Daum worry, be happy
Jason Gregor
April 27 2009 09:31AM
Steve Tambellini returned from the under-18 tournament and has started to focus on every aspect of the organization. He has met with many different people inside the organization including the assistant coaches and Rob Daum.
From what I understand, Daum gave Tambellini an overview of Springfield, but the conversation didn’t get down to specifics of coaching.
Daum does have one year left on his contract with the team, and has stated before that his true passion is coaching. The big question will be where does he want his coaching career to go?
If his ultimate goal is to be an NHL coach, then he should take the head coaching job in Springfield if the Oilers offer it to him.
Out of the 30 NHL teams, only two head coaches went from assistant to head coach within their respective teams. John Stevens was an assistant in Philly, but he was only an assistant for eight games before replacing the fired Ken Hitchcock. Stevens spent six years as the head man for the Philadelphia Phantoms in the AHL, before being promoted to Hitchcock’s staff and ultimately replacing him.
Tony Granato has had a strange rise and fall in Colorado. He was an assistant for a year, and then he got promoted to head coach for two seasons before the lockout. After the lockout he was back as an assistant in Colorado before getting promoted again this past year. It’s fair to say that this situation might never play out again for another coach.
Coaches who were assistants in the NHL and then hired by another team, include Lindy Ruff, Todd McLellan, Joel Quenneville, Dave Tippett, Rick Tocchet, Craig MacTavish and Ron Wilson. All of them were former NHL players, so the chance of Daum following their path isn't likely.
Ken Hitchcock was an NHL assistant, and then became head coach in the IHL before getting promoted to Dallas. Terry Murray did the same as Hitchcock. Andy Murray was an NHL assistant, then left the league and coached in Europe and for the Canadian National team before returning seven years later.
The rest were either rookies who got promoted from junior or the AHL.
If Daum ultimately wants to be the head coach of the Oilers, history shows he’d be better off being head coach in Springfield rather than an assistant in Edmonton. Daum doesn’t have any connections to Pat Quinn or Marc Crawford, and while he knows Tom Renney, he doesn’t have a long-standing relationship with him. I don’t see Tambellini telling his new coach who one of his assistants would be, so look for Daum to be the main man in Springfield.
Over-rating AHL success
With the recent success of Dan Bylsma and Cory Clouston, many feel the best route to go is getting a young coach with AHL success. But Clouston missed the playoffs his first year in the AHL, before getting promoted halfway through this second season. Bylsma was having a good first year in the AHL before replacing Michel Therrien.
Neither had a stellar proven career in the AHL, but Clouston had a great track record in the WHL before going to the AHL. What both guys inherited in the NHL was top-end talent, especially up front. Clearly they both got the attention of their players, and got them to buy into the system.
Scott Arniel seems to be the flavour of the week amongst many to replace MacTavish. He was named coach of the year in the AHL this year, and in three years with the Moose he has compiled an impressive 141-71-38 record.
The Moose have had a dominant winning record in the regular season for five years now. Arniel is a good coach, but one of the biggest keys to his success has been drafting and signing veteran players. He's also had success signing AHL players and some decent young prospects.
Springfield was short in both departments.
The Moose went out and signed Jason Krog, the AHL MVP in 2008, and he led them in scoring this year.
The Falcons signed Jake Taylor, a good leader and stay-at-home D-man, but not someone who will make you a playoff contender. Why didn’t the Oilers stock Springfield with better veterans? Because they didn’t have any NHL contracts to offer them.
That won’t be the case this summer. Currently the Oilers have 30 players signed for next season, and 20 of them played in Edmonton last year. MacIntyre, Chorney and Peckham have two-way deals, and you’d expect Brodziak, Smid, Grebeshkov and a goalie to get signed, so that puts them at 34.
Josef Hrabal, Tim Sestito, Geoff Paukovich, Ryan O’Marra, Viatcheslav Trukhno, Jordan Bendfeld, Bryan Pitton, Cody Wild, Bryan Lerg and Jordan Eberle are the other ten and all of them are on two-way deals. Eberle will either be in Edmonton, or most likely back in Regina, where his contract wouldn’t count amongst the 50.
Out of the other nine, none of them are prospects that are close to playing in Edmonton, and none are dominant AHLers. Chorney will be in the AHL next season, and depending on what trades happen this summer I think Peckham might start down there as well.
Chris Van De Velde and Alex Plante look to be the only new young players in Springfield next season, so Steve Tambellini will need to get some proven veterans. He should be able to entice some proven veterans by dangling a two-way NHL contract in front of them.
Expect the Oilers to sign proven AHL players this summer. Their experience will give the Oilers depth in case of injury, but more importantly, they will lead the young players in Springfield.
The good and the bad for draft picks
Here's a great story about the Raven’s first round draft pick this past Saturday.
Oher’s story has already been written as a book, The Blind Side, and they are currently making a movie about him. Here's the book's synopsis.
There are always great success stories in sports, but there are many cases of players who had all the talent, but made some bad decisions and never made it. Read this story, and if one of your kids is lucky enough to get drafted by a team, make sure as a parent you give the right advice and do you homework on which agent to use.
@ Archaeologuy:
The intention wasn't to "give up" on anyone, it was, as you said to get a small improvement in size+defense for a small sacrifice of offense.
@ RossCreek:
Good for you and your buddy.
The trade might not be striaght up 100% fair, but it certainly doesn't justify 28 repetitive posts acting like we are giving up scrubs for superstars. Cogliano is far more valuable then Ladd.
@ Ogden Brother: He had a lot more points eh?
And Seabrook is far more valuble than Gilbert.
I never said scrubs for superstars.
But I will say winners for losers. You win with a certain type of guy and you lose with a certain type of guy.
YOU proposed this deal, and then acted like this was a bad deal for the Oil. If you're Tambo and I'm KLowe, and you come to me with the deal you put forth, I give my approval.
@ Ogden Brother: 22 Andrew Cogliano (82-18-20-38 -6) 23 Andrew Ladd (82-15-34-49 +26)
BIG Difference
I'll take Ladd.
Too many of the young guys here are more concerned with smokin a jizzle and playing video games. Fact.
RossCreek wrote:
It took Ladd 5 seasons to put up those numbers. Before that his career high was 21 points. He also has a few All-Stars on his team to help with those points, not to mention he's on a well coached winning team.
You take Ladd, he'll be on his 3rd team in the last 4 years and Chicago will take one of the best players from the 2005 draft.
@ Archaeologuy: Alright. Last season: Cogliano 82-18-27-45 +1 Ladd 63-14-16-30 +13 (a year in which he was traded - Ask O'Sullivan about that)
21 points? Huh?
My Bad, read his totals wrong because they were split. Fortunately for me 30 is still below Cogliano's totals, so my point still stands.
RossCreek wrote:
Where did I act like it was a bad deal for the Oil?
@ Archaeologuy: And 30/63*82= 39
So 6 points shy. Ladd was taken 4th overall in 2004, Cogliano 25th in 2005. A great pick I might add. You're making it sound so absurdley in favor for the Hawks if that deal went down.
@ Ogden Brother: When you started arguing with me. You proposed it. I said that'd be great for the Oil. I may be pigeon-holing you and Arch together a bit counting both of your individual thoughts as one person.
Ogden Brother wrote:
Ogden Brother wrote:
Ogden Brother wrote:
Why would you start arguing with me about it if you thought it'd be good for the Oil. I thought it'd be good for the Oil.
RossCreek wrote:
I started arguing with you because you were acting like Seabrook = Lidstrom and Ladd = Iggy.
RossCreek wrote:
Alexander Daigle was taken 1st overall in 1993, so what?
The trade wouldnt be absurdly in favor of the Hawks, but I think the Oilers should get better assets for Gilbert. We're talking about a young Offensive defenseman with good production here. IMO the Oilers shouldnt be using this kind of asset to fill needs in the bottom 6 forwards or 2nd defense pair. Not when there are such glaring needs in the Top 6 and in net. As for Cogs, well I'm drinking the Kool-Aid on that guy because I think he produced very well the last 2 years despite being given a 3rd line roll (one that he clearly doesnt belong in)
@ Ogden Brother: Where did I act like that? I've seen a few other times on here recently who's in the arguments. Some people just like to argue I guess. It's gonna be a loooooooong summer.
Shift-Disturbers.
