Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: News And Other Updates Leading Up To Pats-Giants

Poorcoff

If the Edmonton Oilers had a chance to lose Shawn Horcoff for absolutely nothing, should they do it?  That was the biggest question that the writers here at The Copper and Blue faced as we discussed which players to protect for SB Nation's mock expansion draft.  SB Nation has added franchises in Winnipeg and Quebec, and they'll be managed by the esteemed James Mirtle, and Gabriel Desjardins (who'd be better choices as real GM's than Doug MacLean).  At first, there was some resistance to the idea of losing Horcoff for nothing - our first vote was 3-2 in favour of protecting him - but as the deadline drew closer, the team of writers agreed that leaving Horcoff available was the way to go. 

After the jump we'll take a look at the rules for the mock draft, the whole list of protected and unprotected players, and our reasoning for leaving Horcoff available.

Star-divide

Here are the rules for creating a protected list:

- Teams can protect either 1 goalie, 5 defensemen and 9 forwards OR "2 goalies, 3 defensemen and 7 forwards."

- If you go the two goalie route, at least one goalie left unprotected must have played in at least 10 games last season OR 25 games in the last two seasons combined. One game = at least 31 minutes.

- Each team must leave unprotected at least one defenseman who appeared in 40 games last season OR 70 games in the last two seasons combined.

- Each team must leave unprotected at least two forwards who appeared in 40 games last season OR 70 games in the last two seasons combined.

- Players who have played in 49 or fewer career NHL games are automatically exempt and do not need to be protected.

Ande here are the rules for the selection process:

- Each expansion team selects 30 players. A total of 60 players will be selected.

- The first 24 picks are to be used on 3 goaltenders, 8 defensemen and 13 forwards.

- The final 6 picks can be used to pick a player at any position.

- Only 1 goalie or 1 defenseman can be selected from each existing team.

- No existing team can lose more than 2 players.

- Expansion teams must be compliant with the salary cap.

I decided to put the rules up because they might inform which players the Oilers should protect.  But first, we should know which players are eligible to be drafted.  Here's the list:

Goalies - Khabibulin, Gerber, Deslauriers.
Defensemen -Souray, Gilbert, Whitney, Vandermeer, Foster, Smid, Strudwick.
Forwards - Horcoff, Penner, Hemsky, Gagner, Brule, Cogliano, Jones, Fraser, Stortini, Jacques, Ondrus, Reddox.

That's it.  Everyone else under contract with the Oilers is already exempt and doesn't need to be protected.  The first thing to do, then, is decide whether to protect one goalie or two, and the decision is easy.  There's no way the Oilers should protect only three defensemen and only seven forwards, which means we'll be protecting only one goalie.  So who should that one goalie be?  Well, it sure as hell isn't going to be Nikolai Khabibulin, which leaves Gerber and Deslauriers, and there was some debate over this question.  Both Gerber and Deslauriers are unrestricted free agents after this year, and in this context, I think there's a much better chance that Gerber's two-way deal gets picked up.  Remember, each expansion team is required to select three goalies.  There's bound to be a few goalies on one-way deals who are better than Deslauriers, but I doubt there will be many better than Gerber on two-way contracts.  He'd be an excellent third goalie pick.  As such, we've decided to leave Deslauriers unprotected.  If he gets picked up, the developmental focus moves to Devan Dubnyk, and Gerber is still on the farm to cover for Khabibulin (I'm guessing he won't be selected) in case of injury (although Gerber actually has the better EV Sv% of the two since the lockout).

What about the defense?  There wasn't much debate on this one.  We all saw Strudwick play last year, and it's obvious the Oilers (and Souray) would benefit from seeing Sheldon Souray in another town.  If there was value available for him, he'd be traded by now.  The Oilers already tried losing him for nothing once.  For the purposes of the mock draft, it's time to try again.

And that leaves the forwards, where we need to pay close attention to the rules.  Both Liam Reddox and Ben Ondrus need to be protected from selection (they have fifty or more career NHL games played), but neither of them count toward the minimum of two forwards left unprotected (neither played in at least forty games last year or seventy in the last two).  Since the Oilers only have twelve eligible forwards, one of those guys will get protected by default, and hopefully we can all agree that Reddox is the better man.  Sorry, Liam.

That means that there are two more players to leave out in the open.  Thankfully, one of them can be J-F Jacques, whose forty-nine games played last season are, surprisingly, proving useful.  And that's where Horcoff comes in.  Yes, it's true that Shawn Horcoff is a better player than a lot of guys on this roster.  Ryan Jones may be able to draw penalties, but he's not as good at hockey.  Zack Stortini does a good job of standing up for his teammates, but there's no way he helps the team win as much as Horcoff.  Colin Fraser is a very similar player to Horcoff in terms of role and style, he's just much worse at hockey. 

So why would we leave Horcoff unprotected?  There are two reasons, and both are pretty obvious. The first is that contract.  It's just plain terrible.  Horcoff is a good NHL player, but with a cap hit of $5.5M, the gamble is that he'll be one of your three best forwards.  And on a good team, he's probably not.  His offense last season was offensive (and considering the way MacTavish played him against less challenging opposition in 2006-07, in addition to some pretty hefty luck, Horc's offense hasn't been anything special for four straight years), and the underlying numbers that so often buttress his case are starting to show cracks.  His shot rate fell off substantially from a year ago, and his ZoneShift isn't in the range of others doing similar yeoman's work in the Western Conference:

Horcoff_zs_medium

That list has one guy from each team in the West who's doing similar work to Horcoff.  Some teams didn't have a good fit (Brodziak, Conroy, Madden), while others played with some fantastic players (Thornton, Getzlaf, Kopitar).  But what about guys like Samuel Pahlsson, or Jay McClement?  They weren't getting very good help either - and poor Pahlsson has Ethan Moreau this year, which should provide us with a nice comparison - but managed to outperform the $7M-Dollar-Man $5.5M-Dollar-Man.

Was the underperformance this year partly due to injury?  It seems likely, but there has been a disturbing trend toward more of those in the last few years, and it's not something that tends to get better as players age.  And what if some of that underperformance is already because of advancing age?  Let's not forget that Horcoff turns thirty-two in September. 

And that brings us to the second major reason: the success cycle.  The Oilers aren't going to be a good team in the this year, and it may be more of the same in 2011-12.  Losing Horcoff would no doubt make them worse in the short run, but it would have tremendous upside over the long haul.  If the Oilers were prepared to compete this year, it would be more tempting to retain the services of Horcoff and hope he's better at 32 than he was at 31.  But if the Oilers are planning to be successful in three to five years, is betting on Horcoff's 34-36 y/o seasons really a good bet?  I'd say not.  I suppose it's possible he outperforms his contract in those seasons, but it seems a lot more likely that his contract becomes an even bigger liability as players like Sam Gagner, Ales Hemsky, Taylor Hall, Magnus Paajarvi, and others need to be re-signed - that extra $5.5M in cap space would be awfully nice to have.

So what does that mean for our final list?  It means that Horcoff has the indignity of being left unprotected, and if we're honest, probably the indignity of not getting picked too.

 

The final unprotected list - Khabibulin, Deslauriers, Souray, Strudwick, Horcoff, Jacques, Ondrus.

Poll
Should The Copper and Blue protect Shawn Horcoff in the upcoming mock expansion draft?
Yes
71 votes
No
198 votes

269 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 129 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I think you’ll lose Horc. I’ll have to see the full list, but the expansion teams will have trouble making the floor, and they need somebody who will help them win games.

by Hawerchuk on Sep 1, 2010 4:45 PM MDT reply actions  

David Backes and Patrice Bergeron in ’11 !!

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Sep 1, 2010 4:56 PM MDT up reply actions  

I too think we will loose Horc.

