Proposal: CBJ package for your #4 who can play right side

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,952
40N 83W (approx)
You're making too much of who is on what pair Viqsi.

Murray has been better than Johnson this season. The only reason why he's on the 3rd is because he got injured and the Jackets have been winning. That's why Torts hasn't moved Johnson down to the 3rd and Murray back up.

As far as this team's defense goes this year as well as going forward, it's Jones > Werenski > Murray > Savard > Johnson > Nutivaara.

Johnson's play this season has been OK. Not great.
I sincerely beg to differ with your characterization of JJ's play this year.

With regard to the plan going forward, I agree. But so far JJ has a legit claim to the position he's in.
 

Crede777

Deputized
Dec 16, 2009
14,611
4,124
I sincerely beg to differ with your characterization of JJ's play this year.

With regard to the plan going forward, I agree. But so far JJ has a legit claim to the position he's in.

I agree that he's playing well. And he's having a career year as far as advanced stats are concerned, but as far as on-ice impact his production remains low.

What I'm more getting at is that Murray got displaced by his injury. When he returned, the Jackets had been winning and Johnson was playing pretty well and so Torts hasn't messed with the pairings.

As far as the pairings and how players have played, I'd say that the CBJ have an embarrassment of riches on the back end. Jones is (and is playing like) a #1 D. Werenski is playing like a #2 D and has elite upside. Johnson and Savard have both been playing like #2 / #3 defensemen. Ryan Murray has been playing like a #2 / #3 defenseman. Nutivaara is a big question mark but seems good on the bottom pairing.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,952
40N 83W (approx)
You can have Vatanen for Atkinson & 1st.

...I'm just going to go ahead and assume that you're just not keeping up on current events w/r/t certain Jackets players. I'd go with the "overrating Vatanen" presumption normally, but I just saw you propose a Kapanen for Vatanen straight up trade in the "poor man's top pair D to Toronto" thread about two minutes after this post, and twenty minutes after that offer this gem to another Ducks fan criticizing the idea:
On top of this, Vatanen has been complete garbage. Have Theo and Montour that could take his spot.
So I can only assume that you have no idea what Atkinson's up to. Because otherwise... holy ****ing ****, hon.
 

major major

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
14,598
1,669
You're making too much of who is on what pair Viqsi.

Murray has been better than Johnson this season. The only reason why he's on the 3rd is because he got injured and the Jackets have been winning. That's why Torts hasn't moved Johnson down to the 3rd and Murray back up.

As far as this team's defense goes this year as well as going forward, it's Jones > Werenski > Murray > Savard > Johnson > Nutivaara.

Johnson's play this season has been OK. Not great.

I'm with Viqsi on this. JJ has been more than OK. And I think that Savard has been outstanding. Murray was bad for most of this year, after his early injury, and has just finally started to return to form in recent games.

The way they're playing right now:

Jones - 1
Werenski - 2/3 (he's beat)
Savard - 2
Johnson - 3
Murray 3
Nutivaara 5/6


The whole premise of this thread is absurd. We have or are close to having two top pair RHD, and here this guy thinks Savard should be on the third pair. Again, some stats on Savard:

Leads the team with a +15. (8th among all players in the league).

He's right there with Werenski, 21st in the league among all D in Corsi.

Savard is also 15th in ES P/60.
 

Byrral

Registered User
Aug 2, 2006
5,784
2,321
Columbus, Ohio
Makes no sense. The team is playing well and you are severely under valuing the play of JJ and Savard this season.

Second Torts loves JJ and there is no way that pair is going to the third pair and decreasing their minutes. The expansion draft may take care of this problem or may not. Not giving up assets and making things worse by adding another player that needs protection.

The CBJ are not winning the cup this season. No reason to trade a 1st and Milano for a #4 defenseman right handed or not.

I could see Jarmo making a minor trade around the deadline as they push towards a hopeful playoff spot to solidify the bottom pair and take some pressure off of Nutivaara but this will be a placeholder trade and not one for seasons to come.

Also you have stated many times on our board that you do not like Nutivaara much. He has been fine in the role that he plays. He makes mistakes, he's a rookie. Werenski has been regressing lately as well. Want to find a replacement for him too. He will get better with more experience. He is never going to be a shutdown defenseman. Accept it. He's not going anywhere. They seem to like his skillset and potential.
 

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,433
2,643
Columbus, Ohio
Yes I am. Murray > Johnson and that is a fact. The reason I made the trade was to keep Savard and Johnson on the third pair together while getting Murray a good D partner. Maybe Shattenkirk or a player of his caliber and contract situation. Don't see how it really matters with the expansion draft as we are going to lose a player no matter what. If they take Johnson then okay now we have a guy we can maybe resign as his replacement. Who knows.

I want our team to make a push in the playoffs not just make it. If you are fine with Johnson and Savard playing over Murray and a solid number 4 in the playoffs then I just disagree with your thought process.

Next hypothetical trade I make on an NHL discussion site I will be sure to run by you guys so it doesn't offend you and you can be in your happy places :)
Make all the trades you want. Your premise for this one is nonsensical. Keep JJ and Savard together and get a vet to play on the 3rd pair with Murray if we don't think Nutivaara will cut it. Don't waste assets as you propose. Think it through...
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
27,572
3,657
Da Big Apple
I don't see us making any long term deals at all this year. Not even one for a extra D we have Kukan and Prout who are IMO better then our current #6 anyways.

Now if we can use a F we don't want to lose but we will protect like Jenner that has value + a 1st to make sure it's a have to protect guy it could help us.

My 2 are Tyler Johnson or Stepan and would involve Jenner and a 1st. Then they take jenners spot and we lose Karlson and Sedlak replaces him and we have bjorkstrand after finally being with us a full summer ready to replace the wing.

Any TB or NYR fans want to talk about a Jenner + 1ST trade for Stepan or Johnson?

Came to say Kevin Klein is available for a reasonable price, not a giveaway.

relative to the bold, I want Rangers to run with a top 6 of
Kreider - Miller - Zib
Grabner - Hayes - Vesey

so yes, I put Stepan on the market, and the only ? is is this the best return/use of Stepan.

Have to think out if he is an integral add or not in plan to move Staal to Chicago. Assume he is not.
We can Stepan w/w-out KK.
1st and decent add seems reasonable

slammed for couple of days, my apologies, will get back to you.
but yeah, please run with that here or in a separate thread, would like to see that idea developed
kudos to you for bringing it up
- anything else here to make cap work?
 

Cowumbus

Registered User
Mar 1, 2014
11,504
6,319
Arena District - Columbus
You guys are both reading into this wrong. I don't think Savard and Johnson are 3rd pairing guys but I want more d depth for a solid playoff run. If Jones Werenski or whoever goes down I want someone who I can feel comfortable with playing those minutes. If you are comfortable with Nutivarra or Prout stepping into a first or second pair role than that's fine. I want more depth.

I repeat, I think Savard is a 3/4 JJ is a 4 but I would like us to add another #4 while moving JJ-Savard to the third pairing (because they have good chemistry) which does not mean they are third pairing dmen.

But Murray is our third best d man and I'd like to see him in that role with a suitable #4 for this season and the playoffs. Depth.
ZW-Jones
Murray-4
JJ-Savard
Nutivarra-Prout

feel free to disagree.
 

mikeyp24

Registered User
Jun 28, 2014
5,959
1,231
You guys are both reading into this wrong. I don't think Savard and Johnson are 3rd pairing guys but I want more d depth for a solid playoff run. If Jones Werenski or whoever goes down I want someone who I can feel comfortable with playing those minutes. If you are comfortable with Nutivarra or Prout stepping into a first or second pair role than that's fine. I want more depth.

I repeat, I think Savard is a 3/4 JJ is a 4 but I would like us to add another #4 while moving JJ-Savard to the third pairing (because they have good chemistry) which does not mean they are third pairing dmen.

But Murray is our third best d man and I'd like to see him in that role with a suitable #4 for this season and the playoffs. Depth.
ZW-Jones
Murray-4
JJ-Savard
Nutivarra-Prout

feel free to disagree.

I originally didn't understand where you were coming from but I understand a l other better now. I just think maybe the pieces we use and the timing will be key. TDL we can probably get a guy just like you describe without breaking the bank because it will likely be a rental. Long term we are set but a vet that is dependable to play key 2nd pair minutes for a 2nd half only shouldn't cost a top prospect and 1st. 1 or the other. It would be top prospect late pick or 1st and average prospect. I do Understand now your premise and agree. I am personally uncomfortable with Nutivaara already and would rather Kukan but if there is an injury that means Prout/Harrington step in and that's scary for the playoffs so I am all for the trade you want just with slightly different pieces.
 

Xoggz22

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
7,433
2,643
Columbus, Ohio
You guys are both reading into this wrong. I don't think Savard and Johnson are 3rd pairing guys but I want more d depth for a solid playoff run. If Jones Werenski or whoever goes down I want someone who I can feel comfortable with playing those minutes. If you are comfortable with Nutivarra or Prout stepping into a first or second pair role than that's fine. I want more depth.

