2016 Draft Thread (Lottery: April 30th, 7PM EST)

[Hello Johnny]

Wing is an area of strength and we have areas of weakness. I apologize for bringing up such radical thought. Carry on.

 

[WannabeFinn]

Wing is an area of strength and we have areas of weakness. I apologize for bringing up such radical thought. Carry on.

It's an area of strength because of Saad, though. Remove Saad, move Jenner to center, trade away Hartnell, and we're suddenly not so deep on the wing.

 

[JohnnyJacket13]

It's an area of strength because of Saad, though. Remove Saad, move Jenner to center, trade away Hartnell, and we're suddenly not so deep on the wing.

Exactly. Saad is one of three untouchables on this roster, with Jenner and Jones being the other two. If anything, I would be looking to move Hartnell, Foligno or even Dubinsky before Saad in any scenario.

 

[JohnnyJacket13]

Are any of the top-3 defensemen (Chychrun, Juolevi, Sergachev) close to making the jump to the NHL? If we slip to 5-7, I would be real interested in selecting one of them.

 

[Hello Johnny]

It's an area of strength because of Saad, though. Remove Saad, move Jenner to center, trade away Hartnell, and we're suddenly not so deep on the wing.

This is all under the pretense of drafting Laine, and doesn't need to happen the day after the draft. Laine would need to prove something first, of course.

 

[JohnnyJacket13]

This is all under the pretense of drafting Laine, and doesn't need to happen the day after the draft. Laine would need to prove something first, of course.

There's no reason why we can't both Saad and Laine on the roster in 3 years. There are other guys that would (and should) be moved before him in order to stay cap compliant.

 

[Jackets16]

Exactly. Saad is one of three untouchables on this roster, with Jenner and Jones being the other two. If anything, I would be looking to move Hartnell, Foligno or even Dubinsky before Saad in any scenario.

I don't know a ton about them, but I would put them all behind guys we already have in our system as far as being ready. They may end up being better, but we have enough guys who are close to ready, IMO, that we shouldn't draft a defenseman hoping they can help us soon.

 

[major major]

Wing is an area of strength and we have areas of weakness. I apologize for bringing up such radical thought. Carry on.

No worries, it's worth discussing.

I think the club actually doesn't have huge (positional) holes that merit trading a core guy like Saad, though I'd argue playmaking is needed at any position.

Murray-Jones need to be better, but probably will be given that they are so young. The play of Kukan and Werenski in Lake Erie is encouraging, and with Savard still only 25, things are looking fine in the back end.

We don't have a top C, but have several top six C options, and given Torts' forward system it doesn't appear that C is that different from the wing.

So position isn't as much of an issue right now, to my mind. But if you can land a top flight playmaker at any position, I'll be listening.

 

[major major]

I don't know a ton about them, but I would put them all behind guys we already have in our system as far as being ready. They may end up being better, but we have enough guys who are close to ready, IMO, that we shouldn't draft a defenseman hoping they can help us soon.

I'm not sure the exact context of your point, but i think i agree. Drafting for immediate needs is foolish. I'm not always a BPA guy but you need to have some big long term holes to justify drifting away from the BPA strategy, and our lineup doesn't have holes that big.

 

[Hello Johnny]

There's no reason why we can't both Saad and Laine on the roster in 3 years. There are other guys that would (and should) be moved before him in order to stay cap compliant.

This isn't an effort to save cap space. If we could get a player of Saad's caliber either on defense or at center, I think we'd have to at least be open to the idea. I'm not insisting on trading him for picks and prospects.

No worries, it's worth discussing.

I think the club actually doesn't have huge (positional) holes that merit trading a core guy like Saad, though I'd argue playmaking is needed at any position.

Murray-Jones need to be better, but probably will be given that they are so young. The play of Kukan and Werenski in Lake Erie is encouraging, and with Savard still only 25, things are looking fine in the back end.

We don't have a top C, but have several top six C options, and given Torts' forward system it doesn't appear that C is that different from the wing.

So position isn't as much of an issue right now, to my mind. But if you can land a top flight playmaker at any position, I'll be listening.

Thank you for engaging in some actual discussion.

Saad's value is in the goalscoring department, and in the scenario of drafting Laine (a goal-scorer), we would additionally have Atkinson, Jenner, Hartnell, and Bjorkstrand capable of putting the puck in the net. As you've alluded to, we lack playmakers. With Saad having significant value, he would yield us the greatest return and leave us with a more rounded roster. At least, that's the idea I would have going into trade talks with anyone else – which is to say that the right player would need to be coming the other way.

 

[Cowumbus]

This isn't an effort to save cap space. If we could get a player of Saad's caliber either on defense or at center, I think we'd have to at least be open to the idea. I'm not insisting on trading him for picks and prospects.





Thank you for engaging in some actual discussion.

Saad's value is in the goalscoring department, and in the scenario of drafting Laine (a goal-scorer), we would additionally have Atkinson, Jenner, Hartnell, and Bjorkstrand capable of putting the puck in the net. As you've alluded to, we lack playmakers. With Saad having significant value, he would yield us the greatest return and leave us with a more rounded roster. At least, that's the idea I would have going into trade talks with anyone else – which is to say that the right player would need to be coming the other way.

Then trade Laine Bc he is younger and has more value. The fact is Saad is a winner, and part of the core. Yes he holds value but that doesn't mean we should trade him Bc he does. Plenty of other options. You don't trade Anisimov + Dano and lock up Saad long term, to trade him later.

 

[Xoggz22]

Continue to build the depth. Saad can play second fiddle to Laine for all I care. I'd love to have a team Good enough to put Saad on the second line. Wow! Crazy to talk of trading Saad at this point. His contract should be very good through the length...

 

[WannabeFinn]

Are any of the top-3 defensemen (Chychrun, Juolevi, Sergachev) close to making the jump to the NHL? If we slip to 5-7, I would be real interested in selecting one of them.

Chychrun is the closest IMO. He plays the heaviest minutes and is the most mature physically. I think he could step into a sheltered role immediately.

 

[Jackets16]

I'm not sure the exact context of your point, but i think i agree. Drafting for immediate needs is foolish. I'm not always a BPA guy but you need to have some big long term holes to justify drifting away from the BPA strategy, and our lineup doesn't have holes that big.

I'm saying our prospect defensemen are good enough that I doubt any defenseman we draft this year will be good enough that he will be playing in Columbus in the next couple of years.

 

[Jackets16]

This isn't an effort to save cap space. If we could get a player of Saad's caliber either on defense or at center, I think we'd have to at least be open to the idea. I'm not insisting on trading him for picks and prospects.





Thank you for engaging in some actual discussion.

Saad's value is in the goalscoring department, and in the scenario of drafting Laine (a goal-scorer), we would additionally have Atkinson, Jenner, Hartnell, and Bjorkstrand capable of putting the puck in the net. As you've alluded to, we lack playmakers. With Saad having significant value, he would yield us the greatest return and leave us with a more rounded roster. At least, that's the idea I would have going into trade talks with anyone else – which is to say that the right player would need to be coming the other way.

Why do we have to do that though? We better be getting a player a lot better than Saad if we are trading him. He is young, really good, on a good deal, and we have no real needs with the system we play. We already know Saad can play in our system, so why take the chance of trading for someone who may not be able to play as well in our system?

 

[Viqsi]

Why do we have to do that though? We better be getting a player a lot better than Saad if we are trading him. He is young, really good, on a good deal, and we have no real needs with the system we play. We already know Saad can play in our system, so why take the chance of trading for someone who may not be able to play as well in our system?

Because an upgrade at some other position might be possible?

I'm not saying it's something we should be eager to jump on, but it's at least worth considering if we do get Laine and he really does do what he's supposed to be able to do. One has to balance the roster properly what with the cap and all, and we are in an awkward cap position.

Admittedly, I seriously doubt we'd actually get what we'd hope for in exploring such a deal, but that doesn't mean it's not worth exploring.

 

[Jackets16]

I'm not a big fan of weakening one area to strengthen another, unless it's a player you are looking to trade already.

 

[Johnny Jacket]

I'm not a big fan of weakening one area to strengthen another, unless it's a player you are looking to trade already.

RyJo

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

Seth Jones was UNTOUCHABLE until we put Johansen out there and the Predators GM changed his mind. It takes a village.

 

[Hello Johnny]

Why do we have to do that though?

I never said we had to trade Brandon Saad, just a topic for discussion under the condition that Laine becomes a Jacket.

We better be getting a player a lot better than Saad if we are trading him. He is young, really good, on a good deal, and we have no real needs with the system we play. We already know Saad can play in our system, so why take the chance of trading for someone who may not be able to play as well in our system?

What, do you think I'd just trade him for peanuts? I would assume that his value + his salary would lead to us acquiring a young player with a similar contract, and if said young player had said contract, I'd assume he would be an impact player at a position of weakness.

This would be a good old fashioned hockey trade. You know, like the one that transpired, what, 3 months ago?

 

[Hello Johnny]

For instance, there's a Ryan McDonagh thread on the trade subforum and I brought Saad's name up. I'm not trading him for Connor Murphy, for example, or some other good-but-not-elite young player. Saad has high value and I'd demand a high-value player coming back.

This really isn't a crazy thing to throw out there if it improves and rounds out your team. If it doesn't improve your team, yeah, it's bat**** ****ing crazy. But those aren't my intentions.

 

[Hello Johnny]

Then trade Laine Bc he is younger and has more value.

But he doesn't make $6 million, and a player that I would want to trade him for would hopefully be established enough to be making good money, like Saad. If Laine was the main piece, we'd have to add some negative value contracts (Tyutin, Clarkson) in order to take in the new player, which would bring Laine's value down. (EDIT: actually, I suppose if our target was a defenseman, JJ or Savard could be expendable in this proposed deal involving Laine for a clear upgrade on D) (DOUBLE EDIT: ...but I'd rather have Laine over Saad to be honest, so here we are)

The fact is Saad is a winner, and part of the core. Yes he holds value but that doesn't mean we should trade him Bc he does. Plenty of other options.

I don't disagree with any of this.

You don't trade Anisimov + Dano and lock up Saad long term, to trade him later.

Anisimov and Dano are fine players, but I'd trade them again in a second for a player other than Saad who fills a different area of need at the same level that Saad does.

 

[WannabeFinn]

Laine wins playoffs MVP as his team Tappara wins Liiga championship

10 goals and 5 assists in 18 games

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Want Laine. Want

 

[Cowumbus]

But he doesn't make $6 million, and a player that I would want to trade him for would hopefully be established enough to be making good money, like Saad. If Laine was the main piece, we'd have to add some negative value contracts (Tyutin, Clarkson) in order to take in the new player, which would bring Laine's value down. (EDIT: actually, I suppose if our target was a defenseman, JJ or Savard could be expendable in this proposed deal involving Laine for a clear upgrade on D) (DOUBLE EDIT: ...but I'd rather have Laine over Saad to be honest, so here we are)



I don't disagree with any of this.



Anisimov and Dano are fine players, but I'd trade them again in a second for a player other than Saad who fills a different area of need at the same level that Saad does.

My point was saying we traded two good players for a great player, solely to have that great player (Saad) be a part of our core moving forward. I don't understand why we can't have 2 great wingers on our team. Also Laine hasn't proved anything yet, whereas Saad is a 30G scorer

Also McDonaugh is not the player he once was.