GDT: Game 76: Columbus vs. New Jersey | 3/31 7PM EDT

[Cyclones Rock]

Stop poking the bear, I know you're on my side, haha. I want the 4.5 million that Tyutin is stealing from us! Far bigger problems than a 1.7 million contract, that's the bottom of the barrel for NHL contracts for a veteran.

The narrative seems to be that Tyutin is slowing down significantly. Statistically, he's not according to a few measures. He's the best +/- on the defense:

http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?sea...untry=&status=&viewName=plusMinus&sort=&ord=#

He's on the ice for a greater percentage of goals for vs. goals against 5vs5 as well:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...fense&minutes=50&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

Tyutin adds significant quantifiable value to the team. Boll's value is highly subjective.

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

It's an expensive 4th liner.

Well, are you shocked at what we are paying Clarkson and Bourque to play on the fourth line?

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Well, are you shocked at what we are paying Clarkson and Bourque to play on the fourth line?

It's a "bottom up" financial strategy. It's the wave of the future.

 

[CBJx614]

Well, are you shocked at what we are paying Clarkson and Bourque to play on the fourth line?

Really gonna bring Clarkson into it? Because anyway you look at it Clarkson is better than the alternative of paying Horton to watch hockey from the bleachers for rest of his career. And Borque looked really good in what little we saw of him with only one more year on his "albatross" contract.

 

[niflheim]

The narrative seems to be that Tyutin is slowing down significantly. Statistically, he's not according to a few measures. He's the best +/- on the defense:

http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?sea...untry=&status=&viewName=plusMinus&sort=&ord=#

He's on the ice for a greater percentage of goals for vs. goals against 5vs5 as well:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...fense&minutes=50&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

Tyutin adds significant quantifiable value to the team. Boll's value is highly subjective.

Better I go with Tyutin for 4.5 that Nikitin for 4.5 ( of course we can trade Fedor if we get Proven D for reasonable price) Last time Fedor was sometimes really terrible, but probably he played with injury. And we need Fedor as mentor if we draft Provorov. Here another young russian D ( undrafted) http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=34773&lang=en and he wants play in NHL next season. I don't know have we any interest or not, but if we have - Fedor again may be good as mentor.. on another side too much russians not good

 

[Fro]

Better I go with Tyutin for 4.5 that Nikitin for 4.5 ( of course we can trade Fedor if we get Proven D for reasonable price) Last time Fedor was sometimes really terrible, but probably he played with injury. And we need Fedor as mentor if we draft Provorov. Here another young russian D ( undrafted) http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=34773&lang=en and he wants play in NHL next season. I don't know have we any interest or not, but if we have - Fedor again may be good as mentor.. on another side too much russians not good

exactly...if we were to trade tyutin, we'd get something of value...

 

[db2011]

Nobody said you needed the first overall - except you. I typed the first ovrall because that is what you said - first overall picks aren't that important. I showed to about every team they are - except to a team like Edmonton that may have the worst franchise in the NHL.

My point has always been drafting 5th-8th every year has gotten us no where. Be really good or really bad, not the team committed to mediocrity.

Drafting 5th-8th every year has gotten us nowhere because we've been bad at drafting, not because #5-#8 are bad to places to draft from. I'm not saying first overall picks aren't important, I'm responding to the bellyaching around here that these wins lately are costing us the chance at the first overall, which is a silly thing to moan and groan about because the odds are slim in any case, and there's not a lot of fluidity, this year, when it comes to our draft position.

As to your list, it shows, to me that it's not very often that first overall picks transform a team into a perennial conference finalist; it's rare enough to suggest that normally that's not the case. In the case of Chicago and Pits, you have 2 high picks making that impact (at least).

Great teams win championships. One thing great teams do is win games, reel off 6-8 victories in a row, against other good teams. Our team has done that twice this year. And all some of you care about is how that's ruined our draft position.

 

[EspenK]

Drafting 5th-8th every year has gotten us nowhere because we've been bad at drafting, not because #5-#8 are bad to places to draft from. I'm not saying first overall picks aren't important, I'm responding to the bellyaching around here that these wins lately are costing us the chance at the first overall, which is a silly thing to moan and groan about because the odds are slim in any case, and there's not a lot of fluidity, this year, when it comes to our draft position.

As to your list, it shows, to me that it's not very often that first overall picks transform a team into a perennial conference finalist; it's rare enough to suggest that normally that's not the case. In the case of Chicago and Pits, you have 2 high picks making that impact (at least).

Great teams win championships. One thing great teams do is win games, reel off 6-8 victories in a row, against other good teams. Our team has done that twice this year. And all some of you care about is how that's ruined our draft position.

