[Trade] Oilers trade Smid and Olivier Roy to Flames for Horak and Brossoit

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Disagree, he is a solid defensive d man who is a shot blocking machine.

I'm not sure that's even inconsistent with my description of "medicare bottom pairing defensemen".

Don't get me wrong, I think he's well suited as a penalty killer, but statistically speaking, it's been well documented that he is ill suited as a puck moving defensemen.

Really, he's a guy who doesn't drive the puck up the ice, even against average offensive players. He's a guy best used as a 5-6 guy ES who can defend ok but doesn't offer an advantage to his teammates on the ice.

Let's put it this way, he was a guy who didn't really standout on the Oilers who are laughable defensively. If he was an obvious keeper they presumably would have found a way to keep him. He's simply a bit one dimensional who makes more sense as simply one piece of the puzzle on a good team, but not a corner piece.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

Great might be a bit of a strong word.

Smid is a medicore bottom pairing guy getting paid at market rates. I think it was a fine addition for a defensive starving team, and we didn't lose anything we are likely to regret long term. It was a minor transaction that fit the need of both teams, the way trade are supposed to work.

Why do I feel there should be a hehehe with this post?

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by evman150

Calling Smid a bottom pairing defenseman is controversial, but fair enough. Calling him a "mediocre" bottom pairing guy is absolutely ridiculous. If he's bottom pairing, then he's an awesome bottom pairing guy.

Personally, I think he's a decent #4 guy who has played pretty well for the Flames so far.

Ridiculous? Smid grades out very poorly in most puck possession stats, and offers basically nothing offensively. If you haven't seen those stats it would make sense to educate yourself before calling my opnion "ridiculous".

He's a role player, spare part, fairly run of the mill 5-6 guy. Definite NHL player, but he's a guy that would get exposed against upper echelon players (like he was when he played on the Oilers). Good penalty killer, but I wouldn't say he really offers one other talent I would describe as "above average".

I mean, the Oilers used Jeff Petry (almost exclusively) to move the puck out of the zone when they played together. Not sure if you have seen Petry play, but he isn't exactly Doughty or Keith at moving the puck.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by New Era

Why do I feel there should be a hehehe with this post?

Yeah, good point, Eddybeers. Gonna not address that, like usual?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Yeah, good point, Eddybeers. Gonna not address that, like usual?

Try again.

[Goodlad]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

Ridiculous? Smid grades out very poorly in most puck possession stats, and offers basically nothing offensively. If you haven't seen those stats it would make sense to educate yourself before calling my opnion "ridiculous".

He's a role player, spare part, fairly run of the mill 5-6 guy. Definite NHL player, but he's a guy that would get exposed against upper echelon players (like he was when he played on the Oilers). Good penalty killer, but I wouldn't say he really offers one other talent I would describe as "above average".

I mean, the Oilers used Jeff Petry (almost exclusively) to move the puck out of the zone when they played together. Not sure if you have seen Petry play, but he isn't exactly Doughty or Keith at moving the puck.

Or perhaps you could do a better job of defending your position by presenting said stats.

[Patrick Bateman]

FYI, so there is no confusion, I would describe "an awesome bottom pairing guy" as someone who when used on a bottom pairing would provide a distinct advantage to the team on the ice and be a mismatch for bottom line forwards.

For example, the Blackhawks use Nick Leddy on the bottom pairing in even strength situations, however, he is such a strong puck mover that against lower tier forwards he can really help orchestrate their offense and tilt the ice in the opposite direction.

Smid is certainly not capable of that. He does a fine job of goal prevention , but I feel like he only excels in that piece, and is still fairly limited going the other direction. To me a guy that has no problem taking a shift without a flurry of offensive chances against him, but not a guy who is adding much the other way. Just little offense on both sides in a situation like that, and not a guy who presents a significant advantage for his side when he takes a shift.

I hope that clarifies my stance, thanks.

[Red John]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

Ridiculous? Smid grades out very poorly in most puck possession stats, and offers basically nothing offensively. If you haven't seen those stats it would make sense to educate yourself before calling my opnion "ridiculous".

He's a role player, spare part, fairly run of the mill 5-6 guy. Definite NHL player, but he's a guy that would get exposed against upper echelon players (like he was when he played on the Oilers). Good penalty killer, but I wouldn't say he really offers one other talent I would describe as "above average".

I mean, the Oilers used Jeff Petry (almost exclusively) to move the puck out of the zone when they played together. Not sure if you have seen Petry play, but he isn't exactly Doughty or Keith at moving the puck.

That's twice now you trot out the "Oilers didn't value him so he must suck" line. Actually if the Oilers thought Smid was expendable, that probably means he's a really good defensive player. However that team assesses defensive ability, the opposite is usually true.

Puck possession stats (none of which you provide in particular) help explain what is seen on the ice. It doesn't make your opinion objectively right however.

Smid is being paid like a No. 4 defenseman who is a shut down guy with toughness but doesn't provide offense. Which is exactly what he is. Is it a coincidence that the Flames have been a much better defensive team since that trade?

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

FYI, so there is no confusion, I would describe "an awesome bottom pairing guy" as someone who when used on a bottom pairing would provide a distinct advantage to the team on the ice and be a mismatch for bottom line forwards.

For example, the Blackhawks use Nick Leddy on the bottom pairing in even strength situations, however, he is such a strong puck mover that against lower tier forwards he can really help orchestrate their offense and tilt the ice in the opposite direction.

Smid is certainly not capable of that. He does a fine job of goal prevention , but I feel like he only excels in that piece, and is still fairly limited going the other direction. To me a guy that has no problem taking a shift without a flurry of offensive chances against him, but not a guy who is adding much the other way. Just little offense on both sides in a situation like that, and not a guy who presents a significant advantage for his side when he takes a shift.

I hope that clarifies my stance, thanks.

So you think Smid is Robyn Reghre in his prime?

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Goodlad

Or perhaps you could do a better job of defending your position by presenting said stats.

Gee, I didn't realize that it was my job to do the research for people who claim my stance to be "ridiculous" without presenting any facts. I didn't attack any posters. For someone to deem my opinion "ridiculous", I would expect they would first bring some facts to the table. But I don't mind bringing some facts to the table, as it's not particularly hard.

Behind the net has some insight on his CORSI ratings, which has Smid as being ranked below his line mates in puck possession last season, on a soft Oilers team. That doesn't speak volumes to me that he is an essential part of a defense core.

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stati...4+45+46+63+67#

Further, puckprospectus ranked Smid as being a replacement level defensemen last season, and an average third pairing defensemen the season before. He was projected around that level this season despite his poor ranking in 2013.

This opinion I did not realize to be so controversial. There's a reason that the Oilers had little issue parting with Smid to a division rival for a paltry return. He has a myriad of holes in his game. He's got uses, but if not used correctly, he can certainly be overexposed.

In my humble opinion, I feel that he often gets overrated from the scouts watching him, as he often doesn't have the toughest assignments. He can often be seen playing mistake free hockey against less offensively talented players, but I think a more watchful eye would notice the lack of ability to funnel offense simultaneously, and his participating against non elite forwards. I think he's worth his contract, and being used appropriately by the Flames. I have no problem with the trade. But at the same time, I think it's appropriate not to ignore some pretty clear flaws in his game that some of the advanced stats highlight pretty clearly.

Again, he's on a relatively cheap contract, and was acquired from a division rival for some medicore prospects. If he's as valuable as you guys are claiming, teams around the NHL would have been lining up for his services. Almost every team is looking to add another quality defensemen, it just doesn't appear to me that Smid had the qualities that teams are looking for (puck moving ability, and ability to play a strong two way game against top 6 forwards).

[GettinIggyWithIt]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

I mean, the Oilers used Jeff Petry (almost exclusively) to move the puck out of the zone when they played together. Not sure if you have seen Petry play, but he isn't exactly Doughty or Keith at moving the puck.

Well the Oilers are known for smart coaching decisions, terrific player management, and good overall hockey strategy. If the Oilers thought Petry should be moving the puck out of the zone, then they must have been correct...

[moon]

Smid is not a shutdown guy at all. Just because defense is the best part of his game does not make him a shutdown guy. His foot speed is much too slow and he has a bad sense of positioning.

He does block shots, hits and is a fake tough guy but is not a shutdown guy at all unless you want a bottom 5 defense in the league.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Red John

That's twice now you trot out the "Oilers didn't value him so he must suck" line. Actually if the Oilers thought Smid was expendable, that probably means he's a really good defensive player. However that team assesses defensive ability, the opposite is usually true.

I seriously doubt the Oilers management team actually believe their defensemen are strong. It's not like they have given much up for their existing players.

