Is the Calgary Flames rebuild ahead of the Edmonton Oilers?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Yep. Edmonton had 207 and the Flames had 199 that year.

Even still. 8 goals. Over 82 games.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Yep. Edmonton had 207 and the Flames had 199 that year.

Wow, those were the days when the Flames were an offensive powerhouse with guys like Nik Hagman, David Moss and Krys Kolanos. Blake Comeau was a top 6 forward that year if memory serves.

Was Stephan Myer on that team?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Wow, those were the days when the Flames were an offensive powerhouse with guys like Nik Hagman, David Moss and Krys Kolanos. Blake Comeau was a top 6 forward that year if memory serves.

Was Stephan Myer on that team?

Hey man! Krys Kolanos tried! He did his best!

Naw...that was just bad all around.

[Flash Walken]

When was the last time the oilers allowed less goals in a season than the Flames? 1996?

[MissTeeks]

Last seven seasons:

2015 Flames 229 Oilers 199 +30

2014 Flames 237 Oilers 193 +44

2013 Flames 202 Oilers 199 +3

2012 Flames 128 Oilers 123 +5 (Lockout)

2011 Flames 199 Oilers 207 -8

2010 Flames 241 Oilers 191 +50

2009 Flames 201 Oilers 206 -5

[Locke]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Last seven seasons:

2015 Flames 229 Oilers 199 +30

2014 Flames 237 Oilers 193 +44

2013 Flames 202 Oilers 199 +3

2012 Flames 128 Oilers 123 +5 (Lockout)

2011 Flames 199 Oilers 207 -8

2010 Flames 241 Oilers 191 +50

2009 Flames 201 Oilers 206 -5

So...when they're bad they're abysmal. Nothing we didnt know already, but the actual stats are appreciated.

[Mr.Coffee]

It shouldn't even be close, but I think it is if not Edmonton's is a little behind us only because they're STILL just grasping that there's an entire position to the game that they've virtually ignored for almost a decade, which is unfathomable for any working professional with a brain (to just ignore an entire block of their business) let alone NHL executives.

Also, I'm not so sure it's Edmonton's drafting that is the problem (although, definitely a case can be made for questionable moves to not position themselves in a draft where a dman could be had, like Ekblad or something). But to me it's pretty clear that player development is the problem.

Like, you're telling me that drafting Yakupov, Nugent-Hopkins, Hall, Eberle... that these guys all just were lousy picks? No way. These guys were top of their class amazing hockey players, and then they got to Edmonton and maybe Hall was the only one to live up to the hype and even he had questions about character and a good dressing room presence / teammate???

It all just smells a little bit too much like the whole organization has a development problem.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

It shouldn't even be close, but I think it is if not Edmonton's is a little behind us only because they're STILL just grasping that there's an entire position to the game that they've virtually ignored for almost a decade, which is unfathomable for any working professional with a brain (to just ignore an entire block of their business) let alone NHL executives.

Also, I'm not so sure it's Edmonton's drafting that is the problem (although, definitely a case can be made for questionable moves to not position themselves in a draft where a dman could be had, like Ekblad or something). But to me it's pretty clear that player development is the problem.

Like, you're telling me that drafting Yakupov, Nugent-Hopkins, Hall, Eberle... that these guys all just were lousy picks? No way. These guys were top of their class amazing hockey players, and then they got to Edmonton and maybe Hall was the only one to live up to the hype and even he had questions about character and a good dressing room presence / teammate???

It all just smells a little bit too much like the whole organization has a development problem.

No.

I'm comfortable saying that you are one hundred and eleventy percent wrong on that assertion and yet equally correct on the other.

I'm not sure the Oilers are aware, but just in case I'll state the obvious: There is more than 1 round in the NHL entry draft.

Dont get me wrong, I'm an impatient guy at times myself and I'm sure most people would love to get in there, get that one pick done and get out.

However, it should be noted that theres like...6 whole other rounds afterwards. And while less sexy than the 1st overall, they're no less important to the general concept of team construction.

