The Case for Another Defenseman
I've been practicing cart-before-the-horse style thinking at this blog lately. My "UFA Option" pieces are posted with the assumption that the Oilers have two or three significant areas of need, which I would categorize like this:1) Veteran defenseman
2) Top-six forward
3) Checking line centre
with the 3rd point dependent on Jarret Stoll being dealt.
However, I've never stated explicitly why I feel the Oilers need to address those areas, so today I thought I would show statistically where our current blue-line group falls short.
Here is the current depth chart, ranked by TOI/60 from last season:
Souray - 16:04 EV, 3:59 SH, 4:15 PP, 24:20 TOT
Pitkanen - 17:50 EV, 2:09 SH, 4:07 PP, 24:07 TOT
Gilbert - 17:24 EV, 2:31 SH, 2:15 PP, 22:11 TOT
Staios - 17:52 EV, 3:58 SH, 0:10 PP, 22:01 TOT
Smid - 15:08 EV, 2:24 SH, 0:18 PP, 17:51 TOT
Grebeshkov - 13:37 EV, 1:09 SH, 2:05 PP, 16:52 TOT
Greene - 13:50 EV, 2:46 SH, 0:05 PP, 16:41 TOT
Roy - 10:17 EV, 0:04 SH, 0:01 PP, 10:23 TOT
Rookies who could also be in the mix include Theo Peckham, Taylor Chorney, Josef Hrabal, and Bryan Young.
The first thing that jumps out at me on that ice-time breakdown is how little Grebeshkov played. Towards the end of the season his role increased, but unfortunately, I'm not sure where to find statistical breakdowns by half-season.
Previously I've analyzed the Oilers power-play and penalty-killing for 2007-08. For the purpose of the power-play, I've included Jarret Stoll as a defenseman. On the powerplay, Souray and Stoll both had decent years from the point, while the next best options, Pitkanen and Gilbert, had good production but were victimized by shorthanded goals against, resulting in sub-par years for both. Short-handed, Souray, Staios, Gilbert, and Pitkanen (despite limited use) were extremely effective, while Smid, Greene and Grebeshkov were absolutely brutal.
My conclusion is that the Oilers could use another option on the PK, although presumably Greene and especially Smid should be improved with another season under their belts. Additionally, another PP quarterback might be nice, but it seems reasonable to me to give Gilbert and Pitkanen another try, and then use Grebeshkov (who had very interesting and somewhat conflicting numbers) if they don't succeed. So their is some value in an additional defenseman on special teams, even if I wouldn't go so far as to say it is a critical need.
Even-strength is where the Oilers really need the help. Here again are the incumbent defensemen, ranked by difficulty of competition, with results and TOI added. The TOI data comes from NHL.com, while the rest is courtesy of Behind the Net.
1. Staios - 17:52 TOI, 2.29 GFON/60, 3.20 GAON/60
1. Souray - 16:04 TOI, 1.66 GFON/60, 2.42 GAON/60
1. Gilbert - 17:24 TOI, 2.89 GFON/60, 2.98 GAON/60
4. Pitkanen - 17:50 TOI, 3.10 GFON/60, 3.10 GAON/60
5. Smid - 15:08 TOI, 1.91 GFON/60, 2.93 GAON/60
6. Grebeshkov - 13:37 TOI, 2.90 GFON/60, 2.64 GAON/60
7. Greene - 13:50 TOI, 1.73 GFON/60, 2.21 GAON/60
8. Roy - 10:17 TOI, 2.73 GFON/60, 2.73 GAON/60
There's quite a few things that I should note here before I go on. The first three (Staios, Souray, Gilbert) played roughly equal competition, then there were slight dropoffs between each of Pitkanen, Smid, and Grebeshkov. There was a big drop-off in terms of quality of competition down to Greene, and another down to Roy. Gilbert, Pitkanen, Grebeshkov and Greene generally had the advantage of capable teammates, while Staios, Souray and Smid in general played with lesser performers.
We can basically break these players into three groups: those who performed effectively, those who got lit up, and those who provided good defense at the cost of minimal offense.
Effective: Gilbert, Pitkanen, Grebeshkov
Ineffective: Staios, Smid
Defense only: Souray, Greene
I don't include Roy because he played against nobodies with decent teammates and still finished just even. He clearly isn't better than a reserve defenseman at this point.
A look at Staios makes my point well; he's doing a thankless job against tough opposition, and he needs a break. At his age, it's unreasonable to expect improvement next season, and he simply can't handle playing against the other team's top guns while being saddled with inferior linemates. His responsibilities need to be reduced.