They have attempted to build their D core through their prospect pool, and cheap veteran free agent pickups, while trying to protect their valuable young forwards. I think they continue to find out that method can be very difficult. I don't think a lot of teams are offering quality top 4 defensemen for their scrap forwards (and I don't think I am going out on a limb in saying that).

In summary, I don't think their talent evaluation is necessarily to blame for their awful defines, but more their ability to develop their young players, selection to continue drafting forwards rather than real top defensemen prospects, and aversion to trading their forwards while their value is at a high to acquire a ready made top defensemen. If Smid had the ability to handle top 6 forwards it would show in the stats.

Defensemen are difficult to develop. It takes a steep price to acquire a defensemen from a team that has already gone through the peaks and valleys of a developed defensemen, hence why few are moved from year to year, and rather are locked up. The Oilers have tried to do it their own way, and failed on epic levels.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

For example, the Blackhawks use Nick Leddy on the bottom pairing in even strength situations, however, he is such a strong puck mover that against lower tier forwards he can really help orchestrate their offense and tilt the ice in the opposite direction.

Smid is certainly not capable of that. He does a fine job of goal prevention , but I feel like he only excels in that piece, and is still fairly limited going the other direction. To me a guy that has no problem taking a shift without a flurry of offensive chances against him, but not a guy who is adding much the other way. Just little offense on both sides in a situation like that, and not a guy who presents a significant advantage for his side when he takes a shift.

we all know that Ladislav Smid is not a puck moving defenseman ... no one said he was. You don't have to be a puck moving defenseman to make it as a blueliner in the NHL. Smids bread and butter is blocking shots, killing penalties, playing a physical game. And that's fine, no one expects a 40 point season out of him, you know ...

Also, this part made me laugh:

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

Smid is certainly not capable of that. He does a fine job of goal prevention , but I feel like he only excels in that piece, and is still fairly limited going the other direction.

... isn't that the job of a defenseman? Why would anybody criticize him for that?!?

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by GettinIggyWithIt

Well the Oilers are known for smart coaching decisions, terrific player management, and good overall hockey strategy. If the Oilers thought Petry should be moving the puck out of the zone, then they must have been correct...

If a player can't make it so obvious as to highlight his abilities above Jeff Petry, then I have to question whether he has suitable abilities in that field (i.e. he should be able to make it obvious even to an untrained eye).

Is anyone here actually of the opinion that Smid is a strong puck mover? A cursory look at even his TSN player page would make it quite clear that is not one of his strengths........... I'm surprised that is even being debated to be quite honest.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

Is anyone here actually of the opinion that Smid is a strong puck mover? A cursory look at even his TSN player page would make it quite clear that is not one of his strengths........... I'm surprised that is even being debated to be quite honest.

... you're the only one who used "Smid" and "puck mover" in the same sentence ^^

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by devo22

we all know that Ladislav Smid is not a puck moving defenseman ... no one said he was. You don't have to be a puck moving defenseman to make it as a blueliner in the NHL. Smids bread and butter is blocking shots, killing penalties, playing a physical game. And that's fine, no one expects a 40 point season out of him, you know ...

Also, this part made me laugh:

... isn't that the job of a defenseman? Why would anybody criticize him for that?!?

Funny, I haven't said anything contradictory to anything you said above. I've actually commented a number of times that Smid is more than useful killing penalties, and can handle himself defensively on the third pairing.

The fact of the matter is that most teams have a number of defensemen who add dimensions beyond that. Defensemen can have numerous job descriptions beyond simply "goal prevention". That is only one side of the ice. A defensemen who prevents offensive opportunities by chipping the puck out back to the opposing team has a lot less value than one who can clear the puck out to one of his forwards (but one could argue the goal prevent aspect is near equal in both examples). Again, I'm surprised you wouldn't detect a difference in those scenarios, and I think if you watch a playoff calibre team that they have numerous defensemen who can do this job, whereas Smid is limited in this category.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by devo22

... you're the only one who used "Smid" and "puck mover" in the same sentence ^^

The poster I was responding to implied that Smid might actually be quite a bit better than Petry at moving the puck if given the chance by Oilers management. Did you read that post?

[devo22]

I actually read that differently ... as in "Petry shouldn't be the one to move the puck", not in "Smid is better in that regard than Petry".

That being said, what do I care about Petry ...

[PeteMoss]

The Flames gave up next to nothing for a viable NHL defenseman (which the Oilers clearly lack).