Big Decisions: Signing Ales Hemsky

Jonathan Willis
February 18 2013 03:57PM

There are those who believe that the Edmonton Oilers made a mistake when they re-signed pending unrestricted free agent Ales Hemsky to a two-year/$10 million contract extension just under one year ago.

Those people are wrong. The Oilers made the right decision.

What Have You Done For Me Lately?

One of the more difficult parts of assessing a player is recognizing when a short-term trend is likely to continue or stop. At the time the Oilers re-signed Hemsky, he had played 47 games, scored just five times, and recorded 21 assists. He also had a minus-14 rating. The five goals quickly became a punch line, as pundits joked that the Oilers gave Hemsky ‘a million for every goal he scored.’

The problem was that Hemsky’s dismal performance stood in such stark contrast to his previous work in the NHL. The following are Hemsky’s basic statistics from the five years preceding 2011-12, as well as an average 47-game segment from that span. The last row has Hemsky’s numbers as of the date the Oilers re-signed him.

The difference is striking. Hemsky’s shots were down by a third, the number of shots taken that went in were down by half, and his assist totals were down by one-third.

The reasons for the slump are open to debate. But the Oilers needed to decide whether or not Hemsky’s rough 2011-12 represented the new normal for him, or if it was a temporary lull after which he could be expected to return to his traditional levels of production.

Hemsky’s played 36 games since then; I don’t think the answer is 100 percent clear yet.

It’s Not A Choice, It’s A Lack Of Options

The other issue, one that was obvious at the time, was that somebody was going to play Hemsky’s minutes. At the time, it was not possible to know that the Oilers would end up drafting first overall and picking Nail Yakupov, but even if they had known that ahead of time it would have been folly to expect a fresh-faced rookie to step in and add the kind of scoring Hemsky is capable of.

The free agent market was just as miserable. In terms of established offensive talent, there simply weren’t a lot of options. The Oilers could have gone hard after Zach Parise, or they would have been stuck trying to attract a Ray Whitney, Jaromir Jagr, Alex Semin or Jiri Hudler to town.

Right now, it looks like the 41-year old Jagr would have turned out pretty good. He got a one-year, $4.55 million contract from Dallas. The simple fact is that to replace Hemsky, the Oilers would have been forced to gamble that they could attract one of the few scoring options on the market, and they would be spending roughly the same money.

Alternatively, they could have let Hemsky go, and made a second line out of some combination of Ryan Smyth, Magnus Paajarvi, Teemu Hartikainen or Linus Omark (since at the time it seemed likely they would be picking after the Yakupov selection). While a possible choice, at some point the ‘dwell in the NHL basement and collect draft picks’ phase of a rebuild has to give way to a ‘make the team better’ segment, and keeping Hemsky was a necessary first step.

The Long Run

The Oilers opted to sign Hemsky to a bridge deal – they gave him money, but not term. His $5 million per season was a respectable figure, but the Oilers only committed to it for two seasons – allowing them flexibility if Hemsky failed to return to form, or if the combination of youth on expiring contracts/a falling salary cap (keep in mind that Hemsky was signed before the new CBA came into being) forced the team to shed dollars. It was a sensible choice at the time, and it looks pretty good in retrospect.

It seems likely that at some point in the near future, Hemsky will be a casualty of the salary cap, and the internal difficulties of keeping a trio of right wings – Hemsky, Yakupov and Jordan Eberle – in the system long-term. Hemsky’s the oldest of the group, and his injuries over the years have doubtless made the team hesitant to write him into the long-term plans. At this time next year, the Oilers will face the same decision they did a year ago – to sign Hemsky to a new deal, to trade him at the deadline, or to hang on to him and lose him for nothing in the summer.

If and when Hemsky does leave, I’ll be disappointed. For years, he’s been far and away the most entertaining player on the team, a uniquely gifted forward and on some nights one of the few reasons to watch a team bound for another year in the basement. He’s been called soft, and it’s been suggested at times that he’s lazy, but he’s a guy who seemingly never hesitated to take a hit to make a play, or sacrifice his body to retrieve a puck in the corner, and to me that says more about his on-ice character and his willingness than hit totals, interviews, or what time he leaves practice ever will.