Archaeologuy wrote:
So Seabrook or Gilbert, you'll take Gilbert?
RossCreek wrote:
What? Go back and read you 8 straight posts on the subject.
RossCreek wrote:
Between you, me, and Ogden Brother we probably make up 50% of the arguments/debates on here. I accept that. I'm bored and the Oilers are out, so what else do I have left except argue hypothetical situations until I'm blue in face.
@ Ogden Brother: What does "8 post in a row" have to do with making them sound like Lidstrom & Iginla? What would 10 posts in a row do?
RossCreek wrote:
I think the Oilers need good forwards before they need more defensemen. And since the Oil have a surplus of offensive D-men IMO Gilbert can be moved to get at least one of those forwards. So the deal would be a fine lateral move (assuming Gilbert doesnt get any better), but not one that addresses anything the Oilers really need.
@ Archaeologuy: Alright then. We'll agree to disagree on the values of Seabrook & Gilbert.
@ RossCreek: Deal
@ Archaeologuy: But your still wrong ;-)
RossCreek wrote:
*Slaps head*
8 posts in a row have to do with who's trying to start an argument...especially when most are laced with inflamatory jabs.
The contents of your 8 posts (Monster vs Vanilla) = you trying to imply the trade was superstars for scrubs.
Archaeologuy wrote:
It would address the lopsidedness of our Offensive Dmen vs Deffensive (or all around) as well as some of the size issues in the top 6.
Anyways, trade isn't happening. I can't see the Hawks wanting to make that big of a change in their chemistry.
Ogden Brother wrote:
Are you fighting Cogliano's battles for him now? I'm sure I never said anything "inflammatory to you.
Ogden Brother wrote:
…. for some reason I think it isn’t his tires you are pumping…
You, on the other hand, made an inflammatory comment toward me that I let slide.
Jasmine wrote:
Actually he was an assistant for 2 years with the Rangers and 1 years with the Oilers prior to becoming head coach.
http://hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=3305
@ Ogden Brother: I see the benefit of that, but I agree that the Hawks wont be looking to make that many changes. What about going after Komisarek or some other UFA for a tough Defensive Dman and trading Gilbert to fill the forward needs? Seriously though, we can make hypothetical trade proposals and signings forever and not agree on anything.
@ Ogden Brother: Finally. Something we can probably all agree on.
Ogden Brother wrote:
Fianally. Something we can probably all agree on.
D'oh!
This all started with the ol' Stauffer email: Stoll for Seabrook. He said no, I said ya. I was right.
*pats self on back*
RossCreek wrote:
Right now Seabrook is on the verge of being a stud. He might not bring as much offence as Gilbert, but he is much better defensively. He is much tougher too. The Hawks have Campbell as their offensive guy, and his Horcoff-esq contract means he isn't getting traded anytime soon.
I don't see why the Hawks would make this deal. They would actually add a bit in salary today, although Seabrook will get a raise when his contract is over.
The wild card is Cogliano. None of you can honestly predict what type of player he will be. He might be a 25-30 goal scorer.
I don't see the Hawks making the move because they don't need another soft offensive D-man. The Oilers might be hesitant because of Cogliano. The plus side for the Oilers is that they would get bigger and tougher with Ladd and Seabrook, which is an area that Tambellini wants to improve.
I don't think it is a slam dunk that the Oilers would do it, but today I think the deal would benefit the Oilers because of Seabrook. Gilbert and Cogliano will bring more offence, but less grit. Do the Hawks want that? Not right now.
It isn't one sided for either side, but I could see why Oiler fans would want it because it adds what they need. Grit and size.
I also think that it is much too early to write off Gilbert and Cogliano. Gilbert might be a 50 point D-man and Cogliano could easily become a 25-30 goal scorer. The big question for both of them is if they will become grittier.
@ Jason Gregor: Thanks for your input Gregor. I know we kind of hijacked your article and took it somewhere completely different.
@ Jason Gregor: Archaeologuy wrote:
Yes. Thanks indeed Jason. What he said.
RossCreek wrote:
Their you go, you asked for expert opinion and it basically echoed mine.
*Pats back*
@ Ogden Brother: Jason Gregor wrote:
How is that?
