On Tuesday, Elliotte Friedman returned from the off-season with another stroke of journalism gold. In his piece, the NHL insider outlines the 23-minutes that changed the landscape of the NHL back on June 29th. As Oiler fans know, it was during this span that the team traded Taylor Hall to New Jersey for Adam Larsson.
You can read the piece here, and I highly recommend that you do. It’s a long read, but this is an exceptional look into one of the craziest afternoons in years, and one that changed the course of at least five NHL franchises.
The Inside Scoop:
The piece is absolutely tremendous, arguably one of the best I’ve read in years. I won’t quote a ton of it because you should read everything in the the proper context, but there are two passages that I want to quote and give an opinion on.
The Oilers tried to add defencemen any way they could. Chiarelli wouldn’t provide specifics, but it is believed their targets included St. Louis’s Kevin Shattenkirk, although they wouldn’t trade anyone with term for a player who could walk 12 months later; Carolina’s Justin Faulk and Colorado’s Tyson Barrie. Before the draft, there was a lot of smoke surrounding a Ryan Nugent-Hopkins/Matt Dumba deal, but that fizzled.
There seems to be a thought process from the faction of the fanbase that despises the deal that Chiarelli didn’t look hard enough or try hard enough to get a better defender. Let’s just cast that aside right now because, while I hate to break certain blogger’s and fan’s hearts, that simply is not true.
Friedman confirms that Edmonton made a push for Shattenkirk (who wants to sign with an eastern based team), Tyson Barrie and Justin Faulk.
Edmonton ended up with Adam Larsson because the Devils were willing to move the player. It appears that Carolina was not willing to move Faulk and, considering their commitment, Colorado wasn’t willing to move Barrie.
I know this is an oft-forgotten fact, but it takes two willing parties to make a deal. Oh, and remember that Chiarelli was trying to work that three-way deal with Columbus and Calgary (referenced by Friedman) at the draft and that PC was called the “most active GM” by pretty much every media member at the draft.
It certainly looks like Adam Larsson was the guy the Oilers felt was the best return for Hall that they could get.
“There is no perfect player or person. But who are you going to take your chances with?” Shero replied. “Younger, more aggressive and faster…that’s how we want to be.”
Personally, I think all the ‘Taylor Hall is bad in the room’ talk is a load of crap. That said, it’s clear there are some fears from teams around the NHL, whether they are right or wrong. The fact that Shero went out of his way to mention no player is perfect is an odd statement to me and one that caught my eye.
Again, I don’t buy the ‘Hall is a locker room cancer’ talk, but I thought this was interesting. Of course, I may be reading too much into this and Shero isn’t referencing that at all.
Shockingly, Someone Bashes the Oilers:
The purpose for writing this piece is to ‘respond’ if you will to Yahoo!’s Greg Wyshynski. Wyshynski is an eastern based hockey writer who, shockingly, wrote that the Friedman article painted the Oilers in a bad light. *Make sure to read the sarcasm coming from my shockingly statement.*
You see, it seems like it’s part of the training for eastern-based hockey writers/bloggers to take a turn dissecting a quote or story about the Oilers and figuring out how it makes them look bad. Apparently Tuesday was Wyshynski’s turn.
In his piece, which you can read here, Wyshynski holds the line that the Oilers traded Hall because he was a locker room cancer.
In Hall’s case, a couple of Oilers believe the organization wanted to make it easier for McDavid’s influence to grow in the room. “Taylor’s a dominant personality,” one said. “That’s not a criticism. That’s who he is.” *From Friedman Piece*
First off, some of the NHL’s most successful teams are a melting pot of big personalities. Didn’t they pair Hall and McDavid because of that personality?
Second, while lamenting the idea that dominant personalities might hinder McDavid’s development as a player … didn’t they just sign Milan Lucic?
Of course, this is probably just all code for “Taylor Hall was a locker room cancer,” although who knows how much winning could have changed that outlook.
Trading a top-flight player because you don’t like his personality … what idiot does that?
Speaking of which: Moving on to the Subban trade.
That’s a pretty big leap of faith to suggest that Edmonton simply traded Taylor Hall because they “didn’t like his personality”. Of course, Friedman points out in his piece that Chiarelli was willing to move any (not McDavid of course) of his big forwards to acquire a defender, but because it was Hall let’s all just assume it was ‘character issues’.
That would completely ignore the fact at hand, conveniently, that Edmonton was DESPERATE for a top-pairing defender. It would also ignore the fact that Edmonton had looked at other options and felt this was the best fit, which based on other verbal, it may have been.
That doesn’t mean it was a great trade, it wasn’t the best value, but Edmonton didn’t just wake up and decide to throw Taylor Hall away for fun. Reading some people, linked piece included, you might get the idea that that was the case.
And to further the point: If this is McDavid’s team, and after the Hall trade there’s no disputing it: Wouldn’t he take a little less in the second contract if it meant P.K. Subban was patrolling the blue line behind him and sending him Hail Mary passes down the ice? Isn’t that what star players do? Isn’t that what Sid did?
Look, the Oilers might not have had the assets Montreal wanted for a Subban trade anyway. It’s the philosophy on display here that’s bothersome.
The above passage is referring to Edmonton’s brief interest in Montreal’s PK Subban. According to Friedman, the Oilers never got past the cost of PK’s contract, which pays him $9 million annually. When you factor that in with what Connor McDavid is going to get within the next to years, things get awfully tight.
Could Edmonton afford to give McDavid, say, $13 million a year with PK making $9 million? Factor in another $12 million per committed to Ryan Nugent-Hopkins and Jordan Eberle and all of a sudden you are VERY tight against the cap.
Wait…..isn’t being tight against the cap why Peter Chiarelli was run out of Boston by writers like Wyshynski? Isn’t the reason Chiarelli was a bad GM (according to some) in Boston because he couldn’t manage the cap? And now, some of the same people are yelling “SCREW THE CAP BABY!!!” at the top of their lungs? Huh…
Final Thoughts:
I only pick on Wyshynski’s article because it was the most prominent “Oilers are painted in a bad light” piece from Tuesday. Obviously, I disagree with that stance. Were the the Oilers actually painted in a bad light by this? I fail to see how that is the case.
Is it the fact that there was dead airtime during the phone call with Chiarelli? I’m 22 and trust me, when I find out I don’t get a job there is a lot of dead airtime on that call too, I’m not exactly talkative and I can imagine Hall felt the same way.
Is it because the Oilers moved Hall and ‘caught him off guard’, as some mention on Twitter? If that’s the case, then why aren’t the Predators, who did the same thing to a more accomplished Shea Weber, getting painted in a bad light? Does that not fit the “everyone hates Hall” story? Am I missing something here?
My thoughts on the deal are well documented, but I will leave you with them. The Edmonton Oilers lost the Taylor Hall trade because they got lesser value back. Hall is a helluva player and the Oilers will certainly miss him. Adam Larsson, however, is a very good defender who will help the Oilers in a massive area of need.
The trade of Hall also makes the team more balanced and, I believe, better overall.
But apparently none of that matters, because Taylor Hall apparently has a “big personality” and that’s the reason he was traded. Got it. Glad we figured that one out.
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
