BeterChiarelli

Hey Beter
Member Since
Oct 29, 2017
Favourite Team
Edmonton Oilers
Birthday
Oct 9, 1995
Forum Posts
2156
Posts per Day
2.44
Forum Threads
360
Forum: Armchair-GMMon at 7:18 pm
Thread: Nashville and Tuch
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Claesson4Norris</b></div><div>Doubt Vegas does that. Tuch is younger and much better than Johnsson, and Vegas already have more LD than they can use.</div></div>

I genuinely forgot that Hague and Schuldt existed. I don't see how splitting time between Dermott and Hague hurts the Golden Knights however. They'd have the option to move Dermott the season after clearly. With Martinez being dedicated to his off-hand side, this doesn't seem very problematic.

Is it possible that due to their impending cap crunch that the Golden Knights might be having buyers remorse regarding Tuch? How do you fit a nearly $5M RW behind Stone and Smith? Tuch hasn't had the consistency, and maybe it's a matter of adding a pick to send to Vegas, but I can't see Vegas risking Tuch not panning out when they're going to need his cap elsewhere on the roster.
Forum: Armchair-GMMon at 7:06 pm
Thread: Ranking leafs RD options
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LeafsFanForSomeReason</b></div><div>I agree with basically everything you said here. The only thing is that a 'Hainsey-type' is exactly what they need IF you take that meaning the same way I do. Rielly excelled with Hainsey because A) Rielly is a fantastic player; and B) because Hainsey accepted more defensive responsibilities, thus allowing Rielly to run free. The problem here is that just because Hainsey accepted the responsibilities, doesn't mean he was good at them. If they can get a guy to do what Hainsey did, except be good at it... That's a good partner for Rielly.</div></div>

If I'm the Leafs, I'm looking for a puck-mover to play with Muzzin on the top pair. Reilly and Holl are sufficient enough on the second pair. There's a chance Liljegren can step into a top four role with the proper work in the offseason and his two-way style might click well with Reilly.
Forum: Armchair-GMMon at 6:54 pm
Thread: Ranking leafs RD options
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>palhal</b></div><div>Most player can eat minutes. But you don't want inferior players playing big minutes. I just wouldn't want the celebrity Subban on my team even at 50% retention.
Hainsey was excellent partner Reilly. So I don't understand the logic why it so difficult to find partner for Reilly.. Fact is Reilly is just average at best defensively and the coaches don't want him killing penalties. So many think he's a "number one" players because of offensively totals, He gets a lot of ice time/points on the PP. He's very good when the Leaf have the puck. But the rest his game, average.</div></div>

Most players can "eat" minutes, but not all of them do it successfully. Hainsey was below-average in terms of possession numbers and rode a PDO bender during his time on the Leafs. Calling him "excellent" seems like a stretch at best and is contradictory to your words. Hainsey was very much an inferior player in his role, and it showed when it mattered. The Leafs couldn't win with him, why expect a Hainsey-type to be what they're missing now?

You'd use Subban in this scenario with Muzzin clearly. I very much recognize that Reilly's game is primarily offensive, and that a more stable partner (Holl isn't horrible here) would help keep him afloat. If Subban could get his back sorted out, the personality shouldn't matter. He'd be at worst 75% the player he was at his peak in Montreal. At $4.5M, that's a steal and exactly what the Leafs would be missing. Personality has little to no bearing on the on-ice product, I genuinely don't understand why you'd want that as far away from the Leafs as possible.

