Discussion in 'Columbus Blue Jackets' started by The Wheelchair, Dec 31, 2018.
it was a joke my friend, hence the upper and lower case letters aka sarcasm.
happy new years, bud.
You're joking right? (I think so).
I'd be nervous about taking on Tarasenko, at any price, let alone for a difference maker like Werenski. Zach's defensive game looks better to me in recent weeks.
Yes I am kidding. I agree with you.
But Tarasenko is a career +54
I have never seen Tarasenko as an "elite" player. What do people even see in him? Yes he has an amazing release, I mean used to have it. But he has been in the shadow for a couple of seasons now and there has to be a reason for this.
Wasnt he seriously injured a year or two ago? Maybe he simply cant fully recover and is a dead asset.
You just have to laugh how short people’s memories are . We just all watched , and agreed that our group of forwards are merely average , and severely outclassed when compared to a Toronto, Tampa . I’m not saying it absolutely has to be Werenski for Tarasenko , but you have to give to get . Tarasenko has had 37g, 40g, 39g , and 33 g the past 4 seasons , that’s 37.25 g per season. Garikov looks like he’s going to be a stud , and bringing in Tarasenko and replacing Werenski with a solid stay at home defenseman , makes this team much better . Are you guys thinking Werenski should fetch a better player than Tarasenko ?
Tarasenko had a serious surgery and its possible that he may never be the same again.
Why would one trade for him? Yes there is a chance that he recovers but what if he doesnt?
Its also possible that he simply doesnt give a **** and thats why he cant score.
Either way: if I had a team then Id see getting Tarasenko as a too risky move.
As I said earlier: his biggest strength used to be his release. "Used" to be.
Tarasenko on track to begin year after reconstructive shoulder surgery | CBC Sports
I would trade Wennberg for him, but not Werenski.
More thinking Werenski is too valuable to move. Gavrikov and Murray are more comparable than Gavrikov and Werenski. There is room for Z and Gavrikov. You don't have to make a move for a forward just because you have good defenseman.
I think most people here think Panarin is walking, and a hefty amount of people here think this team isn't good enough to win the cup. Goal scoring hasn't really been an issue this season, and Werenski's game is turning around. This is making a move just to make a move.
I get the idea of Werenski being somewhat of an expendable high-value asset. It makes sense that he would be used as a trade chip for a high end forward. I just don't think Tarasenko is a good bet anymore. If he's lost his scoring touch, that $8m per price tag isn't pretty.
I'm actually not sure if Werenski is a guy you move when you're trying to add to the team offense. Thinking in terms of value over replacement, if Werenski becomes a 60 pt D-man, he'd be getting 30 pts more than an average D in offensive minutes. If we trade him for a 75 pt forward who replaces a 50 pt forward, we actually downgrade team scoring.
He would be replacing what is at best a 40 point forward with virtually all of those points being assists.
It's interesting to hear people thoughts on this.
I have yet to see a decent argument on how Werenski for Tank would not be beneficial. In fact actually makes so much sense.
This team does not score goals in the playoffs. Saying this team doesn't need help and then looking at the regular season is flat out hilarious. The regular doesn't mean anything other than playing well enough to get into the playoffs.
If Panarin walks that leaves with exactly zero elite level offense guys. Unless you want to claim Dubois is, which he isn't really. Neither is Cam.
While an argument could be made Tank isnt elite, there's certainly more room to discuss that notion compared to Cam and Dubois.
Flat out, you need elite offensive players to win Cups. Look at any of the past Cup winners in the past ten years and none of them did it with pure depth. They all had atleast one guy who scored a bunch of goals.
The great teams had 3-4 (Pittsburgh and Chicago). We would have none. Please tell me how having a 35 goal scorer does not help us when this team gives up goals left and right in the playoffs.
Cam is on a pace to score 50 goals. PLD is on a pace to score 30 in his second season. But we have no elite talent? Right. Sure.
It is no coincidence that both are on a line with Panarin. He isn't 100% responsible, but I doubt they would be doing as well as they are without his playmaking ability and the space he creates because opponents focus on him.
Well, how do we know that? It's not the playoffs yet. And its a different team than last year. Young players are better, there is new players, and there is potential to add other players at the deadline. Goal scoring was an issue all of last year, and so far hasn't been this year. You say the regular season doesn't matter, but it predicts how a team will play come April. Last year, we didn't score enough. This year, that hasn't been the issue.