Yes, they rush their players. And yes, they expect their players to be superstars pretty much out of the gates and if they arent the organization itself doesnt have any answers for that.

At the end of the day though it seems to make the most sense to try and find the common denominator. It appears to be the Edmonton Oilers. They're just...No Good. At anything really.

They're No Good at Drafting, they're No Good at Development, they're certainly No Good at winning. They're just all around No Good.

What else is there to say?

[djsFlames]

Yeah Edmonton does reek of very poor development. All of those picks couldn't have been that lousy for 1st overalls.

Half of that problem is they've rushed every. single. top. pick. into the NHL, and just onto the team but most times into a top role. And these players seem to plateau offensively early on and be very one dimensional in their details of the game. To the point now where they can't get ideal trade value for them.

.... I wonder why. Neanderthals running that organization.
The farm system is there for a purpose.

[MrMastodonFarm]

When you're as historically bad as the Oilers have been it's safe to put the blame both of drafting and development.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

When you're as historically bad as the Oilers have been it's safe to put the blame both of drafting and development.

Oh hell, when you're as bad as the Edmonton Oilers you can spread smooth, creamy blame all over your bald head and rub it all over the sweet, delectable body of failure.

[N-E-B]

I don't care about draft pedigree, Johnny Gaudreau is one of the best payers in the NHL today and will be for a long time. They have McDavid who will probably be better, but I honestly don't think the gap is very big at all. I also like Monahan more than RNH, and it's possible Bennett will be better than him too. They probably beat us on the wing but I think that Lucic is going to be the next Clarkson. Good player, awful contract.

Defense isn't even a question. Their top defenseman is a #4 on Calgary. Klefbom is good but he's not the top pairing savior some in Mulletville think he is.

I think goaltending goes to Calgary narrowly. Last year they definitely had us beat but I think Elliott is an upgrade on Talbot, who I think is also a good goalie.

The Oilers have rebuilt, what, 4 times this decade alone? Not a chance they're ahead. It's taken them 9 years to get to 29th, it took Calgary 2 to make the playoffs. Not a single chance they're ahead.

Also, Staples is a hack and I'm glad I didn't read that drivel.

[sun]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Wow, those were the days when the Flames were an offensive powerhouse with guys like Nik Hagman, David Moss and Krys Kolanos. Blake Comeau was a top 6 forward that year if memory serves.

Was Stephan Myer on that team?

#### off Flash, I was so close to erasing that from my memory. You just made me remember people penciling Akim Aliu into capgeek lineup predictions...

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

When was the last time the oilers allowed less goals in a season than the Flames? 1996?

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Last seven seasons:

2015 Flames 229 Oilers 199 +30

2014 Flames 237 Oilers 193 +44

2013 Flames 202 Oilers 199 +3

2012 Flames 128 Oilers 123 +5 (Lockout)

2011 Flames 199 Oilers 207 -8

2010 Flames 241 Oilers 191 +50

2009 Flames 201 Oilers 206 -5

Those are the goals for numbers, not against.

I was curious, so put a quick table together.

[djsFlames]

Both not good. But Edmonton has been just terribad.

[cam_wmh]

Went wild.

ps, over the last 10 years (from 06/07 to 15/16) the Oilers were MINUS 464. LOL

[FireItUp]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Those are the goals for numbers, not against.

I was curious, so put a quick table together.

Wow, -368 goals over 7 seasons!

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

It shouldn't even be close, but I think it is if not Edmonton's is a little behind us only because they're STILL just grasping that there's an entire position to the game that they've virtually ignored for almost a decade, which is unfathomable for any working professional with a brain (to just ignore an entire block of their business) let alone NHL executives.

Also, I'm not so sure it's Edmonton's drafting that is the problem (although, definitely a case can be made for questionable moves to not position themselves in a draft where a dman could be had, like Ekblad or something). But to me it's pretty clear that player development is the problem.

Like, you're telling me that drafting Yakupov, Nugent-Hopkins, Hall, Eberle... that these guys all just were lousy picks? No way. These guys were top of their class amazing hockey players, and then they got to Edmonton and maybe Hall was the only one to live up to the hype and even he had questions about character and a good dressing room presence / teammate???