There's a real chance that without trading Marner, Sandin, or Robertson, that a 50% PK Subban is the best the Leafs will be able to acquire this summer. Teams don't line up en masse to give away their best RHD because the Leafs asked them to. There's no money (nor any sense) to sign Pietrangelo. The thing that separates the Leafs from any other franchise is to do the financial things that don't count against the cap. Sports science and medicine are the Leafs' strength beyond the actual rink. If the offseason is going to be prolonged, this is a move that Toronto should make if they're forced into it.
Forum: Armchair-GMMon at 6:26 pm
Thread: change of identity
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Wqrrior</b></div><div>You guys honestly think that he carries that much trade value? I'd toss in a meh level B prospect instead but wow that counter is bad.</div></div>

Benning - by value of handedness and how consistent he's been - is worth like a B-prospect and a 3rd Rounder. I'm still very adamant about Puljujarvi being worth a prospect and a 2nd Round Pick, His Liiga numbers suggest a quality 3rd line forward in the NHL. How much more growth could there be if a team is willing to play him alongside one of their top-6 centers? The only knock on Puljujarvi at this point is that he's never going back to Edmonton. There's still value there, especially considering that he's not even 22 years old yet. This isn't some 26 year-old burnout we're talking about.

The counter is arguably more sane than the initial deal proposed.
Forum: Armchair-GMSat at 2:34 pm
Thread: My Thoughts on the Off-Season
I'd think getting rid of Carter Hutton for any other "here for a year" goaltender would do the Sabres a bit of good. Any team likely expecting to not be a playoff team and in need of a netminder for next season would likely have him for a midround pick. UPL is still likely a couple years out: this is the window to find a half-decent backup and allow Ullmark to take another step forward in his game. If Buffalo can develop as strong of a 1A/1B core with Ullmark and UPL as everyone wants to see them do so, the rest of this team is a lot easier to figure out.

I'm not sold on running Mittelstadt as a depth forward, and can speak from first-hand experience what that kind of deployment will do to a promising, young forward. Could Johansson be flipped at the draft with retention for additional draft capital or in part of a deal for a Tyler Johnson? I would think a sheltered kid line of Mittelstadt-Cozens-Thompson (with Casey and Dylan flipping wing/center based on the strong-side draw) would be more apt to do all three men more purpose than being ran as a traditional third line. The fourth line would handle the defensive minutes as needed.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar 23 at 12:03
Thread: CBO and an 80M Cap
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>justaBoss</b></div><div>While TB might agree to a deal in that ballpark, I can't really see Johnson waiving his NTC. He'd be moving from a TOP3 contender to a team from the other side of the continent, still retooling and probably finding themselves a spot as a decent playoff team.

Also Khudobin has been so good for DAL for last couple of years that he's in no circumstance getting a discount compared to his former contract. Imo a team such as NJ should give him a 2-year $4,5M contract and try him as 1G with Blackwood as 2G...</div></div>

TJ does have a personal relationship with Yamamoto: if he's a casualty in Tampa, Edmonton's a far cry from the worst place he could end up. They have a legitimate shot at the Pacific and even the Western Conference. If we can agree this is an improved roster, they should go further next season yes?

I mean, you argue TJ not wanting to move from a contender to a team that's "close", but you'd argue that Khudobin would go from an Edmonton-esque team (in terms of playoff odds at least) to one of the league's worst over the past few seasons, just for a payday? I'd think Holtby would be more appropriate for the Devils on a three-year deal at that pricepoint if you're looking for a mentor for Blackwood.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar 22 at 10:09
Thread: Why is Neal a problem
Because paying $6M for a fourth-line power play asset is absurd.

If the cap is going down and Edmonton wants to improve their roster, Neal's the exact place you look at finding the savings. Betting on the Oilers to run a 30% power play over the next three years is silly. Power play opportunities drop come playoff time and you need to start relying on even-strength production to get anything done. Neal offers no solution to how the majority of the game is played, and finding room for him - even on the second PP unit - is a challenge.

If some other team wants to pay him the equivalent of what you think this years' numbers represent, then by all means let that team do so. Neal has been discussed as a buyout candidate for the Oilers well before talks of compliance buyouts were on the table. Edmonton needs the savings to improve their roster: if the power play is clicking at comparable levels without Neal and the goal is 5v5 improvement, there is no better candidate on this roster.

