The Jarmo Thread

[CalBuckeyeRob]

It's really hard to break out from 11th-18th best team in the league to consistently in the top 10. It usually takes multiple generational talents (TB - Point, Kucherov, Hedman / Chicago - Toews, Kane, Keith, Seabrook, Hossa / Pittsburgh - Crosby, Malkin). Maybe you catch lightning (no pun intended) in a bottle - St. Louis with ROR and Binnington. Those instances are pretty rare.

I'm stuck on how this team gets into a perennial top 10 team. They're not projected to have multiple top 5 picks. I'm not sure they have generational type talents outside of the top pair. I also don't think the pipeline is all that good, either. So...what can they do? They acquired Panarin for two seasons and squeaked into the playoffs both years. I'm not sure there's a way out of this "bubble team" area where they probably just rack up a bunch of 1st round losses in the playoffs over and over.

I think a big step to getting there is figuring out how to keep PLD, Seth and Werenski well into their UFA years. It will also probably take some luck in the draft but if you need that luck to just replace the legit high end players you did have, then you are just trying to stay a borderline playoff team and not building from that position.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

...and those were in consecutive years, and they were the last two years. That counts for something regarding how Jarmo's been doing, what he's been getting this team to do lately. ...

I'm only quoting you DSL because the words quoted are often used pejoratively about the Jackets. That would be compelling if those "accomplishments" were a few years ago and a few years apart; but they are the most recent indications of what Jarmo has done with the team.

This is spot on and a good reminder for this line of discussion. Thanks db.

 

[Viqsi]

...and those were in consecutive years, and they were the last two years. That counts for something regarding how Jarmo's been doing, what he's been getting this team to do lately. We hear the Jackets being discussed as players in many of the FA negotiations this offseason, from Hall to Hoffman and Pietrangolo. They didn't come here, and Panarin left, but it's not like Jarmo was on the sidelines- and I still can't discern whether posters here really even wanted those players to begin with (Hoffman still available I know).

I'm only quoting you DSL because the words quoted are often used pejoratively about the Jackets. That would be compelling if those "accomplishments" were a few years ago and a few years apart; but they are the most recent indications of what Jarmo has done with the team.

You get a cookie.

 

[DarkandStormy]

Obviously "objectivity" isn't going to be involved in this discussion.

I'll ask you this though. What is more concerning to you?

A) - A 2C of Wennberg/Jenner

B) - A 3rd pair of Kukan-Peeke

For me it is clearly A, and Kukan-Peeke is completely unconcerning.

We are one injury away (instead of 2+) from "Scott Harrington, NHL regular."

 

[Viqsi]

We are one injury away (instead of 2+) from "Scott Harrington, NHL regular."

Setting aside the fact that Harrington is in fact a decent NHL-quality #6/7 (the Preds could have desperately used someone like him last year), one should note that the most common reasons why we'd have so many injuries on the blueline just went away.

 

[DarkandStormy]

Setting aside the fact that Harrington is in fact a decent NHL-quality #6/7

He's not.

Kukan was out a long time (well, would have been a long time but for covid) with a knee injury. Seth Jones broke his ankle. Peeke broke...what, his hand? Werenski had another shoulder injury.

 

[Viqsi]

He's not.

Then I guess the same is also true of similarly-rated guys (by GSVA) like John Moore, Oliver Kylington, Deryk Engelland, Cody Ceci, Brady Skjei, Adam Larsson, Dan Hamhuis, Ethan Bear, Nikita Zadorov, Mike Matheson, Carl Dahlstrom, Connor Clifton, Nick Leddy, and Travis Hamonic. All a bunch of non-NHLers, right?

Being the worst defenseman on the Blue Jackets (he's #9 out of 9 on that list) is a very different thing than being the worst defenseman on another team.

 

[NotWendell]

You get a cookie.

I think DB should get the cookie just for using the word pejoratively!

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

He's not.

Objectively?

All of those lower-pairing guys come with issues. Harrington perhaps might be best described as a bubble NHL defenseman, usable for periods of time anywhere from 5-8.

 

[Byrral]

The fans only think about today, GMs have to think 5 years down the line. Spending to the cap today might mean we don't keep Jones and Z or possibly someone else in the future.