Sins can be forgiven but conscience is a killer.

by SumOil on Sep 1, 2010 5:12 PM MDT up reply actions  

I’d be surprised if an expansion team would want a guy with five years left of overpay on his deal, but you want him, that’s good with me. I’d think that Chris Drury (if he’s available) would be a much better pick just because his contract is over sooner.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 1, 2010 7:38 PM MDT up reply actions  

Surly an expansion club could bring in someone that didn’t have have 5 years left on their contract if they wanted to make the floor.

Also, if an expansion club wanted to make the floor why wouldn’t they target teams with cap problems and take on bad contracts for picks/prospects instead of doing Edmonton a gigantic favor for free?

San Jose picked up a first round pick from New Jersey for taking on that Russian that had them over that cap.

Why wouldn’t an expansion team do that instead of picking up the worst contract in hockey for free?

Crazy.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 1:11 PM MDT up reply actions  

I agree that taking on a five-year deal seems odd. The reasons the Oilers would want to move Horc would be the same reasons he’s not a good fit for an expansion club. I also agree that that trades would definitely happen if there was a legit expansion draft, but for the exercise we’ve got going at the site, I don’t think trade considerations are an option.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 6:21 PM MDT up reply actions  

Well stated, Scott. I think we all like Shawn Horcoff the player but are much less enamoured with Shawn Horcoff the contract. Today’s management is almost as much about #2 as #1.

My reasoning for leaving him off involved superposing the Oilers’ real situation on the fantasy one created by the mock draft. If the incoming team wanted a workhorse centre and had the cap room to take him, that would be the signal than 2010-11 is officially a rebuilding season and it’s directly to Plan A: Bottomfeed for the Swede. For sure the short-term Oilers would be a Much worse team without Horcoff than with, much more likely to be a lottery team (last year notwithstanding). Not only is he poorly timed for the success cycle, he’s in the wrong phase of the anti-success, build-through-the-draft cycle. Which I am prepared to tolerate exactly one more year, but we better be using a chunk of that $5.5 mil to pursue a tough minutes centre come July 1. Preferably one at the right age to fit the success cycle.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 1, 2010 4:49 PM MDT reply actions  

Bottomfeed for the Swede.

Is that your own invention? I like it. The only problem is that, in this hypothetical, there’ll be at least two incredibly shitty teams competing with you for that pick.

by Passive Voice on Sep 1, 2010 10:29 PM MDT up reply actions  

That’s the beauty of giving up Horcoff: if he is healthy and capable, he makes those teams good enough to finish above us, giving us more lottery balls!

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.

by Doogie2K on Sep 2, 2010 12:00 AM MDT up reply actions  

I’ve been saying all along our team needs more balls.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 2, 2010 9:06 AM MDT up reply actions   1 recs

Yeah that’s mine. Threw it out there with a ™ a few weeks ago.

Right you are about the hypothetical. The whole process is obviously hypothetical since there isn’t really an expansion draft. It does provide a way for each SBN site to consider the core depth of its own team and is interesting to an extent, but in reality an expansion draft wouldn’t occur in a vacuum … e.g. the Oilers might have signed a Potulny or a Johnson just to provide more flexibility in the “available veterans” dept.

Also in reality, an expansion draft in the cap era would be the ultimate dog’s breakfast of bad players, bad contracts, or both. Can you imagine a new club trying to navigate that minefield? Fugly.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 2, 2010 9:06 AM MDT up reply actions  

would be the ultimate dog’s breakfast of bad players, bad contracts, or both. Can you imagine a new club trying to navigate that minefield? Fugly.

Also known as the Toronto Maple Leafs.

If we don't get our sauce, we ain't watching the game!

by Mike @ MHH on Sep 3, 2010 8:16 AM MDT up reply actions  

yeah, Horcoff is definitely not worth what he is making. Probably would be smart to leave him available in hopes he is taken.

by spekel on Sep 1, 2010 5:18 PM MDT reply actions  

However, if Horcoff is claimed, we are in major shit. We will immediately need to get a tough minute center. Need someone like bergeron!

Sins can be forgiven but conscience is a killer.

by SumOil on Sep 1, 2010 5:46 PM MDT reply actions  

Nah, we tank the season and get one in the summer.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 1, 2010 5:48 PM MDT up reply actions  

Yep, shoring up holes at centre; a hallmark of the post lockout Edmonton Oilers.

by Quain on Sep 1, 2010 5:58 PM MDT up reply actions   1 recs

I’m somewhere between you and Sum. They’d need to get a center, but not a long-term fix. Someone like Brendan Morrison on a one-year deal would be fine until they addressed the problem for real.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 1, 2010 7:43 PM MDT up reply actions  

Bergeron and Backes?

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Sep 1, 2010 8:40 PM MDT up reply actions  

That would be dandy! It’s almost hard to believe that those guys are old enough to be UFAs in a year. A forward group with those two, Hemsky, Penner, and some blue chippers would look awfully nice.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 1, 2010 8:52 PM MDT up reply actions  

Especially bergeron. I have always liked him as a player and a duo of Gagner and Bergeron, though not gr8, is solid in between wingers like Hemsky, hall, MPand eberle!! If ven 2 of the 3 wingers in our organisation achieve their potential, then it will be hard to obtain all star centers anyways!

Do you think we should try to offer sheet James Neal for 3 million?

Sins can be forgiven but conscience is a killer.

by SumOil on Sep 1, 2010 9:39 PM MDT up reply actions  

i forgot to mention this earlier, but hands off backes. Gillis has had him earmarked as the bigger-meaner-americaner third Sedin since 2008.

by Passive Voice on Sep 2, 2010 1:40 AM MDT up reply actions  

although a team employing both Dustin Penner and David Backes would be hard to cheer against. almost as hard as it would be to play against.

by Passive Voice on Sep 2, 2010 1:42 AM MDT up reply actions  

Running Penner – Backes together on the same line with Eberle makes it certain that Eberle would have a much easier time adapting to NHL life and producing immediately.

Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.

by Derek Zona on Sep 2, 2010 9:40 AM MDT up reply actions  

“However, if Horcoff is claimed, we are in major shit. We will immediately need to get a tough minute center. "

Guys like Moore are bring signed for 1.2 million. Shouldn’t be hard to replace Horcoff.

But in reality we don’t need a tough minute center.. we need a center that makes the other team play tough minutes. Horcoff has never done that in his career.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 1:17 PM MDT up reply actions  

And the difference is what exactly?

In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!

by dawgbone98 on Sep 2, 2010 1:54 PM MDT up reply actions  

What’s the difference between 5v4 and 4v5?

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 2:27 PM MDT up reply actions  

One consequence of all this is that any writer who voted to expose Horcoff is not entitled to whine about the lack of Oiler lifers for the rest of the season.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 1, 2010 5:46 PM MDT reply actions  

Ales Hemsky. UNTIL WE TRADE HIM.

by Benjamin Massey on Sep 1, 2010 6:30 PM MDT up reply actions  

My first thought when reading this piece is Ben will ensure you all sleep with one eye open.

by till_horcoff_is_coach on Sep 1, 2010 9:49 PM MDT up reply actions  

Although at you have some serenity in that you didn’t attempt to protect JFJ… I believe the term used in the papers would be “Mock Draft ends in Bloody Rampage”.

by till_horcoff_is_coach on Sep 1, 2010 9:56 PM MDT up reply actions  

I like Horcoff well enough as a player, but I’m not overloaded with affection for him. I know, a two-way forward who’s good in the playoffs and in the room is definitely my sort of guy, but while I’d hate to see Horcoff go (and voted to protect him as my last forward, if I recall), Derek’s logic is pretty good.