Russell can be moved. Chiasson can be moved. Khaira can be moved. Koskinen showed enough utility this year to at least play for another season and the FA market for starters beyond Lehner this year is horrible.

The only other player I'd consider for a CBO is Kassian - his deal is phenomenally stupid - but given that Holland just signed it, I'd consider that likelihood to be nil.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar 18 at 7:10
Thread: Oilers if they had a time machine just for the 2015 draft day
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>jassan28</b></div><div>Oilers are always set for a BAP at picks aka. Pulju falling in their lap and forgetting Sergachev so Barzal would be obvious since they weren't too concerned. Chabot was heard as well</div></div>

If that were the case, Chiarelli would have selected Dobson over Bouchard - assuming they take the player from the same position. If it's a whole organization thing, Broberg would not be an Oiler right now. They would have taken Zegras instead. If they were still interested in a defenceman, Soderstrom was ranked higher - almost universally - and thus they would have gone with him.

Barzal was far from Edmonton's radar, and I genuinely fail to understand why. It's possible that the ineptitude of Edmonton's management assumed that if they were to take another center (in the case of JEE) that they would be drafting their #3C as opposed to taking the BPA and playing him or Draisaitl on the wing.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar 18 at 6:18
Thread: Oilers if they had a time machine just for the 2015 draft day
The revisionist history regarding Edmonton and the 2015 draft is phenomenal, and probably wouldn't have resulted in the Oilers going 7/7 on their picks.

From what we've heard from the club - directly or indirectly - the Oilers were very interested in either Chabot or Eriksson-Ek at #16, not Barzal. This was also during a time period where Edmonton's strategy beyond Connor McDavid was to add defencemen at the draft. Brandon Carlo was probably had with the #33 pick, not Aho. You have to remember how much Edmonton's management let it get in their heads that their blueline needed to be addressed at the draft every year until it wasn't a problem: this was the team that was going to take Mikhail Sergachev at #4 in the 2016 draft until Puljujarvi fell. I genuinely don't know who they would have taken at #57 (the pick used to acquire Talbot), but if they had gone for defencemen at #16 and #33, I'd wager that they would have probably taken a goaltender. Daniel Vladar was ranked #2 by central scouting for European goaltenders and ended up going #75 to Boston. His height leads me to believe that if Edmonton hadn't traded any picks, he could have been their guy?

Picks in the third round+ probably don't change all that substantially. Jones and Bear were quality finds late in this draft. Marino likely still gets selected here given that Edmonton went with the shotgun approach to finding defenders in this draft. Svoboda and Pagin were solid bets, and both did eventually see North American ice time, but are likely to not have NHL careers at this point.

Not trading for Talbot pretty much leaves Edmonton's status for 2017-onward in a bit of an enigma. Talbot was instrumental in getting the Oilers into the playoffs that season, so it would be incredibly difficult to say how the team would have fared without him. The Oilers being bad in 2016 was a given, and I figure they end up in a similar situation, and are more aligned with taking a forward at #4 due to Chabot and Carlo now being in the system. Perhaps the team would have a bit more scouting detail on Puljujarvi or would be more apt to take Tkachuk, but it's borderline impossible to tell without being one of the people tasked with making that decision originally.

This day was probably when Chiarelli did the most damage he could have to the Edmonton Oilers.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar 9 at 7:05
Thread: Murray and McLeod revised
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CD282</b></div><div>The sample size is the entire 2019-20 season, not 35 games. And Holtby has been below average for 3 years now, if that's not a large enough sample size for you I don't know what is. I'm not advocating getting Holtby at all.</div></div>

I must've misinterpreted your initial post then: your minimum value for this season was 35, I read it as guys that have played 35 games.