But if Hemsky leaves town because it doesn’t make sense for the team to keep him, I’ll understand that. That could be the case a year from now. It certainly wasn’t the case a year ago.

PREVIOUSLY IN THIS SERIES

74b7cedc5d8bfbe88cf071309e98d2c3
Jonathan Willis is a freelance writer. He currently works for Oilers Nation, Sportsnet, the Edmonton Journal and Bleacher Report. He's co-written three books and worked for myriad websites, including Grantland, ESPN, The Score, and Hockey Prospectus. He was previously the founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue.
Avatar
#51 Walter Sobchak
February 18 2013, 09:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Taylor Gang wrote:

OF COURSE Kadri has more value right now, he's 22. However, you can't overlook Hemsky's performance at the moment. His value is much higher than it was this time last year. It doesn't matter if YOU don't think so, other GM's are taking notice.

That's it...right in your post.

He is performing at the moment, his value is probable as high as it will go, so now would be the best time to trade him.

I like Hemsky, but he's not going to get us anymore value then he would right now.

I think we can all agree that someone has to go.

Avatar
#52 DSF
February 18 2013, 09:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Taylor Gang wrote:

OF COURSE Kadri has more value right now, he's 22. However, you can't overlook Hemsky's performance at the moment. His value is much higher than it was this time last year. It doesn't matter if YOU don't think so, other GM's are taking notice.

IF Hemsky was shooting his career shooting percentage of 11.6% he would have 3G and 3A.

6 points would have him around 200th in NHL points.

Don't think NHL GM's can't see he's riding the percentages.

Avatar
#53 Sanaa Montana
February 18 2013, 09:59PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@Walter Sobchak

Why would you want to trade a player when he is one of your best players on the team at the moment? For what reason? Boredom?

Hemsky's value isn't what he gets in a trade. Hemsky's value is measured in his point production and the things he does for his team.

You could trade two 1st round picks for an 1st line centre, but the value isn't in that trade, the value is the results from it.

Avatar
#54 gazmort
February 18 2013, 10:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@DSF

Actually, ppg is the stat the normalizes the two players performances so that you can accurately compare the two on that single metric. It makes total sense precisely because he's had more games lost to injury. Good grief.

Parise > Hemsky. Call me nostalgic though; I'd still love to see the Oilers hang onto him so he can enjoy some long drinks from the fountain after years in the desert. I guess that's why I'm not a G.M.

Wait, neither is anyone else here.

Avatar
#55 Sanaa Montana
February 18 2013, 10:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
4
props
DSF wrote:

IF Hemsky was shooting his career shooting percentage of 11.6% he would have 3G and 3A.

6 points would have him around 200th in NHL points.

Don't think NHL GM's can't see he's riding the percentages.

That is exactly it. NHL GMs don't watch Hemsky play, they watch his stats and measure his percentages. Just like you: they don't watch the game-they watch stats.

Avatar
#56 Taylor Gang
February 18 2013, 10:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
DSF wrote:

IF Hemsky was shooting his career shooting percentage of 11.6% he would have 3G and 3A.

6 points would have him around 200th in NHL points.

Don't think NHL GM's can't see he's riding the percentages.

What are you talking about? How can you even use that as an argument?

Avatar
#57 Walter Sobchak
February 18 2013, 10:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Sanaa Montana wrote:

Why would you want to trade a player when he is one of your best players on the team at the moment? For what reason? Boredom?

Hemsky's value isn't what he gets in a trade. Hemsky's value is measured in his point production and the things he does for his team.

You could trade two 1st round picks for an 1st line centre, but the value isn't in that trade, the value is the results from it.

So explain then, how you are going to re-extend Hemsky's contract, and get other essential players onto the team?

I said I like Hemsky, has nothing to with the player it has to do with the numbers.

Hemsky WILL start to decline in the next couple years; you want to extend a declining player?

This is about the team and the future.

Avatar
#58 Taylor Gang
February 18 2013, 10:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Besides, GM's with contending teams aren't as conservative as you once it gets down to crunch time. They want to build a team that will push them to the Holy Grail, and Hemsky can be looked at as that piece of the puzzle.

Avatar
#59 Taylor Gang
February 18 2013, 10:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Besides, GM's with contending teams aren't as conservative as you once it gets down to crunch time. They want to build a team that will push them to the Holy Grail, and Hemsky can be looked at as that piece of the puzzle.

Avatar
#60 DSF
February 18 2013, 10:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
gazmort wrote:

Actually, ppg is the stat the normalizes the two players performances so that you can accurately compare the two on that single metric. It makes total sense precisely because he's had more games lost to injury. Good grief.

Parise > Hemsky. Call me nostalgic though; I'd still love to see the Oilers hang onto him so he can enjoy some long drinks from the fountain after years in the desert. I guess that's why I'm not a G.M.

Wait, neither is anyone else here.

Good grief.

Common sense will tell you that a player that has been injury prone througthout his career will be injury prone in the future.

It's why Gillis wouldn't sign Salo, Mitchell and Ohlund to long term deals.

Avatar
#61 Craiger
February 18 2013, 10:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
Walter Sobchak wrote:

So you want to sign Hemsky because he excites you and the fans??? Well........that’s sound logic! We better sign him right away!

What's wrong with that? Hemsky is playing well and is helping the team win and makes some amazing plays? 2 years for 10 million ain't bad... there are worse over pays. Hemsky is already signed... nice comment it sure added a lot to this forum.

Avatar
#62 a lg dubl dubl
February 18 2013, 10:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'd still take Hemsky over the sedin sisters anyday

Avatar
#63 gazmort
February 18 2013, 10:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@DSF

Good grief.

Don't change the lens now. We weren't talking about that. We were talking about points totals of Hemsky and Praise post-lockout, and Willis correctly elected to counter your argument by raising the ppg fact.

If you'd like to talk about signing injury-prone players we certainly can, but let's not and say we did. Try staying on point.

Good grief.

Avatar
#64 Chuckpuck5000
February 18 2013, 10:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Ya i like hemsky , always have , he is entertaining to watch . Can have the sickest dekes and perfect passes. Im sure he will continue to light it up with all the other boys and we will make the playoffs this year and go on a solid run. I feel like i need oilers playoff hockey this year . Lets go oilers. (throws on nation hoodie and runs around neighbourhood screaming lets go oilers lets go )

Avatar
#65 DSF
February 18 2013, 10:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
gazmort wrote:

Good grief.

Don't change the lens now. We weren't talking about that. We were talking about points totals of Hemsky and Praise post-lockout, and Willis correctly elected to counter your argument by raising the ppg fact.

If you'd like to talk about signing injury-prone players we certainly can, but let's not and say we did. Try staying on point.

Good grief.

Results.

Matter.

Avatar
#66 Walter Sobchak
February 18 2013, 10:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Craiger wrote:

What's wrong with that? Hemsky is playing well and is helping the team win and makes some amazing plays? 2 years for 10 million ain't bad... there are worse over pays. Hemsky is already signed... nice comment it sure added a lot to this forum.

Yes he is playing well, and no it's not a bad signing now..........what about next year?

what happens if he gets hurt in a contract year?

What are you going to get next trade deadliine when teams know he's a UFA at season end?

Would you extend his contract?

Fact is, he is at his peak now, and would be a great asset to use.

Avatar
#67 Time Travelling Sean
February 18 2013, 10:15PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
4
props

When there is 50+ posts you know DSF is being stupid.

Avatar
#68 DSF
February 18 2013, 10:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
a lg dubl dubl wrote:

I'd still take Hemsky over the sedin sisters anyday

7 years, no playoffs.

7 years, In the playoffs every season.

Good call.

Avatar
#69 Sanaa Montana
February 18 2013, 10:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Walter Sobchak wrote:

So explain then, how you are going to re-extend Hemsky's contract, and get other essential players onto the team?

I said I like Hemsky, has nothing to with the player it has to do with the numbers.

Hemsky WILL start to decline in the next couple years; you want to extend a declining player?

This is about the team and the future.

I would re-extend Hemsky's contract just like any other, by negotiation.

I don't know what other "essential" players are exactly needed or whom exactly you are reffering to. At the moment, re-signing Hemsky is only a bad idea in your head. I don't know why you feel that way.

I believe Kevin Lowe and the Oilganization know what they are doing. I also believe that Hemsky would even take a pay cut(if necessary) to stay here. I don't believe that is it, or ever was, the best idea for the Oilers or Hemsky to send him away.

Hemsky is signed for another year, and then who knows.

How do you know Hemsky is a declining player? What do you know that we don't? What stats and percentages did you use to come up with that conclusion? Please explain.

What exactly is about the team and the future? What exactly is the problem here and with Hemsky?

Avatar
#70 Sanaa Montana
February 18 2013, 10:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
2
props
Walter Sobchak wrote:

Yes he is playing well, and no it's not a bad signing now..........what about next year?

what happens if he gets hurt in a contract year?

What are you going to get next trade deadliine when teams know he's a UFA at season end?

Would you extend his contract?

Fact is, he is at his peak now, and would be a great asset to use.

You remind me of sad people in the mall-if your outlook is going to be so negative, keep it at home and to yourself.

What if? What if? What if DSF had common sense? We can only hope.

But why do you hope and invision the worst?

There are problems in today's world that cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them.

Avatar
#71 Taylor Gang
February 18 2013, 10:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
DSF wrote:

7 years, no playoffs.

7 years, In the playoffs every season.

Good call.

At the end of the day, nobody has ever called Hemsky soft

Avatar
#72 Eddie Shore
February 18 2013, 10:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
2
props
DSF wrote:

Results.

Matter.

7-3-10 in 14 gp.

Results matter.

Avatar
#73 gazmort
February 18 2013, 10:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

@DSF

They absolutely do, of course.

Wait, what results are we talking about here? Here's a stat: both players have zero Stanley cups. That's a key one.

Oh and Parise has had knee surgery to address a meniscus problem. Minny's signing of a player prone to a knee injury (we all know how fast one knee injury becomes a chronic problem) certainly merits a 'good grief' as well.

I need a Charlie Brown avatar.

Avatar
#74 Craiger
February 18 2013, 10:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Walter Sobchak wrote:

Yes he is playing well, and no it's not a bad signing now..........what about next year?

what happens if he gets hurt in a contract year?

What are you going to get next trade deadliine when teams know he's a UFA at season end?

Would you extend his contract?

Fact is, he is at his peak now, and would be a great asset to use.

What do you think we would get for Hemsky if we traded him? I would not extend his contract until the end of next year around the same time we extended it before. Why get rid of Hemmer when he is playing well... its not like we are going to trick another GM into giving up a 3-4 defenseman or a big centre. Wait till the trade deadline and if there is a good offer then make the decision. I say we roll with this team and see if we make the playoffs, if anyone I would trade Hartikanen... he's soft and has no hands. What could we get for him?

Avatar
#75 Walter Sobchak
February 18 2013, 10:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Sanaa Montana wrote:

You remind me of sad people in the mall-if your outlook is going to be so negative, keep it at home and to yourself.

What if? What if? What if DSF had common sense? We can only hope.

But why do you hope and invision the worst?

There are problems in today's world that cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them.

Well, I don’t visit malls, if you read my post's I like Hemsky, seems to me you’re the one being confrontational.

I'm debating on keeping Hemsky vs. trading him just like the article say's, what are you doing? Cutting me down for my opinion,Class. As to your other post explain to me when the last person took a pay cut to stay on the Oilers?

If you can’t see what other essential players the Oilers need then I’m just wasting my time having this conversation, the Oilers have many holes in the lineup, how do you propose the Oilers fill them?

I know Hemsky is a declining player because there are mountains of stats that say players decline after 30, that’s the nature of getting old. As for Hemsky having another year and “who knows” your right, who knows, maybe he gets hurt in a contract year…..then what? Keep on signing him.

http://capgeek.com/oilers

please explain how the Oilers are going to fit under the cap in 3 years? You want to keep him then tell what players go?

Who is going to replace the players leaving while fitting in Hemsky and his 5 million dollar cap hit.

Avatar
#76 Taylor Gang
February 18 2013, 10:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
2
props
Sanaa Montana wrote:

You remind me of sad people in the mall-if your outlook is going to be so negative, keep it at home and to yourself.

What if? What if? What if DSF had common sense? We can only hope.

But why do you hope and invision the worst?

There are problems in today's world that cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them.

That's deep *slow clap*

Avatar
#77 Taylor Gang
February 18 2013, 10:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Craiger wrote:

What do you think we would get for Hemsky if we traded him? I would not extend his contract until the end of next year around the same time we extended it before. Why get rid of Hemmer when he is playing well... its not like we are going to trick another GM into giving up a 3-4 defenseman or a big centre. Wait till the trade deadline and if there is a good offer then make the decision. I say we roll with this team and see if we make the playoffs, if anyone I would trade Hartikanen... he's soft and has no hands. What could we get for him?

The sad reality is that you have to trade players while they're playing good if you want fair value out of them, just ask scott howson. If I was Steve, I'd trade some of our pipe dream defensive prospects in a package for a roster defenseman, and not a depth d, a top 4 please.

Avatar
#78 Walter Sobchak
February 18 2013, 10:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Craiger wrote:

What do you think we would get for Hemsky if we traded him? I would not extend his contract until the end of next year around the same time we extended it before. Why get rid of Hemmer when he is playing well... its not like we are going to trick another GM into giving up a 3-4 defenseman or a big centre. Wait till the trade deadline and if there is a good offer then make the decision. I say we roll with this team and see if we make the playoffs, if anyone I would trade Hartikanen... he's soft and has no hands. What could we get for him?

Hartikainen is hurt so not much, even then not much when he's healthy unless you package him.

Not that what you’re saying is wrong, so please don’t take this the wrong way, but what happens if Hemsky gets hurt next year?

All I am saying is that his value is at a peak right now, he is worth more on the open market now, he could be even more so next year but do you take the chance?

I don’t see how the Oilers re-sign the players they need to, players that have to fill replacement players spots, re-sign RNH-Yakupov-Schultz and keep Hemsky….it’s not going to happen.

Avatar
#79 Walter Sobchak
February 18 2013, 10:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
Taylor Gang wrote:

The sad reality is that you have to trade players while they're playing good if you want fair value out of them, just ask scott howson. If I was Steve, I'd trade some of our pipe dream defensive prospects in a package for a roster defenseman, and not a depth d, a top 4 please.

This ^

Avatar
#80 Sanaa Montana
February 18 2013, 10:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
2
props

@Walter Sobchak

I'm not being confrontational, I'm being inquisitive.

I asked you why you want to trade Hemsky and for whom. You didn't respond to my questions. You went on to tell me your negative outlook that has nothing to do with nothing.

If you care to debate, then answer my questions so I can see where your coming from and where you going. All your giving me is you pessimistic visions.

Avatar
#81 Gazmort
February 18 2013, 10:46PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Taylor Gang wrote:

The sad reality is that you have to trade players while they're playing good if you want fair value out of them, just ask scott howson. If I was Steve, I'd trade some of our pipe dream defensive prospects in a package for a roster defenseman, and not a depth d, a top 4 please.

Well yeah, but what GM agrees to that? I can't think of a single team, off the top of my head (cap trouble or not), that would have any conceivable reason for trading a top-4 defenseman for prospects and Hemsky.

