Columbus will "Not be the same team" in 2016/2017

[WannabeFinn]

Man, CBJ boards are getting so depressing. I feel like im the only one going into next season with any optimism. I just can't wait until the draft is over and we start camp. I really wanna see Jenner lined up at C this year.

I've got hope for next season. Not saying I'm expecting playoffs, but I definitely think we've got a bright outlook.

 

[Xoggz22]

The big issues last season were goals allowed and an abysmal PK. Assuming that collectively they can score at the rate they did last season, and then clean up the GA, and poor PK, I would think we would at least be competing for a play-off spot.

Even w/o a 1C, this organization has some very good offensive talent. The goaltending and D are the priority. Unlike some people here, I am not convinced that Wennberg cannot grow into a 1C, so for me obtaining a 1C can wait until the other issues are addressed. If we fall into one earlier, fine, but I just don't see that as what needs to be addressed at this time.

If Ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas.

I always wAnted to use that...

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

I expect them to be bad until they are good.

 

[Crede777]

I expect them to be bad until they are worse.

I fixed that for you.

 

[major major]

Im not saying in for our against it, but trading Foligno opens the door for Jenner to take the C.

Jenner leads by example. That's about it. He's not a talker. Foligno is the guy you want keeping everyone in the room together, not to mention handling the PR and doing every charity event (That's a part of the captaincy too). It's a strange amalgam of roles. We're not going to have an easy time finding any one person who can do all of the job well, though I suppose if Foligno had a nice bounce back year in production he'd obviously be the one who covered more of the bases than anyone else.

 

[major major]

The big issues last season were goals allowed and an abysmal PK. Assuming that collectively they can score at the rate they did last season, and then clean up the GA, and poor PK, I would think we would at least be competing for a play-off spot.

Even w/o a 1C, this organization has some very good offensive talent. The goaltending and D are the priority. Unlike some people here, I am not convinced that Wennberg cannot grow into a 1C, so for me obtaining a 1C can wait until the other issues are addressed. If we fall into one earlier, fine, but I just don't see that as what needs to be addressed at this time.

You're absolutely right that GA and PK are the big issues to improve from last year (I'd add PP). We have pieces internally though to fix a lot of that, it's just going to take some time until they're no longer 18-21 years old

Wennberg might be a solution but it is definitely the iffiest solution to a problem we have. In Porty's latest chat he referred to Wennberg as a strong #3C who could put up 60 pts next year. I think he's right about the 60 pts but how in the world is that #3C? 60 pts is first line level production! He always refers to Dubinsky and Jenner as the 1-2 and Wennberg as the 3rd but I'm having a hard time seeing it. Realistically I think we've got three 2nd line centers and just one of them, Wennberg, has the upside to be a decent, but not great, #1C. But like I said, it's iffy. Jones + Murray + Werenski is not iffy.

*As I've shown elsewhere, the Jackets are very, very productive offensively given how little zone time they get. They led the league in defensive zone faceoffs, and still managed to be 9th in 5 on 5 offense! So the #1C issue is perhaps getting too much attention simply by virtue of the entire offense getting too much attention - it is a strength of the org.

 

[major major]

Foligno is going to need a monster year to get any interest in trading for him with his contract. He's paid as a 70 point producer, lets just hope this past season was some lingering symptoms from the concussion, otherwise he's here for a while

Try again.

How much do you think perennial 70 pt guys with the full set of intangibles earn? The answer is a lot more than $5.5m. Closer to double that!

 

[major major]

If Foligno can get 20 goals, other forwards maintain production, Murray-Jones play a bit better, and Bob is fully healthy, I think this is a playoff team again.

The odds of all those happening, though, are miniscule.

That's not miniscule. That's very possible. Though I'd argue Foligno is more likely to produce 15 goals and 40 assists, and Bob and Korpi/Anton can combine to provide much better goaltending, then we will be a playoff team or very close to it. We should be much much better.

Of course the big factor is Murray-Jones. And I think they'll keep growing.

 

[CBJSlash]

The Tyutin buyout will be telling. If we don't, expect Jack to be traded in a bigger deal. I think Porty was cryptic in chat about Colorado which has been my thought for months (#1 center and a pick 8-12, I think was his quote).

Duchene + 10th for 3rd + Jack + Rychel would be an interesting phone call.


Trade Jack or Buyout Tyuts? What's more valuable?

