I think this is probably your problem here. Advanced metrics are not perfect, but they sure do help to cut through the noise that is created from prejudiced and frequently out of context game-observation. But more to the point, these are the same Oilers fans who were convinced that there were seven Giordanos in their system, that Ty Rattie was a bona fide 30-goal scorer, and that Oscar Klefbom and Adam Larson are Norris calibre top-pair defensemen. This is not exactly what I would consider the best source of information.
And this is likely because you 1) have (by your own admission) not watched enough of Milan Lucic from which to make an educated assessment; 2) are basing your opinion on cynical and jaded complaints from possibly the worst hockey fans in the country; 3) have not bothered to consider—as near as I can tell—the tremendous impact that toiling away for three years in the purgatory of the worst forward group in the NHL can have on a player's own performance. The fact alone that Lucic's situation has now suddenly VERY dramatically improved would strongly suggest that he is not the same player that was floundering with an AHL lineup in Edmonton. At worst, he is no better than Neal, and the Flames are still a top-five team.
Well until a week ago Calgary fans had the same opinion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoho
Lucic does allot more than score. Neal not so much.
Of the two I’d take Lucic’s 5 points and intimidating physical play over Neal looking lost and making pretty much every line mate worse right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
Hahaha! What?
No. Lucic has been an awful boat anchor this year. He can't skate, and he can't score. He is always behind the play. His "intimidating physical presence" is decidedly muted by these rather glaring shortcomings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
A straight-swap of Neal and Lucic would make absolutely no sense for the Flames at all. There is no benefit whatsoever.
Last edited by edslunch; 07-26-2019 at 04:57 PM.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to edslunch For This Useful Post:
Flames trade Neal for Lucic (Oilers retain 12.5%) and conditional 2020 3rd
Quote:
Originally Posted by edslunch
Well until a week ago Calgary fans had the same opinion:
You are absolutely right, and at the time of the trade I hated it. But since seeing Bingo's breakdown after digging into the numbers in some greater depth, it seems that Lucic is not nearly as bad a player as I had assumed.
I still don't like this deal, but in the end it is not nearly as bad as I at first imagined.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
From my standpoint the argument for Lucic isn't that he is a good player, it's that Neal is just worse than Lucic. I'll be honest prior to last season I didn't think that was possible, but then came Neal and he looked terrible right from the get go.
Lucic is the faster skater, he is better defensively, he way more physical and there offensive abilities are actually pretty comparable.
Neal has nothing left, people can hang there hat on the he wasn't a fit here excuse if they want, but fit doesn't cause your skating, hands and shot to disappear, age does. The thought that he will bounce back because he is training with Roberts this summer also doesn't fly, because he has been doing that since he was 15. He will get to skate with McDavid, well Lucic got bumped off that line because he couldn't keep up, how is the slower Neal supposed to keep up.
I honestly think there is zero chance that Neal scores 20 goals next year and I 100% believe that Lucic is the better and more complete player, even if only by a marginal amount.
If you can get the better player and save money and cap space then you did pretty good in the trade.
I also don't buy the whole argument that Lucic is buyout proof, there is short term pain in buying him for sure, but a buyout of Lucic doesn't sit on the cap (relative speaking) as long as Neal.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JTech780 For This Useful Post:
The thought that "this must have been the best deal out there" is definitely open to interpretation.
Tree made the best deal, in his opinion. He may have had two or three options for all we know, and it comes down to player evaluation. Just because this was the decision does not mean it was the "best deal out there".
Aren't all assumptions open to interpretation.
I think the fact that he settled on Lucic says there were no other options, but you're right he probably had an ugly sweetner deal or two offered to him that he walked from.
Neal and Calgary's 1st for a slightly bad contract coming back for example.
But if you want we can switch the assumption to "only viable option in Treliving's opinion"
Otherwise he would have taken another one.
The Following User Says Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
I don't know if this has been reported, but Moj from tsn1040 (Van Radio) who has connections with the Lucic family said a deal for Eriksson/Lucic was gonna happen but the Canucks ended backing out last minute and the Oilers then circled back to Calgary and got the deal done.
I'm just glad Benning came to his senses cause a conditional 3rd is not a good enough sweetener.
I'm glad too.
I'd rather have the cap space and Lucic regardless of sweetner than Ericksson on the team.
That would be the same problem. Not good enough to play top six, not suited to play bottom six.
You are absolutely right, and at the time of the trade I hated it. But since seeing Bingo's breakdown after digging into the numbers in some greater depth, it seems the Lucic is not nearly as bad a player as I had assumed.
I still don't like this deal, but in the end it is not nearly as bad as I at first imagined.
He repeats those numbers and it's a pretty good move, it will never be a great move.
And I was shocked too.
I don't watch Oiler games from an Oiler fan perspective. Mostly just watch them blow leads and giggle. Their fan base hated him so you assume he's playing terrible. Staples says he's a possession beast and I think "yeah right", but low and behold he was. Crazy.
