mc79hockey.com

Full value for the W.

Every day we survive without Grebs is a good day…

PDO: Yes, you summed it up. By the chances metric, the Oilers did indeed deserve to win this one.

Plenty of hard line drives from Gagner/Cole/Nilsson. Bashed them right at the shortstop this time, but, for one night at least, the Oilers had two lines applying pressure. If the Oil are going to succeed — given the Peckwick defensive pairing — these two lines are going to have to score plenty.

I pray for no more MacBlendering of these units.

Hey Dennis,

I figured I’d respond here regarding the value of picking up a guy like Havelid or McLaren to replace Peckham as 6D and why I think that’s worth less than a standings point.

First, we’ll assume that a team of replacement level players is good for 30 points (seems low).

Second, we’ll assume that the Oilers are good for another 60 points (seems about right).

Now there are at least 15 other players of equal or greater value to the 6D (9F, 5D, 1G) and we’re talking about, essentially, a quarter of the season to go here.

If we decide to award standings points to individual players (which seems to disregard the aspect of luck, I’m such a fool) then that means we’re talking 4 points per season per player and at a quarter of a season, 1 point per player.

Now this doesn’t even take into consideration that the fourth line would contribute something and it assumes that the quality of your 1C has as much impact on standings points as the quality of your 6D which just seems plain wrong. Now, if one wants to increase the importance of the guys playing twenty minutes a game, I’d imagine you’d have to diminish the value of the bottom D to compensate.

Basically, unless you think Peckham is way under replacement level, I don’t see how one can argue replacing him with Havelid or McClaren is worth even a full standings point. Now, naturally, any improvement is fine, but a lot of this talk (at LT’s) about needing a veteran plug on 6D seems overblown to me.

Thoughts? Concerns? Also, thanks again for the scoring chance info! Much appreciated!

The Oil need another d-man, just for depth, and shouldn’t have to give up much to get a fairly decent one who will be better than either Strudwick or Peckham.

Mtl got Schneider (and a pick) for a second and a third rounder. I’m not such a huge fan of draft picks as some, so that sounds not so terrible a price.

It’s been a good year for Rourkes coming back, so who knows. With that said, Scott’s logic is compelling.

Scott’s logic is sound, but let’s not be too cavalier with Lady Luck. She is not to be trifled with or ignored. The bold and audacious GM brings luck to his team by making aggressive moves, and if Lowe is serious about making the playoffs now is the time to act (without blowing the team’s salary cap brains out).

@ Pat Mc. I know many Oilers fans think the Oilers need a top four defender. In Souray-Staios, Smid-Gilbert, I think the Oil are covered well enough. I suspect that puts me in the minority, but Souray and Staios were the Oil’s best defensive pairing last season when they played together — by a wide margin, I’d argue — and both Smid and Gilbert look to be ready for two of those magic leaps forward in performance.

Gilbert hasn’t looked this good since the start of last season. Becoming the powerplay quarterback has given his confidence a huge boost, evidely, and he benefits from the grit in Smid’s gave at es.

Scott: I can see how your point makes sense but I’d just rather have McLaren in the 6 hole knowing he could handle top four duty if one of the top four became injured. Sure, all teams can’t afford to have bottom pairing guys who are anything more than that but in McLaren we’d have a guy who’s played top 4 before.

Staples: I was posting something at LT’s site the other day and I was gonna comment on how 37-77 played the tough min last year so I went and looked at a few random games down the stretch last season and it was actually the Staios/Pitkanen pairing who was playing the most min at EV.

Still, I’m not ready to crown 24 as a top 4 guy. The Oilers outchanced the Yotes last night and most of it happened with 24/44 on ice but the Oilers were due to OC someone; it had been five or six games since that had happened.

Does each player make a contribution to the team’s overall strength

I’m confident that the answer here is yes.

(such that we can add up each individual’s contribution)?

I do not think I have the tools to do this. Nonetheless, the math would seem to imply that end of the roster players, if they can play at the replacement level, won’t much hurt the team.

I think the real argument here is whether or not Peckham is below replacement level.

I’d just rather have McLaren in the 6 hole knowing he could handle top four duty if one of the top four became injured. Sure, all teams can’t afford to have bottom pairing guys who are anything more than that but in McLaren we’d have a guy who’s played top 4 before.

And a guy who lost his job to Alexei Semenov. I’m not convinced this guy is a better bet than Peckham. Now if we’re talking about bringin in a legitimate top four D that’s an upgrade on Staios or Smid, that seems like it might make a tangible difference. I get that you’re argument rests mostly on another injury to a guy playing top 4 now, but if the 6D continues to play in the 5/6 hole, I can’t see him making a big difference.

Why is it that Phoenix isn’t getting credited for both of their PP scoring chances in the Second? Only listed 1 in the Second.

My constant defense of the fat kid has made him my favorite Oiler.

Scott: Boyle-Lukowich-Blake-Erhoff-Vlasic-Murray.

McLaren’s in the minors because of his salary.

On Penner: I don’t mind the big guy a whole lot and I was one of the few numbers guys that thought he might be able to cover the bet. But he’s not and when you read things him saying that if gets as many points as he did last year - which is basically what he said in that int linked to by Staples - then his year’s fine, then I think that says a lot.

27 would be a lot easier to like if he was our own pick and he was making Robert Nilsson money.

I know Sauer didn’t have a stick on the play but the play 27 made last night where his rebound shot turned into a PP assist on 83’s goal is basically all this guy has to do in order to garner love. That exact move was what Bertuzzi used to do when he was on the top of his game.

Which is …? Penner’s weight? His “try”?

I should add that I don’t care all that much about Penner at this point. He undoubtedly produces and the question of his true value vis-a-vis the cost to obtain him is a debate that died when Lowe ducked out of his reckoning as a GM.

However, I will add that doing well while playing with two of the best forwards in the entire WC is fairly unimpressive to me. I have yet to see any convincing evidence that he is doing anything but benefitting from outstanding linemates. I do welcome any and all arguments plagued by small sample size though, as that is your specialty. Knock yourself out.

I do welcome any and all arguments plagued by small sample size though, as that is your specialty. Knock yourself out.

RQ: Dammit, you’re a cantankerous son of a gun. Sample size above is the entire season, which happens to include lots of time where the three are together and lots of time where they aren’t. To you this is enough to prove that Penner is being carried by “two of the best players in the WC”, but insufficient sample size to prove he fares at least as well as they do when he isn’t being carried by them. Or so I read your retorts; please enlighten me otherwise.

I have yet to see any convincing evidence that he is doing anything but benefitting from outstanding linemates.

I gave a lot more stats with respect to this combination on LT’s GDT for San Jose, based entirely on those shots and Fenwick numbers and Corsi numbers that you Statzis normally swear by. Or is that only so if said data supports your preconceived notions, and for some reason it becomes suspect when it involves some guy you don’t like?

My “small sample size” shows to my satisfaction if not yours, that all three guys succeed when together, and fare MUCH more poorly when separated. As a line they’re +14; in all other situations each of the three is a minus player on the scoreboard and the shot clock. Maybe the outstanding linemates are benefitting from Penner also?

I’m just trying to give all three of them credit, hardly to single out Penner for special praise as you seem to infer. When the trio is outscoring the bad guys 19-5 at evens that’s enough for me to conclude they’re a pretty darn good line that must be firing on all three cylinders.