Avatar
#82 Gazmort
February 18 2013, 10:47PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Sanaa Montana

Nothing to do with nothing is a double-negative that ends up implying the opposite. Whoops!

Avatar
#84 Sanaa Montana
February 18 2013, 10:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
2
props

@Walter Sobchak

Hall6, Eberle6, RNH5, J Schu5, Yakupov5, Hemsky4. Thats 31 in salary, and another 30-40 left to sign other players. Whats the problem?

Avatar
#85 Taylor Gang
February 18 2013, 10:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Walter Sobchak

I don't think we should trade Hemsky, in the same way I don't think we should trade any of our top 6 players, unless an offer too good to refuse is offered. Personally, the only completely untouchable players on our team are Hall, Nuge and Schultz.

Avatar
#87 craiger
February 18 2013, 10:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Taylor Gang

How high can Hemsky's trade value be? He has 10 points in 14 games... what could he get for him that would make the Oil a contender... we have the cap space right now so I would not be in a rush to ship him out. I say we trade Kleffbom (spelling) for a hard nose defenseman, he seems softer then Petry and comes with a pretty good resume so maybe we can trick the Islanders for example to giving up some grit for him. Hopefully the Oilers know what they are doing but a couple our pro scouts I think are one of the Sutters and Semenko so maybe we should stand pat for a while.

Avatar
#88 Taylor Gang
February 18 2013, 10:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
craiger wrote:

How high can Hemsky's trade value be? He has 10 points in 14 games... what could he get for him that would make the Oil a contender... we have the cap space right now so I would not be in a rush to ship him out. I say we trade Kleffbom (spelling) for a hard nose defenseman, he seems softer then Petry and comes with a pretty good resume so maybe we can trick the Islanders for example to giving up some grit for him. Hopefully the Oilers know what they are doing but a couple our pro scouts I think are one of the Sutters and Semenko so maybe we should stand pat for a while.

A scorer who actually has a solid playmaking reputation could bring home more than you think from a contending team. As I said before, if a GM thinks his team is good enough for a legitimate cup run, they'll make a move for Hemsky. Part of me wants Hemsky to stay with Edmonton for his entire career, but I know deep down that our core is sitting between the ages of 19-23, aka fab 5

Avatar
#89 otter2233
February 18 2013, 11:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@DSF

Good gravy... Garrison played only 2.5 seasons there and was +9... You are basing his playing against toughs on what data exactly??? I may give you last season when the Panthers made the playoffs and therefore can't really be considered a bad team as season he played against most top lines but the previous 1.5 seasons, not so much... And the Oil have actually made the playoffs twice with Hemsky...

Avatar
#90 Sanaa Montana
February 18 2013, 11:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Gazmort wrote:

Nothing to do with nothing is a double-negative that ends up implying the opposite. Whoops!

Nothing is a negative, there isn't another negative there. The second appearance of nothing is employed as an intesifier and should be understood as strengthening the negation rather than removing it.

Avatar
#91 etownman
February 18 2013, 11:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

There are so many things that need to play out first before decisions are made on trading or keeping front line players! Is Yakupov going to be the real deal & fit in with the team? We're seeing Ebs, Hallsy & Nuge are but what about some others? Is Gagner going to continue to grow, looks good with him but the next 12 months are going to be very important to see where everything fits!

Avatar
#92 Gazmort
February 18 2013, 11:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Sanaa Montana

I've reconsidered my position. You're still wrong, but so was I.

Nothing isn't negative - it is like zero, which implies the complete absence of something. The same way you can't "extra-zero" something, you can't "intensify" a nothing.

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Oil.

Avatar
#93 Oiler Al
February 18 2013, 11:18PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

The answer is the question, its so obvious that even Tambelini might figure it out?

You have 4 high end right wingers.. Eberle, Yakapov, and Hemsky... all skillful, fast and expensive. Hemsky is the oldest of the bunch , so its obvious that he's the odd man out.

You might suggest well either him or Yak move to the left side, then you will have a cap issue.