He was like Derek Ryan in the first half of the season last year. Many on this site wanted him gone because he was useless, but I was arguing he was good defensively, and literally a non event player. Nothing good, nothing bad happens.
If he doesn't. If he becomes a liability then the toughness won't save him from entering Neal territory. Luckily Neal would already have been in Neal territory in Calgary.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
If Calgary retained salary and traded Lucic, are they allowed retaining up to 50 percent of what they are paying Lucic, or only up to 50 percent of the original contract?
If Calgary retained salary and traded Lucic, are they allowed retaining up to 50 percent of what they are paying Lucic, or only up to 50 percent of the original contract?
As demonstrated by the trade of Dubnyk to Nashville (50% retained by Edmonton) and subsequently Montreal (25% retained by Nashville), up to 50% can be retained in each transaction, but a maximum of 2 salary retained transactions are allowed on any one contract.
Neal was no longer a fit after the Carolina trade clicked so well - no one could predict that. However, Neal also did nothing to improve his situation and was given opportunities to make an impact on some lines but bombed.
All those who wanted Neal back another season have to understand there must have been more behind the scenes that we don't know. Brad is too smart and patient to move a guy out that fast after 1 season for no reason.
I wonder what kind of contract Lucic would fetch if he were a UFA this summer. 3.5M?
Found some highlights of Lucic scoring a natural hatty a few years back:
I think the fact that he settled on Lucic says there were no other options, but you're right he probably had an ugly sweetner deal or two offered to him that he walked from.
Neal and Calgary's 1st for a slightly bad contract coming back for example.
But if you want we can switch the assumption to "only viable option in Treliving's opinion"
Otherwise he would have taken another one.
Why does it have to be "only viable option"?
There are other players out there with bad contracts. Buyout was a better cap option. Neal clearly is considered the more likely team to rebound by both teams (hence the sweeteners going to Calgary.
The point being is, there was no gun to his head, and this was not the only option. He has assigned some on ice value to lucid in he trade for a period of 4 years....
Fwiw, I'm ok with the transaction, but it's not accurate to portray this as the only option. Our gm sees some value in Lucic, and time will tell if he is correct..... but it's not a free pass situation if it doesn't work out as you seem to portray it as.
Some people think way too highly of the buyout option. Like you just do it and he's gone. But you buy him out now or next summer and you're stuck with that cap penalty forever. It does screw the Flames a bit once there's only one year left on the contract and I agree the sweetener could have been a tad sweeter but unfortunately there is no more Chia. In the end Lucic addresses a weakness for a cheaper price and Neal brings less than nothing.
Some people think way too highly of the buyout option. Like you just do it and he's gone. But you buy him out now or next summer and you're stuck with that cap penalty forever. It does screw the Flames a bit once there's only one year left on the contract and I agree the sweetener could have been a tad sweeter but unfortunately there is no more Chia. In the end Lucic addresses a weakness for a cheaper price and Neal brings less than nothing.
Not to mention that it isn’t the GM that buys out the player, it’s the owners. The last thing a GM probably wants to do is go to the owners and ask to buy out a player they signed.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
I find it fascinating that only about 1-in-5 fans have a negative view on this deal.
I bet that if this poll had been conducted, say, the day after, that figure would be a lot bigger.
__________________
"This has been TheScorpion's shtick for years. All these hot takes, clickbait nonsense just to feed his social media algorithms." –Tuco
Indifferent - I get the possible motivations and rationale behind the deal but it feels like the sweetener should have been sweeter.
100% agree with the reasoning but went with "like it" as a shot of slight optimism instead - even though I disagree with the forced explanation accompanying "like it".
If Lucic is as expected, I will be disappointed in the return (would've like an unconditional 2nd or two unconditional 3rd-7th).
If Lucic changes and plays a disciplined game aside from sticking up for teammates or message sending I like this trade for the Flames.
My optimism is rooted in the fact the Oilers have been a complete gongshow where the inmates run the asylum. With a non-bush league coaching staff and some actual leadership I think he can turn it around - or I'm delusional.
Consider the below "non-intimidation" minor penalty ranks when accounting that Lucic ranked 156th in forward ice time over the span. Cutting those in half makes a huge difference on its own.
Lucic minor penalty rank among forwards, 2017-18 and 2018-19:
Cross-checking: T-5th
High-sticking: T-49th
Interference: T-15th
Slashing: T-78th
via IcyData
__________________ "I think the eye test is still good, but analytics can sure give you confirmation: what you see...is that what you really believe?" Scotty Bowman, 0 NHL games played
"You ain't gotta like me. You're just mad 'cause I tell it how it is and you tell it how it might be."
Last edited by united; 07-27-2019 at 01:33 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to united For This Useful Post:
