Oilers Sign Sutton To A One-Year Extension
by ryanbatty on Feb 13, 2012 12:22 PM MST
in News
Email
PrintIn the last few weeks many NHL insiders have speculated that Ales Hemsky and Andy Sutton were the Oilers most likely to be moved at this season's trade deadline. With news this morning of a contract extension we can take one of those two players off the likely to be traded list. Unfortunately, the player in question is not Ales Hemsky. The Oilers still don't have one of the best forwards to ever play for the franchise signed to a new deal but have now gotten another bottom pairing defenseman locked up. Sutton's extension (according to Bob McKenzie because the Oilers still refuse to release financial details) is worth $1.5M with a $250k bonus for games played.
After the jump I'll take a look at Sutton's season, the value of this deal, and what this means for the Oilers going forward.
Sutton was acquired by the Oilers on July 1 last year in exchange for Kurtis Foster and has played in 33 games this season, scoring three goals and adding six assists. Sutton's value isn't found in his point totals but the physical aspects of his game, something his 56 penalty minutes points to. That physicality has resulted in his first season in Edmonton being interrupted by two suspensions - the first was for five games and then a second for eight more. He also suffered a groin injury that caused him to miss another seven games.
When Sutton has been in the lineup he's been okay. At 36 Sutton is nothing more than a bottom pairing defenseman at this point in his career and that's how the Oilers have used him this season. He's played most of his minutes at even strength against easy competition when compared to the rest of the Oilers defense corps. The good news is that Sutton has fared well in that role. Based on his relative Corsi and his zone starts/finishes he's managed move the puck in the right direction which is certainly a good thing.
But at $1.5M, even for one-year, I can't say that this is a good deal. This is a player that was a healthy scratch twice last week and the Oilers just signed him for $1.5M; try to wrap your head around that. Sutton has been serviceable this season, but bottom pairing defensemen who will be 37 next season don't make $1.5M. At a minimum this is $500k more than he should be making, and while that $500k won't make or break the Oilers next season, it's another example of the Oilers not understanding market value and choosing to overpay everyone, all of the time. The Oilers held all the cards in this negotiation and still managed to overpay. I'm sure the media will write about how this is a good example of locking up a player who wanted to be part what the Oilers are building but who in their right mind wouldn't want to work somewhere that pays them 50% more than they're worth?
What is most terrifying about this deal though is what it means for next season. With the Sutton extension that means he will be back along with Tom Gilbert, Ryan Whitney, Ladislav Smid, and Corey Potter. Assuming that the team qualifies Jeff Petry that gives the Oilers six defensemen returning next season, which would be fine if the blue line hadn't been a total disaster this season. Derek has been told that the team is interested in bringing Cam Barker back as well, which would leave the team just a qualifying offer for Peckham away from bringing the whole gang back for next season. That's almost as crazy as bringing back a general manager who will have steered his team to three straight lottery picks.
45 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Mean streak plus soft hands plus moving puck in the right direction… Though it is not cheap, I’m not against this deal. And one more thing: with Teubert available down the pipeline all arrows point at Teddy being traded this year, perhaps even packaged with Hemsky.
Do you really think based on his play this season that Peckham has any real value?
Everyone knows rock attained perfection in 1974. It's a scientific fact.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and a frequenter of the time waster that is Twitter.
I see your point. However, Peckham’s price depends on other team’s perception and needs during the post-season. In fact, “Teddy” wasn’t terrible in every and each game: so he might have some marginal appeal. And it’s not that the market is full of D’s for grabs…
by Roman_Pilgrim on Feb 13, 2012 12:50 PM MST up reply actions
I agree. Teddy Peckman gathered enough hype and is playing with such poor quality playmates that someone will see value in him in a deal. The only logical conclusion from this move is the Oilers doing a 2 for 1 or 3 for 1 deal (see Lowetide) and Peckham is one of the players on his way out.
That said, this is the Oilers and logic often has nothing to do with management actions. Peckham could just as likely get waved…
With the Bruins prospect cuppard fairly bare, and Rask bristling at being stuck behind Thomas, and Horton hurt, could the Oilers pry Rask out of Boston for some deal including Hemsky (to replace Horton) and Dubnyk (to replace Rask) and how would people feel about that kind of deal?
Rask isn’t leaving Boston anytime soon. To get him out of Boston is a price higher than Oilers fans would want to listen to.
I dunno. If he WANTS out, and after the Bruins got shut out by the Rangers this evening, I beleive anything is possible. I thought Boston was nuts to give up Colbourne AND a 1st for that bum Kaberle, but they did it. Thomas is under contract for a couple of more years. Something has gotta give there.
Not saying Hemksy and Dubnyk would do it alone, but I think the starting point of a deal that wouldn’t gut the prospect pool is there if you are creative enough.
Chiarelli would have to be breathtakingly retarded to trade his next starting goalie unless his hand was publicly forced. Timmy ain’t playin’ forever.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Robertson's Rants - Exceedingly occasional, lengthy ramblings on hockey topics, hosted at Puck Podcast. And no, my name's not Doug.
http://espn.go.com/boston/nhl/story/_/id/7563765/boston-bruins-tuukka-rask-happy-wants-play-more
“With Tim Thomas’ Facebook postings reigniting a media firestorm this week, word came out of Tuukka Rask’s native Finland that he is unhappy with his situation in Boston as Thomas’ backup.”
The subsequent “clarifications” are total bullshit.
One of Rask or Thomas has to go before next season. I would try and move Thomas, but he has the NTC and if he has a strong playoff, moving him is all but impossible. So, I would take a run at Rask now as a warm up for the summer bidding frenzy, or to supercede it.
What a horrendus deal. Overpaying for a 3rd pairing defencemen on the wrong side of the age-productivity curve. Alternatively, we could have got a 3rd round pick back at the deadline (I’m assuming, less? more?)
Can we not find better 3rd pairing defencemen on waivers for salary which more resemble the league minimum. I’m sure the mindless sheep will like this deal as he is a big guy that hits. Too bad he doesn’t contribute to winning games.
by George Roop on Feb 13, 2012 12:45 PM MST reply actions 1 recs
I like this deal, not because I actually like the deal (as you’ve said, it’s on the rich side), but because the Oilers clearly could’ve gotten a mid-round pick for Sutton and decided that making next year’s team better was more important. Even though it probably made more sense for them to get that pick, the change is refreshing. Hopefully it’s a sign of things to come.
In addition, Sutton has been pretty good so far this season. Way better than I expected, and a lot more entertaining too. The huge number of penalties makes him pretty poor value, but those aside, he’s played pretty well. If the Oilers bring in two more guys to play top four minutes, and Sutton is 7th or 8th on next year’s depth chart (as far as I’m concerned, teams should be carrying 13F and 8D), the Oilers could have a pretty good defense.
The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 13, 2012 12:52 PM MST reply actions
I disagree with your assessment of Sutton, but you make reasonable points.
Where I question you is that you say this is the Oilers making next year’s team better, then you go on mentioning Sutton is 7th or 8th on the depth chart next year. Did I miss the memo we are competing for the cup next year. How does signing a defencemen to sit in the press box and fill roster spots when there are injuries make the team significantly better? NHL labour market is an open market, we are not limited to those only in our organization. Is there nobody at a better replacement value for a lower salary?
I probably wasn’t very clear. This isn’t a deal I’d be comfortable making myself. I agree that you could probably get a better deal in the summer, and so I think it would have been better for the Oilers to send Sutton away for a pick at the deadline. I do think he makes the club a bit better than the in-house alternatives (Peckham, Teubert, Plante or an even younger player), but as you’ve said, there will be several players available on the open market who can provide what Sutton provides.
BUT
That the Oilers have decided the marginal gain for next year’s team is more important to them than a mid-round pick is refreshing because it means the shift towards trying to win is happening. That means judgment day for “the rebuild” is coming. I like that. Further, even though it’s not a very good deal, it’s a long way from backbreaking. As I said above, if Sutton starts the year 7th or 8th on the depth chart (alongside Potter), and the Oilers add two top four defenders, Sutton could be part of a solid group of defensemen.
