Wednesday, March 08, 2006
Rololing into town
Cosh gets his wish. Roloson is the Oilers new #1, 1a, 1b, whatever.
Discuss.
Discuss.
# posted by sacamano @ 11:29 am 
Comments:
My initial thoughts:
1) 1st rounder seems like a lot for a rental, but word on the street is that this year's draft isn't deep anyway.
2) Rolo was probably the best of the goalies available for short term, let's hope that JDD and Dubnyk are the real deal in the pipeline.
3) Perhaps he will be able to play in the Oilers low-shot-against scheme. A .910 save % should do us wonders.
The Oilers do have a fair number of respected prospects, if not necessarily in goal, so a 1st in a draft that might only be 10-15 deep may not be too bad. As I said on a previous thread, if teams want something at deadline time, it won't be cheap. Paying this much for a goalie that you may only keep for a couple of months proves it. As you noted, they still have 3 goalies after waiving Morrison, so I'll ask again, what's next? They don't really have a minor league spot for a third goalie, as we've seen all year, so doesn't a move involving Conklin or Jussi have to ensue? They still could use one more forward, and they do have a stockpile of D as well. The assets for one more at least middle size move are in place.
Let's not forget how the Oilers still play Minnesota 5 times this season, and I'll bet Roloson starts every single time.
Good trade.
It's a surprisingly good trade. I was pursuaded that minnesota wouldn't deal with the oilers.
As a flames fan, I find it mildly annoying.
As a Flames fan, I hope he reprises the middling performance he put on when he was wearing red.
FYI, vs. the Flames this season, Roloson is 1-2 with 10GA (3,3,4) in 3 starts. SV% of 0.907.
I'm just wondering how MacT is going to handle Roloson? Will he be as ...excitable (best word I can come up with)... with the hook as he has been up to this point?
So the Oilers gave up a first round draft pick and they still don't have a proven reliable playoff goalie?
I still think Biron was the better option, but I like this deal. It's not like we have a great track record with our first-round picks anyways.
By the by, I believe I was the first to call for Roloson. Normally I wouldn't complain, but that damn Cosh gets enough attention as is, even with that picture on his blog that makes him look like he is intently scrumming with a 14 year-old in a chat room.
I have just awoken from a mid-afternoon nap, so any idea out there if Lowe sees this as a rental, or if he believes he can sign Roloson in the offseason? And furthermore, is this an indication that to get anything at the deadline now, you have to grossly overpay?
which of the other two goal tenders stays? will he be shipped out by deadline day? and for what? that's more intriguing question which will start many-a-false rumours
So the Oilers gave up a first round draft pick and they still don't have a proven reliable playoff goalie?
Two seasons ago, Roloson helped carry a team that basically never scored to the conference final. Maybe that doesn't qualify him as a "proven reliable playoff goalie," but by your standard how many of them are available? Did you want Lowe to sign Gump Worsley to a contract?
Admittedly Roloson only has a couple years on the Gumper, but still.
Nice job by the league of trying to ruin our party by sending Sopel and Nieminen back west. And Calgary's favourite goalie, Astrom Jr., just hopped a flight the other way. If I were a Flames fan I'd be feeling pretty nervous right now.
Good thing the Canucks didn't pick up Stempniak, or we would all be pissing our pants. And couldn't we have tried to get Sanford and Son, if only to give Matt the cold-sweats?
The Parrish deal was great for the Kings, but the Aebischer/Theodore trade blows my mind. Gainey must be ecstatic. I am assuming that Lacroix is looking for lightning in a bottle a second time with the trade, but I am sceptical that even getting Theodore out of the zoo that is Montreal will help him. Plus the guy has a huge salary, and isn't even healthy right now. It makes giving up a 1st round pick seem like nothing at all, in my mind.
I guess this speaks to how good Theo was when he was at his best: we're talking about a guy who (a) is unanimously considered the league's most overpaid player, (b) is about to cross over to the wrong side of 30, (c) has alleged family ties to organized crime, (d) failed a drug test, (e) sucked this year, and (f) is on the DL with (g) a type of injury that could easily nag at him in the long term. And despite all that you're still kind of tempted to say "Yeah, but it's Jose Theodore."
Meanwhile, the flagship franchise in the game now has a Frenchman and a Swiss as nos. 1 and 2 on the depth chart in net. Talk about living in a cuckoo clock.
Two seasons ago, Roloson helped carry a team that basically never scored to the conference final. Maybe that doesn't qualify him as a "proven reliable playoff goalie," but by your standard how many of them are available? Did you want Lowe to sign Gump Worsley to a contract?
Roloson has 6 career playoff wins. Thats not exactly what I would consider a proven playoff goalie.
What do I want Kevin Lowe to do?
I want him to not have painted himself into the corner where he has to overpay for a goalie in order to placate the Oiler fans.