I repeat, I think Savard is a 3/4 JJ is a 4 but I would like us to add another #4 while moving JJ-Savard to the third pairing (because they have good chemistry) which does not mean they are third pairing dmen.

But Murray is our third best d man and I'd like to see him in that role with a suitable #4 for this season and the playoffs. Depth.
ZW-Jones
Murray-4
JJ-Savard
Nutivarra-Prout

feel free to disagree.

Again, if anything, the CBJ will go for an expiring contract to play with Murray. That's is they don't feel Nutavaara can handle the run. At this point there is nothing to think they don't trust him. He's played every game and for someone who's never played on North American ice he's adjusting quite well in my opinion. We'll see what happens at the deadline.

I'll still disagree, this year, that Murray is our 3rd best D-man. JJ and Savard at playing at a level that separates them from Murray at this point - in my opinion. I like Murray and think he's got 2/3 upside and he hasn't played poorly by any stretch. He may be a 2nd pair guy on the 3rd pair for this year. What a great problem to have.
 

Double-Shift Lasse

Just post better
Dec 22, 2004
33,355
14,030
Exurban Cbus
Again, if anything, the CBJ will go for an expiring contract to play with Murray. That's is they don't feel Nutavaara can handle the run.

This sounds about right. I get what geez is saying about depth. Typically I'm right there. It's just a matter of using assets and the expansion draft.
 

Columbus Jack

He's from Columbus
Nov 25, 2009
10,853
1,838
PA
M.Stone for Milano. Or maybe a 1st and Prout.

Lol not trading Milano for Mark Stone a UFA. Wouldnt do it even if he wasnt a UFA, Milano could be really good and hes developing nicely

How is this thread not dead yet.
 
Nov 13, 2006
11,520
1,400
Ohio
M.Stone for Milano. Or maybe a 1st and Prout.

Good luck getting that kind of return for Stone. I'd offer a 2nd at the TDL.

To the OP - it's bad asset management to pay the equivalent of two 1st round picks or a 1st and a 2nd for a #4 defenseman.
 

major major

Registered User
Feb 18, 2013
14,598
1,669
You guys are both reading into this wrong. I don't think Savard and Johnson are 3rd pairing guys but I want more d depth for a solid playoff run. If Jones Werenski or whoever goes down I want someone who I can feel comfortable with playing those minutes. If you are comfortable with Nutivarra or Prout stepping into a first or second pair role than that's fine. I want more depth.

I repeat, I think Savard is a 3/4 JJ is a 4 but I would like us to add another #4 while moving JJ-Savard to the third pairing (because they have good chemistry) which does not mean they are third pairing dmen.

I think what's not working about this proposal is that in order to get a Murray - x pairing that deserves more minutes than JJ - Savard, we would need to pay a near fortune and get yet another top pairing D. Our current second pairing is playing just too damn good to justify cutting their minutes at all. They're like +15 ffs.

Of course you think Murray is better, but I think Savard in particular is on a different level.

If you want to elevate Murray, and I do too, as he deserves better than third pair, then put him on the pair with Jones and give Werenski easier minutes to feast on.

Murray - Jones
JJ - Savard
Werenski - Nuti/Prout/Harrington, etc..
 

JohnnyJacket13

(formerly PD9)
Sponsor
Jan 14, 2015
4,747
2,398
Columbus
I think what's not working about this proposal is that in order to get a Murray - x pairing that deserves more minutes than JJ - Savard, we would need to pay a near fortune and get yet another top pairing D. Our current second pairing is playing just too damn good to justify cutting their minutes at all. They're like +15 ffs.

Of course you think Murray is better, but I think Savard in particular is on a different level.

If you want to elevate Murray, and I do too, as he deserves better than third pair, then put him on the pair with Jones and give Werenski easier minutes to feast on.

Murray - Jones
JJ - Savard
Werenski - Nuti/Prout/Harrington, etc..

This is my line of thinking too, especially once we hit mid-January to February. At that point, though, I'd love to add a veteran RHD like Stone for a playoff push. I'd offer Bittner+3rd

Murray-Jones
Johnson-Savard
Werenski-Stone

That d corps can compete with any come playoff time.
 

Revelation

Registered User
Aug 15, 2016
5,298
2,963
Mike Green would be perfect if the cap could be made to work

Werenski Jones
Murray Green
Johnson Savard
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->