The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 13, 2012 2:52 PM MST up reply actions
Interesting take. I do agree that on its face, this move isn’t bad, but it just depends on how you look at it – on the one hand, it’s keeping part of a horrible team status quo, but on the other hand, it’s at least a recognition that moving everyone for picks is a bad idea. Still, I’d be shocked if the Oilers carried 8 defensemen and frankly it always struck me as a little idiotic when NJ would carry 8.
Driving Play - The Blog with Three First Lines
I think that quality defensive depth is more important to have on the NHL roster. Having a guy who clears waivers on your fourth line for a few games in a row isn’t really a big deal. Having a guy who clears waivers on your third pairing is quite a bit more problematic. It’s much harder to hide him if he’s not good enough to be there, especially if you need to play him for several games in a row. This is in part because young forwards on ELCs tend to be ready for NHL minutes more often than defensemen on ELCs.
The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 13, 2012 3:07 PM MST up reply actions
Fair point – it depends on who you’ve signed and waiver eligibility. But surely you can see how since most teams keep 7, most defensemen pass right on through waivers.
Driving Play - The Blog with Three First Lines
Well… most bad defensemen. That’s the whole problem. Defensemen get hurt pretty frequently and then you’re stuck with someone who’s bad enough to pass through waviers playing 15 minutes per game.
The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 13, 2012 3:46 PM MST up reply actions
The problem is that you’re probably sitting a player out for long stretches.
Driving Play - The Blog with Three First Lines
I would think bottom pairing defenseman could be effectively rotated with little discernible drop-off. Also, the possibility of of using the extra defenseman as a winger(especially offensively minded defenseman) if needed. I believe Ron Wilson was using Jake Gardiner as a winger at times this season.
The Edmonton Oilers, keeping opposition fans happy for the last 6 years
I don’t think that would be a problem. It forces guys to earn their ice time when everyone is healthy. And when everyone isn’t healthy, you wouldn’t be carrying more than seven, so pretty much a normal roster.
The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 13, 2012 6:26 PM MST up reply actions
I guess I can somewhat believe the sentiment that this shows that rebuilding is not only concern, and making team better is the consequence of this signing.
However when evaluating Tambellini on this, I think it is a huge failure. Rumour was, other teams were offering a 2nd round pick, so I’d be conservative and say 3rd rounder. But even if you don’t like getting more picks, it’s not like the pick is not tradeable in offseason to acquire an asset either. Getting a pick, flipping it along with some other part to acquire an actual useful player next year………..would be solid management.
There is no excuse for this signing, and especially at the price they paid. As for this season with everyone healthy, we now have an abundance (of largely ineffective) defencemen. But still an abundance with 8 on the roster right now. The plan should be for next year, and Tambellini is not addressing this.
The question is now, once the rebuilding phase is over, is there any indication that Tambellini has demonstrated any proficiency in his job that he is capable of building a winning team.
Next to Jones waiver pickup and Potter signing, have there been any winning trades that he has to show? How many value contracts has he signed players to? How many overpayments have there been? Overall, outside of Oilers getting out of comfort zone, are there not any better candidates in the management market to be hired as GM?
We mostly agree on all of this. Like I said, if it were up to me, I’d have traded Sutton for the pick. I’m just pleased because this is the kind of thing a GM would do if the rebuilding phase is nearing an end. If that’s the case, expectations will rise and Tambellini can either surprise everyone and do well, or fail in a way that will result in someone new taking the job. And that’s great!
The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 13, 2012 4:51 PM MST up reply actions
Or if he legitimately thinks his man is better than the alternatives inevitably available on the open market. But you’re apparently much more optimistic in your interpretation than I am.
Put another way, making a bad decision that looks like the beginning of the end of the rebuild in no way means the rebuild is close to done. It could just be a bad decision.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Robertson's Rants - Exceedingly occasional, lengthy ramblings on hockey topics, hosted at Puck Podcast. And no, my name's not Doug.
