Frank Seravalli and Tyler Yaremchuk look at some of their old takes and expose themselves on the latest episode of Daily Faceoff Live.
Tyler Yaremchuk: We’re going to look back at some of the thoughts we’ve had throughout the season and see what didn’t go right. What’s yours?
Frank Seravalli: Mine is saying that the Mattias Ekholm trade for the Edmonton Oilers was a risk. And I was looking at it in a way that I’m always critical of GMs around the league that they spend so much time worrying about what they’re losing and don’t focus enough on what they’re gaining. In this case, I was thinking of the power play.
It’s been clicking so well all season long and last year at a historically high rate. So to take Tyson Barrie off of that I was thinking man this is a risk. He’s also such a well-liked player. To take him out of the room, how does the rest of the team react?
Well, Ekholm has been just about the perfect fit for the Edmonton Oilers, and not just from a points perspective and point production perspective. I think the way that he’s meshed in with the team, the pressure that he’s taken off of Darnell Nurse and the top pair. To me, it has been worth his weight in gold and I think you worry about whatever ramifications might come with that trade, whether its the last couple years of Ekholm’s deal or whatever it might be, you worry about that after the fact.
Because this was all about maximizing the playoff opportunity that you have while you have the best player on the planet in your lineup, and probably the second-best one as well.
Tyler Yaremchuk: The Oilers’ power play since the trade is second in the NHL at just over 32 percent and you mentioned the ripple effect. What Ekholm has done for a guy like Evan Bouchard, he’s been a point a game since the trade deadline as well. He’s been Duncan Keith 2.0. Think how good that Keith-Bouchard pairing was against the Calgary Flames last year, Bouchard took a huge step back and now you have an upgrade on that helping Bouchard along as well.
I’m going to stay in the Pacific for mine Frank. I will be giving you a pat on the back, I kind of laugh at myself. I didn’t think the Los Angeles Kings could do it that was my old take. You said that they were good enough to win the division and I flat-out said no. I said to Frank that goaltending is not good enough, Quick and Petersen are not going to be enough to get them to where they need to be and I just didn’t think that roster was good enough to overcome the goaltending.
While, I guess I was right that Quick and Petersen were not good enough to do the job. I was wrong in terms of how good this roster can be. I think I misread just how dangerous that forward group can look and how deep they can be. And how difficult that would be for the opposition to handle throughout the course of an 82-game season. When you have three lines that can consistently score for you that’s going to do some damage throughout the course of a season and it could do some damage in the playoffs as well.
I was flat-out wrong about the Los Angeles Kings.
More must-reads: