2016-17 roster

[csk]

Is Petan a centre next year? has he shown anything to support that theory so far in the A? Hasn't played any C with the big club to date (edit: IIRC).
Jets should absolutely try him out there, slide him to LW if it doesn't work out. Good evidence Perreault can be effective at C.

I think he played a few games a 4C when Copp was injured. He also played one game at 4C with Copp at 4LW before he was sent down. It didn't work... but in the same way that playing 4LW didn't work.

 

[portamoral]

LOL, no...

Perre-Burmi-Dano was not really much bigger and dominated bigger players.

Big is not some aspect separate from others. It's just of one of many attributes that makes a player good or bad.

You don't need a certain amount of size; you need a certain amount of effectiveness.

lol okay bud. obviously one of those bigger guys would compliment that line much better. burmi is a lot bigger and grittier and defensive than petan anyways. its a big difference. inb4 "BRO OUTSCORING ONLY MATURZ LOOK AT MY STATS", they would not be able to control play effectively and outscore. petan would only work at 3c with some bigger bodies surrounding him. this is all just a dream anywAY, we both know nic won't be C next year, stafford will still be around and so will thorburn. maurice will put lowry 3c and copp/burmi 4

petan will be somewhere on the wing or with the moose

 

[csk]

Any predictions on contracts for the RFAs?

I had one buddy suggest Lowry get 8 x 4 (32mil)

I figured 2 x 1.5 max.

Ack that is scary.

 

[garret9]

lol okay bud. obviously one of those bigger guys would compliment that line much better. burmi is a lot bigger and grittier and defensive than petan anyways. its a big difference. inb4 "BRO OUTSCORING ONLY MATURZ LOOK AT MY STATS", they would not be able to control play effectively and outscore. petan would only work at 3c with some bigger bodies surrounding him. this is all just a dream anywAY, we both know nic won't be C next year, stafford will still be around and so will thorburn. maurice will put lowry 3c and copp/burmi 4

petan will be somewhere on the wing or with the moose

Who cares about stats... You can't even do the eyetest right if you don't think Petan has an edge to his game.

It also had nothing to do with what I think will happen.

 

[heretik27]

Which is why Dano works well with Perreault-Petan.

You can argue that he compliments the line as a finisher. You could also argue that the line would get bullied around too much as it lacks the size to generate consistent offense from zone pressure.

 

[robertocarlos]

This is what I'd want for our best 20 players

Perreault-Scheifele-Wheeler
Connor-Little-Ehlers
Armia-Burmi-Stafford
Lowry-Copp-Dano

Enstrom-Buff
Trouba-Myers
Chiarot-Postma

Hellebuyck
Hutch

That's 9.3 million dollars of players twiddling their thumbs.

 

[garret9]

You can argue that he compliments the line as a finisher. You could also argue that the line would get bullied around too much as it lacks the size to generate consistent offense from zone pressure.

I disagree. I think these are just archaic ideals and complete conjecture.

Perreault is the best for tilting the ice on the Jets despite his size anyways.

Forest/Trees. Size isn't needed; it's simply a tool to get results.

 

[portamoral]

Who cares about stats... You can't even do the eyetest right if you don't think Petan has an edge to his game.

It also had nothing to do with what I think will happen.

lol i never said he doesn't have an edge. that doesn't matter though because he is still too small to do well with those line mates. the whole point is to ease him into it with a big body or two to take the load off of himself.

 

[csk]

Who cares about stats... You can't even do the eyetest right if you don't think Petan has an edge to his game.

It also had nothing to do with what I think will happen.

"Who cares about stats" -Garret Hohl, 2016

 

[heretik27]

I disagree. I think these are just archaic ideals and complete conjecture.

Perreault is the best for tilting the ice on the Jets despite his size anyways.

Forest/Trees. Size isn't needed; it's simply a tool to get results.

Matty P works his butt off on the boards, but Petan and Dano have yet to play enough with us to show they're effective there. Simply put though, they can get out muscled regardless of how tenacious they are.

 

[garret9]

lol i never said he doesn't have an edge. that doesn't matter though because he is still too small to do well with those line mates. the whole point is to ease him into it with a big body or two to take the load off of himself.

Matty P works his butt off on the boards, but Petan and Dano have yet to play enough with us to show they're effective there. Simply put though, they can get out muscled regardless of how tenacious they are.

I guess I just simply don't agree.

 

[Puckatron 3000]

"Who cares about stats" -Garret Hohl, 2016

Quick Garret, get that printed up on your business cards.

 

[Daximus]

I think we have 5 top 6 spots pretty much locked up with;
Wheeler, Little, Scheif, Ehlers and Perro.

Then we have a few more guys that I think are almost guaranteed to be on next seasons roster which are;

Stafford, Armia, Lowry, and Thorburn.

So that leaves one top 6 roster spot open and three bottom 6 roster spots open and anywhere from 1-2 pressbox spots for forwards. So in total about 5 to 6 spots that are up for grabs. I think Peluso is likely penciled in for 1 PB spot so that leaves 4 roster spots and maybe 1 more PB spot for forwards.

So then we have Burmi, Dano, Petan, De Leo, Kosmachuk, Copp, Lipon, Lemieux, Lodge and Olsen and possibly Connor and Halischuk trying to obtain one of those 4 roster spots.

I'd say the forwards grouping likely looks like this..

Perreault -Little - Wheeler
??? -Scheifele - Ehlers
Stafford - ??? - Armia
Lowry - ??? - Thorburn

I think the if we win one of the 3 lotto spots that Stafford should be dealt at the draft for pick(s) and one of Matthews or the Fins will slot into the bottom 6 to start the season.
If Connor signs he can play where Stafford is above and work his way into the top 6.

TC is going to be more fun than it has ever been next year. It could be quite the dog fight for that top 6 winger spot. The nice thing is Ehlers can play either side comfortably so it won't matter who it is but anyone can play up in there. If we get Matthews he likely centers the 3rd line to start the season. Then we have a good mixture of bottom 6/PB spots and if management moves away from Thor then we have even more. Our depth will be young but very good.

 

[Zhamnov10]

Man after watching tonight's game I am really excited about our depth going into next year.Copp is looking way better out there,playing with actual hockey players helps a lot.Lowry to me should be put on the wing he doesn't handle or pass the puck well enough to play centre.The vets on the team are going to have to fight for playing time because the young guys are coming on strong and are so much more talented.we will have 4 solid lines to start the season with 3-4 legit call ups waiting and ready.

 

[digmor crusher]

You guys are loaded with prospects, in a couple of years you'll be a contender without a doubt.

 

[Gil Fisher]

Ehlers - Scheifele - Wheeler
Connor - Little - Stafford
Perreault - Burmi - Armia
Lowry - Copp - Dano
Thorburn - Petan - Kosmachuk
Lemieux - DeLeo - Peluso

Trouba Buff
Enstrom Myers
Morrissey Postma
Chychrun
Chiarot
Stuart

Hellebuyck
Hutchinson
Pavelec
Comrie

1. Do you think they keep Stafford around with one year left and all that youth coming through?

2. I think they'll split duties between Helly and Pav next year, riding the hot hand, and go full-time Helly the following year when Pav is gone. They may try to sneak Hutch down to the minors, but more likely they'll trade him for a mid-round pick.

 

[lanky]

I like your lineup Gil. It's nearly identical to mine. Regarding Stafford, I see no reason to trade him. We wouldn't get a lot of value in return and he gives us good scoring depth. If he's traded for a low pick and then two other forwards get injured, the lineup starts looking too green and too weak.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

I like your lineup Gil. It's nearly identical to mine. Regarding Stafford, I see no reason to trade him. We wouldn't get a lot of value in return and he gives us good scoring depth. If he's traded for a low pick and then two other forwards get injured, the lineup starts looking too green and too weak.

I'd agree with this. Stafford is a flawed, but good scoring asset. If we keep him around, he could be very good trade bait at the next deadline for a team looking to push deep into the playoffs, and that requires a scoring forward.

 

[Coach G]

Re: Stafford, i think we keep him around to have some salary to expose at the expansion draft, presumably next summer.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Re: Stafford, i think we keep him around to have some salary to expose at the expansion draft, presumably next summer.

We need to extend him then.

 

[Gil Fisher]

Re: Stafford, i think we keep him around to have some salary to expose at the expansion draft, presumably next summer.

I think it comes down to whether he contributes to the 25% or not. If he doesn't, get rid and lower your team cap.

 

[Coach G]

We need to extend him then.

Maybe. In previous expansion drafts, pending FAs "counted." We don't have clarity on that issue this time around. If, when we do get that answer (which would be before the draft, and therefore before any decision has to be made) you turn out to be right, then I would look for other ways to get to the 25% (we don't have clarity on that yet, either) pretty hard before extending Stafford.
Edit: Gil gave my response much more succinctly. Brevity is not my thing.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Maybe. In previous expansion drafts, pending FAs "counted." We don't have clarity on that issue this time around. If, when we do get that answer (which would be before the draft, and thereforoe before any decision has to be made) you turn out to be right, then I would look for other ways to get to the 25% (we don't have clarity on that yet, either) pretty hard before extending Stafford.
Edit: Gil gave my response much more succinctly. Brevity is not my thing.

If it's going to apply that way, why are so many pundits predicting a bunch of 2 yr contracts will be signed this offseason to prepare for expansion?

Wouldn't it be more prudent to sign 1 yr deals so you don't get stuck with the contract if it's not selected?

This is why I think Stafford won't be counted unless he's extended.

 

[10Ducky10]

We need to extend him then.

Why? The expansion draft will be held before he is an UFA.

 

[10Ducky10]

If we bridge Lowry, is he eligible for salary arbitration after that contract?