I think that people like me who have bemoaned the winning at the expense of our draft position do understand and appreciate that what the Jackets have reeled off lately is pretty amazing and bodes well for the future. See? two different concepts that can be embraced by a fan. They are not mutually exclusive. If we hadn't done as well and our pick was better, statistically there is a better chance of getting a better player than where we look like we will wind up. Not a certainty but a better chance. I get as sick of this argument as you so I am dropping out of it but not before I mention one last time that a slightly better chance at McDavid would be a good thing.

 

[db2011]

I think that people like me who have bemoaned the winning at the expense of our draft position do understand and appreciate that what the Jackets have reeled off lately is pretty amazing and bodes well for the future. See? two different concepts that can be embraced by a fan. They are not mutually exclusive. If we hadn't done as well and our pick was better, statistically there is a better chance of getting a better player than where we look like we will wind up. Not a certainty but a better chance. I get as sick of this argument as you so I am dropping out of it but not before I mention one last time that a slightly better chance at McDavid would be a good thing.

If they're not mutually exclusive, in your mind, then why are there like 2-3 of your posts in every recent thread sarcastically sending up the "winning is more important than draft position" point of view? Ah, you get to have it both ways... right. I'm not tired of this debate, I'm just sick of the tanking advocates who are basing their opinions on clearly flawed and ruinous logic. Your position is clear even if you don't want to say it loudly.

Increasing our likelihood of getting McDavid by 2% over a 3-game losing streak just isn't worth it when the alternative is winning these games like you're supposed to do and showing the league, our fans, and our players themselves that we are bad ***** that are not in need of the #1 pick to beat you up. Puck Daddy be damned.

 

[NotWendell]

Tyutin is not part of the problem on defense. Our biggest need is to find a clone of Murray in case he can't stay off IR again next season.

 

[NotWendell]

Actually, you CAN have it both ways. NEVER EVER tell the team not to play hard, not to play to win. On the other hand, Jarmo, now that were officially eliminated from the playoffs, can insist we play some of the young players, maybe give Forsberg a couple of games in net, put Jared Boll back in the lineup... the loses will take care of themselves.

 

[db2011]

Actually, you CAN have it both ways. NEVER EVER tell the team not to play hard, not to play to win. On the other hand, Jarmo, now that were officially eliminated from the playoffs, can insist we play some of the young players, maybe give Forsberg a couple of games in net, put Jared Boll back in the lineup... the loses will take care of themselves.

So never tell the team not to play to win... but, play not to win and dress it up like you're trying to give guys experience. Got it.

I'm sure savvy, dyed-in-the-wool professionals like we have FINALLY assembled on this team (Dubi, Harts, Nick) will appreciate that, and young, competitive guys who will hopefully be keys to our future success (Joey, Cam, Murray, Matty, BOB) will learn a valuable lesson

 

[NotWendell]

So never tell the team not to play to win... but, play not to win and dress it up like you're trying to give guys experience. Got it.

I'm sure savvy, dyed-in-the-wool professionals like we have FINALLY assembled on this team (Dubi, Harts, Nick) will appreciate that, and young, competitive guys who will hopefully be keys to our future success (Joey, Cam, Murray, Matty, BOB) will learn a valuable lesson

Spare me the :snakehead

Jarmo actually DOES need to see what he has in the new acquisitions, as well as the prospects, before any offseason trades. We're out of the playoffs. Now is the time to do it - and improve our draft position in the process. A win-win.

 

[db2011]

Spare me the :snakehead

Jarmo actually DOES need to see what he has in the new acquisitions, as well as the prospects, before any offseason trades. We're out of the playoffs. Now is the time to do it - and improve our draft position in the process. A win-win.

But that's not how you're framing it, Lee. You're saying now that we're eliminated, set the team up for failure. There are ways to figure out what you've got, they're called the minor leagues. It's how the big boy teams do it.

We aren't getting McDavid. Do you just want the number 7 pick instead of the number 9 on principle, never mind how positive this winning streak is?

 

[major major]

I won't bother to try and think through whether it's better for the team in the long run to tank or not.

There's no need for that level of complexity. The object of each game is to win, and we're doing that.

 

[db2011]

I won't bother to try and think through whether it's better for the team in the long run to tank or not.

There's no need for that level of complexity. The object of each game is to win, and we're doing that.

It's not. Tanking is fool's gold.

