Edmonton is No Good XI: Mud, Sweatpants and Tiers

[GGG]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

These are the ages of some of the best players when they began their career seasons:

Wayne Gretzly: 24
Mario Lemieux: 22
Bobby Orr: 22
Maurice "Rocket" Richard: 23
Mike Bossy: 24
Gordie Howe: 24 (technically had more points at 40, but in more games played)
Jean Beliveau: 24
Jaromir Jagr: 23
Sidney Crosby: 19
Alex Ovechkin: 21

There's already a decent chance that McDavid is past his prime. The only reason he seemingly improves his point totals is that league scoring and powerplays have gone up so much in recent years.

Peak scoring years. Now McDavid hasn’t decided to play defence yet so it may not apply to him but id argue that none of those players best seasons correspond with their peak offensive production.

[indes]

God I hope both the wonder twins re-sign in Edmonton. That franchise will be destined for 12th-20th finishes over the duration of those contracts.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by FanSince'01

Now, 31 years old in 2025 and 31 years old in 1967 are two vastly different things

Maybe so, but probably not in the way you're thinking.

Using the same method you used (age off Hockey Reference and add half a year):

1966-67 Rangers, 29.5
Canadiens, 28.9
Red Wings, 28.9
Black Hawks, 28.5
Bruins, 26.0


I omitted any players who didn't play at least 10 games.

Except for the woeful Bruins (who were just beginning a rebuild with the youngest player in the NHL, 18-year-old Bobby Orr), it was a pretty old league. The Leafs were the oldest team, but not by a wide margin.

Aging stars like Gordie Howe (38), Andy Bathgate (34), Pierre Pilote (35), Glenn Hall (35), ‘Boom Boom’ Geoffrion (35), Jean Béliveau (35), and Gump Worsley (37) were still productive, and weren't giving up their stalls for anybody. With only six NHL clubs, players usually had to serve a lengthy apprenticeship in the minors before they earned a callup.

All that changed after expansion, as players were promoted much more quickly to fill a vastly increased number of roster spots. The league got younger in a hurry.

[stemit14]

After the reported comments from Draisaitl’s agent that the ball is in the oilers court… I wonder what that means in the contract offer? The oilers have no negotiating power here. Draisaitl essentially gets to hold not only himself but McDavid hostage in the sense that if he leaves, it’s likely McDavid leaves as well. So if he wants $14-15 million, that’s what he gets. If he wants 8 years, that’s what he gets. If he wants 1 year, that’s what he gets.

If it’s true that the “ball is in their court”… what are they doing with the ball? If they wait, they risk him choosing to leave because he does not want to negotiate during the season (sounds like an August deadline from the agent). If he’s offered to stay for anything beyond what he is signed for right now… what more are the oilers management asking for? I know they have a GM to hire, but the decision on Draisaitl would be beyond just a GM’s decision - it would be ownership/president of hockey ops.

Outside of waiting to hire a GM first… what would make the Oilers management hesitate if Draisaitl’s camp has given them his number and term? The only number that would likely make them not sign him is if it’s north of $16 million IMO… simply because they’ll have to give McDavid $18 million in that case.

The best guess I would have is that it’s over term. I don’t really know what term Draisaitl would want or what term the oilers want… maybe Draisaitl only wants to sign for 2 years. Or maybe 4 years. I assume the oilers want 8 years but would 4 years be so bad for the Oilers? They would get essentially the remainder of his prime years… and players like him can have a sharp decline in their 30s especially since he plays so much and seems to play injured all the time. If Draisaitl only wanted to sign for 4 years, that would be way better for the Oilers than 8 years I would think. Of course, I guess the problem again with a four year extension for Draisait is that it likely means only a 3 year extension for McDavid because that would make them both free agents in the same year. And the oilers want McDavid forever.

[Rutuu]

A lot could change in a year. Draisatl could be stuck in Edmonton solo with McDavid in Toronto.

[8sPOT]

This article where his agent says 'There's no rush yet, but either it happens quickly, i.e., by the end of August, or it doesn't work out at all,'.

I mean that seems like theres a rush to me. You have 1 month to sign probably the biggest deal in franchise history.

https://www.si.com/onsi/breakaway/ne...n-oilers-court

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by butterfly

The older players on the Oilers are going to get worse, the PK is objectively worse without McLeod, and McDavid and Draisaitl have peaked or are at their peak (don't expect more).

Originally Posted by Rising_Oil_Prices

Skinner’s going into only his third year, with a ton of valuable experience. McDavid and Draisatl, are in their prime. Hey I’m not saying there aren’t significant issues lying ahead, but this year, nope… other than the short offseason and possible injuries through a season, which as I said is a mild concern.

Credit where it is due, and as much as I hate to admit, or even believe it, but the Oilers P/K was at historical levels in the playoffs. That simply can't continue with or without one player.

Skinner had a great run but what will that translate to next year? It could very well mean a continued improvement or a peak he can't get to again like many goalies that have performed in the playoffs and then could not get to that level again.

McPisswad (Sorry, I just really hate them!) have likely peaked, and are in their primes. I think those are mostly synonyms. How long you can sustain the peak is your prime is how I would put it. However, we know how much they play all season long and how much they played in the playoffs. That almost kills most players and few come out in October fresh as daisies. With the additional mileage they have it would be amazing if they went back to their regular pace. They have show they can overcome a slow start but can they do it again? I would be almost certain they will be slow starters again.

I can't decide if it would be better for me if they left or if they both signed max deals and the Oilers had to ride out those contracts. Either would be good by me.

The only 'downside' I can see is if Oilers management traded them for a haul that would set them up for years to come. I guess if one of them stayed and they traded the other for a haul that would be very bad for the Flames as well.

[Enoch Root]

For the PK, it isn't just McLeod that's gone, but Foegele too, who had a really good playoffs. First, you simply can't expect to reproduce a crazy-hot run. And second, they lost 2 key guys.

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by manwiches

New NHL 25 cover released.

Sent from my SM-F946W using Tapatalk

I think this may be a photoshop.

Some of the pixels seem to have been re-arranged to indicate that he actually stepped foot on the ice and accepted the tropy.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

For the PK, it isn't just McLeod that's gone, but Foegele too, who had a really good playoffs. First, you simply can't expect to reproduce a crazy-hot run. And second, they lost 2 key guys.

They replaced Foegele with Arvidsson. I'd take that swap every day of the week.

Edmonton isn't no good because of what it did in free agency this year. The deals that were made and the players they let go don't make them worse. Edmonton is no good because... well, first of all, it's Edmonton. But their key weaknesses are
a) paying 9.25 million to a dude who is maybe a #4 defenseman and even at that, needs to be paired with specific players in order to not be a liability; and
b) goaltending that is extremely hot and cold, which is a very easy way to lose a playoff series when it goes cold for a few games. It happened to Skinner twice - against VAN (4/5 starts below .900) and then again against FLA (first 3 starts below .900). They were lucky to survive it the first time (other team missing its starting goalie and top goal scorer at the end) and did lose the second.

Neither of those problems are going away.

[TheIronMaiden]

Goaltending is the real question going into next season.

Skinner played well enough to outpace the competition.

It'll be interesting to see what his first full season as the number 1 guy looks like. They pretty well rode him solid since his call up last year.

[topfiverecords]

I see the league has done some work to counteract the potential of a slow start. Already in game two they get to wait at home for a tired opponent (Chicago) with travel and less than 24 hours between games. Can guarantee the Blackhawks backup goalie here also.

Then they get the Flames on a B2B with travel. Six of the first eight at home.

They then get to go into Detroit and wait, while the Wings are on the road the day before.

[Jbo]

True champs dont need all the help the Oilers get. I dont care how soft the schedule, these chumps had the shot and blew it

[FanSince'01]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Maybe so, but probably not in the way you're thinking.

Using the same method you used (age off Hockey Reference and add half a year):

1966-67 Rangers, 29.5
Canadiens, 28.9
Red Wings, 28.9
Black Hawks, 28.5
Bruins, 26.0


I omitted any players who didn't play at least 10 games.

Except for the woeful Bruins (who were just beginning a rebuild with the youngest player in the NHL, 18-year-old Bobby Orr), it was a pretty old league. The Leafs were the oldest team, but not by a wide margin.

Aging stars like Gordie Howe (38), Andy Bathgate (34), Pierre Pilote (35), Glenn Hall (35), ‘Boom Boom’ Geoffrion (35), Jean Béliveau (35), and Gump Worsley (37) were still productive, and weren't giving up their stalls for anybody. With only six NHL clubs, players usually had to serve a lengthy apprenticeship in the minors before they earned a callup.

All that changed after expansion, as players were promoted much more quickly to fill a vastly increased number of roster spots. The league got younger in a hurry.

Thanks for this, that puts how old this Oilers team is going to be this year into even greater perspective!

I guess never-say-never given league parity and garbage NHL officiating (I'll still say never because E=NG always and forever), but man they are going to have an uphill battle this coming season to even repeat what they just did, let alone win it all.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

For the PK, it isn't just McLeod that's gone, but Foegele too, who had a really good playoffs. First, you simply can't expect to reproduce a crazy-hot run. And second, they lost 2 key guys.

Personell doesn't matter, in case you didn't know. Mark Stewart is a savant and can get a 90% pk out of anyone.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Maybe so, but probably not in the way you're thinking.

Using the same method you used (age off Hockey Reference and add half a year):

1966-67 Rangers, 29.5
Canadiens, 28.9
Red Wings, 28.9
Black Hawks, 28.5
Bruins, 26.0


I omitted any players who didn't play at least 10 games.

Except for the woeful Bruins (who were just beginning a rebuild with the youngest player in the NHL, 18-year-old Bobby Orr), it was a pretty old league. The Leafs were the oldest team, but not by a wide margin.

Aging stars like Gordie Howe (38), Andy Bathgate (34), Pierre Pilote (35), Glenn Hall (35), ‘Boom Boom’ Geoffrion (35), Jean Béliveau (35), and Gump Worsley (37) were still productive, and weren't giving up their stalls for anybody. With only six NHL clubs, players usually had to serve a lengthy apprenticeship in the minors before they earned a callup.

All that changed after expansion, as players were promoted much more quickly to fill a vastly increased number of roster spots. The league got younger in a hurry.

This is a particularly interesting point. the Original 6 teams went into 1967 with all kinds of advantages, one would think, although the then defending Stanley Cup Champ Leafs are still waiting for a followup, and the Rangers, Hawks and Wings would all need to wait over a generation (not even a hockey generation but a generation generation) to win again

only 2 of them went on to sustained success

one is the Bruins, the youngest on that list who while 'only' winning in 70 and 72 were basically in the conversation as Cup threats throughout the 70s

the other, of course is the Habs- while they were squarely middle of the pack age wise, even in 1967 they had 4 HOFers 25 and under in the system (Laperrier, Cournoyer, Savard and Vachon), they would be soon to add Lemaire and Lapointe and then partly due to the fact that they had one of the only GMs whose brain was moving in the right direction and they ended up being one of about 4-5 teams in the early 70s that seemed to be aware the draft was a thing (Habs, Sabres, Isles, Flyers and one or two more) they ended up adding Dryden, Lafleur, Robinson, Gainey, Shutt , Houle etc etc- not something any current team will be able to replicate in a 32 team league

[Enoch Root]

Obviously, players are in much better shape today, than several decades ago, and remain in good shape well into their 30s.

However, while health and fitness have changed drastically, the game itself has changed even more. Players used to be able to coast at times, and pick their spots. This gave an advantage to experience. Now, every shift is contested at top speed, which favours fitness and speed over experience.

Then there are the playoffs themselves, which have gone from 2 rounds to 4 - the physical toll is immense. This also favours youth.

So it isn't at all surprising that we don't see older teams lifting the cup anymore. And the idea of going to the cup final, back to back, as the oldest team in the league, is a really big ask.

Then factor in that you have a team that relies more on its top players than any other team does.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Enjoying that it's truly and old an depreciating team now and the clock is ticking.

Seems like every fan up there is in denial of this and just assumes they'll be able to lock down every expiring core piece while continuing to improve the team somehow.

Going to get really interesting when it hits them that keeping draisaitl past the deadline means that they'll essentially be walking him to free agency and gambling a return that could've been on one run.

I wonder if they'll turn on McDavid and his legacy there when he bolts to Toronto.

[EldrickOnIce]

They are all convinced that the 25 cup is a lock.
I think they'll trade Mcd and Drai for one.
They will be irrevocably devastated when they fail and they both walk away for nothing.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Obviously, players are in much better shape today, than several decades ago, and remain in good shape well into their 30s.

However, while health and fitness have changed drastically, the game itself has changed even more. Players used to be able to coast at times, and pick their spots. This gave an advantage to experience. Now, every shift is contested at top speed, which favours fitness and speed over experience.

Then there are the playoffs themselves, which have gone from 2 rounds to 4 - the physical toll is immense. This also favours youth.

So it isn't at all surprising that we don't see older teams lifting the cup anymore. And the idea of going to the cup final, back to back, as the oldest team in the league, is a really big ask.

Then factor in that you have a team that relies more on its top players than any other team does.

It's hard to evaluate players from generations many years ago vs now. But the best comparable for McDavid is Crosby

Crosby is still putting up big numbers but when you factor is scoring is up and PP % is way up as well his 90 points is well behind top players who are getting 140 in a season. Clearly Crosby is not the Crosby he once was, no way peak Crosby finished 50 points behind the leading scorers.

When you look at the potential dip - scoring and PP% started to climb in 2017-18, the season Crosby turned 30. His point totals remain close to the same but other scorers have taken off and leaving him behind. Seems like there wasn't much of a dip, but there has been.

30 year old Crosby had 1 big playoff (21 in 12) and 100 point season.

Since Sid turned 31, he is basically an 85/90 point players who is under a PPG in the playoffs and has not made it past the 1st round in 6 seasons. Not all on him, team is on the decline but Sid was still only 31 and Malkin was 32 when the Pens were done.

Crosby has no cup in his 30s, 1 playoff series win, no scoring titles (not even close). He is still proving to be a great player in his 30s but the decline happened many years ago it was just harder to see it with the scoring increase.

McDavid is 28 and Leon is 29 next year, surrounded by a very old roster. The Pens last cup their top 9 scorers were in their 20s. The Pens are often a comparable to the Oilers as Sid and Geno were often labeled as guys carrying a weaker team, but their team was also young when Sid and Geno were at the end of the road for winning cups. Sid and Geno were 29 and 30 the last cup.