Souray isn't getting lit up to the extent that Staios is, but the team simply isn't generating much offense when he's on the ice at even strength. He could probably be very effective against middling opposition, but the Oilers can't afford to shield him like that.
Pitkanen and Gilbert (especially Pitkanen) should be better next season. They're both young and Pitkanen is coming off the worst season of his career. Denis Grebeshkov can handle more responsibility, and certainly MacTavish seemed to give it to him as the year wore on (and Grebeshkov's play improved).
Smid's performance was at about the same level as that of Staios, but unlike Staios, Smid is 22 and should certainly improve. He was also playing tough opponents, and he would look much better against easier opposition. Greene, on the other hand, has similar statistics to Souray, but unlike Souray played inferior competition. He can't play the powerplay and was awful on the penalty kill. He must be shielded and at this point is a major liability on the backend.
Thus, with the group as is, I would imagine that Gilbert/Pitkanen see tough opponents, Souray/Staios the next level, Grebeshkov/Smid the third tier, and Matt Greene only plays when Eric Godard is on for the other team. With this lineup, I'd say it's a decent bet that the Oilers break even at 5-on-5- and that isn't good enough. The Oilers need to be in a position to outscore their opponents, and this becomes more apparent when we discuss other factors. Souray has been injury-prone his entire career, Pitkanen missed more games with day-to-day ailments than any other player in recent memory, Gilbert looked exposed as the season wore on, and Staios isn't getting any younger.
What I would like to see is one top-flight shut-down defenseman (like, say, Norstrom) to pair with one of the finesse guys (Pitkanen/Gilbert) against tough opposition. Staios would take the other and play against mid-level opponents. Finally, Souray would play with one of Grebeshkov/Smid (preferably Grebeshkov) on the third pairing, and Smid would be the seventh defenseman. Matt Greene would be dealt; he's now 25 years old and could certainly emerge as a shut-down guy, but right now, he's a liability. Grebeshkov could be dealt too; he only signed a one year deal and seems like a guy that could be difficult to get signed to a long-term contract. Smid, of course, is another option for trade, but he's three years younger than Greene and is ahead of him right now, so I'd like to keep him personally.
The other option that signing a veteran gives the Oilers is to trade Pitkanen. I don't like the idea, but there seems to be ample circumstantial evidence of some character issues, and getting him signed to a contract could be difficult. If Pitkanen is dealt, the need for another defenseman jumps from important to red-alert, hull-breach critical.
If next season were a rebuilding year, I'd be a fan of rolling out the current group, but if the playoffs are the goal, an upgrade is a must.
11 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
My big concern, going into this year, is that Lowe underestimates some of the talent lingering around the organization and makes a move to compete this year.
I think Reasoner should be gone. Theres no reason other than MacT's thinking, that he reminds him of himself, to keep him. As affordable as he is if the coaching staff and the captains do their job Pouliot or Brodziak or Cogliano could play his role with an increase in offense.
by jdrevenge on Jun 9, 2008 12:35 PM MDT reply actions
My big concern, going into this year, is that Lowe underestimates some of the talent lingering around the organization and makes a move to compete this year.
I think that Lowe needs to make the playoffs this year. Each home playoff date brings in a non-trivial amount of revenue, and with a new owner, I'd imagine that Lowe feels the need to compete, especially given how much flak he's taken (both deserved and otherwise) since the 06 Finals run.
The thing about bringing in a veteran is it (in my opinion) can actually help development by putting young players in a position to succeed. Take Smid, for example- he's getting torched, and it can't be good for his confidence. If he got a slight decrease in playing time and a major decrease in opponent level, he could put up some good numbers, develop more confidence, and next year look at repeating his success against tough opposition.
Look at what MacT has done with Greene; he's shielding him, (all comments IMO) partially to win, but partially to give him a chance to excel before ratcheting up the difficulty level. The importance of success can't be understated- Detroit in particular is one team that does a good job of it.
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 9, 2008 12:44 PM MDT reply actions
Brad Stuart is going to get a very good contract from someone - that is if the wings cant convince him to stay in Detroit for a million under market.
A lot of our Pitkanen questions are going to be answered in the next 3-4 weeks. If we trade him we better be getting the best player in the deal. Its going to be very interesting.
by Sean on Jun 9, 2008 1:03 PM MDT reply actions
Maybe even two years, depending on price, but I agree that if someone were brought in it would be more as a stop-gap than final solution. Theres lots of good youth coming up, I just dont think its quite there yet.