 

[Mayor Bee]

There's no such thing as season-to-season momentum; it simply does not exist. If it did, last year's playoff team wouldn't have started off 4-10-1 and then 6-1-2. If it did, 2012-13's all-but-in playoff team wouldn't have started off 2-5-0 and then 5-10-0.

Winning games after being basically eliminated and then actually eliminated is all well and good, but there's nothing that carries over into the next season.

 

[db2011]

There's no such thing as season-to-season momentum; it simply does not exist. If it did, last year's playoff team wouldn't have started off 4-10-1 and then 6-1-2. If it did, 2012-13's all-but-in playoff team wouldn't have started off 2-5-0 and then 5-10-0.

Winning games after being basically eliminated and then actually eliminated is all well and good, but there's nothing that carries over into the next season.

Look at it from the other side- the negative momentum. People bemoaned the "country club atmosphere" for years, now we want to "temporarily" reinstate it in order to gain a spot or two in the draft? Fact is, these players want to win. And a good number of them on this young team are learning how to win and developing habits. We want to jeopardize that for a slight increase in position? It's a slippery slope.

Maybe I have an inflated view of our team's quality, but Buffalo's or Arizona's tank jobs will be lucky to result in them icing a team as competitive as ours right now, never mind ours with a top-10 pick. We are doing it a different way

 

[ca5150]

The narrative seems to be that Tyutin is slowing down significantly. Statistically, he's not according to a few measures. He's the best +/- on the defense:

http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?sea...untry=&status=&viewName=plusMinus&sort=&ord=#

He's on the ice for a greater percentage of goals for vs. goals against 5vs5 as well:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...fense&minutes=50&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

Tyutin adds significant quantifiable value to the team. Boll's value is highly subjective.

We need offensive defensemen, not someone that can't create a lick of offense for 4.5 million a year on the backend. He's worse in his own end than any other defensemen we havel, he consistently gets caught up ice and leads to odd man rushes.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

We need offensive defensemen, not someone that can't create a lick of offense for 4.5 million a year on the backend. He's worse in his own end than any other defensemen we havel, he consistently gets caught up ice and leads to odd man rushes.

Are you serious? Are you talking about Tyutin or Prout?

 

[Jovavic]

If Boll could score FIVE goals he would be acceptable as a fighter. Never mind 20. But Boll's game has actually deteriorated, from the not very high level of its peak, over the past few years. Five goals for him would be a pipe dream.

Jody Shelley scored twice in one game once, anything can happen.

As far as drafting is concerned, I'm confident that if Jarmo likes a guy enough he'll trade to get the needed pick. He convinced the Blues GM to trade the previous years first round pick in Rundblad for the pick to use on Tarasenko, you don't see that very often

 

[EspenK]

If they're not mutually exclusive, in your mind, then why are there like 2-3 of your posts in every recent thread sarcastically sending up the "winning is more important than draft position" point of view? Ah, you get to have it both ways... right. I'm not tired of this debate, I'm just sick of the tanking advocates who are basing their opinions on clearly flawed and ruinous logic. Your position is clear even if you don't want to say it loudly.

Increasing our likelihood of getting McDavid by 2% over a 3-game losing streak just isn't worth it when the alternative is winning these games like you're supposed to do and showing the league, our fans, and our players themselves that we are bad ***** that are not in need of the #1 pick to beat you up. Puck Daddy be damned.

It would be a 40% increase in the likelihood of getting McD.

 

[Fro]

Are you serious? Are you talking about Tyutin or Prout?

yeah...that made ZERO sense...

 

[EspenK]

There's no such thing as season-to-season momentum; it simply does not exist. If it did, last year's playoff team wouldn't have started off 4-10-1 and then 6-1-2. If it did, 2012-13's all-but-in playoff team wouldn't have started off 2-5-0 and then 5-10-0.

Winning games after being basically eliminated and then actually eliminated is all well and good, but there's nothing that carries over into the next season.

Finally. A voice of reason.

 

[JacketsDavid]

I'm not so sure I'm on board with - we use to suck at drafting but now we're good.

Most first round picks we took the best available - big exception was Zherdev. Seemed like most folks (including internally) wanted to go another direction but Doug wanted to get his Gaborik (and I remember him saying on his old radio show that whoever he got in that draft was going to be better then Gabby).

Now how we developed guys was questionable, including how they were handled. From Doug forcing King to play Klesla, to letting Nash float defensively, to not getting Zherdev in line, to Brassard, Brule, Filatov, etc just seemed like too many kids were plugged in and were better in their initial 1st season (minimal games) than they were when they were given a full-time job.

But it's not like we were taking guys projected as 2nd round picks in the top 8 picks. We were taking guys that made sense according the publically available draft information.