If there doesn't exist a goalie who could make a big impact at a reasonable price, then I want Lowe to take his chances with Markkanen or Conklin in the playoffs. That is a better move than making a bad trade. Who knows? Markkanen might get hot. Conklin might get hot.
As things stand right now, Edmonton gave up a first round draft pick and will likely still have one of the weakest starting goaltenders among playoff teams.
They also only have one regular time loss in 10 games, so they must be doing something right.
The value of Theodore is in a memory. I doubt he can still steal a playoff series. Of course, I don't really wanna find out.
Roloson is 13th in the league in SV%. That puts him behind Vokoun, Kiprusoff, Legace and Giguere in Western playoff teams. I'll take that for a first round pick, since our 1st round draft picks since 1997 have resulted in 1 regular starter. His wins are irrelevant, and he isn't bad with a 3.00 GAA. Was there someone in the 15-30th slot of the 1st round you were hoping to snag?
Minnesota Wild goalies tend to have high saves percentages. The Wild defensive scheme prevents many high quality shots. Roloson being 13 in saves percentage does not show he is anywhere near the 13th best goalie in the NHL.
I would be very hesitant in using the fact that the Oilers are bad at drafting to mean they should trade their picks for mediocre rentals.
Pierre Maguire made a monster point tonight about how Theodore seems to have been hurt more than anyone else by the new equipment restrictions. Despite this, Pierre Lacroix has made enough shrewd moves over the years to earn the benefit of the doubt for now, as far as I'm concerned. The Avs have not been sold on Aebischer as their number one guy, so the biggest concern is taking on Theo's salary for the next two years.
As for Roloson, I'm still reeling from the fact that he commanded a first round draft pick in the trade market. I do think that he gives the Oilers a better chance of not just making the playoffs, but moving up and winning the division as well. Out of the players on the current plyaoff teams in the west, he's arguably the 4th best goalie (behind Kipper, Turco, and Vokoun), and should help the Oil compete with anyone.
An added value that no one has mentioned is that having him land in Edmonton severly limits the options that Vancouver has to upgrade their goaltending.
>Minnesota Wild goalies tend to have high saves percentages. The Wild defensive scheme prevents many high quality shots.
That's rather hard to prove isn't it?
The way I see it, Roloson still has decent numbers behind a defensively weakened 2006 Wild team that's 5th in shots allowed.
A defence is only as good as its defenceman, and Minnesota ain't all that good (granted, Fernandez is the big factor there).
Lest we forget the truly stupid things Lowe could have done: many Oilers fans were willing to move Schremp, and many more wanted to see Cujo back. Good trade by Lowe.
Minnesota Wild goalies tend to have high saves percentages. The Wild defensive scheme prevents many high quality shots.
1) Define "high quality shots".
2) The Oilers allow 25.5 shots a game, 2nd lowest in the league. The Wild allow 30.6., 22nd in the league.
So, he has the 13th best SV% in the league, on a team that is 22nd in shots allowed a game.
I would be very hesitant in using the fact that the Oilers are bad at drafting to mean they should trade their picks.
Why? I think it is a perfectly good reason. You think taking a kid with a late round pick in a weak draft is less of a risk that signing a proven goaltender who you can let go at the end of the year if things don't turn out?
I'm not a fan of trading draft picks (especially in the first round). I think that the draft will become increasingly important in the salary cap era. The teams that will be successful are the ones who can develop their own players and get their early, inexpensive years of service.
I don't think it's a bad thing to trade a draft pick if you think the player you're acquiring will be a regular NHLer for a number of years (Calgary's trading a 2nd Rounder for Kiprusoff is a good example here).
As for giving up a pick for a rental player, it's justifiable if you think your team has the potential to be a championship club, and the player that you're acquiring will put you over the top. So that's what it comes down to for me. If you think Roloson makes the Oilers a championship contender, it's a good trade. If not, it was a bad trade.
But hey, if you still disagree, I'm sure Roloson will look great in yet another first round Oilers loss to Dallas this spring.
As for the Oilers draft record, it hasn't been good as of late, but it's worth noting that the four players they have drafted in the first round between 2003 and 2005 all played in the World Junior Championships, and still project to be above average players in the NHL.
This draft year is considered one of the weakest in recent years, but there will still be good players availale in the 15-30 range, it's just a matter of finding them.
If you don't have confidence in the Oilers front office, consider this. Looking at draft picks as assets, would the first round pick have been better used trading yesterday for Roloson, or would it have been more valuable in June, when it could potentially be packaged for a goalie who's signed for longer than 2 months, and has a number of good NHL years left in front of him?
Post a Comment
<< Home
My initial thoughts:
1) 1st rounder seems like a lot for a rental, but word on the street is that this year's draft isn't deep anyway.
2) Rolo was probably the best of the goalies available for short term, let's hope that JDD and Dubnyk are the real deal in the pipeline.
3) Perhaps he will be able to play in the Oilers low-shot-against scheme. A .910 save % should do us wonders.
The Oilers do have a fair number of respected prospects, if not necessarily in goal, so a 1st in a draft that might only be 10-15 deep may not be too bad. As I said on a previous thread, if teams want something at deadline time, it won't be cheap. Paying this much for a goalie that you may only keep for a couple of months proves it. As you noted, they still have 3 goalies after waiving Morrison, so I'll ask again, what's next? They don't really have a minor league spot for a third goalie, as we've seen all year, so doesn't a move involving Conklin or Jussi have to ensue? They still could use one more forward, and they do have a stockpile of D as well. The assets for one more at least middle size move are in place.
# posted by 
: March 08, 2006 11:51 am
: March 08, 2006 11:51 am Let's not forget how the Oilers still play Minnesota 5 times this season, and I'll bet Roloson starts every single time.
Good trade.
It's a surprisingly good trade. I was pursuaded that minnesota wouldn't deal with the oilers.
As a flames fan, I find it mildly annoying.
As a Flames fan, I hope he reprises the middling performance he put on when he was wearing red.
FYI, vs. the Flames this season, Roloson is 1-2 with 10GA (3,3,4) in 3 starts. SV% of 0.907.
I'm just wondering how MacT is going to handle Roloson? Will he be as ...excitable (best word I can come up with)... with the hook as he has been up to this point?
# posted by : March 08, 2006 1:29 pm
: March 08, 2006 1:29 pm So the Oilers gave up a first round draft pick and they still don't have a proven reliable playoff goalie?
I still think Biron was the better option, but I like this deal. It's not like we have a great track record with our first-round picks anyways.
By the by, I believe I was the first to call for Roloson. Normally I wouldn't complain, but that damn Cosh gets enough attention as is, even with that picture on his blog that makes him look like he is intently scrumming with a 14 year-old in a chat room.
I have just awoken from a mid-afternoon nap, so any idea out there if Lowe sees this as a rental, or if he believes he can sign Roloson in the offseason? And furthermore, is this an indication that to get anything at the deadline now, you have to grossly overpay?
which of the other two goal tenders stays? will he be shipped out by deadline day? and for what? that's more intriguing question which will start many-a-false rumours
# posted by : March 08, 2006 3:31 pm
: March 08, 2006 3:31 pm So the Oilers gave up a first round draft pick and they still don't have a proven reliable playoff goalie?
Two seasons ago, Roloson helped carry a team that basically never scored to the conference final. Maybe that doesn't qualify him as a "proven reliable playoff goalie," but by your standard how many of them are available? Did you want Lowe to sign Gump Worsley to a contract?
# posted by : March 08, 2006 4:33 pm
: March 08, 2006 4:33 pm Admittedly Roloson only has a couple years on the Gumper, but still.
Nice job by the league of trying to ruin our party by sending Sopel and Nieminen back west. And Calgary's favourite goalie, Astrom Jr., just hopped a flight the other way. If I were a Flames fan I'd be feeling pretty nervous right now.
# posted by : March 08, 2006 7:02 pm
: March 08, 2006 7:02 pm Good thing the Canucks didn't pick up Stempniak, or we would all be pissing our pants. And couldn't we have tried to get Sanford and Son, if only to give Matt the cold-sweats?
The Parrish deal was great for the Kings, but the Aebischer/Theodore trade blows my mind. Gainey must be ecstatic. I am assuming that Lacroix is looking for lightning in a bottle a second time with the trade, but I am sceptical that even getting Theodore out of the zoo that is Montreal will help him. Plus the guy has a huge salary, and isn't even healthy right now. It makes giving up a 1st round pick seem like nothing at all, in my mind.
I guess this speaks to how good Theo was when he was at his best: we're talking about a guy who (a) is unanimously considered the league's most overpaid player, (b) is about to cross over to the wrong side of 30, (c) has alleged family ties to organized crime, (d) failed a drug test, (e) sucked this year, and (f) is on the DL with (g) a type of injury that could easily nag at him in the long term. And despite all that you're still kind of tempted to say "Yeah, but it's Jose Theodore."
Meanwhile, the flagship franchise in the game now has a Frenchman and a Swiss as nos. 1 and 2 on the depth chart in net. Talk about living in a cuckoo clock.
# posted by : March 08, 2006 8:33 pm
: March 08, 2006 8:33 pm Two seasons ago, Roloson helped carry a team that basically never scored to the conference final. Maybe that doesn't qualify him as a "proven reliable playoff goalie," but by your standard how many of them are available? Did you want Lowe to sign Gump Worsley to a contract?
Roloson has 6 career playoff wins. Thats not exactly what I would consider a proven playoff goalie.