It all just smells a little bit too much like the whole organization has a development problem.

They have actually developed players like Petry, Klefbom, and I was impressed by Brandon Davidson last year who was a long term guy in their system. Eberle as a 24th OA has to be considered a success even if he can be a soft dum dum (Not as if a guy like Tanguay was much better at certain details).

But they probably botched some key picks:

Hall vs Seguin - Even if they were calling their tank the "Fall for Hall", if it's close you take the centre (see: Dubois over Puljujarvi) and that one was was real close.

Yakupov vs Galchenyuk vs Murray. See above, but add if it's close you take the defenseman. This is not a retrospect pick - Murray was drawing Niedermayer comparisions at the time and may actually be a bust relative to expectations thus far but would absolutely have been the right pick.

Ristolainen vs Nurse - Maybe I am twisting it to retrospect but I do truly recall there were teams that had Risto way higher than where he actually went. Including Calgary. You have to draft offensive ceilings, I will expand later.

2015 #16OA+#33OA for Griffen Reinhart - A bad trade is one thing, but when it's for a prospect whose ceiling is basically Cory Sarich it follows a broken pattern.

That pattern? Drafting players with bottom pair / 3rd line offensive ceilings under the assumption that their stars could carry the load and just needed grit to "make space" for them.

It doesn't work like that. You need a player that can hopefully be a first liner just to actually luck across a competent 3rd liner. You need a player with potential top pairing skills to max out as a useful #5PP specialist. Your late rounders have to have some high end skill and hockey sense, not just be hard workers who give effort.

Flames learned it after Detroit outskilled us in 2007. That was the year we took our drafting philosophy and overhauled it.

Oilers never took a chance on a guy that could be anything more than a 2nd pair D at best or a 3rd liner at best. I would say Petry was a resounding success... a 20 pt #4, maybe #3. But that was with everything bouncing right for him. He was the rare player that hit his original ceiling. Which offensively was "eh".

Which brings us back to Nurse VS Ristolainen.

You can't predict how a player will develop. You can somewhat guide it. In the draft though you can start with the best set of tools available to give your guidance the best chance.

Offensive skill, not belligerence or size, is the best tool you can have. In this sport escapability with the puck is the best defense, that's why even a pure shut down centre or true defensive blueliner needs high-end offensive skill to an extent (Koivu or Hjalmarsson).

Ristolainen and Nurse were very close in some categories but the offense always favoured Risto. Everything else could not be and still cannot be predicted, but Nurse will likely never develop Risto's offensive skill. Just as Adam Larsson is unlikely to ever approach Dougie Hamilton's offensive skillset. Defense? Maybe in two years Dougie and Larsson are equals. There is only so much you can impact the game without the puck. The offensive player is always at the advantage.

That is how Nurse was an inherently poor pick. That he is now defensively behind Ristolainen is luck of the draw, but the difference offensively was clear on day zero.

On a side note that is also why Montreal lost the Subban trade. Even if Weber is better away from the puck, Subban is more able to individually impact a team game with his dynamic skill.

On a side side note that is also why Dougie Hamilton is better than Trouba and Myers.

On a side side side note that is also why I would hedge my bets on Kylington over Olli Juolevi despite that coming across as overly homerish.

On a side side side side note, I unfortunately can't say anything bad about the Leafs/Sens, they actually do get it systemically.

[Gaudreauvertime]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

They have actually developed players like Petry, Klefbom, and I was impressed by Brandon Davidson last year who was a long term guy in their system. Eberle as a 24th OA has to be considered a success even if he can be a soft dum dum (Not as if a guy like Tanguay was much better at certain details).

But they probably botched some key picks:

Hall vs Seguin - Even if they were calling their tank the "Fall for Hall", if it's close you take the centre (see: Dubois over Puljujarvi) and that one was was real close.