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 9, 2008 1:23 PM MDT reply actions
Makes sense i just dont really have a sense for how much is too much with all the dmen and forwards ready to make the jump. I see your point that playoffs would be a must this year but at what price. Everyone makes a big deal in the blogs regarding the developement curve. Do we lose out on talent by plugging with Veterans?
by jdrevenge on Jun 9, 2008 1:53 PM MDT reply actions
I think what's going on up front is a completely different issue from what's going on at the back end.
On defense, we're developing Pitkanen, Gilbert, Grebs, Smid and Greene, and we have a whole bunch of top-flight prospects waiting for a spot (Peckham, Chorney, Petry, etc.).
The Oilers have to make a choice on which guys they want to develop, so some of the current crop of guys aren't going to make it anyway, if Peckham et al. are going to get a shot at a job. Axing one of them now to insert a reliable veteran will a) allow the guys we have to develop in a near-ideal situation, and b) clear out some space for the next wave of prospects.
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 9, 2008 2:01 PM MDT reply actions
Screw the "stop-gap", let's think big. Vancouver needs a shit-load up front, and they have a new, unproven GM. They have a young and already established shut-down type that can play the PP to boot.
Let's go get Kevin Bieksa. Roughly the same age as our other core defenders, and brings a skill-set that isn't duplicated.
Could a package of Smid and Stoll work for both parties? We'd be taking on a bit of salary, but it solves the problem of too much depth up front, and your need for a shutdown/vet defender.
by doritogrande on Jun 9, 2008 3:02 PM MDT reply actions
Interesting idea. Leaving aside the Gillis-Lowe complications, and the inter-division-trading complications, it's an intriguing possibility (although that's a lot of complications to ignore).
Bieksa just had a brutal season in virtually every way possible, but his 2006-07 was awfully good. Smid and Stoll? I wonder if he would take Greene instead...
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 9, 2008 3:38 PM MDT reply actions
That seems to describe what did happen down the stretch. Smid was paired mostly with Greene, they were unquestionably the third pairing, and handled it pretty well. Smid was -15 on the season, but was even over his last 21 games; and never played as much as 16 minutes in his final 14. Greene posted a +2 in 33 games after returning from injury, and gradually saw more ice down the stretch, emerging as a key guy on the PK unit despite admittedly unimpressive numbers. (I'd like to see the splits on those.)
Each guy showed decent growth in 2007-08, and like most of the team played their best hockey down the stretch. Both guys played hard with a little muscle and meanness as required. They were MacT's first choice to play with the surprisingly-effective unit of Brodziak-GlenX-Stortini, and as a group they kicked a fair amount of butt by playing simple, hardnosed hockey. With both guys now hovering around the 150 GP mark they have learned their share of lessons the hard way, but both are learning and imporving and I expect both to be better in 2008-09.
Whether that happens in Edmonton or elsewhere is the question. But having been patient this long, I'm not keen on giving up on them just now.
by Bruce on Jun 9, 2008 5:59 PM MDT reply actions
Lined up against Lowetide [& You]
These 8:
Pitkanen-Gilbert
Staios-Souray
Grebeshkov-Greene
Smid
Roy
I don't think are that bad.
I mean, I wish Souray wasn't there at 5.5 gazillion per
And, Green was mentioned a couple of times, uhh, unpositively in late-season post-games.
MacT did say after the WC that he was surprised how well the Oilers matched up.
And he was handling the D
by Mr DeBakey on Jun 9, 2008 7:52 PM MDT reply actions
Pitkanen-Gilbert
Staios-Souray
Grebeshkov-Greene
Smid
Roy
I don't think are that bad.
It isn't a bad group, if everything breaks right. But, if, say...
*Souray gets injured
*Pitkanen is dealt this summer
*Gilbert plays like he did in the last 40 games rather than the first 40 games
*Greene and Smid don't take the next step
*Staios, at 35, takes a step back
or any combination of that list occurs, then the team is in trouble. There is no margin for error here; everything needs to work out right for these guys to be on the plus side of the ledger; heck, half the defense corps last year was around -1 in goal differential per 60 minutes. It wasn't good enough last year, and I'm not convinced that they're guaranteed to be much better next year.
I don't like entering next season without a margin for error. Up front, so many guys are coming off injury that we have tremendous depth, enough that we can deal some of it away. We don't have the same luxury on the back end.
by Jonathan Willis on Jun 9, 2008 10:45 PM MDT reply actions

by 






