I could get on board with this but recent history shows Jarmo doesn't seem to care about 5 years down the road as much as you think he does. He decided to keep Panarin around when he knew he most likely wouldn't sign here and he gave up potential future assets in a trade for him. Then he traded away a bunch more assets to get players for a playoff hope. These players weren't going to re-sign here. That's not caring about the future. I disagreed with him doing it but understood why.

I'm not calling for spending long term all the way to the cap just to spend. Taylor Hall signed a one year deal. Mike Hoffman is rumored to be interested in a one year deal. These are not long term commitments. Both of these players could have helped the team win this year. For one year. They have the cap space this season. All it took was money...even if they had to overspend for one season. This doesn't hurt the future. How is that a bad thing.

Maybe I'm a bad judge of players. Maybe these aren't the exact guys. And maybe Jarmo tried all of these things and these guys all laughed at the city and told him to stuff it. Kudos to him. But you have now said fans like me only think about today and about shiny new toys. That's not the case. For you to double down on this theory is not a good look for you.

The team is pretty good. Why are some against making the team even better by adding another quality player or two. Jarmo is still on the clock. There's still cap space available. There's still time for him to do something. I hope he does.

 

[MoeBartoli]

While Jarmo failed to deliver the big FA signing we all were awaiting, this team looks better to me than last years team for several reasons. I do believe we lost D depth and a healthy Murray is a loss, but a healthy Murray is likewise a wish. So why do I feel we are better?

Domi is more valuable to us than Anderson. Like him a lot, but Boone is not a 2C. Wennberg either isn’t or wouldn’t play like one and the plus in his subtraction is Torts isn’t faced with any longer trying to worry about him as a 2C (or any C for that matter so moving on to Koivu gives me more comfort). Finally we have that position set to create two top six offensive lines. Thus we are far better off up the middle.

Now...do we have two top 6 LWs? That’s an unanswered question. But I still think Jarmo has one more shorter term move up his sleeve if he could resolve the PLD contract. It’s at that point I’ll move from a positive incomplete grade to a final mark.

 

[Dumais]

I agree we need a top6 left wing. Just don't like any of the FA; Granlund maybe...but I wouldn't call us a cup contender with him...

I vote wait; maybe around TDL or next year after Dubi and Foligno come off the books. Maybe pull off a trade or someone from Europe/KHL in the meantime.

And I think Jarmo is smart for the bridge deals. One of the centers here will likely become a true #1 (60% chance) and if they hit PPG give them 8-9m in two years, pretty sure (80%) the other will be able to put up 50-60points, sign them to a 6-7m longterm. Jones/UFA 9-10m while RFA Werenski 8-9m. As for the goalies, lets see which one can prove it again. They call bridge deals "prove it" deals; going to be so exciting! 4 to 6 NHL players who are young enough to still have the potential to grow and get better; playing for contracts...I like where this is going.

 

[NotWendell]

I'm not happy with what Jarmo has done this offseason TO DATE. That can change quickly with just one announcement.

 

[EspenK]

I'm not happy with what Jarmo has done this offseason TO DATE. That can change quickly with just one announcement.

I'm with you. If there is an internal cap in place I'd give him props. He signs Hoffman (or acquires a top 6 LW) he gets an A. Also locking PD up for a long time would help.

 

[DarkandStormy]

While Jarmo failed to deliver the big FA signing we all were awaiting, this team looks better to me than last years team for several reasons. I do believe we lost D depth and a healthy Murray is a loss, but a healthy Murray is likewise a wish. So why do I feel we are better?

Domi is more valuable to us than Anderson. Like him a lot, but Boone is not a 2C. Wennberg either isn’t or wouldn’t play like one and the plus in his subtraction is Torts isn’t faced with any longer trying to worry about him as a 2C (or any C for that matter so moving on to Koivu gives me more comfort). Finally we have that position set to create two top six offensive lines. Thus we are far better off up the middle.

Now...do we have two top 6 LWs? That’s an unanswered question. But I still think Jarmo has one more shorter term move up his sleeve if he could resolve the PLD contract. It’s at that point I’ll move from a positive incomplete grade to a final mark.

Simply by staying healthier, we'd probably be "better" than last year. Same as if we don't have a bunch of guys shoot career low shooting %s. We were one of the worst teams (maybe *the* worst) in the league in terms of shooting %.

Did we make moves to get out of the perennial "will scratch their way into the playoffs but won't sniff the Conference Finals" tier of teams? I don't think so. But if they play the same Torts-style, low-event, play for OT hockey they'll rack up loser points again to put them in that same tier. And fans will point to St. Louis or the L.A. Kings of nearly a decade ago as a reason to be hopeful and that just getting in to the playoffs gives you a chance.

As I noted up thread (and Portzline and Lukan cover on this week's Athletic podcast)...it's really hard to get out of that tier and into "legitimate" (whatever that means, it's pretty subjective) Cup contenders.

 

[CBJx614]

I could get on board with this but recent history shows Jarmo doesn't seem to care about 5 years down the road as much as you think he does. He decided to keep Panarin around when he knew he most likely wouldn't sign here and he gave up potential future assets in a trade for him. Then he traded away a bunch more assets to get players for a playoff hope. These players weren't going to re-sign here. That's not caring about the future. I disagreed with him doing it but understood why.

I'm not calling for spending long term all the way to the cap just to spend. Taylor Hall signed a one year deal. Mike Hoffman is rumored to be interested in a one year deal. These are not long term commitments. Both of these players could have helped the team win this year. For one year. They have the cap space this season. All it took was money...even if they had to overspend for one season. This doesn't hurt the future. How is that a bad thing.

Maybe I'm a bad judge of players. Maybe these aren't the exact guys. And maybe Jarmo tried all of these things and these guys all laughed at the city and told him to stuff it. Kudos to him. But you have now said fans like me only think about today and about shiny new toys. That's not the case. For you to double down on this theory is not a good look for you.

The team is pretty good. Why are some against making the team even better by adding another quality player or two. Jarmo is still on the clock. There's still cap space available. There's still time for him to do something. I hope he does.

How is what he did with Duchene acquisitions any different then the Hoffman, Hall situation. He'd be going all in for one season. Except this time he would be handcuffing himself in the immediate future. By signing those players we essentially take away any flexibility and possibility for moves during the season. At least with Hall he was attempting a long term deal (thinking about the future).

We could be giving up a chance to acquire a true game changer that could help long term(Jones/Panarin type deals) for one year of Hall or Hoffman. Yeah Panarin didn't work out, but he was attempting to make a move for the future of the franchise.

 

[Byrral]

How is what he did with Duchene acquisitions any different then the Hoffman, Hall situation. He'd be going all in for one season. Except this time he would be handcuffing himself in the immediate future. By signing those players we essentially take away any flexibility and possibility for moves during the season. At least with Hall he was attempting a long term deal (thinking about the future).

I see a big difference:

1. Hypothetical Panarin trade (might not like the value for him but hypothetically): A mid level NHL roster roster player. A 1st. A 2-3 organizational prospect.
2. Abramov, Davidsson and 2 1sts for Duchene (ended up one 1st)
3. Duclair and 2 2nds for Dzingel
3, A 5th for Kincaid
4, Bergman, a 4th and a 7th for McQuaid
5, None of the players re-signed with the CBJ

Yes they won a series and it was welcomed and important for the franchise. But it also came at a price. Those are hard assets, whatever value you put on them, traded to go "all in"....... whatever that means. They barely made the playoffs and lost in the 2nd round. Signing Hall or Hoffman for one year would cost cost zero assets. This will not affect long term moves. And it didn't have to be those specific players. Others have been mentioned on this board. Those were examples of known/available quantities.

We could be giving up a chance to acquire a true game changer that could help long term(Jones/Panarin type deals) for one year of Hall or Hoffman. Yeah Panarin didn't work out, but he was attempting to make a move for the future of the franchise.

I would totally be behind this concept if I was sure this was up Jarmos sleeve. He has been able to pull these off but I wouldn't be banking on that happening before the next season starts for it to affect the team this season. It's more possible at the trade deadline. I'll continue to say that I hope Jarmo finds a player(s) that can help the team this year. There's still time.

 

[LetsGOJackets!!]

I see a big difference:

That is a well thought out response Byrral, Thank you - I look at this team & it is so much better positioned then prior Mgmt. I want to see Jarmo succeed so badly. I think he has vision that other GM's do not, and I think he scours the world for players that could be potential answers. As constructed IF WE STAY H E A L T H Y.. big if, I can see us taking a needed step forward with the team that we have. Love our team down the middle on the blue line and in goal.. PL Domi Koivu Nash. Jarmo found that 2nd CENTREMAN we needed and as mentioned above with time they may be more 1A 1B. This next season will swing on three things:

1) Point production from LW (Texier / Nyquist/ Foligno 2) Point Production RW OB, Cam, Grigs (Cam needs to regain All Star form) and 3) health of the blue line. We lost our cushion/ depth

The real surprise in the future looks like it won't be Finns but instead a Russian line of Chinakov Voronkov Marchenko (Vids) could you give us some thoughts on what this trio could do if they progress as projected?

I have to admit that I thought there was going to be a splash acquisition, but I remain a believer in Jarmo, Ville, & Josef

 

[CBJx614]

I see a big difference:

1. Hypothetical Panarin trade (might not like the value for him but hypothetically): A mid level NHL roster roster player. A 1st. A 2-3 organizational prospect.
2. Abramov, Davidsson and 2 1sts for Duchene (ended up one 1st)
3. Duclair and 2 2nds for Dzingel
3, A 5th for Kincaid
4, Bergman, a 4th and a 7th for McQuaid
5, None of the players re-signed with the CBJ

Yes they won a series and it was welcomed and important for the franchise. But it also came at a price. Those are hard assets, whatever value you put on them, traded to go "all in"....... whatever that means. They barely made the playoffs and lost in the 2nd round. Signing Hall or Hoffman for one year would cost cost zero assets. This will not affect long term moves. And it didn't have to be those specific players. Others have been mentioned on this board. Those were examples of known/available quantities.



I would totally be behind this concept if I was sure this was up Jarmos sleeve. He has been able to pull these off but I wouldn't be banking on that happening before the next season starts for it to affect the team this season. It's more possible at the trade deadline. I'll continue to say that I hope Jarmo finds a player(s) that can help the team this year. There's still time.

I'd argue the only valuable pieces we lost out on in those moves are the 1st and 2 2nds. Which are a minor set back and we're only made because we have other, more valuable pieces in the system. Low risk, with a possible huge reward. In hindsight, they were pure rentals, especially Dzingel. But we wanted to keep both Panarin and Duchene for the long term.

And Jarmo has already said as much. They want flexibility to make moves should they arise. By signing those players today, we potentially lose out on chances throughout the next season.

 

[Monstershockey]

Simply by staying healthier, we'd probably be "better" than last year. Same as if we don't have a bunch of guys shoot career low shooting %s. We were one of the worst teams (maybe *the* worst) in the league in terms of shooting %.

Did we make moves to get out of the perennial "will scratch their way into the playoffs but won't sniff the Conference Finals" tier of teams? I don't think so. But if they play the same Torts-style, low-event, play for OT hockey they'll rack up loser points again to put them in that same tier. And fans will point to St. Louis or the L.A. Kings of nearly a decade ago as a reason to be hopeful and that just getting in to the playoffs gives you a chance.

As I noted up thread (and Portzline and Lukan cover on this week's Athletic podcast)...it's really hard to get out of that tier and into "legitimate" (whatever that means, it's pretty subjective) Cup contenders.

So if they stayed healthy and shot better last year they would have been a pretty good team. They were 29th in shooting percentage, which is bad, but they were 6th in shots on goal. So even unhealthy they still were able to rank 6th in shots on goal. The reason they "played for loser points" may be attributed to the low shooting percentage. If they would have tried late in tie games to win it with such a putrid percentage, chances are they would have lost those games instead of getting "loser points". I guess finishing 33-37 with 66 points and no points off losses is better than 33-37 with 81 points because they were able to convert 15 of 37 losses into points. I will take a coach, don't care who they are, that realizes his teams strengths and weaknesses, and uses them to maximize the best production they can get out of his team. They weren't converting shots all year so this was the end result. Had they shot the league average, which I think was 9.5 percent, they would have scored 216 goals instead of 180. Depending on which games those extra 36 goals came in, could have drastically changed the season. Same goes for the playoffs where they shot 7.3 percent.

I brought up the Kings because someone had asked why Columbus can't build championship teams as fast as other teams and cited Chicago and LA as examples. I noticed as I was looking at those teams that LA won their cups with teams that put up similar numbers and were low seeds like Columbus. I was merely showing that you can still win championships with teams like that. Also, yes, just getting to the playoffs gives you a chance. I have heard athletes in interviews all my life saying, "Hey, if we can just get to the playoffs, who knows what can happen?". I have yet to see a team win a championship by not making the playoffs, but I have seen plenty of teams squeak in and make it to the finals, and even win.

 

[Byrral]

I'd argue the only valuable pieces we lost out on in those moves are the 1st and 2 2nds. Which are a minor set back and we're only made because we have other, more valuable pieces in the system. Low risk, with a possible huge reward. In hindsight, they were pure rentals, especially Dzingel. But we wanted to keep both Panarin and Duchene for the long term.

And Jarmo has already said as much. They want flexibility to make moves should they arise. By signing those players today, we potentially lose out on chances throughout the next season.

This whole debate started because I responded to a couple of your posts stating fans are impatient and don't care about the future.

I questioned the quote and you doubled down.

I listed several reason why it wasn't true. I used examples of short term player contracts that could help the team today without jeopardizing the future.

You then stated saying those signings would be no different than the Duchene trade (one year all in).

I posted all the trades that showed assets that were traded for Duchene and lost (Panarin). Signing a Free Agent, that costs nothing, to a one year deal is much different then Duchene/Panarin.

You then downplay the trades as a minor setback and deemed roster depth and some of the mid-lower draft picks as less important.

And still nothing on the original point.

I'll give you the answer: It's not true.

 

[majormajor]

Setting aside the fact that Harrington is in fact a decent NHL-quality #6/7 (the Preds could have desperately used someone like him last year), one should note that the most common reasons why we'd have so many injuries on the blueline just went away.

He's not.

I don't think Harrington is a decent 6/7, but for us as for most clubs, there isn't a difference in quality between the #7 guy and an AHL top-pair guy. I think if we have a long-term injury issue on the backend the more likely scenario isn't Harrington as a full-time guy (unless he really improves which is unlikely). The more likely thing is Torts rolling through Harrington, Bayreuther, Carlsson and Clendening to find something that works, or Jarmo gets a cheap fill-in from one of the many teams trying to shed salary mid-season. I'd actually be excited to see what Bayreuther or Clendening could do. The specter of a full-time Harrington ruining our season is a little bit silly in my opinion. If he's that bad he won't play. It wouldn't be on the top 20 or 30 factors I'd list.

 

[majormajor]

I agree we need a top6 left wing. Just don't like any of the FA; Granlund maybe...but I wouldn't call us a cup contender with him...

I vote wait; maybe around TDL or next year after Dubi and Foligno come off the books. Maybe pull off a trade or someone from Europe/KHL in the meantime.

Pretty much this. People are getting super-focused on UFAs that are kind of mediocre, looks like "grass is greener" effect going on.

Either 1) we've got an internal cap or 2) Jarmo is keeping his powder dry for a better upgrade than what is available in UFA. I'm making the case that (2) is very sensible, and that it's more consistent with Jarmo's approach. He said at the outset of the offseason that it will be trades not UFA, is there some kind of selective listening going on?

Here's another thing to consider - as is, our pro-rated cap space at the trade deadline is going to be enormous. This at the same time that the normal deadline buyers are tight to the cap and can only make cap for cap moves. It's possible that there will be teams aggressively cutting salary mid-year and that would be a potential windfall for the few buyers with room left.

How is what he did with Duchene acquisitions any different then the Hoffman, Hall situation. He'd be going all in for one season. Except this time he would be handcuffing himself in the immediate future. By signing those players we essentially take away any flexibility and possibility for moves during the season. At least with Hall he was attempting a long term deal (thinking about the future).

We could be giving up a chance to acquire a true game changer that could help long term(Jones/Panarin type deals) for one year of Hall or Hoffman. Yeah Panarin didn't work out, but he was attempting to make a move for the future of the franchise.

I think you've got it backwards. A one year UFA deal doesn't cost you assets. It's a free short term benefit with no long term cost. The long-term deals for UFAs are usually bad long term. Often we say that UFA deals are good in the first year or two and bad after that. I'd love to have Hall for this year but don't want him at all long-term. I'm debating the same for Hoffman but I think we might be better off waiting for something better through trade.