Yakupov vs Galchenyuk vs Murray. See above, but add if it's close you take the defenseman. This is not a retrospect pick - Murray was drawing Niedermayer comparisions at the time and may actually be a bust relative to expectations thus far but would absolutely have been the right pick.

Ristolainen vs Nurse - Maybe I am twisting it to retrospect but I do truly recall there were teams that had Risto way higher than where he actually went. Including Calgary. You have to draft offensive ceilings, I will expand later.

2015 #16OA+#33OA for Griffen Reinhart - A bad trade is one thing, but when it's for a prospect whose ceiling is basically Cory Sarich it follows a broken pattern.

That pattern? Drafting players with bottom pair / 3rd line offensive ceilings under the assumption that their stars could carry the load and just needed grit to "make space" for them.

It doesn't work like that. You need a player that can hopefully be a first liner just to actually luck across a competent 3rd liner. You need a player with potential top pairing skills to max out as a useful #5PP specialist. Your late rounders have to have some high end skill and hockey sense, not just be hard workers who give effort.

Flames learned it after Detroit outskilled us in 2007. That was the year we took our drafting philosophy and overhauled it.

Oilers never took a chance on a guy that could be anything more than a 2nd pair D at best or a 3rd liner at best. I would say Petry was a resounding success... a 20 pt #4, maybe #3. But that was with everything bouncing right for him. He was the rare player that hit his original ceiling. Which offensively was "eh".

Which brings us back to Nurse VS Ristolainen.

You can't predict how a player will develop. You can somewhat guide it. In the draft though you can start with the best set of tools available to give your guidance the best chance.

Offensive skill, not belligerence or size, is the best tool you can have. In this sport escapability with the puck is the best defense, that's why even a pure shut down centre or true defensive blueliner needs high-end offensive skill to an extent (Koivu or Hjalmarsson).

Ristolainen and Nurse were very close in some categories but the offense always favoured Risto. Everything else could not be and still cannot be predicted, but Nurse will likely never develop Risto's offensive skill. Just as Adam Larsson is unlikely to ever approach Dougie Hamilton's offensive skillset. Defense? Maybe in two years Dougie and Larsson are equals. There is only so much you can impact the game without the puck. The offensive player is always at the advantage.

That is how Nurse was an inherently poor pick. That he is now defensively behind Ristolainen is luck of the draw, but the difference offensively was clear on day zero.

On a side note that is also why Montreal lost the Subban trade. Even if Weber is better away from the puck, Subban is more able to individually impact a team game with his dynamic skill.

On a side side note that is also why Dougie Hamilton is better than Trouba and Myers.

On a side side side note that is also why I would hedge my bets on Kylington over Olli Juolevi despite that coming across as overly homerish.

On a side side side side note, I unfortunately can't say anything bad about the Leafs/Sens, they actually do get it systemically.

This is an excellent post. I agree with your principles, especially the bolded concepts. How many successful 3rd line players didn't look like they had top line potential in junior? Draft for ceiling and don't pretend to know how a player will or won't develop, especially with the ever changing demands of the league.

I will say that beyond offensive ability that pure hockey IQ and processing power are the most important things in a prospect. But I think that goes along with escapability, being able to make the right decisions quickly while under pressure. This is especially true when it comes to defenseman (more specifically, shut down defenseman). Which is why I think a guy like Adam Larsson is actually a really good player despite his production - his role just calls for that skill to be used in a different way than Dougie.

[GranteedEV]

Larsson is a very good defenseman, and as a prospect he was being compared to Lidstrom himself for a reason (hockey sense but ALSO offensive upside that never progressed).

Where the two players (Larsson / Dougie) are at right now, I would say Larsson is the better player.

But in two or three years, I don't know if that will be true. For a 23 year old defenseman to defend like Larsson has over the last season, two seasons is pretty impressive. But Hamilton himself was only 22 last year, and defensive play typically doesn't solidify until around age 24, 25 in blueliners. If he figures it all out he can be a true impact player like Hedman. At this point I would put Larsson's ceiling at more of a Ryan Suter. Who is still a great player, just not as great as Hedman.