Recalled/Assigned: Eric O'Dell on waivers CRITICAL MOD WARNING POST #176

[Peter Tagli Eddie]

[mod]

I don't think he will be claimed. If anyone does it's Panik.

 

[ihadtochangethename]

why is everyone acting like a guy who has shown promise being sent down is not a big deal when we are still the same BAD team. Meawhile Lowsy is thy saviour, and i believe in Adam too.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

.... to reiterate, this was Maurice's decision. He has control over the roster at this point working with the players that Chevy has accumulated.

That doesn't make it a good move.

 

[Guerzy]

I don't think I ever really "overreact" to things around here, but I just don't like this.

We seen 30 NHL games from O'Dell last season where he showed fairly well. I was watching a guy who could play in the NHL, in my opinion. And he's even proven to contribute consistently and efficiently in the AHL. In my opinion if O'Dell was in the line-up even in a 3rd/4th line role, bottom 6, I think we see a fine, efficient, quality two-way player who could contribute a bit, say 7-12 goals, 20-25 points or so, give or take. Solid, respectable bottom 6 production. One that can play wing and centre, slide up and down your bottom 6/top 9 (3rd line if need be), etc. You don't think he could be those things over a Thorburn or Peluso? I fully understand Maurice wants "certain players for certain roles here", I just don't agree with it when we have a 23-man roster with BOTH Thorburn and Peluso... can we just pick one?

Holden ... ... if we wanted him to get in game-shape, could we not of sent him down on a conditioning assignment? Or can that be done with players on two-way contracts? Or would we have had to wait until the regular season was underway?

My ideal 23-man roster based on what we have/have kept. The most efficient to me, would be...

Ladd - Little - Frolik/Byfuglien
Kane - Scheifele - Wheeler
Lowry - Perreault - Frolik/Byfuglien
Galiardi - Slater - O'Dell
Thorburn OR Peluso
Halischuk

Enstrom - Bogosian
Stuart - Trouba
Clitsome - Postma
Pardy

Pavelec
Hutchinson

 

[surixon]

Kings sent Brayden Schenn on a conditioning stint when he was on a 2-way and not even waiver eligible to Manchester.

Here's the CBA quote, he is eligible for a conditioning stint


Not a single thing about one-way/two-way. As that has absolutely nothing to do with conditioning loans.

He's the 9th best forward on the team (8th really since Byfuglien is a D). Who's better in the top 9? Lowry? Halischuk? THORBURN? Come right on.

I wonder if they tried to put him on a conditioning stint but he didn't agree. I believe the player has to accept. He probably wanted to take his chances in waivers as well. Can't say I blame him.

 

[Whileee]

Not to mention Lowry. Even granted the Lowry love is justified (which I don't) Lowry could be sent down freely while O'Dell is given the opportunity that he has shown he merits. At this time of year he may well squeak through waivers but that won't make this a good move. O'Dell is probably a better player than several who will remain here. We could argue all day (no, week) exactly who should be on that list and why but I think almost all of us would agree that there are some who should.

...based on what? He's a better player than Peluso and Thorburn, but they have a different role in Maurice's eyes. But I haven't seen much to suggest that he's better than Galiardi or Halischuk, and I can think of a bunch of reasons why I prefer to have Lowry with the Jets instead of O'Dell.

 

[garret9]

...based on what? He's a better player than Peluso and Thorburn, but they have a different role in Maurice's eyes. But I haven't seen much to suggest that he's better than Galiardi or Halischuk, and I can think of a bunch of reasons why I prefer to have Lowry with the Jets instead of O'Dell.

I wouldn't be surprised if he's better than one or both of Galiardi and Halischuk...

He could not be, but he could be.

 

[johnnynucleo]

I don't think I ever really "overreact" to things around here, but I just don't like this.

We seen 30 NHL games from O'Dell last season where he showed fairly well. I was watching a guy who could play in the NHL, in my opinion. And he's even proven to contribute consistently and efficiently in the AHL. In my opinion if O'Dell was in the line-up even in a 3rd/4th line role, bottom 6, I think we see a fine, efficient, quality two-way player who could contribute a bit, say 7-12 goals, 20-25 points or so, give or take. Solid, respectable bottom 6 production. One that can play wing and centre, slide up and down your bottom 6/top 9 (3rd line if need be), etc. You don't think he could be those things over a Thorburn or Peluso? I fully understand Maurice wants "certain players for certain roles here", I just don't agree with it when we have a 23-man roster with BOTH Thorburn and Peluso... can we just pick one?
Holden ... ... if we wanted him to get in game-shape, could we not of sent him down on a conditioning assignment? Or can that be done with players on two-way contracts? Or would we have had to wait until the regular season was underway?

Regarding the bolded.....the reason we have both on the roster is because Thorbs can't actually do the role of enforcer, so they need Peluso to do that. Peluso actually fulfils the role, while Thorbs just wastes a roster spot, because what else are they gonna do with him? Sign a 3 year contract and then waive him?

 

[Positive]

Halischuk has had a better career and a good camp. How do you look him in the eye and tell him he lost his position to a guy with 30 games NHL experience and 3 career goals who missed training camp? Answer: you don't. I thought that we didn't want older players without as much upside "blocking" young prospects. Lowry had a terrific camp and has been improving very fast through his development. I much prefer to see him on the 3rd line than O'Dell for a bunch of reasons.

If O'Dell is that desirable, I say trade him. He doesn't have a long-term future with the franchise. Instead, I am pretty sure we'll see him clear waivers.

I agree with your assessment, and similarly doubt that a team will take a flyer on a guy with O'Dell's NHL numbers, who has an undisclosed injury, and missed all of TC and pre-season.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

Halischuk has had a better career and a good camp. How do you look him in the eye and tell him he lost his position to a guy with 30 games NHL experience and 3 career goals who missed training camp? Answer: you don't. I thought that we didn't want older players without as much upside "blocking" young prospects. Lowry had a terrific camp and has been improving very fast through his development. I much prefer to see him on the 3rd line than O'Dell for a bunch of reasons.

If O'Dell is that desirable, I say trade him. He doesn't have a long-term future with the franchise. Instead, I am pretty sure we'll see him clear waivers.

It's a business. You do what you have to. If it hurts someone's feelings, well too damn bad.

You have to be able to evaluate talent and project players past two weeks where players are just getting their skating legs back.

You are once again being intentionally overly literal to prove a point I never made. By that logic Ehlers would be 1st line LW since he has most upside. Obviously not. O'Dell has proven that he can score at EVERY level. Once again Jets refuse to give players that have earned their chance a chance. O'Dell is young and has upside. Lowry can also have a chance. I'm not advocating cutting him. Cut the dead weight that don't add anything or even hurt the team (Peluso, Thorburn, Halischuk). Jets seem to be completely unable to project players at all.

I thought this organization wanted to be one where young players earn their time. Why then do they consistently refuse to give chances to players who have earned that right?

 

[Whileee]

why is everyone acting like a guy who has shown promise being sent down is not a big deal when we are still the same BAD team. Meawhile Lowsy is thy saviour, and i believe in Adam too.

Why is everyone acting as though we are one Eric O'Dell on the 3rd or 4th line from being a contender?

 

[wpgsilver]

Why is everyone acting as though we are one Eric O'Dell on the 3rd or 4th line from being a contender?

I don't get it.

Maurice wants a big, fast, physical team.
Where does Eric O'Dell fit that?
He's a fringe NHL player.

 

[truck]

Why is everyone acting as though we are one Eric O'Dell on the 3rd or 4th line from being a contender?

I don't think that is close to the implication here.

People are confused as the why he'd be sent down vs Thorburn or Peluso and some are worried about what the says about the organizational philosophy.

 

[johnnynucleo]

Why is everyone acting as though we are one Eric O'Dell on the 3rd or 4th line from being a contender?

Man, you're missing the point. Nobody thinks O'Dell is the missing piece that will take us to the promise land. The point is that MGMT would rather keep gusy who maybe fill a small role on the team while waiving guys who are versatile and can add real depth to our roster. It's about bad decisions being made time and again.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

Holden ... ... if we wanted him to get in game-shape, could we not of sent him down on a conditioning assignment? Or can that be done with players on two-way contracts? Or would we have had to wait until the regular season was underway?

We could have sent him on a conditioning stint. He would have had to agree, but I doubt that was the problem.

I wonder if they tried to put him on a conditioning stint but he didn't agree. I believe the player has to accept. He probably wanted to take his chances in waivers as well. Can't say I blame him.

It'd be shortsighted by O'Dell if he did reject it. Waivers is risky even for players that should be in NHL (ie O'Dell). Risking alot of money (he would still be getting NHL money on stint) and it's harder to get claimed right now.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

There should be no surprise that a borderline player who was out the majority of camp is sent down.

No complaints from me.

Now if he isnt the first player up, then I will whine and complain.

and if he is picked up?

I think he probably doesn't because at this time of year teams are concentrated entirely on their internal issues but he certainly can play in the NHL.

 

[johnnynucleo]

I don't get it.

Maurice wants a big, fast, physical team.
Where does Eric O'Dell fit that?He's a fringe NHL player.

Where does Chris Thorburn fit that?

 

[garret9]

There are some who said Thorburn's contract doesn't block players because he plays different roles.

My question is:
If Thorburn wasn't extended... let's say someone offered him more money... would they have gotten another Thorburn type player? or would one more non-Thorburn type mae the team like O`Dell?

Honest question.

 

[johnnynucleo]

There are some who said Thorburn's contract doesn't block players because he plays different roles.

My question is:
If Thorburn wasn't extended... let's say someone offered him more money... would they have gotten another Thorburn type player? or would one more non-Thorburn type mae the team like O`Dell?

Honest question.

EXACTLY what I've been saying all along. There should be room on our marginal team for a guy like O'Dell, but there isn't because of a wasted roster spot held by Thorbs

 

[Positive]

I thought this organization wanted to be one where young players earn their time. Why then do they consistently refuse to give chances to players who have earned that right?

I don't think they consistently refuse at all. A more accurate statement is that they are inconsistent. I'd argue that Lowry, and Hutchinson (and in some respects Trouba and Scheifele) have been given their chances and scored.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

Man, you're missing the point. Nobody thinks O'Dell is the missing piece that will take us to the promise land. The point is that MGMT would rather keep gusy who maybe fill a small role on the team while waiving guys who are versatile and can add real depth to our roster. It's about bad decisions being made time and again.

This is exactly it. It's just one in the pattern that Chevy has shown.

 

[Whileee]

It's a business. You do what you have to. If it hurts someone's feelings, well too damn bad.

You have to be able to evaluate talent and project players past two weeks where players are just getting their skating legs back.

You are once again being intentionally overly literal to prove a point I never made. By that logic Ehlers would be 1st line LW since he has most upside. Obviously not. O'Dell has proven that he can score at EVERY level. Once again Jets refuse to give players that have earned their chance a chance. O'Dell is young and has upside. Lowry can also have a chance. I'm not advocating cutting him. Cut the dead weight that don't add anything or even hurt the team (Peluso, Thorburn, Halischuk). Jets seem to be completely unable to project players at all.

I thought this organization wanted to be one where young players earn their time. Why then do they consistently refuse to give chances to players who have earned that right?

Halischuk earned that right in training camp. O'Dell didn't exactly burn it up at the NHL when he had a decent run of games (including quite a few with Kane) last season. It's important to instill that culture, instead of gifting players spots because they've shown promise at lower levels. Halischuk is only two years older than O'Dell.

You say that the Jets are unable to project players, and yet that is exactly what they are doing by playing Lowry on the 3rd line. Maurice explicitly said that he is excited about how Lowry performed in pre-season, and even moreso by how he projects as a player in the next year or two.

Sorry... just can't get worked up about this, and certainly can't see this as part of some larger narrative.

 

[wpgsilver]

Where does Chris Thorburn fit that?

Well if you are asking where Thorburn fits in big, fast and physical, I'd say two of the three. Unfortunately, he's not a good hockey player.

If Maurice wants a fourth line that bangs, and uses their speed O'Dell doesn't fit that role.
I'm not saying its the right call, but O'Dell doesn't bring that.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Good grief people get worked up over our fourth line.

He shouldn't be on our 4th line. He should be on our 3rd line.

 

[ihadtochangethename]

I don't think that is close to the implication here.

People are confused as the why he'd be sent down vs Thorburn or Peluso and some are worried about what the says about the organizational philosophy.

Also, i know he is a rookie and needs support and due to his size alone i have been incredibly anxious of Adam joining the big club, but im just confused as to the philosophy, when Chevy and Maurice, cant seem to stop talking about him, as though he is the reason we will contend.

A lot of decisions has me flummoxed.