If Edmonton wants a long-term solution to its goalie situation - and we're in agreement that one of Rodrigue/Konovalov are 2 to 3 years away from being a full-time NHL backup - then Edmonton has very few options. You're either committing term to a tenured UFA/RFA or you're rolling the dice on a relatively unproven backup. The Oilers took the second approach with Talbot and managed a quality year out of him, but little else.

The UFA market for starters is <strong>not</strong> saturated. The market for quality back-up goaltenders is. The only goaltender on the UFA market younger than 30 with a save percentage above .900 this summer is Lehner. The only other sub-30 year old goaltender going to free agency this summer with more than 10 games played is Louis Domingue. The cost for Lehner is going to be insane, both in term and in cash dollars. When evaluating goaltenders over a three-year window by 5v5 save percentage and a minimum TOI of 3000min, Lehner ranks 13th in the league with a 0.927sv%. Khudobin and Halak find themselves on this list as well - 1st (0.934) and 12th (0.927) respectively - but neither of these represent a long-term solution nor a smart bet to give starter minutes to. Khudobin will be 36 and Halak 37 come the end of this season. How much longer can they maintain their dominance at even strength? Which team will be foolish enough to give Markstrom or Holtby - both 30 as of right now - term and dollars? Both men are near the .920sv% mark at even strength over that same three year window and won't cost as much as Lehner or an RFA netminder would.

The RFA market offers more solutions, but these by nature come at asset cost. In some cases, there's risk due to the lack of games played. Does this goaltender have enough of a track record to justify giving up pieces to acquire him? Jarry, Merzlikins, and Blackwood are likely all untouchable right now. This leaves the Oilers with their choice of a very unproven Adin Hill, Linus Ullmark, Joonas Korpisalo, Alexandar Georgiev, or Matt Murray as their only real targets for a long-term solution. Because the sample size for most of these guys is smaller, I'm limited in observing data from this season and last season: when sorting by even-strength save percentage, Ullmark ranks 25th (0.923), Murray 30th (0.922), Korpisalo 38th (0.919), Hill 39th (0.919), and Georgiev 52nd (0.915). To me, it comes down to Ullmark and Murray, but the Sabres have little to no incentive to flip Linus instead of Hutton this summer. An argument could be made for Korpisalo, but I genuinely prefer the bulk of experience Murray has seen thus far in his career.

Murray has had an awful season, but how much of it has been beyond his control? The Penguins, especially of late, have been garbage, and over the course of the season have rarely iced a full roster. A player we essentially gave away became a mainstay in their top four out of necessity due to injury. Jarry has thrived in relation to Murray, but there's a myriad of reasons that would explain that. It could be something as simple as Jarry being a better goaltender, but it could be a nagging minor injury, a lack of confidence from the local Yinzers bagging on him nightly, the team not wanting to perform in front of him, Jarry getting the better lineup in front of him more often, you name it.

I've already revised my ask from a previous AGM. I figure this one is as close as taking Larsson out of the equation. Possible that a year and half a million dollars could be shed from Murray's pricetag as well. Unless the Sabres think Ullmark is the problem, Murray is the only "safe" long-term solution to the Oilers' need of a goaltender. Korpisalo is a riskier fit.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar 9 at 4:47
Thread: Murray and McLeod revised
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CD282</b></div><div>Of the 30 goalies that have played at least 35 games this year:

4. Lehner: .920
5. Markstrom: .918
6. Koskinen: .917
8. Crawford: .916
.
.
.
.
27. Murray: .898
28. Holtby: .897

Why are you even doing this? If you want a crappy "name-brand" goalie to back-up Koskinen next year, just sign Braden Holtby. That won't cost you a single asset and he'll surely sign for less than the ridiculous 8 x $6.4M deal you have above.

Let Pittsburgh find out the hard way that the goalie market is totally saturated this summer and they won't get to set the price for Matt Murray. Unless, of course, he backstops them to another Cup.</div></div>

C'mon man you know the sample size I'm looking at is more than 35 games. Don't handpick the smaller window to justify overpaying Lehner or Holtby