If JFJ had been protected, though, yeah it would have been Lawnmower Man in here.

by Benjamin Massey on Sep 1, 2010 10:04 PM MDT up reply actions  

It says a lot about the state of the Oilers that I agree with your decisions, and yet there’s at least one protected player (Vandermeer) who I’d be willing to give up for free.

by sarcasticidealist on Sep 1, 2010 7:21 PM MDT reply actions  

Yeah, I was tempted to expose VDM and protect Struds, just on $$$ grounds.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 1, 2010 8:32 PM MDT up reply actions  

But then we’d never be fucking rid of him! He’d keep getting one-year deals until he became the Ghost of Northlands Coliseum, haunting the Oil Kings well after the Oilers had moved on to a new Batcave.

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.

by Doogie2K on Sep 2, 2010 12:02 AM MDT up reply actions  

I know I was (and am) in favour of this move, but it just feels wrong.

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Sep 1, 2010 11:17 PM MDT reply actions  

As wrong as leaving your captain unprotected? Cuz that’s what we did…

If we don't get our sauce, we ain't watching the game!

by Mike @ MHH on Sep 2, 2010 8:10 AM MDT up reply actions  

Well so did we, in real life. “Lost” him on waivers.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 2, 2010 9:10 AM MDT up reply actions  

I know I was (and am) in favour of this move, but it just feels wrong.

That’s because it so clearly weakens the team on the ice. Without cap and contract concerns this guy would be among your core forwards without a smidgen of a doubt. But in this age if you can dump a contract you can then use the money to chase another player who might be a better fit age-wise if nothing else (Bergeron and Backes being two solid examples). Sure UFA season is a year off, but this year is not looking too promising anyway. There are also opportunities that will spring up during the season to acquire guys who might fit if you have the cap space available.
The most frustrating thing about the Oil of the past couple years is the combination of cap team/crap team. Hard to rebuild when your up to your ears in cap hit.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 2, 2010 9:18 AM MDT up reply actions  

Shawn Horcoff has the worst contract in hockey. The only player close is Wade Redden.

No team would ever claim Shawn Horcoff, especially rebuilding franchise like an expansion club.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 1:01 PM MDT reply actions  

Interesting that you went with Redden (my own choice for the nomination) when his teammate Chris Drury is perhaps the best contract/role comparable for Horcoff in the league.

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Sep 2, 2010 1:43 PM MDT up reply actions  

The recent article from puck prospectus has Souray the worst (at least in Goals Versus Salary terms). In the non-injured department, Redden wins. Drury was 5th worst, Gomez 7th, Horcoff 9th.

I love our GM.

Camp Torturella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
Blueshirt Banter - "ARISTH"-Assuming Redden is sent to Hartford
Twitter: RangerSmurf

by George E. Ays on Sep 2, 2010 2:01 PM MDT up reply actions  

Where’s Khabibulin rank? Or is he on the “injured” dept., or the “physically unable to perform” list? I don’t buy that Horcoff is the worst contract on the Oilers, let alone the league.

That said, there are reasons all three of Khabibulin, Souray, and Horcoff were left unprotected by C&B’s (on?) crack writing team. A major one is that we didn’t think the expansion teams would likely bite on any of them, allowing us to protect younger, cheaper players in the limited spots available. For the most part we tried to protect the 15 best contracts, not the 15 best players.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 2, 2010 3:01 PM MDT up reply actions  

I’ve got to agree with Bruce here. Khabibulin’s deal is definitely worse than Horcoff’s.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 6:23 PM MDT up reply actions  

I see your Horcoff and raise you Tom Preissing.

If we don't get our sauce, we ain't watching the game!

by Mike @ MHH on Sep 3, 2010 8:17 AM MDT up reply actions  

I also don’t think this team would be worse if Horcoff was claimed.

Sure he’s better than some of our 4th liners and couple of our 3rd liners but that’s not going to be where he plays.

He’s not competing for a job against JFJ or Stortini he competing against guys like Sam Gagner.

Maybe Gagner can’t shut down the opposition like David Bolland but neither can Horcoff unless he plays with Hemsky and Penner and it’s because those guys play the game in the other zone, not because of Horcoff’s defensive greatness.

The difference is guys like Gagner can actually create plays for themselves while Horcoff needs Hemsky to put food in his mouth or he starves to death offensively. He’s batting 4th in the order and has the worst power on the team. We might be able to use him 7th or 8th in the order but if we lose him from 1-4 it’s not going to hurt this club at all.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 1:27 PM MDT reply actions  

There’s a case to be made for that at even-strength, but I’m not sure how you can say Horcoff’s a negative on, say, the penalty kill.

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Sep 2, 2010 1:46 PM MDT up reply actions  

I’m very confident that the Oilers would be worse if Horcoff was claimed. If Horcoff is, as you concede, able to handle tough minutes with Penner and Hemsky, Gagner will have softer minutes, and should be able to take advantage, at least to some extent. That said, I doubt Horcoff gets put between Hemsky and Penner this year; it would leave the rest of the roster far too exposed. And if the vets are broken up onto (at least) two lines, it’s hard to see how losing Horcoff is beneficial. Whenever you lose a good hockey player, your team is inevitably going to be worse.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 6:28 PM MDT up reply actions  

Max Talbot – 2.62 goals against per 60 – makes 1.050M

Daniel Winnick – 2.63 goals against per 60 – makes 600k

Scott Nichol – 4.09 goals against per 60 – makes 750k

Shawn Horcoff – 6.26 goals against per 60 – makes 5.5M

There’s a difference between playing on the PK and killing a penalty.

It’s been ages since Horcoff could kill a penalty and even if he ever gets to the level of a guy like Winnick he makes close to 1000% more money than him.

The guy is dead weight any way you slice it.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 2:03 PM MDT reply actions  

SV%‘s for those PKer’s
Talbot .934 Winnick .951 Nichol .917 Horcoff .889

Not that it obscures your basic point that Horcoff is overpaid, but that group would look worse if they had the 09-10 Oilers’ goaltending situation.

Camp Torturella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
Blueshirt Banter - "ARISTH"-Assuming Redden is sent to Hartford
Twitter: RangerSmurf

by George E. Ays on Sep 2, 2010 2:13 PM MDT up reply actions  

Yeah, and if those numbers were at all sustainable that would be fantastic, but they aren’t.

And you are equating penalty killing with 1 player, and you are either being dishonest or you are an idiot.

In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!

by dawgbone98 on Sep 2, 2010 3:57 PM MDT up reply actions  

76 forwards played 2+ minutes per game on the pk and 30+ plus games.

46 players were better than Horcoff.

In 2008/2009 91 forwards played 2+ minutes per game on the PK and 30+ games

78 of those 91 players had better rates than Horcoff.

The only people being dishonest is those who suggest losing Horcoff on the PK would hurt the club. At very best he’s an average level PKer. You can find those for 500k-1M.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 4:38 PM MDT up reply actions  

Frankly, the individual PK rankings for each player is so dependant on team performance that I have trouble with them. Toss in the fact that even two minutes per night for 80 games is the equivalent minutes of 10 minutes per game for 16 games at even-strength, and all sorts of sample issues creep in.

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Sep 2, 2010 5:26 PM MDT up reply actions  

The only people being dishonest is those who suggest losing Horcoff on the PK would hurt the club.

If he wasn’t replaced, he would. And Tambellini’s shown no inclination to hire experienced penalty killers at any point during his tenure.

It’s a side point really, since team performance next year is almost irrelevant anyway, and I’m still in favour of exposing Horcoff (and have been since the question first came up, for a variety of reasons) but I don’t think we’ll be able to agree that Horcoff is an average to below average penalty killer, based on his track record.

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Sep 2, 2010 5:28 PM MDT up reply actions  

We wouldn’t need to replace him with an experienced PKer, just someone that can fill the minutes. Strudwick is experience but there’s a difference between having experience and being good at something. Ryan Jones or Liam Reddox could likely give them team average level penalty killer.

At the end of the day the difference would be minimal and certainly not wotth the 4-5M dollar extra price tag.

Same thing goes on the PP.

Horcoff had only a 2.80 ppg on the PP last year.

To put things in perspective Hemsky was 2.8 at 5X5 last year and Penner was 2.4.

The guy doesn’t do anything.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 5:42 PM MDT up reply actions  

So let me get this straight.

Do Talbot and Winnick post those rates playing for the Oilers last year?

You continue to equate the penalty killing to just one player and if you are doing that you are either being dishonest or an idiot.

It’s not an accident that when Horcoff plays with good players and there are quality centres behind him in he lineup, he plays better. That’s not rocket science. The fact of the matter is, he was good enough to be the primary option at C for a team that went to game 7 of the cup finals.

If you aren’t going to put some depth behind him, you better give him quality players to play with. If you don’t, you are running a guy ragged and not giving him anyone to play with.

In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!

by dawgbone98 on Sep 2, 2010 6:58 PM MDT up reply actions  

In fairness, that run to the finals is now four years in the rear-view mirror and several surgeries ago. I’m very confident that 27 y/o Horcoff circa 2005-06 >>> 32 y/o Horcoff circa 2010-11 and beyond.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 7:02 PM MDT up reply actions  

I don’t disagree.

Doesn’t mean he still isn’t good enough to be the #2 C on a team that goes to the SC finals as a 33 year old ;)

In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!

by dawgbone98 on Sep 3, 2010 7:49 AM MDT up reply actions  

I’m curious what you think these numbers mean. I note that Talbot and Winnik led the league by your parameters in 2009-10. Would you say that they were the two best penalty killers in the NHL last year? If so, why is Talbot only middle of the pack in 2008-09 (6.55 GAON/60)? Did he just play that much better in 2009-10? And what about the leader in 2008-09, Jarret Stoll (2.18 GA/60)? Why were his numbers so much worse (6.92 GA/60) with the Oilers in 2007-08? Is this, again, just Stoll playing better? If not, what other factors do you think we need to take into consideration when evaluating how good an individual player is on the PK?

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 7:12 PM MDT up reply actions  

Scott::

The numbers imply that a successful PK is a byproduct of a system and good fortune and has less to do with the actual skill of the penalty killers.

But this pretty much just strengthens my original point: Why pay more than 500k-1M for a PKer?

Is there any evidence at all that Horcoff is a better PKer for 5.5M than the average PKer?

I already know the answer.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 8:09 PM MDT up reply actions  

I hear what you’re saying here. The market doesn’t seem to pay much for PK skill, likely because it’s very difficult to measure. The only evidence we have that Horcoff is better than average on the PK is that he’s been used on the PK for a long time, and that he’s generally been better than average on draws, which would provide some marginal value on the PK over the course of a season. On the other hand, he’s been middle of the pack on the Oilers for the last three years in terms of SA/60 (which I prefer to GA/60 to increase sample size). Staples’ error stuff is pretty inconclusive; Horcoff apparently looked awful to him in 2008-09, but was one of the best on the team in 2009-10 by that metric, which probably points to the luck factor again. At any rate, whether he’s a bit below average, or a bit above average, I agree that there’s no compelling reason to think that he’s providing a bunch of surplus value against replacement in that area.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 8:24 PM MDT up reply actions  

JDD overall save% .905
Fleury overall save% .901

Perhaps the difference 4v5 is Pittsburgh has players that can PK while Edmonton just has players that play on the PK.

In 2008/2009 Shawn Horcoff had a 8.45 goals against per 60 on the PK… that’s close to pathetic.

Losing Horcoff from the PK would be a minimal loss. Especially when you can replace him on the PK for 500k.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 2:25 PM MDT reply actions  

I think you have those numbers backwards.

JDD’s overall sv% was .901 and Fleury’s was .905. Not sure what exactly that has to do with the PK though.

In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!

by dawgbone98 on Sep 2, 2010 3:53 PM MDT up reply actions  

The top 3 PKers on Pit (in minutes):

Staal (.877 sv%), Adams (.884), Cooke (.873)

Top 3 on Edm:

Pisani (.901), Moreau (.899), Horcoff (.889)

So was Talbot just a machine that negated the badness of Fleury, or is it more likely that the 100 minutes Talbot got were too small a sample to filter out luck?

Camp Torturella - Where Vomit is a Mainstay
Blueshirt Banter - "ARISTH"-Assuming Redden is sent to Hartford
Twitter: RangerSmurf

by George E. Ays on Sep 2, 2010 8:53 PM MDT up reply actions  

I can name 46 players that were better on the PK than Horcoff this year and 78 players that were better than Horcoff in 2008/2009.

It’s not just Talbot.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 9:08 PM MDT up reply actions  

The numbers imply that a successful PK is a byproduct of a system and good fortune and has less to do with the actual skill of the penalty killers.
I can name 46 players that were better on the PK than Horcoff this year and 78 players that were better than Horcoff in 2008/2009.

How do those two comments work together? If you think the numbers are mostly indicative of system and good fortune, then you can’t name 46 players that were better last year and 78 who were better in 2008-09. You can’t have it both ways.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 9:20 PM MDT up reply actions  

I don’t see anything contradictory here.

Willis believes that Horcoff is an above average PKer.

The numbers I posted show that Horcoff has had poor rates for consecutive years (not just with JDD in goal).

There could be a number reasons as to why Horcoff hasn’t performed on the PK the for ages but the fact is there is no evidence that Horcoff is an above average level PKer.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 9:43 PM MDT up reply actions  

It’s just those two statements that I find contradictory. It has nothing to do with Willis’ opinion on whether Horcoff is above-average. The idea that you can, with confidence, “name 46 players that were better on the PK than Horcoff this year” using a statistic that “impl[ies] that a successful PK is a byproduct of a system and good fortune and has less to do with the actual skill of the penalty killers” doesn’t make any sense. If the stats you’re using don’t tell us who the good penalty killers are, then you can’t use them to name the good penalty killers.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 9:59 PM MDT up reply actions  

I guess that’s the problem when you take snippets from a conversion with someone else.

You should note I said I could name 46 players that were better on the PK last year, not 46 players that are better penalty killers.

The Ranger fan didn’t like me naming Talbot as someone who had success on the PK because of his sv%.

That’s fine. Toss him out. But there are still 45 players that had better numbers on the PK this year and 78 players that had better numbers than Horcoff last year.

There’s no evidence that Horcoff is an above average PKer, and that’s to Willis’ point.

If you say that Willi’s opinion doesn’t matter or the Ranger fans opinion doesn’t matter then don’t use quotes from my that were directed at them.

And if that’s not good enough for you I will just stick with Horcoff flat out sucks

- horrible 5×5 numbers
- horrible 5×4 numbers
- unsuccessful pk numbers
- doesn’t hit
- can’t win draws anymore

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 1:03 AM MDT up reply actions  

You should note I said I could name 46 players that were better on the PK last year, not 46 players that are better penalty killers.

But that just rolls back to the same question I raised earlier. Does having a better GA/60 really make them better penalty killers? Personally, I very much doubt that Max Talbot and Daniel Winnik were the two best penalty killers in the league last season. If there are other relevant factors, then let’s bring those out. Maybe Horcoff looks better when those are factored in, maybe he looks worse. My point is that it’s inconsistent to tell one person that GA/60 results are the “byproduct of a system and good fortune and ha[ve] less to do with the actual skill of the penalty killers,” and then use GA/60 as the only criteria for evidence of “who’s better” when talking to another person. If you think it’s more luck than skill, why are you pretending that it’s indicative of who’s the best when you’re talking to Willis or the Ranger fan? To me, that’s the reason their opinions aren’t relevant to the question I’m asking. I’m not asking, “Is Horcoff a good penalty killer?” (I think he’s somewhere in the mushy middle) I’m asking “What do we need to know to determine if Player X is a good penalty killer?” So far, I don’t think you’ve answered that. Instead, you’ve told me one thing when discussing method, and then disregarded that discussion when talking about a specific individual (Horcoff) with others. So, no, that’s good enough. You need to be consistent.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 3, 2010 3:13 AM MDT up reply actions   1 recs

I think you are missing the point on a number of levels.

I was told that Horcoff is an above average PKer. I showed evidence that he wasn’t.

Basically what you are arguing now is that if a player had a 10.5 goals against per 60 on the PK and another player had a 2.5 goals against per 60 that you can’t say that the player that has the 2.5 was better whicih is about as dumb as saying Horcoff is “worth” 2.5 million yet Bulin is somehow worth negative 1.5 million. Talk about pulling numbers out of your ass.

Please tell me which goalie you are going to sign for 500k that had 80 wins the past 4 seasons.

Mike Comrie just signed for 500k and he’s a much more accomplished player than Horcoff.

Also, just because I said the numbers imply something doesn’t mean that I believe it. Perhaps I’m just giving all angles a fair shot. Horcoff’s -20 this year imply that he is a horrible 5×5 player. I’m sure not everyone would agree with that.

If Shawn Horcoff was an above average PKer he would have above average numbers in relation to his teammates. This year the the useless Ethan Moreau and the ill Pisani both had better numbers. Last year Horcoff had the worst numbers on the entire team!

I’m not sure how you determine if a player is an above average PKer but I think it’s clear when someone isn’t getting the job done. Horcoff hasn’t for some time.

Horcoff is 3rd line plumber and has the worst contract in the league. You want consistency.. that’s something I’ve never wavered on.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 11:13 AM MDT up reply actions  

Basically what you are arguing now is that if a player had a 10.5 goals against per 60 on the PK and another player had a 2.5 goals against per 60 that you can’t say that the player that has the 2.5 was better

That’s not exactly what I’m saying. I’m saying that those numbers don’t tell the whole story, and that if we’re going to talk about who’s better and by how much, we shouldn’t be using one statistic to do it. Let’s add some context to those numbers. If the GA/60 numbers measure a system as much as individuals, maybe we compare an individual’s performance within that system to other individuals within that system, i.e., how does the player perform relative to his teammates? If sample size is an issue, maybe we should be using SA/60 instead of GA/60. Things like that. It’s not that GA/60 is completely useless, it’s just that you’re using it in isolation to talk about “who’s better” after admitting that it doesn’t really tell us that when used in isolation. One might also consider controlling for save percentage, at least somewhat.

Please tell me which goalie you are going to sign for 500k that had 80 wins the past 4 seasons.

I probably wouldn’t. But then, I don’t think that “wins” tell us much about how good a given goaltender is.

Also, just because I said the numbers imply something doesn’t mean that I believe it.

Then why say it in response to “I’m curious what you think these numbers mean”? I didn’t ask what they might mean to some imaginary person. I asked what you thought they meant. If your first answer was an attempt to avoid the question (which is ridiculous), I’ll ask it again. What do you think the results over three years imply? That Talbot was the best penalty killer in the NHL last year? That Stoll was the best in 2008-09, but marginal in 2007-08? What do you think? If you’re “not sure how to determine if a player is an above average PKer,” perhaps you shouldn’t say things like “I can name 46 players that were better on the PK than Horcoff this year and 78 players that were better than Horcoff in 2008/2009.”

and has the worst contract in the league

Worst contract on the Oilers? Maybe. I can see an argument for that. But worst in the league? Preposterous. There’s just no way anyone in the league can compete with Rick DiPietro.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 3, 2010 1:39 PM MDT up reply actions  

I guess that’s the problem when you take snippets from a conversion with someone else.

You should note I said I could name 46 players that were better on the PK last year, not 46 players that are better penalty killers.

Distinction without a difference.

Either the numbers mean Player A is a better penalty-killer than Player B or they don’t. Make your choice.

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.

by Doogie2K on Sep 3, 2010 11:28 AM MDT up reply actions  

I think it’s safe to say that a player with the best PK numbers i n the league did a better job than the player with the worst PK numbers in the league.

The closer you get to the middle the less accurate it will be.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 11:32 AM MDT up reply actions  

I tend to think the numbers at the extremes are less accurate in and of themselves, because the percentages are usually buggered to hell and back. That being said, I do agree that in the middle, there’s not much to differentiate Player 30 from Player 40 without getting more granular than we have the resolution to reliably measure.

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.

by Doogie2K on Sep 3, 2010 9:10 PM MDT up reply actions  

Khabibulin has 11.25 left on his contract and 3.75 cap hit for 3 more years.

Horcoff has 26 million left on his contract and a 5.5 cap hit for 5 more years.

Horcoff is owed close to 15 million more dollars than Khabibulin.

Your my favorite blogger Bruce but you’re totally out to lunch.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 3:37 PM MDT reply actions  

We’ll be lucky if we get 100GP out of that contract.

In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!

by dawgbone98 on Sep 2, 2010 3:58 PM MDT up reply actions  

Horcoff is just as injury prone as Khabibulin. I’ve been hearing about his wonky shoulder for 4 years now. Mr Faceoff couldn’t even crack 50% on the draws last year.

Horcoff makes 15 million more than Khabibulin.
Horcoff’s horrible cap hit stays on 2 years longer than Khabibulin.

It’s not even close.

Khabibulin also had the potential of going back to Russia which would save the owner even more real money.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 4:54 PM MDT up reply actions  

Horcoff is just as injury prone as Khabibulin.

I suppose the difference is that Horcoff continues playing, albeit ineffectively this year. Horcoff’s also significantly younger, and while I am worried about his injury situation, it’s hyperbole to suggest his problems compare with Khabibulin’s seemingly chronic issues.

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Sep 2, 2010 5:30 PM MDT up reply actions  

You are calling hyperbole on me?

Your calling Khabibulin’s injury’s “seemingly chronic” yet call it hyperbole to compare someone who hasn’t had a healthy shoulder for the past 4 seasons.

Go look on lowetide’s re: Horcoff during 2006/2007.. it’s all about his wonky shoulder. That’s the reason he was -22.

Then the next year he injures his shoulder in the all-star game but Horcoff tells everyone that it was injured before that.

Then last year his numbers are bad because he’s just coming back from shoulder surgery. “The same thing happened to Souray.. give it time” I was told.

Then this year he injures his shoulder again when Sutton hit him around game 20.

Horcoff’s shoulder wasn’t even good enough to take draws last year. Penner had to take a ton for me.

How is Bulin’s injuries chronic but Horcoff’s aren’t?

Horcoff may be younger but goalies have a better history of playing into their later years.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 5:51 PM MDT up reply actions  

I may be wrong about this, but I thought it wasn’t the same shoulder each time. Do you know for sure either way Traktor?

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 6:34 PM MDT up reply actions  

I’m not 100% certain on which shoulder it was that kept getting hurt.

But there is also many different muscles in the back so while he Bulin may have injured his back on more than one occasion they injuries could be unrelated and not the chronic injury that Johnathan implies.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 6:56 PM MDT up reply actions  

For sure, I was just curious if you knew. It would be a good thing to keep tabs on.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 6:58 PM MDT up reply actions  

Fair point. The lower/upper body nomenclature makes it difficult to be sure, which is why I said “seemingly” chronic.

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Sep 2, 2010 7:10 PM MDT up reply actions  

Khabibulin is already in his later years, at the extreme end of them.

In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!

by dawgbone98 on Sep 2, 2010 6:54 PM MDT up reply actions  

On my “hyperbole” comment, I made it because I don’t think it’s accurate to compare the 31-year old forward who has missed 41 games since the lockout with the 37-year old goaltender who has missed 127 games in the same time span.

You may disagree but I don’t see the comparison.

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Sep 2, 2010 7:12 PM MDT up reply actions  

Bulin played 60 games, 50 games and 42 games the 3 previous seasons.

In 2006/2007 Bulin had the 14th most starts in the league.

In 2007/2008 Bulin had the 23rd most starts in the league.

In 2008/2009 Bulin had the 27th most starts in the league.