 

[CBJx614]

The Tyutin buyout will be telling. If we don't, expect Jack to be traded in a bigger deal. I think Porty was cryptic in chat about Colorado which has been my thought for months (#1 center and a pick 8-12, I think was his quote).

Duchene + 10th for 3rd + Jack + Rychel would be an interesting phone call.


Trade Jack or Buyout Tyuts? What's more valuable?

How is trading Jack for Duchene helping our situation any? 1 more player we have to protect and we definitely would have to trade Hartnell bringing in Duchene...not to mention were still stuck with Tyutin

 

[major major]

How is trading Jack for Duchene helping our situation any? 1 more player we have to protect and we definitely would have to trade Hartnell bringing in Duchene...not to mention were still stuck with Tyutin

Jack for Duchene in isolation is a no brainer. When you get a real deal legitimate young #1C you really need to stop worrying about the damnable expansion draft.

It's 1 more player you have to protect, but either way you only lose one player total.

And I think Tyutin is bought out regardless of what happens with other trades.

 

[major major]

The Tyutin buyout will be telling. If we don't, expect Jack to be traded in a bigger deal. I think Porty was cryptic in chat about Colorado which has been my thought for months (#1 center and a pick 8-12, I think was his quote).

Duchene + 10th for 3rd + Jack + Rychel would be an interesting phone call.


Trade Jack or Buyout Tyuts? What's more valuable?

Well if we did the deal you listed there (taking on salary) we'd have no choice but to buy-out Tyuts to get under the cap.

It's a well constructed deal, which obviously works for the Jackets. Avs are in a perilous situation though where their last rebuild has left them in limbo and they're going to be reluctant to re-re-build. So no Duchene for #3 trade.

Interestingly an Avs commenter said for Duchene, Murray has to be involved and not the #3. Would we rather do that too?

 

[CBJSlash]

Jack for Duchene in isolation is a no brainer. When you get a real deal legitimate young #1C you really need to stop worrying about the damnable expansion draft.

It's 1 more player you have to protect, but either way you only lose one player total.

And I think Tyutin is bought out regardless of what happens with other trades.

I knew the expansion draft frantic police would come out quick.

I can even imagine a scenario where you ask Foligno to waive to avoid putting him on the list. If he has a year like this one, I'm not sure who would touch that contract. There will be a solution. There will be backdoor deals like crazy. Here's our 2nd round pick if you take this guy sort of stuff. I'd suspect that we'd try to deal 2 or 3 prospects before we'd lose a player off of our non-protected list.

If you are adding a player who is better than one of the other players you'd protect... why wouldn't you?

Suppose Wennberg plays in 82 games and goes 3 goals and 11 assists... do you think we are protecting him? A lot can change.

 

[CBJSlash]

Well if we did the deal you listed there (taking on salary) we'd have no choice but to buy-out Tyuts to get under the cap.

It's a well constructed deal, which obviously works for the Jackets. Avs are in a perilous situation though where their last rebuild has left them in limbo and they're going to be reluctant to re-re-build. So no Duchene for #3 trade.

Interestingly an Avs commenter said for Duchene, Murray has to be involved and not the #3. Would we rather do that too?

In that situation, I'd expect us to deal Hartnell. Depends on what we know about Clarkson as well. He could have been put on LTIR last year, but that thought was dismissed because we didn't need the room.

I wouldn't do it for Murray. That pretty much undos the Johansen-Jones trade. If we aren't sold on him staying healthy long-term, you'd have to consider it though.

 

[EspenK]

Interestingly an Avs commenter said for Duchene, Murray has to be involved and not the #3. Would we rather do that too?

So Murray & Rychel for Duchene and 10OA? I think I'd do that. And hope like heck one of the top D was available at 10.

 

[Viqsi]

I knew the expansion draft frantic police would come out quick.

I can even imagine a scenario where you ask Foligno to waive to avoid putting him on the list. If he has a year like this one, I'm not sure who would touch that contract. There will be a solution. There will be backdoor deals like crazy. Here's our 2nd round pick if you take this guy sort of stuff. I'd suspect that we'd try to deal 2 or 3 prospects before we'd lose a player off of our non-protected list.

If you are adding a player who is better than one of the other players you'd protect... why wouldn't you?

Because then in essence that player is added to the trade cost.

 

[Fro]

So Murray & Rychel for Duchene and 10OA? I think I'd do that. And hope like heck one of the top D was available at 10.

Hartnell and Tyutin would have to be gone first, we can't take on that much cap...

 

[Kev22]

So Murray & Rychel for Duchene and 10OA? I think I'd do that. And hope like heck one of the top D was available at 10.

Seems like the Jackets would win this trade. Definitely the best two assets would be coming our way. So basically we'd get Duchene, Puljujarvi and a top ten prospect defenseman in all likelihood. I think I would have to agree with you that Jarmo would have to seriously consider making that deal.

 

[CBJSlash]

Because then in essence that player is added to the trade cost.

Wrong. The difference between that player and the next player is added to the trade cost.

If the player unprotected is a hypothetical graded "80" and the player that would have been taken is a hypothetical graded "75" then sure this "5" could be added to the trade cost.


When we talk about having too many assets, it's very likely the trade to be made would be with Vegas -- a team with no assets. They would likely be interested in 3 of our prospects than 1 unprotected player.

Would they rather have three of these:

Forsberg, Carlson, Heatherington, Bittner, Zaar, Kolesar, Anderson.

Maybe just two if they are interested in Korpisalo, Milano or Rychel.

Or

Cam Atkinson

Not sure...

 

[CBJSlash]

Seems like the Jackets would win this trade. Definitely the best two assets would be coming our way. So basically we'd get Duchene, Puljujarvi and a top ten prospect defenseman in all likelihood. I think I would have to agree with you that Jarmo would have to seriously consider making that deal.

If it's too good to be true. It probably is... Can't imagine Colorado trading their first pick without getting one in return.

 

[LetsGOJackets!!]

So Murray & Rychel for Duchene and 10OA? I think I'd do that. And hope like heck one of the top D was available at 10.

I'm not nearly as knowledgeable as you folks but there is no way I trade Murray Jones or Werenski. We haven't even gotten to see 1 season of that collection of talent. Nor would I pack Savard. We have a legit top 4, I am looking at feeling as comfortable as the Preds for a change. When you have smart D that can jump in/ or get back the forwards can be more dynamic. Lets actually watch our own players for a short time/ I am tired of watching ex-Jackets play well for others.

 

[theD86]

I've got hope for next season. Not saying I'm expecting playoffs, but I definitely think we've got a bright outlook.

I'll second this. I think in 2 years the Jackets will be a very good team.

 

[MoeBartoli]

I knew the expansion draft frantic police would come out quic

Suppose Wennberg plays in 82 games and goes 3 goals and 11 assists... do you think we are protecting him? A lot can change.

This is very much on point as it relates to several decisions and why we need to see how the upcoming season develops. Several slots will be influenced over. The course of the year. To me, Bob heads the list. Most have him pegged as the G to protect. I think that is only true if he has an All Star type year. Otherwise his salary will either keep him from being selected or leave us clearing cap space thru a player not performing at a $7M level. And it also allows us to protect one of the young goalies.

Cam is often considered on the bubble or "first out" on the list. But what if he pumps in 28-30 goals? A lot to let go,especially of Hartnell is traded and and another 25 goals are gone.

I think the Wennberg point is fair, though I have a tough time seeing him not protected. But that feeling is based on the potential promise he must fulfill, especially knowing his payday is coming up.

Jack Johnsom - probably no decision to be made as only three D can be protected. But Savard has to demonstrate he is a clear #2 D and earning his $4M. Not saying he isn't, but still wanting to see more.....So possibly another decision to unfold in the coming season.

One more unknown - who else waives their NMC (Hopefully Clrkson does as it will end the closest he comes to earning his money )

Where it all lands, time will tell. The point is I don't think the protected list until then.

 

[Viqsi]

Wrong. The difference between that player and the next player is added to the trade cost.

If the player unprotected is a hypothetical graded "80" and the player that would have been taken is a hypothetical graded "75" then sure this "5" could be added to the trade cost.

Except that those "hypothetical grades" are nonsensical and do not exist. Player value is not a constant. Players are not fungible assets.

In particular, I think the difference between losing Cam Atkinson and losing some other guy after him could get really, really ugly indeed. Unless we're getting a C with a transition game that's about as good, we could end up hurting a lot more than expected that way.

 

[CBJx614]

Im not trading Johnson until Werenski proves he's NHL capable.


Im not trading Murray until Werenski is a bonafide #1D

Im not trading for another C until Wennberg proves he's not a 1C


Just my .02