So if they stayed healthy and shot better last year they would have been a pretty good team. They were 29th in shooting percentage, which is bad, but they were 6th in shots on goal. So even unhealthy they still were able to rank 6th in shots on goal. The reason they "played for loser points" may be attributed to the low shooting percentage. If they would have tried late in tie games to win it with such a putrid percentage, chances are they would have lost those games instead of getting "loser points". I guess finishing 33-37 with 66 points and no points off losses is better than 33-37 with 81 points because they were able to convert 15 of 37 losses into points. I will take a coach, don't care who they are, that realizes his teams strengths and weaknesses, and uses them to maximize the best production they can get out of his team. They weren't converting shots all year so this was the end result. Had they shot the league average, which I think was 9.5 percent, they would have scored 216 goals instead of 180. Depending on which games those extra 36 goals came in, could have drastically changed the season. Same goes for the playoffs where they shot 7.3 percent.

I brought up the Kings because someone had asked why Columbus can't build championship teams as fast as other teams and cited Chicago and LA as examples. I noticed as I was looking at those teams that LA won their cups with teams that put up similar numbers and were low seeds like Columbus. I was merely showing that you can still win championships with teams like that. Also, yes, just getting to the playoffs gives you a chance. I have heard athletes in interviews all my life saying, "Hey, if we can just get to the playoffs, who knows what can happen?". I have yet to see a team win a championship by not making the playoffs, but I have seen plenty of teams squeak in and make it to the finals, and even win.

The board is UFA-addled, it's not the important stuff when it comes to "getting over the hump" or having a great regular season.

To have a great season this year I'd ask in this order -

Can they stay relatively healthy?
Can Werenski, Dubois, Jones play like they did in the playoffs?
Can they shoot like they used to?
How much will the lineup improve through maturation of the other young players?

And a bit further down the list, I'd ask:

What can Domi's passing ability do for us in the middle of our lineup?

And then miles down the list:

Can the Jackets sign Mike Hoffman?

 

[Monstershockey]

To have a great season this year I'd ask in this order -

Can they stay relatively healthy?
Can Werenski, Dubois, Jones play like they did in the playoffs?
Can they shoot like they used to?
How much will the lineup improve through maturation of the other young players?

And a bit further down the list, I'd ask:

What can Domi's passing ability do for us in the middle of our lineup?

And then miles down the list:

Can the Jackets sign Mike Hoffman?[/QUOTE]
The first three questions I would answer yes, they can. But will they? I honestly think they will. I thought Werenski, Dubois, and Jones played fine during the season. It would have been nice if Dubois could have gotten more points, but that could have just been a down year for him. Being only his 3rd year, it is impossible to say if that's the player he will be. The playoffs were probably more indicative of the type of player he will be. The maturation of the younger guys is a tough one, but fair or not, I definitely would like to see more from them, meaning Texier and Bemstrom. I like Stenlund, but I just don't know how much he will improve. He was basically the same guy in his time in Cleveland. I really haven't seen enough of Foudy to have an opinion on him. The guy I really like is MacInnis. He has improved so much in his time here, I would love to see him carry it to the NHL. His last 3 AHL seasons he has put up 14 pts in 59 games, 24 pts in 71 games, and 30 pts in 45 games. He has been solid on the PP and the PK. If he keeps up that pace, I would think he should get a good look with the parent team. He has gotten noticeably better. I would like for Kukan to get a little better, and I do like Peeke, but he hasn't played enough to get a good gauge on him.

Domi's passing ability would be welcome, but the guys he is passing to hopefully shoot better. He could be a nice sign for the Jackets. I wouldn't mind them signing Hoffman for next year, he would help.

Speaking of shooting percentages, I was looking at Bjorkstrand's season, and through the first 32 games he was shooting at 6.5 %. His last 17 games, he was 25.5 %, 14 goals on 55 shots. If he can even that out over the course of a season, he really should be a legit 40 goal scorer.

 

[CLW]

Hoffman has padded goal stats, but he is expensive and atrocious at the defensive side of the game. Not a Jarmo/Torts type of player at all I'd say and no other teams seems keen to sign him either. Fans may go "ooh look we need to sign a 30 goal scorer for our wing" but there's more to it than that.