How many of the127 games that he missed were because of injury or because he was resting or giving way to Huet? Looks like he is still getting an average workload. I admit the trend is scary though.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 7:26 PM MDT up reply actions  

Those 127 games were only games he was listed as hurt for (info via tsn.ca).

A posse ad esse.

The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!

Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca

by Jonathan Willis on Sep 2, 2010 7:34 PM MDT up reply actions  

At this point in his career, I’d compare Horcoff to players like Sammy Pahlsson and Manny Malhotra, who seem to be worth about $2.5M on the open market. I don’t know if you feel that valuation is too high, but it seems pretty reasonable to me (I’m sure some others would say he’s worth more than that). That means, for this season, he’s worth $3M less than his cap hit. Now, it’s my opinion that NK is about replacement level when he plays, which means that he’s worth about $3.25M less than his cap hit. If he falls below replacement level over these next three seasons, which I think is likely, and the Oilers continue playing him (also likely), he’ll be significantly more costly (unless the Oilers are tanking). The other thing that makes NK’s contract so bad is the 35+ rules, but relative to Horcoff it’s not as big a consideration since Horcoff has a NMC for the next three seasons, which makes the situation similar at least during that time-frame. I had actually forgotten about that NMC in my comments above, but I still think NK edges out Horc. The two deals are both really terrible though.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 6:56 PM MDT up reply actions  

dogbone said: "It’s not an accident that when Horcoff plays with good players and there are quality centres behind him in he lineup, he plays better. That’s not rocket science. "

And it’s no accident that when you take away players like Hemsky that Horcoff struggles to produce offensively and will compete for the Green Jacket (two years in the last 4 he has finished -20 or worse).

Cogs had 14 points in 18 games when he got to play with Penner at the end of the year too.

So what’s the excuse when Horcoff can only manage a pathetic 2.8 ppg on the PP last year? Was that an accident?

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 7:10 PM MDT up reply actions  

Did this end up in the wrong spot, or is it a reply to what I have above?

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 7:13 PM MDT up reply actions  

I guess it was in the wrong place.

To your above comment…. i mean this in the nicest way possible but I think you’re pretty far off base.

The difference in value between Horcoff and Bulin is as big as the difference in a 1st and 7th round pick.

Horcoff is owed close to 15 million dollars more than Bulin and his cap stays on 3 years longer.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 7:42 PM MDT up reply actions  

2 years longer I mean.

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 7:43 PM MDT up reply actions  

The difference in value between Horcoff and Bulin is as big as the difference in a 1st and 7th round pick.

This is an odd comment in that the value of draft picks varies widely depending on the quality of the draft, and the value of a first round pick varies widely depending on where in the first round its found. As such, I’m guessing you just mean that the difference is “big” based exclusively on the money owing and the term.

Although I do think those are both important considerations, I think that the amount the player is expected to underperform his cap number is more relevant. If Horcoff’s average value over the next five years is $2.5M, that leaves a difference of $15M against the cap. And that’s awful, no doubt. However, I think NK’s average performance will be below replacement level over the next three years, and if NK averages -1.5M in value over the next three years (i.e. costing the Oilers a bit less than one win against replacement), that’s a difference of $15.75M against the cap. Perhaps you disagree with those projections, but they don’t strike me as being completely ridiculous.

Do you think there’s a problem with the methodology used here, or would you use different valuations? If it’s the latter, what would you use?

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 8:09 PM MDT up reply actions  

Your my favorite blogger Bruce but you’re totally out to lunch.

Why thank you Traktor, what a nice compliment!

Scott said pretty much what I was going to say, other than I don’t quite agree that Khabibulin is just a replacement-level goalie. That’s a bit harsh. But the difference between their contracts is one of degree: an overpaid centre can still contribute at 2C or even 3C. What sucks about the Khabibulin contract is that it completely hamstrings the team at a pretty important position for several years. A back-up goalie isn’t worth any $3.75 MM, and a guy on IR or in jail is is worth less than that. Negative value just for the confusion. Then there’s the >35 clause that means Khabibulin could retire tomorrow and join a Buddhist monastery to reform his evil ways and Oilers would be stuck with his cap hit for 3 years. I don’t see where calling Khabi’s contract even worse than Horcoff’s is being particularly complimentary to either Horcoff or Oilers management.

The Horcoff contract is Bad – I have said that repeatedly – but the player is good. Not good enough to carry the likes of JFJ and POS around for months on end while trying to slow down the opposition’s finest, but good. Like most good players he fits best on a line with other good players – surprise! – and he’s been the best fit for Hemsky for quite some time.

Vic’s pairings tool wasn’t active in ‘07-08, but for sure Hemsky got the Minus Touch after Horcoff went down. (+4 before the All-Star Break, -13 after.) In ’08-09 Hemsky was +35/-22 when playing with Horcoff, +8/-15 with everybody else; +50 on the shot clock with Horc, -36 with everybody else. In his abbreviated 2009-10 Hemsky was +9/-6 with Horcoff, +7/-2 without (riding a .970 Sv% ON in that second situation), but again Ales was an outshooter with Shawn at +10, and an outshootee without him (-9).

So it’s not just a one-way street that Hemsky was carrying Horcoff, as you seem to imply. It’s like you don’t credit that even a tiny bit.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 3, 2010 2:01 PM MDT up reply actions  

Horcoff was – 20 something last year. Couldn’t stop a thing 4×5. His PP numbers were pathetic and he was a black hole offensively and defensively 5×5.

Please tell me how Horcoff is “contributing”. Doesn’t hit, can’t win draws, can’t play special teams and was murdered 5v5.

His season last year is equivalent to a goaltender with a .800 save%

And that’s being generous.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 2:14 PM MDT up reply actions  

can’t win draws

In 2008-09 Horcoff took, and won, more draws than any other player in the league.

C’mon Traktor, it’s like you’ve taken a Sharpie to Horcoff’s statistical record and blacked out everything you don’t like (the stuff what I would call “good”). If you’re prepared to judge the guy’s entire future on the black hole that was the Oilers in 2009-10 then you simply think differently about the game than I do. He had back to back excellent seasons before that, and this Oiler fan is hoping he’ll return to that form. What are you hoping for? That he sucks, so you can go around saying I told you so nyah nyah nyah? Maybe HF Boards is the place for you, after all.

Seriously I don’t believe that, I enjoy your contrariness which is often useful to a conversation. But, your apparent characterization of Shawn Horcoff as 100% Bad undermines your credibility.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 3, 2010 2:28 PM MDT up reply actions  

Very interesting comment.

We know that Horcoff couldn’t win draws last year but apparently it doesn’t matter because he has in the past.

Yet all of NK’s previous accomplishments don’t matter as you and Scott are putting all your marbles into NK’s season last year. Now he’s just a ineffective backup that has negative value.

Can you say hypocrite?

And you didn’t answer my previous question (probably because you can’t): tell me how Shawn Horcoff “contributed” last year. From what I can tell he “contributed” in the same fashion you or I would if we suited up for Oilers.

And despite what you think I’m not interested in “I told you so”. I would think that ship has sailed anyways considering you and your posse use to label Horcoff as a top 15-20 center in the NHL..

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 2:43 PM MDT up reply actions  

Of course I consider Khabibulin’s previous accomplishments also. I said immediately above that he’s considerably better than a replacement level goalie. When healthy and out of jail. If he’s both of those things for two out of the next three years we’ll salvage some value from that contract. At the same time, I’m not sure I value past performance as much in a 37-year-old as I do in a 31-year-old. And I’m surely biased by having seen Horcoff make his positive contributions to the Oilers … Khabibulin not so much. He’s brought us nothing but grief to date.

What value did any player deliver the Oilers last year? They finished DFL. Horcoff’s performance was similar to Brind’Amour’s; veteran presence on a bad team with insufficient depth and goaltending, facing way superior QualComp than QualTeam. Guys like that get murdered on bad teams, frequently. He did get murdered. Had a decent finish (22 GP, 4-12-16, +4) but his stats were so subterranean by then there was no salvaging them.

