Over the past two years, I have listened to a lot of opinions on the Edmonton Oilers and their rebuilding process. For the most part, everyone seems to be in agreement. The three things that the Oilers need are some solid defence, a number one centre, and strength up front. As the trade deadline closed in, I was anxious to see if Steve Tambellini would acquire anyone who could fill one of these requirements and assist the team in their rebuilding process.
Going into the deadline, the GM was in a position of strength. In Ales Hemsky and Dustin Penner, Tambellini had two players that could be an integral part for a team either trying to make the playoffs or trying to make a run for the Stanley Cup. However, knowing that each player had a year left in their contract, he did not need to move either unless a deal was available that would be a good fit for the team, moving forward.
I really didn't think that the Oilers would move both Hemsky and Penner, although there was some talk that the Los Angeles Kings may be interested in both. However, I was fairly confident one of the two players would be traded at the deadline. From my perspective, I was hoping that that player would be Ales Hemsky.
Now, I know that the suggestion of moving Hemsky instead of Penner may irritate a lot of Oiler's fans, as many think that Hemsky is currently the most talented player on the Oiler's roster. However, I have a number of reasons why I think that moving Hemsky would have been better in the long term for the team.
Firstly, as I mentioned earlier, the Oilers need strength up front. Granted, Penner didn't always play like a power forward, as his size suggested he should, but at least he was a big man. Hemsky is like the rest of the top forwards on the team right now, small. Too often I hear that the Oilers get pushed off the puck too easily. So why would you trade the one guy that wasn't as easy to knock around?
Secondly, Ales Hemsky is injured a lot. It seems every 20 games or so Hemsky is out of the line up for one reason or another. One day after training Penner, Hemsky was injured, again. Penner over the last two seasons, on the other hand, hasn't missed many games due to injury. So again I ask, why would you keep a player who is regularly out of the line up, due to injury, and trade a player who rarely misses a game? Hemsky still is perceived to be a valuable player, but if he continues to miss games due to injuries, no matter how talented he may be, no team will want someone they cannot rely on when needed.
Thirdly, there is no question that Hemsky can move the puck. However, in my opinion, he doesn't do it enough. I have watched numerous games where he cycles along the half boards over and over again looking for that perfect scoring opportunity and ends up losing the puck or throwing it in the middle for no one. As the players like Hall and Eberle continue to grow, they need to handle the puck as much as possible, and waiting for a pass from Hemsky isn't going to provide them with enough of those opportunities. What I liked about Penner was that he would at least get in front of the net. He was the type of player that would enable Hall and Eberle to handle the puck and create scoring opportunities, and he would be there to tap it in when needed.
I think the thing that disappoints me the most about the Penner trade is what they got in return, a first round draft pick in 2011, a conditional third round pick in 2012 and Colten Teubert, a young defenseman who is still unproven in the NHL. It's not that the Oilers completely lost out in the trade. However, I cannot help but think they could have received the same, if not more, for Hemsky and they would have still kept a player that, in my opinion, would be more helpful to the Oilers as they continue to rebuild and develop.
Until next time,
Jon.
No comments:
Post a Comment