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

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Since I would argue most people view 'stay at home' and 'shutdown' defenseman as the same thing, can we call him a stay at home D and call it a life?

The term 'shutdown' defenceman has only been used in reference to hockey players for a few years now. It was originally an NFL term, used to describe the handful of cornerbacks in the league capable of 'shutting down' the opposition's top receivers. First time I heard it used was in reference to Champ Bailey. The term recently migrated to hockey, where it described exceptionally effective defensemen who could do the same thing to opposition forwards.

If it really has come to mean the same thing as 'stay-at-home' defenseman (a defenseman who is effective only in his own zone), that's kinda sad. Because now we have two terms for the same thing, and we'll have to come with a new one for a defenseman who is exceptionally effective at defence.

[TheDebaser]

Oh my god who cares.


Also, Patrick Bateman (Bait-man) is clearly a troll. CP should stop encouraging him.

[old-fart]

I think it was a great trade, but just because I think it is a great trade doesn't mean I think we got a "great" player. If Edmonton had traded us their 5th rounder for our 7th rounder, it's a great trade for us and a bad one for Edmonton.

I think we got a very good bottom pairing guy, or a decent number 4 guy who is better in his own end that the oppositions end. Sort of like a Regehr light maybe. Thing is though, we needed that type of player. He's better than Butler and SOB. He also has that 'edge' to his game where he will take someone out if they are harassing the goalie, or going after one of our smaller guys. No, he's not a heavy weight, but he can hold his own. He seems to have great leadership and be good in the room too.

What's even funnier is that he is one of the pieces that Edmonton needs. Their defence in their own zone is laughably bad, they have a lack of leadership and guys that will give anything for the team, and yet they trade away one of the few guys on their team that actually meets that criteria. And for what? Cap space to sign a one year bandaid in goal that has been at best "ok".

What did we give up? Our 5th best goalie prospect maybe (depending on if you count Ramo as a prospect or not) and Horak - who I like but will never be more than a bit part that is somewhat redundant on the Flames with Reinhart, Knight and now Colbourne (and possibly even Jones). Now that I think about it, Byron is playing that role wonderfully too.

In effect we gave up nothing and got a quality NHL defenceman back. Will he challenge for the Norris - no. But he is providing quality minutes and is also playing the way we want to - balls to the wall leave it all on the ice - and leadership for the young dudes. If we decide he doesn't fit we can easily flip him at the deadline for far more than we gave up to acquire him.

Does anyone think that anyone would give up anything tangible at the deadline for Horak and an ECHL goalie that can't cut it in the AHL?

Coilers were desperate chasing dreams yet again, and the Flames were one of the few teams in the NHL with room to bend them over, and likely knew that the idiotic Coilers management would overvalue our 5th best goalie prospect because he used to be an Oil King. Well done Feaster and co.

As for why the Coilers didn't trade another asset to get the necessary cap space... who? and to where? They have been trying to dump Hemsky since the summer and have had zero takers. MacTipsy made a "gentleman's agreement" with Gagme to not trade him this year. They won't part with any of their "superstars in waiting" unless they are getting Crosby or Ovenchin back because, yet again, they vastly over rate their players. The rest of their roster is basically trash, so who would want it?

Unless Edmonton is prepared to admit their folly and "rebuild the rebuilding rebuild" they will continue to go absolutely nowhere.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by TheDebaser

Oh my god who cares.


Also, Patrick Bateman (Bait-man) is clearly a troll. CP should stop encouraging him.

If you question CP dogma you are always a troll.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

If you question CP dogma you are always a troll.

Do you whine the most about CP while still posting here? Don't like it? No one is forcing you to post here.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by devo22

so? The draft is not perfect. Players develop at different rates.

That was actually my point. Do you even read my posts?

I was suggesting an argument as to why Horak still had a chance.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

If you question CP dogma you are always a troll.

If it is a new poster stirring up crap about a trade 2 months ago it comes across as trolling. Posters like you and Moon are just haters

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by strombad

Teams don't pay 3.5 million for mediocre third pairing defencemen that are easily replaceable. It literally does not happen in any scenario.