Can’t speak for my “posse” – say what? – but I think I may have made a case for Horcoff to be in the top 30 centres in the league, not so much top 15. Meaning that he can be the best we’ve got and still not be good enough – by my simple equation you want somebody in the top half of the league at whatever roster position. But by my math that means we have to upgrade practically our entire roster. To just single out one guy and harp harp harp on him like that’s the full extent of our problems is a little over the top IMO.

I do anticpate Horcoff will bounce back in ‘10-11, including on the dot, and if he doesn’t, we’re likely fucked. I’ll talk to you again about that contract in six months.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 3, 2010 3:24 PM MDT up reply actions  

Interesting that you equate Horcoff’s season last year with Brind’Amour’s as Brind’Amour retired shortly after the season.

Also interesting that you put more faith into a 31 year old than you do a 37 year old and then go ahead and compare Horcoff to the 39 year old Brind’Amour.

The fact that Horcoff replicated Brind’Amour’s season despite being close to a decade younger should be a serious concern for the team.

I don’t see Horcoff bouncing back for a number of reasons but for if nothing else because he is no longer the best option.

I’ll be surprised if he gets much PP time, if any.

He might improve on his draws but I guess that’s going to depend on his shoulder. As far as I know he hasn’t had any surgery on his shoulder this year so unless he just needed time away from the game I’m not sure how it’s going to be dramatically better,

Talk to you in 6 months.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 4:05 PM MDT up reply actions  

Sorry, that was off the top of my head. Fair point about age.

But I think we’re talked out here. Let’s see what happens in the upcoming season, or at least, the first part of it.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 3, 2010 4:15 PM MDT up reply actions  

Always a pleasure Bruce.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 4:33 PM MDT up reply actions  

Yet all of NK’s previous accomplishments don’t matter as you and Scott are putting all your marbles into NK’s season last year.

At least in my case, this isn’t true at all. The three main reasons I’m pessimistic about NK are because (1) he has had many injuries over the last several seasons, (2) his EV Sv% since the lockout is .904, significantly below average (about .917), and worse than the recently signed Martin Gerber (.906), and (3) he’s very old for a goaltender – the list of goalies to play in at least 25 games at 37 or older since 1994-95 (Lockout 1) is not long, and many of those who do grossly underperform what they did earlier in their careers. Khabibuliln’s performance last season wasn’t particularly encouraging, but it’s not one of the main reasons that I’m pessimistic going forward.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 3, 2010 4:55 PM MDT up reply actions  

The list you provided had 13 goaltenders

The combined W/L record of those 13 goaltenders 561 – 498

Not exactly strong evidence against NK.

It’s also unfair to compare NK save% before and after the lockout because the no-clutch era will obviously provide greater scoring chances.

He’s not the goaltender that he was when he won a cup but some of that drop from .917 to .904 is most likely due to rules changes.

In 2003/2004 there were FOUR goaltenders that had a .930sv or better

In 2005/2006, the year after the lockout, there were ZERO goalies with a save% of .930 or better.

In 2003/3004 there were SEVENTEEN goalies with a sv % of .915 or greater.

In 2005/2006 there were only EIGHT golaies with a sv% of .915 or greater.

Why is that? Did all the goalies just all the sudden just start sucking or did the rule changes have something to do with goalies drop in sv%

You really haven’t provided any evidence that NK has negative 1.5 value.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 6:33 PM MDT up reply actions  

2005-06 was an anomaly, largely caused by an extreme overreaction by the league to call a million penalties. Since Scott is looking at EV Sv% that shouldn’t be a factor.

For sure, “since the lockout” should not be characterized by 2005-06 alone, there was an enormous bounceback towards high Sv% after that. Here are league Sv% for the 10 seasons 1998-2009:

1998-99 0.908
1999-00 0.904
2000-01 0.903
2001-02 0.908
2002-03 0.909
2003-04 0.911
2005-06 0.901
2006-07 0.905
2007-08 0.909
2008-09 0.908

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 3, 2010 7:12 PM MDT up reply actions  

“2005-06 was an anomaly, largely caused by an extreme overreaction by the league to call a million penalties.”

I’ll remember that the next time we’re discussing Horcoff’s 2005-06 season that say many use as evidence of 10’s greatness.

Talk to you in 6 months.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 9:03 PM MDT up reply actions  

See comment above about PPs affecting Sv%.

Note, in 2005-06, Horcoff was first on the Oilers in even-strength scoring, 8 points ahead of Hemsky. Meanwhile, he was a distant 5th in PP scoring, 18 behind Hemsky and Pronger. So it wouldn’t seem that his “career year” was overly predicated on PP production.

That said, I could write a thesis on the heat death of the Universe and you’d find a way to blame Horcoff.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 4, 2010 11:50 AM MDT up reply actions  

The combined W/L record of those 13 goaltenders 561 – 498

Again, “wins” are close to meaningless in terms of evaluating goaltender performance. They tell you much more about whether the goalie played for a good team than whether or not the goalie was any good.

some of that drop from .917 to .904 is most likely due to rules changes.

I think you misunderstood this. The average EV Sv% since the lockout is .917. That wasn’t NK’s pre-lockout performance. NK’s .904 was compared to average, not to his previous performance. Thus, the rule changes have no extra impact no more impact on the .917 than they do the .904.

You really haven’t provided any evidence that NK has negative 1.5 value.

My basis for saying that NK will be worth about -1.5M per year, on average, over the next three years revolves around the idea that 6GD (one win) is worth about $2.2M on the UFA market (this is based on Gabe’s analysis here; you may have a better number that you’d like to suggest). Since replacement level costs between 500k and 600k, -1.5M in value would be about one win per season, or 18 GD total.

For goalies, I think it’s easier to measure, since most times save percentage is considered the best evaluative tool. I prefer EV Sv% since the PK stuff tends to fluctuate wildly because of so few reps. I think a replacement level EV Sv% of .905 is fair. I believe there is freely available talent who can do that. My bet is that, over the next three seasons, Khabibulin sees about 3000 shots and has an EV Sv% of .899 or worse based on the general decline we see in goalies as they age, and NK’s already sub-par performance. Maybe I’ll be wrong about that. Last year he was actually quite good before getting hurt. We’ll see.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 3, 2010 7:58 PM MDT up reply actions  

Your numbers are bunk.

At worse Kabbi is a backup.

Makes 2.75 more than the average backup.

x 3 that = 8.25M

You already said yourself that Horcoff is overpaid by 15M.

8.25 or 15M?

Pretty simple stuff (for most).

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 9:11 PM MDT up reply actions  

Saying that they’re bunk with little further explanation isn’t all that helpful. If everyone agreed that NK was really worth $1M per season over the next three years, then yes, it would be simple. I can infer from your “at worst a [competent] backup” comment that you think the projection for Khabibulin’s save percentage is too low, or that save percentage is a poor measure of goaltender quality. If it’s the former, what do you think Khabibulin’s EV Sv% will be over the next three seasons? If the latter, what do you suggest we use in addition and/or instead? From a valuation perspective, is the pricing of the goals above replacement alright, or would you like that tweaked as well? Or is the problem deeper, i.e. you feel that the valuation method itself is “bunk”?

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 3, 2010 11:37 PM MDT up reply actions  

Wins are a poor gauge of a goaltender’s ability because they’re so dependent on the rest of the team accomplishing something at the other end of the ice, something the goaltender has effectively no control over.

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.

by Doogie2K on Sep 3, 2010 9:16 PM MDT up reply actions  

Well the majority of these older goalies were winning games, possibly due to cagey experience rather than a sparkling sv%.

I would expect that players to have more confidence playing in front of a veteran goalie so it’s really no surprise.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 9:24 PM MDT up reply actions  

Even though I still think that wins are a poor measure of goaltender quality, it’s worth pointing out that of the 13 goalies on that list, exactly 6 had winning records, 6 losing records, and 1 was exactly .500 (couting OTL’s as ties). As for the confidence argument, I don’t know why they’d have more confidence playing in front of a bad old goalie than a young good one.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 3, 2010 11:40 PM MDT up reply actions  

Wouldn’t cagey experience be reflected in save percentage?

I see what you’re saying about confidence in the goalie allowing players to take a few more chances, but I wonder how much of an effect that really is, and how much of it is stuff like systems, coaching, talent, etc. I think cause and effect are a bit backwards there, too, but it’s 1 AM and I’m having trouble articulating what I think of this at the moment.

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.

by Doogie2K on Sep 4, 2010 1:08 AM MDT up reply actions  

His season last year is equivalent to a goaltender with a .800 save%

And that’s being generous.

Pure comedy. Let’s be “generous” and say that you’re referring to a backup goaltender who played, say, 10 games and faced 25 shots per game. We’ll set replacement level goaltending at .900. That means the goaltender cost his team 25 goals against replacement level. Somehow that doesn’t seem like a “generous” evaluation of Horcoff’s contribution.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 3, 2010 2:42 PM MDT up reply actions  

Take a look at those in the running for the green jacket the past few years. There are quality players scattered in the bottom 20, some of them multiple times.

So yeah, not playing with good players and not having any depth behind you at your position matters a hell of a lot.

As for your last statement, you truely are an idiot. What on earth would make you think of using the word accident? Was it an “accident” that Penner was only at 3.15 (and the difference between a 3.15 and a 2.8 is roughly about 2 points) last year?

Is it an accicdent than Hemsky’s PP/60 has dropped almost a full point in the last 2 years?

Accident has nothing to do with it, so why ask such a stupid question?

In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!

by dawgbone98 on Sep 3, 2010 7:42 AM MDT up reply actions  

“As for your last statement, you truely are an idiot. What on earth would make you think of using the word accident? Was it an "accident" that Penner was only at 3.15 (and the difference between a 3.15 and a 2.8 is roughly about 2 points) last year?”

Why did I use the word accident?

Because in your post I was replying to that’s the word you used.

dogbone said: "It’s not an accident that when Horcoff plays with good players and there are quality centres behind him in he lineup, he plays better. That’s not rocket science. "

Anyways..you can call me names all you want. If I wanted to I would just go to HF and copy and paste some of you posts over here and show everyone what you are. Not worth my time though.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 11:19 AM MDT up reply actions  

Question: Does Horcoff’s NMC obligate the Oilers to protect him in any real expansion draft?

by sarcasticidealist on Sep 2, 2010 4:33 PM MDT reply actions  

I have no idea. I know that it doesn’t in the SB Nation draft, but my gut tells me that it would in a real expansion draft.

by Scott Reynolds on Sep 2, 2010 6:35 PM MDT up reply actions  

Do you have the edit feature here?

by Traktor on Sep 2, 2010 5:54 PM MDT reply actions  

Alas, no. I am told by the tech guys that it is the most-requested feature by a wide margin but no luck.

by Benjamin Massey on Sep 2, 2010 6:01 PM MDT up reply actions  

Comrie will score more points making 500k next year than Horcoff will while making 5.5

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 11:25 AM MDT reply actions  

Playing with Crosby or Malkin will do that.

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.

by Doogie2K on Sep 3, 2010 11:31 AM MDT up reply actions  

Comrie has scored 30 goals twice and 20 or more goals 5x

Horcoff has never even scored 25 goals and only topped 20 goals 2x

Playing with Malkin or Crosby will be nice but Comrie is better than Horcoff no matter who he plays with.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 11:39 AM MDT up reply actions  

Comrie will score more points
Comrie has scored 30 goals twice and 20 or more goals 5x

Oh, look at that, the standard suddenly changed from “points” to “goals”.

Comrie has scored 50+ points three times and has never exceeded 60.

Horcoff has four 50+ point seasons, with a career high of 73.

See, I can pick cherries too. Not sure that it advances the conversation.

Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries

"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg

by Bruce McCurdy on Sep 3, 2010 3:34 PM MDT up reply actions  

Comrie career points per game: 0.63

Horcoff career points per game: 0.58

Comrie career goals per game: 0.29

Horcoff career goals per game: 0.20

Not really cherry picking when most measures show that Comrie is better.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 3:48 PM MDT reply actions  

Better offensive talent in his prime? Likely. He did play his best years during the Dead Puck Era, while Horcoff was learning the ropes in the bottom six.

Better all-around player? Highly debatable.

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.

by Doogie2K on Sep 3, 2010 9:19 PM MDT up reply actions  

Bet you he scores more points than Horcoff next year and does it while sawing off the toughs.

by Traktor on Sep 3, 2010 9:32 PM MDT reply actions  

If Comrie plays the toughs with Crosby while Horcoff plays the toughs with a couple of jokers like he did last year, yes, yes, I do expect that to come to pass.

SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.

by Doogie2K on Sep 4, 2010 1:09 AM MDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Edmonton Oilers community.

Northwest Standings

GP W L OTL PT
Vancouver 52 32 15 5 69
Minnesota 51 25 19 7 57
Colorado 54 26 25 3 55
Calgary 52 24 22 6 54
Edmonton 51 20 26 5 45

(updated 2.4.2012 at 4:07 PM MST)

20 - 26 - 5

Won 2

Clear Victory Standings

Western Conference

  1. Detroit Red Wings (22-7, .759)
  2. San Jose Sharks (13-5, .722)
  3. Vancouver Canucks (17-7, .708)
  4. St. Louis Blues (11-6, .647)
  5. Chicago Blackhawks (16-11, .593)
  6. Nashville Predators (11-10, .524)
  7. Los Angeles Kings (9-9, .500)
  8. Phoenix Coyotes (11-12, .478)
  9. Dallas Stars (11-14, .440)
  10. Edmonton Oilers (11-14, .440)
  11. Anaheim Ducks (10-14, .417)
  12. Colorado Avalanche (8-13, .381)
  13. Calgary Flames (9-15, .375)
  14. Minnesota Wild (7-13,.350)
  15. Columbus Blue Jackets (5-19, .208)

Eastern Conference

  1. Boston Bruins (20-3, .870)
  2. New York Rangers (17-8, .680)
  3. Pittsburgh Penguins (16-8, .667)
  4. Philadelphia Flyers (14-9, .609)
  5. Washington Capitals (12-12, .500)
  6. Toronto Maple Leafs (12-12, .500)
  7. Montreal Canadiens (10-10, .500)
  8. Ottawa Senators (10-11, .476)
  9. Winnipeg Jets (10-13, .435)
  10. Florida Panthers (7-10, .412)
  11. Carolina Hurricanes (9-13, .409)
  12. New Jersey Devils (8-12, .400)
  13. Buffalo Sabres (7-14, .333)
  14. New York Islanders (6-14, .300)
  15. Tampa Bay Lightning (8-19, .296)

Division Standings

  1. Central (50-38, .568)
  2. Northeast (46-37, .554)
  3. Atlantic (45-37, .549)
  4. Pacific (36-36, .500)
  5. Northwest (33-43, .434)
  6. Southeast (32-51, .386)

The Oilers Top 25 Under 25


Managing Editor

Kurri_small Derek Zona

Laraque_horcoff_250x360_small Scott Reynolds

Columnists

Batman_small ryanbatty

0615pisani_small dawgbone98

Okc_shoulder_small Eric Rodgers

Neal_small Neal Livingston

Mike_small Mike Wntrz

Contributors

Mccurdycloseup_small Bruce McCurdy

Esaandstanley_small Benjamin Massey

Me_smyth_bobblehead3__1_of_1__small Lisa McRitchie

Small Triumph44

Gyi0062208469-bobrovsky_small Chase W

Small JaredL