Player Discussion: All purpose: Zach Werenski thread.

[thebus88]

Or the realization that 1 of Jones or Murray is needed to make the "reads" on the bad "reads" that Werenski makes.

 

[Iron Balls McGinty]

I think he was rewarded for being better defensively so they could be put back together.

I think the reward should now be taken away. Last year’s ”rover” B.S. is being such a hinderance to this season.

 

[Monk]

Previously I would have said one of the things that impressed me about Werenski is how he seemed to be so effective so effortlessly.

Now that's entirely flipped on its head and it seems like when he's ineffective, it's due to a lack of effort. It often just doesn't look to me like he's moving with much urgency, at all.

 

[Crede777]

I think the reward should now be taken away. Last year’s ”rover” B.S. is being such a hinderance to this season.

I think a problem with this could be that the team is obviously structured where much of the offense comes from the defensemen.

That could mean the defensemen are required to take chances and pinch when they otherwise wouldn't on a different team.

The counter to this point would be that Murray, Jones, and Nutivaara seem to be able to handle things better.

 

[Viqsi]

I think a problem with this could be that the team is obviously structured where much of the offense comes from the defensemen.

That could mean the defensemen are required to take chances and pinch when they otherwise wouldn't on a different team.

The counter to this point would be that Murray, Jones, and Nutivaara seem to be able to handle things better.

That same structure was in place last year and he was more or less okay.

I'm personally going with the "growing pains" explanation. Sometimes we forget just how young some of these guys are.

 

[major major]

That same structure was in place last year and he was more or less okay.

I think he's basically the same as the last two years, our expectations are just higher and he's maybe not getting bailed out by Jones and Bob as much. He did play some of his best defensive games just last week so I'm not too worried. I would get a little draconian if I was coaching Werenski (cut minutes, battle drills, ban fortnite, etc...) but there's nothing new prompting that.

 

[EspenK]

He still has better stats this year than Hanifin (slightly) & Provorov.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

I recently wrote that I thought that management should restrain Zach offensively. I retract that

The kid has a chance to be an upper echelon, big scoring defenseman for a decade to come. While I'm not advocating the "rover" idea, I think that squelching his offensive instincts much in a game which is becoming more and more high scoring (thankfully) isn't in his or the CBJ best interests.

Let the plugs like Savard, Murray, Harrington and our lesser offensive capable forwards cover for him. Give up a few extra goals against for hopefully a lot more goals for.

 

[blahblah]

I'm personally going with the "growing pains" explanation. Sometimes we forget just how young some of these guys are.

He's a top pair D, he's also 21. We're in this position where if we play him in the role that he will eventually play in (26+ minutes a night), we'll have to deal with the problem that come from that. We also want to win. Good problem to have.

The good news is that Murray is doing pretty well right now, so we have options. We're running fairly well 5 deep. That 6th can be a bit sketchy. Veteran could be a good thing to look at to solidify things at the deadline.

 

[JohnnyJacket13]

He's a top pair D, he's also 21. We're in this position where if we play him in the role that he will eventually play in (26+ minutes a night), we'll have to deal with the problem that come from that. We also want to win. Good problem to have.

The good news is that Murray is doing pretty well right now, so we have options. We're running fairly well 5 deep. That 6th can be a bit sketchy. Veteran could be a good thing to look at to solidify things at the deadline.

Ian Cole

 

[blahblah]

Ian Cole

First thing that came to my mind.

 

[Mikos87]

Previously I would have said one of the things that impressed me about Werenski is how he seemed to be so effective so effortlessly.

Now that's entirely flipped on its head and it seems like when he's ineffective, it's due to a lack of effort. It often just doesn't look to me like he's moving with much urgency, at all.

Watched a nunber of CLB games. I see the same thing. He looks disengaged out there.

Has he always been like this?

 

[thebus88]

Watched a nunber of CLB games. I see the same thing. He looks disengaged out there.

Has he always been like this?

I'm just waiting for the "possibly playing through injury" rumors.

 

[major major]

Watched a nunber of CLB games. I see the same thing. He looks disengaged out there.

Has he always been like this?

Yes.

He's been groomed well to conserve his energy so he can play half the game. Trouble is you might not want such a large serving size when the food is bad.

 

[Maylo]

All 3 goals against tonight with him on the ice. That pairing with Nutella was 10 minutes nightmare. But then again he didn't look good with anyone this year.

 

[Monk]

Watched a nunber of CLB games. I see the same thing. He looks disengaged out there.

Has he always been like this?

He always looked like he was skating effortlessly and without urgency, but he somehow seemed to be well positioned and speedy nonetheless. Now he still looks effortless, but the results aren't there in that he seems to be getting beat more often and caught out of position more often... if that makes sense. So that effortlessness has transitioned from good to bad imo.

 

[major major]

He always looked like he was skating effortlessly and without urgency, but he somehow seemed to be well positioned and speedy nonetheless. Now he still looks effortless, but the results aren't there in that he seems to be getting beat more often and caught out of position more often... if that makes sense. So that effortlessness has transitioned from good to bad imo.

I swear Zach would get caught out of position just as frequently in his previous seasons. I remember games where he would need bailed out over and over again - like Bob stopping multiple breakaways. Bob hasn't been a world-beater this year, which is making other problems visible.

 

[Monk]

I swear Zach would get caught out of position just as frequently in his previous seasons. I remember games where he would need bailed out over and over again - like Bob stopping multiple breakaways. Bob hasn't been a world-beater this year, which is making other problems visible.

Definitely possible. It feels different to me this year for some reason. Maybe it's just my expectations that are different.

 

[Old Guy]

Okay..........

(Approx) 1/2 season of Zach Werenski remaining under his entry level contract. I will pose the question so that you get two bites of the apple.

If you were Jarmo what would you offer?
If you were Zach's agent what would be your ask?

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Okay..........

(Approx) 1/2 season of Zach Werenski remaining under his entry level contract. I will pose the question so that you get two bites of the apple.

If you were Jarmo what would you offer?
If you were Zach's agent what would be your ask?

Agent $8-8.5 million x 8 years.

CBJ $5.5-6 million x 6-8 years

 

[Inquiring Minds]

Agent $8-8.5 million x 8 years.

CBJ $5.5-6 million x 6-8 years

Just curious: Is that what you would be asking/offering, or what you think the agent/org will be asking/offering?

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Just curious: Is that what you would be asking/offering, or what you think the agent/org will be asking/offering?

My projections of what each side would initially ask/offer.

I would think there would be a healthy gap between the two sides in a negotiation like this. I also wouldn't project there to be that much trouble in signing-although the Nylander situation in Toronto may have opened up a huge can of worms with top RFAs.

 

[major major]

Agent $8-8.5 million x 8 years.

CBJ $5.5-6 million x 6-8 years

I think this is pretty much on target, and they'll probably settle close to $7m per. Except I don't see why the Jackets would want anything less than 8 years. Unless Werenski gets hit by a truck, he'll be getting even more after this contract is done.

 

[EspenK]

I agree with Cyclones initial asks and I would settle on $7mm for 8 years if I was GM.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

I think this is pretty much on target, and they'll probably settle close to $7m per. Except I don't see why the Jackets would want anything less than 8 years. Unless Werenski gets hit by a truck, he'll be getting even more after this contract is done.

I'm pretty sure that there's been a sensible shift in the thinking of most GMs.

Most players play their best in their mid 20s. Their peak contract value to a team is through age 32 or so. The recent contracts of Draisaitl, Eichel, Nylander (though I'm not sold on him), Guentzel, McDavid and other young RFAs in which the dollar and term values are high make sense. The probability of these players living up (or close to) their contracts is high. 30+ year old UFAs don't have the track record of living up to long term deals like younger players. Who wouldn't rather sign Matthews and Marner to 8 year deals over Bob and Panarin? Not that anyone wouldn't want all four of them, but the contract risk factor is highly tilted toward the latter two.

Crosby, Malkin, and Ovechkin were all signed to huge deals in their mid 20s and they've all outperformed their deals. The Dustin Browns, Callahans, Dubinskys, Ryans, Lucics have all been disasters.

I hope Jarmo and JD are completely over their mind-boggling dumb "prove it again" crap to young players who already have proven they can play at a high level. Signing a top young player without the burden of a NTC makes good sense almost all of the time. Signing late 20s and early 30s veterans to 6+ year deals generally doesn't.

I have no issue with signing ZW for 8 years now. 8 years at age 30 is another story.