a stab?

    21. November 4, 2008 at

      Dennis: I was thinking Carolina. After all, they blew a big chunk of change on Samsonov, so they clearly aren’t afraid of SOFT. I gotta disagree on the love for Rutherford though- his ratio of good moves to bad moves can’t be that great, I dare say I’d take Lowe over him.

      With Carolina gone, I’ll say Phoenix. Don Maloney is going to be on that list of super GM’s in very short order – guy knows what he’s doing.

    22. lowetide
      November 4, 2008 at

      I’ll say Washington.

    23. mc79hockey
      November 4, 2008 at

      Columbus has a reasonable track record with fellows who aren’t endorsed by the professional media, what with that Dan Heyda fellow. Their PP stinks. Question, I suppose, is whether Howson knows anything about him. If I ever get access to a piece of social mapping software, it’d be fun to load up all of the connections between GM’s that you can see of and see what it produces. I think that you’d see a lot of relationships between teams that result in players going back and forth between them. Maybe that’s Oullet’s problem – with Feaster and Craig Patrick out of the league, there are no GMs who can be phoned about him.

    24. November 4, 2008 at

      And since I’m not doing a post about this: Gobama! I’m predicting at least 353 electoral votes for him. There were guys in the subway today selling Obama t-shirts, which is astounding because I live in Toronto. His inauguration better feature him walking across Lake Michigan on his sway to Washington or there are going to be some disillusioned people out there.

    25. November 4, 2008 at

      Lowetide:
      “That’s the group of men I’d expect might look at this player. Risebrough, Regier, Poile, Rutherford, Gainey…”

      It’s uplifting to see Gainey make LT’s short list. I’ve had some doubts about him. Moving Rivet and Huet at the deadline shows that he gets the “buy low/sell high” concept. He also knows when *not* to make a move. As far as player valuations go he did well with Lang and Tanguay this year but his track record also includes a couple of near misses: $22M/4yr offer to Souray and a stupendous offer to Briere.

      This site is by a guy from Baseball Prospectus: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

    26. November 4, 2008 at

      I would say the best move the Habs made is when they hired that old Sens assistant GM to be in charge of their scouting. I forget his name; I just know it’s an english name.

    27. November 4, 2008 at

      That ‘ol anglo Andre Savard? Both the Sens and Habs did well at the draft with him in the organization. Gainey bumped him out of the GM’s office. Their current head scout is Trevor Timmins. I’m not aware of any connection he has with Ottawa.

    28. November 4, 2008 at

      I was thinking of Timmons; I knew there was some alliteration going on there.

      I’m pretty sure Timmons came from Ott or that’s at least how I remembered it.

      And, yeah, I was right; Timmons did work for the Sens.

      http://www.geocities.com/inthesharkstank/article1.html

    29. November 4, 2008 at

      Gainey reminds me a lot of Kevin Lowe.

    30. lowetide
      November 4, 2008 at

      Apparently he’s cleared. Wow.

    31. canucklehead
      November 4, 2008 at

      Very surprising to see he cleared.

      mc79hockey re Obama walking on water: I’d settle for him approaching the podium on inauguration day, leaning into the microphone and saying “Excuse me while I whip this out,” then pulling out his speech.

    32. November 4, 2008 at

      Yeah, does anyone know off the top of their head what the pecking order is for waived players?

      As an aside, where does the previous team fit in? I’m pretty sure in this case, he was traded, not waived, from Tampa (though it’s hard to keep track, with all the moves they’ve made), but for my own personal reference, doesn’t the previous team get priority over everyone else if they lost him to the team doing the waiving earlier in the year? (That is to say, Florida would have dibs on Big Mac if we waived him, just as Phoenix got the legendary Krys Kolanos back from us after two games in the Pronger year.)

      Kyle Wellwood (gerbil spunk)

      Ouch. Line of the day right there.

      There were guys in the subway today selling Obama t-shirts, which is astounding because I live in Toronto.

      And I saw on the cover of the morning Metro here in Calgary that Calgarians are all about him, which is baffling for many reasons, not the least of which is, why does our opinion matter? Who cares what Canadians think? We’re not the ones voting; our opinion is immaterial to the matter. I really doubt the Americans, of all people, are looking for our validation.

    33. November 4, 2008 at

      I think that you’d see a lot of relationships between teams that result in players going back and forth between them.

      so true. you like what you know and don’t know what you’d like. shero doesnt like this guy but i cant imagine therrien wouldnt be chomping at the but to replace kennedy with oullet at this point. colombus is a mess again, isn’t oullet an upgrade over andrew murray? though i guess when you staple voracek to the bench late and in ot against the worst team in the nhl so you can roll out murray and malhotra, there are bigger problems than not having oilogosphere-king michel.

      I’m going to look and see if there’s someone who moved dramatically down the waiver priority list to whom Ouellet would have been attractive who the Canucks might have wanted to keep him away from.

      does this matter? doesn’t every team other than van have a shot at them, with the waiver order just determining the respective rights of the other 29 teams? if van was worried about a specific team snatching him up, that team was going to get its chance no matter what.

    34. mc79hockey
      November 4, 2008 at

      Rajeev – pretend Calgary, Edmonton, Minnesota and Colorado all had shit PP’s and shit forwards and were sitting 1,2,3 and 4 on the list. I would think that the Canucks might be hesitant to expose him to recall waivers in those circumstances.

    35. November 4, 2008 at

      I see. I think that reasoning only works on the assumption that he’s going to be claimed; you don’t want him to be claimed by someone in your own division.

      But if Van was thinking this, it doesn’t make much sense. If you think there’s a realistic chance he’s claimed, you don’t want to bring him up regardless of the waiver order because you don’t want to pay half his salary for nothing no matter who gets him (yes this is exacerbated if it’s one of the teams you mention). If Van is worried that CGY takes him at the waiver 3 spot, then Van should still be worried that CGY takes him at the 28 spot, regardless if another team takes him sometime before 28. In either situation, VAN should not bother calling him up. I dont think the waiver order matters here. Though of course the proximity of the timing to Nov 1 raises a red flag.

      Put another way, pretend Calgary, Edmonton, Minnesota and Colorado all had shit PP’s and shit forwards and were sitting 26, 27, 28 and 29 on the list. Would Van be any more or less hesitant to recall him in such a situation? Actually, I suppose they should be marginally more hesitant in that situation. How on earth do you quantify something like that though? It would involve assigning a likelihood that each team puts a claim in, which judging from how gm’s manage their teams individually, would appear to be a fool’s game. If Gillis really was doing that, it would have to have been on math that was hopelessly speculative. But it’s an interesting as hell idea.

    36. antro
      November 12, 2008 at

      Mr. Ouellet has just been sent down again. The legend continues.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *