Confirmed with Link: Bjorkstrand to Seattle for 2023 3rd & 4th round picks

[Viqsi]

What makes it an annoying meme is the assumption that it wasn't possible? Or that it was only possible by also surrendering other valuable assets?

I think it's more the constant repetition. I feel the same way but I don't feel the need to keep bringing it up.

 

[Halberdier]

This is a good summary of why the Jackets needed to shed another winger contract on top of Nyquist's by 2023, and why Bjorkstrand isn't necessarily integral to the long term plan. What I don't like is that it is presented as "this need in 2023 is why we had to move Bjorkstrand now" as if a player with that contract would be hard to move next March or next June when we need to. It superficially looks like we sold under duress but as I pointed out earlier, we were only about $1.6m over the cap, there is much more to explain here.

I agree on everything other, but isn't that a bit a strawman to say the situation was presented *just* as a -23 cap crunch issue?

I haven't heard for example Jarmo describing it that way.

Yes, the -23 cap situation was pressing and needed to be addressed, and in practice it needed to be addressed either by trade or with possible LTIR solution in unofortunate (and unlikely) case for example Jenner was not able to play next season. All "just run a 20 man roster and can't let your prospects play" -solutions seemed so annoyng that I can see why Jarmo probably ignored that right away.

But there were obviously lot more on the table that Jarmo tried to fix with Bjorkstrand trade:

-23 cap situation
-24-26 cap situation
-needed TOP-6-9 spots for the prospects going forward
-given that the prospects pan out (crucial for any hopes of contending), it's hard to see TOP-6 spot for Bjorkstrand anymore in 1-2 years and while everyone would just love him as a 3rd liner on a great team, you don't necessarily want to pay 5.4M for a 3rd line winger on a front-heavy team

Six birds with one stone.

 

[Forepar]

I agree on everything other, but isn't that a bit a strawman to say the situation was presented *just* as a -23 cap crunch issue?

I haven't heard for example Jarmo describing it that way.

Yes, the -23 cap situation was pressing and needed to be addressed, and in practice it needed to be addressed either by trade or with possible LTIR solution in unofortunate (and unlikely) case for example Jenner was not able to play next season. All "just run a 20 man roster and can't let your prospects play" -solutions seemed so annoyng that I can see why Jarmo probably ignored that right away.

But there were obviously lot more on the table that Jarmo tried to fix with Bjorkstrand trade:

-23 cap situation
-24-26 cap situation
-needed TOP-6-9 spots for the prospects going forward
-given that the prospects pan out (crucial for any hopes of contending), it's hard to see TOP-6 spot for Bjorkstrand anymore in 1-2 years and while everyone would just love him as a 3rd liner on a great team, you don't necessarily want to pay 5.4M for a 3rd line winger on a front-heavy team

Six birds with one stone.

I see four birds, but I get your point!

 

[Halberdier]

I see four birds, but I get your point!

6, if you count -24, -25 & -26 seasons separately

 

[majormajor]

My theory of the day is internal cap limit. We were $1.6m over the league cap, which makes it nonsensical to choose Bjorkstrand as the player to dump. But if our actual cap limit was about $79m then it makes a bit more sense, then our options would be much more restricted.

 

[majormajor]

Yes, the -23 cap situation was pressing and needed to be addressed, and in practice it needed to be addressed either by trade or with possible LTIR solution in unofortunate (and unlikely) case for example Jenner was not able to play next season.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. The situation in 2023 needs to be addressed now? Folks have said that but i really don't think so. Trade Bjorky next year if you want to.

All "just run a 20 man roster and can't let your prospects play" -solutions seemed so annoyng that I can see why Jarmo probably ignored that right away.

"Can't let your prospects play" is the opposite of what happens. The worst case scenario if you don't find a trade by game one is that you can't have players sitting in the press box until a trade clears cap, that means it isn't an option for Jarmo to stash his prospects there.

 

[JohnnyJacket13]

My theory of the day is internal cap limit. We were $1.6m over the league cap, which makes it nonsensical to choose Bjorkstrand as the player to dump. But if our actual cap limit was about $79m then it makes a bit more sense, then our options would be much more restricted.

There’s no internal cap. We need wiggle room to fit a call up or two (or 3) under the cap when injuries happen and those players can’t be LTIR’d.

 

[majormajor]

There’s no internal cap. We need wiggle room to fit a call up or two (or 3) under the cap when injuries happen and those players can’t be LTIR’d.

I don't think we know that. In the past Jarmo has said that there was no internal cap when it sure looked like it was an issue.

 

[Halberdier]

I'm not sure what you're talking about. The situation in 2023 needs to be addressed now? Folks have said that but i really don't think so. Trade Bjorky next year if you want to.



"Can't let your prospects play" is the opposite of what happens. The worst case scenario if you don't find a trade by game one is that you can't have players sitting in the press box until a trade clears cap, that means it isn't an option for Jarmo to stash his prospects there.

I used past sense. And for 23 I meant 22-23 season. The 22-23 situation had to be addressed somehow, and it was adressed by Jarmo & the boys by trading Bjorkstrand. There were some options, but none of them were good.

Yes, now that the situation was addressed by trading one of the TOP-6 wingers, prospects have 1 more spot to fight for and get better, when compared to no-trades alternative. Most likely CBJ won't be a contender this season, so I think right now is the perfect opportunity to let 1-2 more prospects to have a lot of quality minutes on NHL beside guys like Voracek, Gaudreau, Laine, Nyquist, Jenner. After the next season it's likely one of them is properly ready for full time TOP-6 job, and that's when Nyquist probably retires or continues as bottom-6 guy with smaller salary.

I have high hopes on Sillinger, Johnson, Marchenko this season, and also I am keen to see whether Texier or even Bemström (or even Chinakov) have something to offer. I think right now it's crucial for CBJ to have roster spots for these guys, and since Johnny "stole" one spot for them for the next 7 seasons, I think the free spot for prospects is the silver lining of trading Bjork.

 

[CBJx614]

.

I have high hopes on Sillinger, Johnson, Marchenko this season, and also I am keen to see whether Texier or even Bemström (or even Chinakov) have something to offer. I think right now it's crucial for CBJ to have roster spots for these guys, and since Johnny "stole" one spot for them for the next 7 seasons, I think the free spot for prospects is the silver lining of trading Bjork.

One of these players is not like the rest.


Out of all the players listed in that quote(outside of Gaudreau) Texier is the only one whose all but guaranteed a spot on the roster. IIRC Jarmo was quoted saying he was our best player when he got hurt last season. The only (somewhat) valid question around Texier was if he was coming back. Which since has been put to bed that he's coming back. It's not a question of if Texier plays, it's which line in the top 9 does he fit into.

 

[LJ7]

My theory of the day is internal cap limit. We were $1.6m over the league cap, which makes it nonsensical to choose Bjorkstrand as the player to dump. But if our actual cap limit was about $79m then it makes a bit more sense, then our options would be much more restricted.

It's possible but I would sooner believe some combination of these reasons: that it would require a first to part with Nyquist and they did not want that, the FO thinks waiting will only drive up prices to free cap space, they want to put players at ease as soon as possible, and they love the new toys. Offering Panarin $12m (pre covid albeit) and remodeling the locker room and gym tricked out with saunas, hot tubs, cold tubs, LED flat screens and all that makes me think ownership is willing to spend whatever.

 

[Halberdier]

One of these players is not like the rest.


Out of all the players listed in that quote(outside of Gaudreau) Texier is the only one whose all but guaranteed a spot on the roster. IIRC Jarmo was quoted saying he was our best player when he got hurt last season. The only (somewhat) valid question around Texier was if he was coming back. Which since has been put to bed that he's coming back. It's not a question of if Texier plays, it's which line in the top 9 does he fit into.

Yes, Texier is good, but maybe not top-6-good going forward and I am eager to see whether he could be even that. Being the best player on the team I don't buy, but I like him a lot and want to see him being successful.

Texier is one of the possible, though improbable centers for the 1st line stars.

 

[CBJx614]

Yes, Texier is good, but maybe not top-6-good going forward and I am eager to see whether he could be even that. Being the best player on the team I don't buy, but I like him a lot and want to see him being successful.

Texier is one of the possible, though improbable centers for the 1st line stars.

overall best player on the team? No, but at that point last season? its definitely high, he was already at career highs across the board and had more goals last season than the rest of previous two seasons combined. He was engaged and helping lead the team into battle.

However, his FO% numbers have remained....less than ideal. And this is someone who had him slotted as a possible 1C. His play style could fit really well with Laine and Gaudreau.

 

[majormajor]

It's possible but I would sooner believe some combination of these reasons: that it would require a first to part with Nyquist and they did not want that, the FO thinks waiting will only drive up prices to free cap space, they want to put players at ease as soon as possible, and they love the new toys. Offering Panarin $12m (pre covid albeit) and remodeling the locker room and gym tricked out with saunas, hot tubs, cold tubs, LED flat screens and all that makes me think ownership is willing to spend whatever.

My thinking was that losing a fortune in the last few years, and perhaps the fact that the team isn't as competitive, has lowered the internal cap. The idea would be that they were willing to bump it up for Gaudreau but not all the way up to $82.5m.

Obviously it's just a guess. It could be all the things you mentioned but I would then have a hard time explaining how they made the move with such duress, if they were that close to being under the cap. If it was a matter of finding space for the kids I still think they approach it with more patience and wait until the market opens up in the Fall.

 

[koteka]

The Ducks get John Klingberg for one year. Maybe they can flip him at the deadline (maybe even to Dallas) with 50% retention for a decent return.

That is how they are using their cap instead of trading for Bjorkstrand.

 

[LJ7]

My thinking was that losing a fortune in the last few years, and perhaps the fact that the team isn't as competitive, has lowered the internal cap. The idea would be that they were willing to bump it up for Gaudreau but not all the way up to $82.5m.

Obviously it's just a guess. It could be all the things you mentioned but I would then have a hard time explaining how they made the move with such duress, if they were that close to being under the cap. If it was a matter of finding space for the kids I still think they approach it with more patience and wait until the market opens up in the Fall.

If it was an internal cap motivated move, it could just as easily have been a quick heavy sweetener price deal to part with Nyquist, or Voracek and Merzlikins even. I might be off base on this but I feel like Voracek would have been an option to sell off if it was an internal cap thing, and I believe Portzline hinted they specifically wanted to keep him. To me if it was in order to get under an internal cap they wouldn't be as discriminatory with who they chose to shop around. It isn't 100% mutually exclusive though. They could have an internal cap and want to keep Voracek but it gives me hesitation.

Right now I'm taking it purely at face value and thinking they actually do expect the market to get even worse as the summer goes on. I've said we'll learn more about if that's true or not as the summer goes but honestly that doesn't even confirm it either way. If the market softens the FO could just have been wrong in their assessment and it wouldn't indicate anything about the intention. It all kinda comes down to gut feeling from what we've all observed from how the team operates, and I don't read the team as having an internal cap. One undeniable observation is them loving the new toys though.

 

[majormajor]

If it was an internal cap motivated move, it could just as easily have been a quick heavy sweetener price deal to part with Nyquist, or Voracek and Merzlikins even. I might be off base on this but I feel like Voracek would have been an option to sell off if it was an internal cap thing, and I believe Portzline hinted they specifically wanted to keep him. To me if it was in order to get under an internal cap they wouldn't be as discriminatory with who they chose to shop around. It isn't 100% mutually exclusive though. They could have an internal cap and want to keep Voracek but it gives me hesitation.

Right now I'm taking it purely at face value and thinking they actually do expect the market to get even worse as the summer goes on. I've said we'll learn more about if that's true or not as the summer goes but honestly that doesn't even confirm it either way. If the market softens the FO could just have been wrong in their assessment and it wouldn't indicate anything about the intention. It all kinda comes down to gut feeling from what we've all observed from how the team operates, and I don't read the team as having an internal cap. One undeniable observation is them loving the new toys though.

I think it runs the other way. If you have to clear $1.6m then you can do that two dozen different ways. If you have to clear $5m and get under $80m cap, then you only have three options - Voracek, Nyquist, and Bjorkstrand. And I tend to think that the price to move Voracek would be super super high. More than a 1st. And Nyquist I have no idea, I could imagine his trade value bouncing around positive to negative to positive as the market moves. They love Gus, as do I, so keeping him doesn't necessarily tell us the price to move him.

I am curious to see what players go for this September and October. You're right that it won't necessarily tell us what the FO was thinking, because their market expectations can be wrong.

 

[cslebn]

The Ducks get John Klingberg for one year. Maybe they can flip him at the deadline (maybe even to Dallas) with 50% retention for a decent return.

That is how they are using their cap instead of trading for Bjorkstrand.

Smart plan I think to help your rebuild, which they are doing

 

[CBJWerenski8]

 

[Xoggz22]

He's in Columbus training. Sounds like he may have been banged up at the end of the season and he's doing a recovery plan. He's working out with my trainer at the gym who also works with Kuraly (and used to have Connor Murphy in the gym as well). Still an upbeat guy and going to miss Columbus but looking forward to Seattle. Going to miss this guy.

 

[MoeBartoli]

I haven’t posted in the last week as I’m still bitter over trading Oliver. Over the last two years we have now traded two guys who wanted to be here. Good or necessary trades maybe - not the point. But the next time someone you blast someone who leaves via FA because they want to be elsewhere though were unconcerned that we jettisoned guys wanting to be here, be ready for me to remind you of your hypocrisy as afterall, it’s just business.

If you’re familiar with my post history you know this is a bit out of character for me but a while many days have passed, I’m still pissed. And if you’re put off by what I said, I really don’t care.

 

[Fro]

Not to reopen old wounds for some, but listening to Bobby and Jody with Jarmo from last night...I feel you can really feel and hear the remorse from Jarmo on having to trade Bjork...

The Inside Edge for September 21, 2022 - Guest: Jarmo Kekalainen

Bob McElligott and Jody Shelley are joined by Blue Jackets GM Jarmo Kekalainen to prepare you for the new NHL season.

on.soundcloud.com

 

[Doug19]

it does open healing wounds He will be missed greatly. I hate this one as much as I hated when we got rid of Malholtra.

 

[Aurinko]

Not to reopen old wounds for some, but listening to Bobby and Jody with Jarmo from last night...I feel you can really feel and hear the remorse from Jarmo on having to trade Bjork...

The Inside Edge for September 21, 2022 - Guest: Jarmo Kekalainen

Bob McElligott and Jody Shelley are joined by Blue Jackets GM Jarmo Kekalainen to prepare you for the new NHL season.

on.soundcloud.com

I get the feeling it's more about the fact that they back stabbed him and their values in a way.

But what I've read about Laine being in extremely good condition, and Björk not 100%, it does look like it was the right decision play wise.

 

[CorporateVrabs]

Sucks we had to trade him so so little but I understand why.