If there is an argument to be made, as in its not unanimous, why would you trade a young stud defensive who can grow into a star for a "maybe" elite offensive player? To hope that your intuition of Tarasenko being a star pans out? To hope Panarin stays just because we brought in another one of his friends? Sounds like bad asset management and taking risks to take risks, at the expense of one of your potential homegrown stars.
The notion Werenski can't be an elite offensive player from the back end is laughable. I assume you mean elite offensive forwards, which in that case is fair enough, but Werenski and Jones are absolutely elite level offensive talents, just from the defense. Stats don't lie.
To be fair, Tarasenko is and has been more of an elite offensive threat. Werenski to this point is a solid defenseman with a lot of upside but surely far from elite. He puts up points but is out there for just as many against. Trading for Tank has nothing to do with trying to keep Panarin. He's the replacement. If he helps keep him, it's gravy.
Werenski has as many goals by a defenseman in the last 3 years as Erik Karlsson, Brent Burns, and many other “elite” offensive defenseman. His accomplishments and his upside is being way overlooked just because people want Tarasenko. Saying he’s out there for as many goals for as against can be said about literally every single player, but is only used against werenski because he’s a defenseman.
If Tarasenko is seen as a Panarin replacement, rather than Panarin complimentary piece, then that’s like putting a shiny new coat of paint on a broken down car. Not trying to downplay Tarasenko’s skill, but he’s not driving any offense by himself like Panarin does. That’s a recipe for disaster. Look how it’s working out for St. Louis in his time there.
If you take away the TOP PLAYER on any team in the league it would negatively affect the 2 other players on his line and the whole team in general.
Also, a quick reminder that the 2016/17 season DID HAPPEN, and both Dubois AND PANARIN were not on the team.
AND CAN WE NOT IGNORE HOW MUCH OUR DEFENSE PUTS UP POINTS!!!
THE TEAM WOULD HAVE TO BE TOP 5-10 IN EVERY STATISTICAL TEAM CATEGORY FOR SOME PEOPLE TO BE HAPPY.
You are going much too far. Looking at Werenski in the most positive light, while doing the complete opposite for Tarasenko. I'm not sure with the age difference of the 2 guys, along with his recent surgery, that it would be a "great" move for a trade 1-1, (I'd like to see "more" added on both sides) but to say that Tarasenko isn't "worth" Werenski, or act like it would be some terrible move for the team is quite ridiculous.
You are overlooking Tarasenko's accomplishments and his "upside" because you want to keep Werenski. STL is having a rough year, almost all of their players offensive numbers will be affected. He is still, and has been in recent memory, a top 10-20 goal scorer in the league (at the least). I'm really not sure what you are trying to get at when talking about Panarin, and "replacement" and "complimentary" pieces, but other that Panarin, Jones, Dubois and Atkinson, ANY GUY traded for Tarasenko would make the team better for the next 2-3 years, at least. Are you saying acquiring Tarasenko, without knowing Panarin would stay, "is a recipe or disaster"? ANY PLAYER acquired if Panarin left, would have to be better than Tarasenko?
There's a very good chance that Tarasenko and the Blues in general simply need a "change" for their own good. Doesn't really mean either entity is at fault. Every year there are team who overachieve and teams that underachieve. STL is 1 off those teams this year. I haven't really seen any of them or Tarasenko, but it very well could be that with a team full of Canadians and 1 other Russian, that Vlad might be looking for a buddy to play with. I also want to add that I don't know how you could think adding Tarasenko to the team wouldn't have SOME positive affect on the possibility of Panarin wanting to stay.
Your also significantly downplaying Werenski's DEFENSIVE GAME. And yes, since he IS a defenseman, it is important.
Goals scored are just as important as goals against.
“Werenski has as many goals in the last 3 years as Brent Burns”.....
when reading this, I knew this was an entirely inaccurate statement. upon further research, yup.. entirely false.
last 3 seasons goals scored:
last time I checked, 47 > 36.
Oh gee. The difference is 11. Yes, its incorrect. I thought I heard that stat, maybe it was PK Subban instead. Regardless, that's kind of a lot of production, and elite company to be held in. Odd nitpick, but okay you got me?
Maybe you're reading me the wrong way. Or I'm not getting my point clear enough.
The value of Tarasenko for Werenski seems fair to me. Tarasenko is a very good goal scorer, and I would gess is in the top 10 of goals ever since he's been in the league. That being said, the upside of adding Tarasenko to a team that isn't struggling offensively (statistically at least) is...??? Maybe he'd help the powerplay. However, I don't think one guy is saving that thing.
The point I was making about complimentary piece vs Panarin replacement is I don't think Tarasenko drives a team himself. I think Panarin does. Gagnefan was suggesting that if we make the move for Tarasenko, and Panarin leaves, we still have Tarasenko to be our "star" player rather than having none. I don't think of Tarasenko as a star player. I think of him as a very good player who scores goals. We have a similar player in Cam Atkinson (Yes, I am comparing Cam Atkinson to Tarasenko). This is where my complimentary piece thing comes in. I think Panarin-Tarasenko could be a lethal combination, even more so than Cam-Panarin. But if Panarin leaves and it's Tarasenko-Cam, I don't think it'll be near as effective. Why? Because Panarin drives that line.
I think adding Tarasenko would be a good idea, obviously. But adding Tarasenko at the cost of Werenski is NOT a good idea. Yes, you have to give to get, but the scoring pace Werenski is on for a defenseman in his first three years is one of the best starts in NHL history. Maybe there is something else that the Blues could have interest in.
Yes, he has a ways to go defensively. Not every player is perfect. If I recall, Seth Jones had similar struggles and was sheltered on the third pairing for a reason before he got here. Werenski was thrown into the fire as soon as he got here, and never eased his way. He struggled, but has since battled back. I wouldn't trade him.
Also, I find it funny you say goals for is just as important as goals against in critique of Werenski, yet literally the post before you say...
If he's putting up points, and continues to progress defensively like he has in recent weeks, wouldn't that be a GOOD thing?
An 11 goal differential is substantial, especially since we’re talking about two defensemen here. Not sure if you were insinuating this but Z is nowhere near the overall d-man that Brent Burns is, lmao.
Still think you are trying to downplay Tarasenko while doing the complete opposite to Werenski. Werenski is one of the best young offensive defensemen in the league, currently, not (anything) in NHL history. He's good. He's not that good. He was "thrown into the fire" on a very good team, a very good powerplay, and with a very good partner. Lets also not forget about usage in regards to this "fire". The Murray-Jones 3rd period pairing has been a thing for 3 years now.
I'm curious as to how good you think Jones is? Or how much better you would consider him than Werenski? Realize he's only 2 years older, also.
And who would you consider an acceptable offensive return for Werenski 1 for 1?
Two defenseman, one of whom is 33 and the other 21, and also one of whom started his career as a forward. There's more of an age difference than a goal difference. I'm pretty sure damn near every other team in the league would find Werenski untouchable if they were on their team, why don't we?
No, he's not yet. Could he one day? If you look at his pace, it's not ridiculous to think he could be.
Coincidentally, the powerplay his rookie year got good when he was on the team. It wasn't good the year prior. Now, he wasn't the reason for that (because if he was the reason, it wouldn't suck now), but he had a hand in it (just like he has a hand in its struggles ever since).
His first three years offensively are up there with one of the best starts for a Dman in NHL history. Not just young defenseman in the league currently.
Murray-Jones is way more reliable when holding a lead. This much is true.
Jones is a lot better than Werenski. He's a better passer, skater, shooter, and defender. Jones is one of the best defenseman in the league. Werenski is one of the best offensive defenseman in the league. However, he has potential to join Jones one day as top defenseman, but that day hasn't come yet. But as of today, its not close. Jones is top dog. (However, Jones also needs to play better. I think he's struggled recently, while Werenski has picked his play back up.)
As far as young players in a 1 for 1 with Werenski (excluding obvious ones like McDavid, Matthews, etc) , Mitch Marner, Matt Barzal, Filip Forsberg, and MAYBE Sebastian Aho come to mind as players I would do one for one trades for. As far as putting veterans in there too, that list would be harder to get together.
Tarasenko can be seen as a replacement to Panarin. Of course he cannot replace him, not many players can but you sure as hell arent going to replace Panarin in FA. I didnt think it needed to be said that Tank and Cam would probably be worse than Panarin and Cam. The fact of the matter is, you cannot replace Panarin, you can only try and make it less painful to see him go. And yes, trading Werenski accomplishes that, you get a star, someone who is in the top 10-20 goals every year is a star. Werenski is young and good but is certainly no guarantee to continue to progress. Neither is Tarasenko for that matter but ultimately you need to replace Panarin with someone who changes games. I like Tarasenko's track report in that matter.
Ps: you show Bread you are serious if you make this trade. Not that it makes him stay but it's a trade I would imagine most people would understand and approve of due to our luxury of solid defenseman.
Separate names with a comma.