jacketsnation
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2017
- 262
- 129
keep in mind that the jackets play tampa in 8 days but... they're done playing FLA.
I'd do itDoes this trade sound reasonable?
Panarin + Sonny Milano for Fiala, Tolvanen, and a 2nd.
Nashville upgrades Fiala to Panarin at the cost of Tolvanen and a low pick. Milano added to improve the pick to a 2nd rounder which replaces the one CBJ have already traded away. The pick could then be used to add in another deal or just add to out 2019 picks.
Nashville isn't going to trade both Fiala and Tolvanen. It's going to be strictly one or the other, if any. (And given the choice, I want Fiala.)Does this trade sound reasonable?
Panarin + Sonny Milano for Fiala, Tolvanen, and a 2nd.
Nashville upgrades Fiala to Panarin at the cost of Tolvanen and a low pick. Milano added to improve the pick to a 2nd rounder which replaces the one CBJ have already traded away. The pick could then be used to add in another deal or just add to our 2019 picks.
Nashville isn't going to trade both Fiala and Tolvanen. It's going to be strictly one or the other, if any. (And given the choice, I want Fiala.)
Honestly, I don't think he'd be available for Panarin in any case.And see, I'd prefer Tolvanen, but you are correct. Fat chance getting both.
And see, I'd prefer Tolvanen, but you are correct. Fat chance getting both.
You guys realize that he's stalled in his development, right? He's not doing the "meteoric superstar rise" thing anymore.I would want Tolvanen and it isn't close.
You guys realize that he's stalled in his development, right? He's not doing the "meteoric superstar rise" thing anymore.
You guys realize that he's stalled in his development, right? He's not doing the "meteoric superstar rise" thing anymore.
You know how Abramov got super-hot in juniors and was looking like he had major star potential and then came to the AHL and has suddenly been pedestrian and so he's still an excellent prospect but no longer looks like he's going to singlehandedly conquer the world?He is 19 years old. How exactly has he stalled in his development?
Fair enough. I just happen to think they have similar ceilings but Fiala has a higher floor because he's already done it.I'd be surprised if anyone on this board follow prospects as closely as yours truly.
I'd still prefer Tolvanen.
You know how Abramov got super-hot in juniors and was looking like he had major star potential and then came to the AHL and has suddenly been pedestrian and so he's still an excellent prospect but no longer looks like he's going to singlehandedly conquer the world?
It's kind of like that.
Okay, in that case I honestly don't get why you think the gap is that large.Well, I never thought Abramov was going to be a star. Also, I never thought Tolvanen was going to be a star.
Fair enough. I just happen to think they have similar ceilings but Fiala has a higher floor because he's already done it.
I could not possibly be less concerned about that injury, myself. As you said, it's been years. Indeed, I'd forgotten it had ever happened until your mentioning it reminded me.Fiala also horribly broke his femur a couple of years ago. I think Tolvanen has a bit higher ceiling myself, he won't make us forget Panarin, but I think he could be a player for us right away. I would worry about Fiala's development moving forward, I'm honestly surprised he came back to full health from it.
The first one is a no go, if it involves Wennberg being our #2 center. Second lineup looks much better, but my guess is PLD, and Duchene would flip. Duchene is a better face off guy, better passer, and has more speed. Not to mention, hes a better plaer than PLD at this point. Put Pld on Ottawa, away from Panarin, and Cam, and see if his #s would be close to Duchenes. Not a knock on him, but hes still growing into the position.Hi all, long-time reader, first-time poster. Big fan of much (but not all ) of your guys’s work.
The more I think about it, the less I like the notion of being both a buyer and a seller (i.e., trading Panarin/Bob and then trading for someone like Duchene or Stone).* I’m fine with the idea of standing pat/selling. (I lump standing pat and selling together because, like Jarmo, I think there’s a bar that teams should reach if they want either Panarin or Bob. If the best offer you get for Panarin is 1st & B prospect, just keep him for the stretch run/playoffs.) But this whole “trade a UFA and bring in another that hasn’t even played with these guys” doesn’t make sense to me.
Like many of you, I think this team, as it stands, is a notch below teams like Toronto and TB, and possibly Pittsburgh and Washington, and not quite a Cup contender, though anything can happen in the playoffs. Key words: as it stands. But how about, for a little insanity this afternoon, something I basically haven’t seen mentioned anywhere at all: the possibility of being a buyer only? As in, keeping Panarin/Bob AND trading for Stone or Duchene?
I think we’d be the favorites to get out of the Metropolitan side of the bracket in that scenario. By no means would it be a guarantee, but I honestly believe we’d have a better team than Pittsburgh, Washington and the Islanders and have a great shot at reaching the conference finals. I think it’d put us right about at Toronto’s level. We’d still be a little below Tampa, but Washington was a notch below them last year too, plus Toronto could upset them anyway. I’d say we could legitimately call ourselves Cup contenders, even if not at the level of Tampa/Winnipeg/Nashville.
It would likely cost a pretty penny. (I’d imagine Stone a bit more than Duchene.) And if the team still doesn’t win a round, and not only didn’t get assets for Panarin but actually gave up assets... yikes. But either of these would be extremely potent:
Panarin - PLD - Atkinson
Bjorkstrand - Wennberg - Stone
Foligno - Jenner - Anderson
Duclair - Nash - Sedlak/Hannikainen
Panarin - PLD - Atkinson
Wennberg - Duchene - Bjorkstrand
Foligno - Jenner - Anderson
Duclair -Nash - Sedlak/Hannikainen
(In the above scenario, I like that Jenner line as it stands, but you could also move him to LW and bump Wennberg down to 3C. And I like Duclair in the lineup but know Torts might prefer the current 4th line or Dubinsky in there.)
Like I said, I wouldn’t mind the stand pat/sell option... but I also wouldn’t complain if Jarmo was crazy and went for it. Curious if other people have thought about this and agree.
*The one exception is if Stone/Duchene agree to a sign-and-trade. Then I’m fine with trading Panarin if those assets are part of the deal to get the guy from Ottawa.
How about we pay you guys to take Wennberg, only if you take on Larsen (our beloved assistant coach), as well.Hey CBJ fans. Yotes fan here. I've seen some tweets that our two teams have been keeping an eye on each other. Could be nothing, but I suspect we're interested in Wennberg. I know he's had a rough season or two now and the contract is a little out of whack for what he's produced, so just trying to get a sense of the fan sentiment toward him. Where do you place his value? I don't think it'd be "dump at all costs" but maybe a little more so than a comparable talent given his contract. The other thing here is I don't really set a fit on our side in terms of what we'd give up for Wennberg.
Fiala also horribly broke his femur a couple of years ago. I think Tolvanen has a bit higher ceiling myself, he won't make us forget Panarin, but I think he could be a player for us right away. I would worry about Fiala's development moving forward, I'm honestly surprised he came back to full health from it.
I'd previously proposed a Wennberg-for-Stepan swap; would love to know if that's (still? ever?) a viable idea.Hey CBJ fans. Yotes fan here. I've seen some tweets that our two teams have been keeping an eye on each other. Could be nothing, but I suspect we're interested in Wennberg. I know he's had a rough season or two now and the contract is a little out of whack for what he's produced, so just trying to get a sense of the fan sentiment toward him. Where do you place his value? I don't think it'd be "dump at all costs" but maybe a little more so than a comparable talent given his contract. The other thing here is I don't really see a fit on our side in terms of what we'd give up for Wennberg.