*chin checks opponent*
@ RossCreek: @ Ogden Brother:
Jason essentially validated parts of both arguments. Seabrook is a great Dman, Cogliano could easily become a 25-30 goal scorer. Like most things the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
RossCreek wrote:
Do they need to get softer? Do they need another puck moving D-man? Tell me why this improves the Hawks next season. Ask yourself why you are proposing this trade?
Because the Oilers need grit and size. The Hawks' don't have a lot of size, with Kane, Toews, Havlat and Versteeg, so why would they add Cogliano and then Gilbert on the back end. It doesn't make sense for them.
Jason Gregor wrote:
Jason Gregor wrote:
Jason Gregor wrote:
Jason Gregor wrote:
All these quotes to me suggest the Oil would most likely do it, but may hesitant, while the Blackhawks wouldn't think twice before saying NO! That would suggest that its at least slightly one-sided.
@ Jason Gregor: Gregor, you misunderstood me. I was quoting you to OB. I've been the one saying that the Hawks wouldn't make this deal. I said if Tambo could pull this off, he'd look like a genius.
RossCreek wrote:
And I've been saying the value was fair (or close) but the fit likely isn't... to which you reply was overating and homerism.
@ Ogden Brother: Correct. Read Jason's comments. He basically states there's no way the Hawks make the deal, yet the Oil would consider it. Therefore, it is at least slightly one-sided. Not on talent, on intangibles.
And I didn't use the word "homerism". I said Oil fan typically "overvalues" their own.
And my problem with the whole thing is that the Oilers would lose 2 of its most valuable assets to fill only 1 of its needs (grit and size on the 3rd line and 2nd defense).
Meanwhile, the Oilers are still without a quality top 6 forward (and now without a future top 6 player)and have no Goaltender.
@ Archaeologuy: You are much more reasonable to argue with. Ladd could play on the 2nd line for one, and Seabrook could be a 1st pairing, so I disagree with your assesment. However, I agree that I would look at filling other needs with those "chips", but if this scenario presented itself, I'd jump at it.
....moving on.
The Sharks have to be close to blowing it up (or at least making some major changes)
Clowe Michalek
could be of interest
Cheecho showed alot this past series... including a few glimpses of his old scoring touch. He would likely be had for (relativly) cheap.
Marleau? He stunk in the PO, but has all the tools.
@ RossCreek: It's a judgement call neither us are ever going to have a chance to make. yeah, Seabrook could probably play top minutes, but i would think that the team would want his tough reliable minutes to pair with Grebby and i doubt he would be placed ahead of Souray and Vis. Again, coaches discretion. And Ladd would be fighting for time on the top 6 with Horc, Penner, Hemsky, Gagner, O'Sullivan and anyone else that Tambi can get. He could make it though. I'm just not sure that HE is that big of an improvement on the status quo. At least he'd be more physical.
@ Ogden Brother: I believe Marleau was hurt. He does have the most playoff goals since the lockout.
I agree with you that they could blow it up, but I think they'll give it one more year. Marleau & Nabokov are UFA's after next season. The Oil should have interest in Michalek & Clowe (UFA). I've been a lifelong Sharks & Flames fan (the Darryl Sutter connection, heck throw the Hawks into that mix too). I never took a Shark in out playoff draft (took 5 Ducks, 6 were taken in total - WOOOOHOOO). I just didn't believe in the Sharks this year. Or last. Or ever since they broke my heart in '06 giving up a 2-0 lead to the Oil (*openly weeping*). I was glad they got rid of Ron Wilson, but they're still not "right". Big question marks there. My gut tells me they'll give it 1 more year though (my head doesn't necassarily agree).
How crazy does this sound? Tampa's still lookin to move Lecavalier's contract, but sponsors would riot. Thornton, Cheechoo & draft pick for Lecavalier & Prospal (bcuz he's Vinny's buddy) I think Lecavalier brings way more to the table than Thornton come playoff time (fan of both). Thornton has 2 years left at similar $ to Lecavalier, so Tampa's not losing a superstar. They're looking to get out from the 11 years, perhaps they'd be more comfortable with Thornton's 2 years. I know...crazy.
@ RossCreek: @ Archaeologuy: @ Ogden Brother:
You guys like to argue almost as much as I do.