I would wait to trade dead line, to see where the Oilers are, and also you get your best value at that point.

I would trade him for O Reily's rights , who would be your second line ctr, and Gagner would be the third line guy. Would give you three decent center men.

Ideally you would go for a D Man, but you wont get a top 4 D man for Hemsky.

Its unfortunate, but this team has a poor track record in drafting and more so developing players from within.[PS. lotto kids dont count as good drafting]

Avatar
#94 Sanaa Montana
February 18 2013, 11:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Gazmort

Zero is like nothing, but, nothing is not like zero.

You're right, you can't "extra zero" something. But you're wrong, I just showed you how to "intensify" a nothing.

Avatar
#95 Gazmort
February 18 2013, 11:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Sanaa Montana

An impasse. I tip my hat to you good sir. We will agree to disagree.

Avatar
#96 Sanaa Montana
February 18 2013, 11:29PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Gazmort wrote:

An impasse. I tip my hat to you good sir. We will agree to disagree.

I'm just DSFing you. To be honest, English is my 4th language and I don't even know if what I was saying really made sense.

Speaking of impasse-I refuse to play chess with that stupid rule.

I also hate the agree to disagree statement, it is made for people who aren't very stern on their stances. I like to argue until you agree with me.;-')

Avatar
#97 Gazmort
February 18 2013, 11:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Sanaa Montana

It doesn't really make sense, that was/is the problem.

There are two types of impasse - one wherein you accept that your opponent has equal skill and without agreeing to an end you are resigned to chasing each other around the board (ie. a king v king or king v king + knight scenario).

The other type of impasse is the one where you recognize the opponent is never going to get it, and it isn't worth continuing. If you are secure enough in your knowledge and convictions, you don't need to beat others over the head with it - not unlike trying to prove a point to a fish. They're never going to understand, but I can be pretty sure I'm right, even so.

:-)

I can DSF with the best of'em.

Avatar
#98 RSD
February 18 2013, 11:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Oiler Al wrote:

The answer is the question, its so obvious that even Tambelini might figure it out?

You have 4 high end right wingers.. Eberle, Yakapov, and Hemsky... all skillful, fast and expensive. Hemsky is the oldest of the bunch , so its obvious that he's the odd man out.

You might suggest well either him or Yak move to the left side, then you will have a cap issue.

I would wait to trade dead line, to see where the Oilers are, and also you get your best value at that point.

I would trade him for O Reily's rights , who would be your second line ctr, and Gagner would be the third line guy. Would give you three decent center men.

Ideally you would go for a D Man, but you wont get a top 4 D man for Hemsky.

Its unfortunate, but this team has a poor track record in drafting and more so developing players from within.[PS. lotto kids dont count as good drafting]

I agree with you: hemsky's value will be greatest at deadline but, if I'm trading for O' Riely he has to sign before the deal is done and it has to be under 5 mil. Honestly whom is really willing to part with their top 4 d-man, maybe NYI but I doubt it.

Avatar
#99 DieHard
February 19 2013, 12:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Trading Hemsky (bad idea) at the trade deadline nets you prospects and picks which is not what we need.

Avatar
#100 Jeff
February 19 2013, 12:33AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
wiseguy wrote:

Glad this was brought up. Hemsky only has 55 less points over 7 years but here's the startling statistic: he's -28 on a team that was -297 over that time. Parise is +57 on a team that was +87. Seems to me, Hemsky was outperforming his teammates by a significant margin and while Parise was underperforming, his stats being elevated by his team. It amazes me how a player can only be -28 when his team got outscored by 297 goals in that span. I agree with all others who've wondered just how good Hemsky would've been on a decent team.

Beauty response... I eagerly scrolled scrolled down to see the comeback, but, shockingly, there wasn't one.

No name calling, or passive agressive insults, just using his own numbers against him... left him speechless.

I guess sometimes a guy is so dead set on trolling, that he doesn't clue in his own numbers completely contradict his arguement.

Well done.

Comments are closed for this article.