What do I want Kevin Lowe to do?
I want him to not have painted himself into the corner where he has to overpay for a goalie in order to placate the Oiler fans.
If there doesn't exist a goalie who could make a big impact at a reasonable price, then I want Lowe to take his chances with Markkanen or Conklin in the playoffs. That is a better move than making a bad trade. Who knows? Markkanen might get hot. Conklin might get hot.
As things stand right now, Edmonton gave up a first round draft pick and will likely still have one of the weakest starting goaltenders among playoff teams.
They also only have one regular time loss in 10 games, so they must be doing something right.
The value of Theodore is in a memory. I doubt he can still steal a playoff series. Of course, I don't really wanna find out.
Roloson is 13th in the league in SV%. That puts him behind Vokoun, Kiprusoff, Legace and Giguere in Western playoff teams. I'll take that for a first round pick, since our 1st round draft picks since 1997 have resulted in 1 regular starter. His wins are irrelevant, and he isn't bad with a 3.00 GAA. Was there someone in the 15-30th slot of the 1st round you were hoping to snag?
Minnesota Wild goalies tend to have high saves percentages. The Wild defensive scheme prevents many high quality shots. Roloson being 13 in saves percentage does not show he is anywhere near the 13th best goalie in the NHL.
I would be very hesitant in using the fact that the Oilers are bad at drafting to mean they should trade their picks for mediocre rentals.
Pierre Maguire made a monster point tonight about how Theodore seems to have been hurt more than anyone else by the new equipment restrictions. Despite this, Pierre Lacroix has made enough shrewd moves over the years to earn the benefit of the doubt for now, as far as I'm concerned. The Avs have not been sold on Aebischer as their number one guy, so the biggest concern is taking on Theo's salary for the next two years.
As for Roloson, I'm still reeling from the fact that he commanded a first round draft pick in the trade market. I do think that he gives the Oilers a better chance of not just making the playoffs, but moving up and winning the division as well. Out of the players on the current plyaoff teams in the west, he's arguably the 4th best goalie (behind Kipper, Turco, and Vokoun), and should help the Oil compete with anyone.
An added value that no one has mentioned is that having him land in Edmonton severly limits the options that Vancouver has to upgrade their goaltending.
>Minnesota Wild goalies tend to have high saves percentages. The Wild defensive scheme prevents many high quality shots.
That's rather hard to prove isn't it?
The way I see it, Roloson still has decent numbers behind a defensively weakened 2006 Wild team that's 5th in shots allowed.
A defence is only as good as its defenceman, and Minnesota ain't all that good (granted, Fernandez is the big factor there).
Lest we forget the truly stupid things Lowe could have done: many Oilers fans were willing to move Schremp, and many more wanted to see Cujo back. Good trade by Lowe.
Minnesota Wild goalies tend to have high saves percentages. The Wild defensive scheme prevents many high quality shots.
1) Define "high quality shots".
2) The Oilers allow 25.5 shots a game, 2nd lowest in the league. The Wild allow 30.6., 22nd in the league.
So, he has the 13th best SV% in the league, on a team that is 22nd in shots allowed a game.
I would be very hesitant in using the fact that the Oilers are bad at drafting to mean they should trade their picks.
Why? I think it is a perfectly good reason. You think taking a kid with a late round pick in a weak draft is less of a risk that signing a proven goaltender who you can let go at the end of the year if things don't turn out?
I'm not a fan of trading draft picks (especially in the first round). I think that the draft will become increasingly important in the salary cap era. The teams that will be successful are the ones who can develop their own players and get their early, inexpensive years of service.
I don't think it's a bad thing to trade a draft pick if you think the player you're acquiring will be a regular NHLer for a number of years (Calgary's trading a 2nd Rounder for Kiprusoff is a good example here).
As for giving up a pick for a rental player, it's justifiable if you think your team has the potential to be a championship club, and the player that you're acquiring will put you over the top. So that's what it comes down to for me. If you think Roloson makes the Oilers a championship contender, it's a good trade. If not, it was a bad trade.
But hey, if you still disagree, I'm sure Roloson will look great in yet another first round Oilers loss to Dallas this spring.
As for the Oilers draft record, it hasn't been good as of late, but it's worth noting that the four players they have drafted in the first round between 2003 and 2005 all played in the World Junior Championships, and still project to be above average players in the NHL.
This draft year is considered one of the weakest in recent years, but there will still be good players availale in the 15-30 range, it's just a matter of finding them.
If you don't have confidence in the Oilers front office, consider this. Looking at draft picks as assets, would the first round pick have been better used trading yesterday for Roloson, or would it have been more valuable in June, when it could potentially be packaged for a goalie who's signed for longer than 2 months, and has a number of good NHL years left in front of him?
Post a Comment
<< Home