He cannot be both worth his contract, and a mediocre third pairing defenceman who is easily replaceable, one of the two is wrong, and popular opinion would be the latter.

In this thread, I have been hammered for saying that just because the Oilers are doing something doesn't mean it's right.

Yet, you are able to make the exact same argument. Isn't it possible that Edmonton misevaluated Smid in the first place and gave him a contract he didn't deserve. You can't have it both ways.

Scrolling through NHL numbers, each of the following guys are currently making a cap hit of about $3.5M or more, and IMO, each could be argued to be more of a #5/6 than a top 4 guy (if you disagree, then you probably believe that most teams have 5-6 calibre top 4 players which makes no sense:

1. Bryan Allen
2. Nick Schultz
3. Andrew Ference
4. Henrik Tallinder
5. Tim Gleason
6. Mike Komisarek pre buyout
7. James Wisniewski
8. Trevor Daley
9. Kyle Quincey
10. Tom Gilbert (before new contract)
11. Ed Jovanovski
12. Anton Volchankov
13. Andrej Meszaros
14. Luke Schenn
15. Nicklas Grossman (seriously what is Paul Holmgren doing?)
16. Rob Scuderi
17. Brad Stuart
18. Sami Salo
19. JM liles
20. Arguably Mike Green - Caps fans say he is pure garbage ES right now


Most teams have a defensemen that they have overpaid despite them being miscast in a top 4 role, and are probably better suited to be on a third pairing somewhere.

Every team is always looking to improve their top 6, because it is a very difficult position to develop internally. That forces teams to give defensemen with a pulse contracts to either keep them once they get to their RFA years, or to spend unwisely on the free agent market.

It happens all the time. Just because a team has signed the contract it does not automatically mean that the evaluation and decision is a smart one. In some cases like Schenn the team is paying for potential they may never get. In others, like Edmonton, the team is so bad they have to overpay players to convince them to stay. I'm not saying that happened in Smid's case, because it actually seems he loves Alberta, but stuff like that happens.

Smid is too pathetic offensively to be a true #4 guy. Good teams have at minimum 5 guys better than a guy of Smid's calibre. The Blackhawks for example inarguably have 6 when Roszival is healthy enough to be in the line-up, and use a less talented version of Smid as their #7/8 guy. Smid wouldn't make Boston, LA's, Anaheim's, Vancouver's, The Blues, Coyotes, Montreal's, Ranger's, Sharks, etc. top 4's when healthy.

Smid is a guy that on good teams is a clear cut #5/6 guy. On poor teams he would be miscast in a top 4 role, even if they are forced to use him that way, and trick themselves into believing he can handle those duties because he was the best man available for the job.

When the Flames start becoming competitive over the next few years, I will be very dissapointed if we don't have 4 defensemen better than him. He makes a great penalty killer, and average 5/6 in even strength situations, and as long as he's used in that role, he'll probably be worth his contract, and be a good fit on the team, but anything more, and he's going to be overexposed like he was in Edmonton.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Red John

Not offensive enough to be a No. 3/PP guy, not elite enough defensively to be a top-pairing shutdown guy, but he's also not a 3rd pairing guy whose goal is to soak up 12-15 minutes and hope to not be a weak link. That describes guys like O'Brien and Butler and to group Smid in with them is silly.

Well Butler and O'Brien aren't even NHL calibre players. They are more #7/8 type guys who could legit be replaced by quality, cheap AHL players.

When they play, their goal is to simply survive the game without getting killed.

Smid I have said is adequate on the third pairing. That's a clearl disctinction I have made.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by TheDebaser

Oh my god who cares.


Also, Patrick Bateman (Bait-man) is clearly a troll. CP should stop encouraging him.

Have people really not seen American Psycho? Patrick Bateman is a very well known character and has nothing to do with trolling.