I agree that 1.5mil is too much money. Other than that I like the signing as it gives us an slightly above average defender and a good hitter. which imo is a “useful” player
I think it is a huge failure. Rumour was, other teams were offering a 2nd round pick, so I’d be conservative and say 3rd rounder. But even if you don’t like getting more picks, it’s not like the pick is not tradeable in offseason to acquire an asset either. Getting a pick, flipping it along with some other part to acquire an actual useful player next year………..would be solid management.
I’m just trying to understand: so basically you state your assessment on rumours and probability? let’s for the argument sake say that we get a 3rd rounder, then we can package that (with what other part anyway?) for some “useful” player?
This bothers me everytime I read about someone calling out the Management for making poor decisions when trading for players or not acquiring a player.
Simply said: The trade market is not like a store where you walk in, take whatever you want, pay and be merry. You need a trade partner who accepts your currency. So he might ask too much (a player you don’t want to give up) or you might simply not have what your trade partner wants for the player you want (he is looking for a defender while all you want to give up is forwards). Again, this is very simplified but I hope you understand what I’m getting at…
also I don’t agree with your assessment that we have an “abundance of largerly ineffective defencemen”. Smid and Gilbert are solid, Petry has shown tremendous improvement and is still developing and Whitney was injured. Sutton was mostly effective in his role (when playing) and we have a depth defenceman in Potter who is struggling after his injury (a lot of players do). The ineffective ones are Peckham and Barker who were both just terrible so far and need to be replaced. Plus we had call-ups in Teubert, Chorney and Plante who just aren’t good enough (in Teubert’s case there’s some hope).
all in all I believe that in this case the bird in the hand is better than two in the bush.
I state my assessment on expected return of trade, by what I hear through the media. Personally, I don’t see Sutton going for any more than a 3rd, but GMs panic at the trade deadline, so I don’t think a 2nd rounder as reported is that out of the question. I’m not saying that we will package the 3rd rounder for some useful player, but the option is available. Just as winning teams use draft picks as tradeable assets, teams like the Oilers can as well. Whether it is trading up for a higher pick, or using it as one of those additional parts to a trade for prospects/NHL ready players. I’m not saying you can trade the 3rd round pick for some spectacular player. Saying it’s an asset you have, if you choose to take the route.
For abundance of largely ineffective defenceman, referring to Sutton, Barker, Teubert, Peckham at the bottom end obviously. I’m not saying the group as a whole. Gilbert, Whitney, Petry, and in my opinion to a lessor extent Smid are all fine. The abundance is at the bottom end.
So I am completely ignoring the salary aspect of the Sutton signing, which makes it absolutely horrendus. I’d argue that even if signed at true value…(somewhere in the 900k neighborhood due to his age, eagerness to stick with team, etc) that he is not the tool that this team requires to be better immiediately, or going forward into the future.
making next year’s team better was more important
I don’t care about the 3rd rounder, but aren’t there better ways of making the team better for next year than spending $1.5m on a defenceman who might sit a lot of the games he’s not suspended for? I’d of been more than happy for them keep him past the deadline but still wait until the summer before making this move.
I agree. Sutton has been pretty good all things considered. I’m in favour of keeping players that have been pretty good. There is value in continuity. I’d rather have the old, slow, average guy I already have then some other old, slow, average guy I don’t know as well. Moreover, if we are reading tea leaves and perhaps this is the optimist in me, I think this makes it less likely that they keep Barker.
by Captain Obvious II on Feb 13, 2012 2:10 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Staios got $1.6 million this year. Gill earns more than $2 million.
$1.5 million is a reasonable contract. Injuries have demonstrated that more defensemen are better than fewer. If the Oilers sign a top 4 defenseman, it pushes Petry to #5 on the depth chart, Sutton to #6, Peckham to #7, and Potter to #8. The second year on Potter’s contract means that he will likely be shuttle-able to OKC without worrying about waivers.
They still need to sign a top #4 guy. And to forget that Cam Barker exists.
They probably need two. I wouldn’t want to count on Whitney to be a top four guy.
The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 13, 2012 4:51 PM MST up reply actions
Unless the Oilers have an open 3rd-pairing spot I don’t think that’s wise. Gill lost a step this year to the point where he couldn’t be carried by Subban in top-pairing minutes (which happened n the second half of last season) and has been shunted down to a 3rd-pairing role where’s he doing okay.
Peckham and Barker can both go, I think you are selling Potter a little short. I believe Potter is a better option than Peckham and he has some offensive ability(which is sorely missing on the back end). Potter has struggled lately, but that may be to his injury. Peckham was playing in some luck last year, but he sucked last year and has sucked this year.
Also, who is Cam Barker?
The Edmonton Oilers, keeping opposition fans happy for the last 6 years
Oilers once again set the market for a player type…
Is there another defenceman out there who is over 35 and plays 15 minutes per night who makes this kind of money?
Do the Oilers have anyone who bothers to even look at the going rate for these kinds of players?
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
Tactical contributor to the Copper & Blue and just as boring on the twitters... @dawgbone98
Sure enough, Dellow answers the question…
http://www.mc79hockey.com/?p=4326
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
Tactical contributor to the Copper & Blue and just as boring on the twitters... @dawgbone98
In isolation, this isn’t a terrible signing. The dollar amount is high(-er than it might otherwise have been) because the term is low; I’d wager Sutton could likely have found a two-year offer for $1M or so this off-season, so he demanded a little bit more on a one-year deal. It makes sense, in that regard, to me, especially since the Oilers have cap room for him.
However, in its context, this move is mind-boggling. Why Oilers management would feel any interest in preserving their current D-corps beyond this season is a mystery to me, especially since moving Sutton at the deadline could have brought in a tangible long-term asset (third- or maybe even second-round pick) plus the fact that there are a plethora of better defencemen becoming free agents this summer.
Reeks of failure to see the forest through the trees: Sutton (the tree) has played as well as expected, so keep him there. But the defence corps in total (the forest) has been horrible, so… why?
Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay
by Peter Raaymakers on Feb 14, 2012 11:17 AM MST reply actions
If someone could tell me how Sutton is worth $750k more than Jim Vandermeer AND make me believe it, that would be great. Thanks.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
by Derek Zona on Feb 14, 2012 8:35 PM MST reply actions 1 recs
That’s actually the most succinct and accurate way of thinking about it I’ve seen yet. Jesus.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Robertson's Rants - Exceedingly occasional, lengthy ramblings on hockey topics, hosted at Puck Podcast. And no, my name's not Doug.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on The Copper & Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Oilers Schedule
Last 5 Games
@
Vancouver
|
Sat 04/07 | L 0 - 3 |
|
Anaheim
|
Thu 04/05 | OT - L 2 - 3 |
|
@
Los Angeles
|
Mon 04/02 | L 0 - 2 |
|
@
Anaheim
|
Sun 04/01 | W 2 - 1 |
|
Los Angeles
|
Fri 03/30 | L 1 - 4 |
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Friday’s Three Stars: Devils head to Final; Brodeur, Kovalchuk the difference in Game 6
- Devils eliminate Rangers in Game 6, ending fear of the past, setting course for the future
- Adam Henrique sends New Jersey Devils to Stanley Cup Final with OT goal vs. Rangers (VIDEO)
- Watch Ilya Kovalchuk’s Game 6 goal for Devils, a.k.a. power-play porn (VIDEO)
- Devils look to eliminate Rangers in Game 6; Hal Gill’s broken tibia (Playoff Puck Previews)
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Blues CEO Mike McCarthy stepping down
- Blues CEO Mike McCarthy stepping down, not long after ownership change
- Rangers eliminated by Devils with crushing OT loss after another rally in Game 6 falls short
- Rangers season ends as another rally falls short
- Hard-skating Cataractes upset set defending champ Saint John 7-4 at Memorial Cup
