| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 09/10/2009 : 14:42:28
What are your thoughts. I thought this guy burnt every bridge and branch on his way outta Edmonton last time he played here. Didn't see this signing.
But I gotta say it does answer some Centerman questions. Here is a legitamate goalscorer come home. I say this is a good signing for Edmonton, but this one comes with some baggage. |
| 4 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 09/10/2009 : 22:31:47
Nilsson, although loaded with talent is the odd man out. There are too many players on the Oiler roster from the same mold. Unfortunately, Nilsson is the least consistant of Cogliano, Gagner, and Comrie. I see Nilsson getting dealt somewhere very quicky and not for a lot. Free up cap space and drop a player you won't see. Unless Penner flops again. Then, you will see Nilsson and Penner alternate duties until a deal can be made, if one can be made. |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 09/10/2009 : 15:46:24
I actually think this takes the pressure off Penner. If they play on the same line and PP2, Penner has the size, O'Sullivan has the talent and Comrie, who may not be a 50 goal player, but I do actually think he is a sniper. His 1st year in NYI he started to show the flash he had in Edmonton. It was when he was not given a decent line mate to take the pressure off his production slowed. In Ottawa he was the 3rd Centerman and had many possible replacements nipping at his heals.
If he gets 15-20 minutes a game this guy will flurish again. Its just the attitude when he left made this a surprise signing, not the potential |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 09/10/2009 : 15:39:09
I think it's a great move for the Oilers and any "boobirds" will fade quickly and accept his return home. The Oilers are a better team for this in my books....
Beans... Does Nilsson not crack the roster this year? I know they had high hopes for him, but does he just not cut it? Heard the knock on him was he didn't like the physical stuff, but he wouldn't be the first guy with that prob? What's your thoughts?
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 09/10/2009 : 15:27:31
Here's the deal from what I heard today. Apparently, the players that are still in the dressing room from when Comrie played here last had no issue with him. Neither did coaching or management. They said he is solid in the dressing room and this was before the signing today. The whole Comrie thing was completely blown out of proportion by the media and the fans. He simply wanted to leave and he did. The fans in Edmonton HATE when players leave. It's been 20 years of players leaving. It leaves a bad taste in people mouth. Will he get booed off the start?? By some for sure. But a quick start and 10ish points in October will shut those boos up quick. 35+ by Christmas will bring cheers, 60+ and a playoff spot and he will be the Golden Boy once again.
This gives the Oilers a couple of options. Comrie is a potential 30+ goal scorer but he's not a sniper. I don't think that Comrie and Hemsky will click. However, this frees Sam Gagner up to play the wing on the first line with Horcoff and Hemsky. This makes the 2nd line of Comrie, O'Sullivan, and I would say Penner will get the shot early in the year. This puts Cogliano with Moreau(surprising chemisty there) and Pisani as the third line and then a committee of Pouliot, Stortini, Smackintyre, to name a few that will make up the 4th line.
More so, this is another solid option of the boards on the PP. There is now more than Hemsky and Souray as the PP option in Edmonton. Most importantly, this means that there is another bonified centre option so that Horcoff is not thrown over the boards every 2nd shift. I think of any player on the Oilers roster, Horcoff will benefit the most from this deal and they won't even play together.
Did the Oilers get better today? Definately. Did they do enough to make the playoffs? More than likely but a little more would be nice. Did they do enough to make a run deep? Nope. Still need about 20-30 goals a season.
Maybe Penner will actually earn his paycheck under Quinn. Wouldn't that be something. |
|
|