[REDVAN]

... but, but, but... Smid has a terrible corsi

[puckluck2]

Who on earth is calling Smid a top 4 guy? Saying it's a great trade doesn't = OMGZ11!1 Smid is a top 2 guy on any team in the NHL! I think we all know he's a 4/5/6 guy on pretty much every team in the league except for a few. Calgary currently being one of them. It was still a great trade for the Flames and that sentiment was agreed upon among pretty much any NHL guy that matters and more importantly, Oiler fans.

Oilers got hosed.

[Goodlad]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Who on earth is calling Smid a top 4 guy? Saying it's a great trade doesn't = OMGZ11!1 Smid is a top 2 guy on any team in the NHL! I think we all know he's a 4/5/6 guy on pretty much every team in the league except for a few. Calgary currently being one of them. It was still a great trade for the Flames and that sentiment was agreed upon among pretty much any NHL guy that matters and more importantly, Oiler fans.

Oilers got hosed.

I think this is why he's pretty confused about everyone piling on him. He said that Smid is a mediocre bottom pairing player. Most people feel he is a great bottom pairing guy and a mediocre/poor #4. The distinction between the opinions didn't really warrant the reaction.

[Bourque's Twin]

Another attribute of Smid's that people are discounting is his ability to play on the PK. Yes, on a Stanley Cup team Smid's a 5/6 guy. But, he is definitely on the PK 2 unit and quite possibly on the PK 1 unit. That makes him different from a lot of other 5/6 guys who are simply there to log 12 minutes per game.

[AltaGuy]

I agree that Smid is ideally a 5/6 guy whether in Calgary or somewhere else. For instance, if we get Girardi, like many of us want, our top 4 becomes Gio, Wideman, Brodie, Girardi, leaving Russell and Smid as 5/6. Pretty good defensive group imo.

But - having Smid is also important for depth, and having that guy to move fairly comfortably into the top-4 when needed is valuable.

[puckluck2]

The thing is you need 5/6 guys on your team to win. Sometimes a couple good 5/6 guy can be the most important part of your team.

We all know Doughty is going to be a stud and help the team win but what about LA's 5/6 guys? If they shat the bed that team would suffer a lot. Alec Martinez and Matt Greene both have the second and third best plus/minus at +10 while 5th and 6th least minutes. Those are the type of players that win you hockey games. Without those good secondary players, the primary players look like the Oilers top 4.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

In this thread, I have been hammered for saying that just because the Oilers are doing something doesn't mean it's right.

Yet, you are able to make the exact same argument. Isn't it possible that Edmonton misevaluated Smid in the first place and gave him a contract he didn't deserve. You can't have it both ways.

Scrolling through NHL numbers, each of the following guys are currently making a cap hit of about $3.5M or more, and IMO, each could be argued to be more of a #5/6 than a top 4 guy (if you disagree, then you probably believe that most teams have 5-6 calibre top 4 players which makes no sense:

1. Bryan Allen
2. Nick Schultz
3. Andrew Ference
4. Henrik Tallinder
5. Tim Gleason
6. Mike Komisarek pre buyout
7. James Wisniewski
8. Trevor Daley
9. Kyle Quincey
10. Tom Gilbert (before new contract)
11. Ed Jovanovski
12. Anton Volchankov
13. Andrej Meszaros
14. Luke Schenn
15. Nicklas Grossman (seriously what is Paul Holmgren doing?)
16. Rob Scuderi
17. Brad Stuart
18. Sami Salo
19. JM liles
20. Arguably Mike Green - Caps fans say he is pure garbage ES right now


Most teams have a defensemen that they have overpaid despite them being miscast in a top 4 role, and are probably better suited to be on a third pairing somewhere.

Every team is always looking to improve their top 6, because it is a very difficult position to develop internally. That forces teams to give defensemen with a pulse contracts to either keep them once they get to their RFA years, or to spend unwisely on the free agent market.

It happens all the time. Just because a team has signed the contract it does not automatically mean that the evaluation and decision is a smart one. In some cases like Schenn the team is paying for potential they may never get. In others, like Edmonton, the team is so bad they have to overpay players to convince them to stay. I'm not saying that happened in Smid's case, because it actually seems he loves Alberta, but stuff like that happens.

Smid is too pathetic offensively to be a true #4 guy. Good teams have at minimum 5 guys better than a guy of Smid's calibre. The Blackhawks for example inarguably have 6 when Roszival is healthy enough to be in the line-up, and use a less talented version of Smid as their #7/8 guy. Smid wouldn't make Boston, LA's, Anaheim's, Vancouver's, The Blues, Coyotes, Montreal's, Ranger's, Sharks, etc. top 4's when healthy.

Smid is a guy that on good teams is a clear cut #5/6 guy. On poor teams he would be miscast in a top 4 role, even if they are forced to use him that way, and trick themselves into believing he can handle those duties because he was the best man available for the job.

When the Flames start becoming competitive over the next few years, I will be very dissapointed if we don't have 4 defensemen better than him. He makes a great penalty killer, and average 5/6 in even strength situations, and as long as he's used in that role, he'll probably be worth his contract, and be a good fit on the team, but anything more, and he's going to be overexposed like he was in Edmonton.

You can write all the novel length posts you want about the subject, but you said two things:

Smid is probably worth is contract, but I don't think he's worth a whole lot more than 3.5M...Ideally you don't have to pay guys like Smid 3.5M, but many teams have to when they dip their toes in the free agent market

He's a role player, spare part, fairly run of the mill 5-6 guy...Smid is a medicore bottom pairing guy getting paid at market rates...Smid I have said is adequate on the third pairing.

Those two contradict each other. I was never the one who said Edmonton paid him correctly, YOU did. YOU said many teams would have to pay him 3.5 (which would dictate 3.5 as his 'market value'). YOU also said he's a mediocre third pairing player. As I said before, both of those things cannot be true, only one can be true.

You can pay a great third pairing guy 3.5, or a mediocre second pairing guy 3.5, but (unlike what you claimed) 3.5 is not market value for a mediocre, replaceable third pairing defenceman.

What I'm saying is that you are either wrong on about his contract (which you said he was worth) or wrong about his quality of play (which you said was mediocre).

Decide and get back to me, seems pretty straightforward. You can't go back now and say Edmonton overpaid him when you previously said he was paid "market value" and was "worth his contract".

[Patrick Bateman]

My argument is pretty straightforward. He's an average 5-6 guy.

Average 5-6 guys get paid decent salaries as they approach unrestricted free agency. I don't think he's particularly difficult to replace, however, when doing so on the UFA market, it does take some salary commitment.

Other teams acquire such players through different avenues (internal development, draft pick trades). The Flames paid little through player acquisition but did have to commit some money. When your internal player development stinks, then it is costly (money wise) to acquire NHL calibre players, even bottom pairing ones.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

My argument is pretty straightforward. He's an average 5-6 guy.

Average 5-6 guys get paid decent salaries as they approach unrestricted free agency. I don't think he's particularly difficult to replace, however, when doing so on the UFA market, it does take some salary commitment.

Other teams acquire such players through different avenues (internal development, draft pick trades). The Flames paid little through player acquisition but did have to commit some money. When your internal player development stinks, then it is costly (money wise) to acquire NHL calibre players, even bottom pairing ones.

That must be your own completely unfounded opinion, because there is zero evidence to suggest 3.5 million is market value for an average bottom pairing defenceman.

It's alright to admit you were wrong. As I said before, it's just blatantly ignorant to suggest an average third pairing defenceman is worth 3.5 million. In fact, I'd be delighted if you could find any other "average" third pairing defenceman who makes more than 3 million.

I'll save you the trouble: you won't.

[Patrick Bateman]

I listed 19 comparable players that are getting paid similar amounts of money to Smid. There are tons more in the 2.5-3M range as well.

3.5M is just not that much money anymore. I think it's pretty close to fair market value for a third pairing guy, similar to what the guys I suggested as comps make.