Speculation: Trade, FA & Rumours (Mod warning OP)

[surixon]

I might be one of those that over rates him - but I think a guy with his talent on a team with our wingers, would be / could be a site to see. I can see him as a 100 pt center and maybe enough to take a team from wanna be to contender.

I dont see that in him personally. He had some good puck luck this year in which he had a career high shooting percentage and had a crazy high on ice shot percentage. I think his numbers will regress back to being an 85 to 90 point guy again.

We didn't see a player like Tavares magically score more playing with a winger like Marner I dont see a material change in his production

 

[AWSAA]

I dont see that in him personally. He had some good puck luck this year in which he had a career high shooting percentage and had a crazy high on ice shot percentage. I think his numbers will regress back to being an 85 to 90 point guy again.

Please. Eichel is way better than Mark. Just hitting his prime now.
That's a nobrainer swap, avoiding Scheifele's next contract would be a huge win.

 

[surixon]

Please. Eichel is way better than Mark. Just hitting his prime now.
That's a nobrainer swap, avoiding Scheifele's next contract would be a huge win.

Based on what exactly. Point production is pretty close between the two.

 

[Romang67]

Please. Eichel is way better than Mark. Just hitting his prime now.
That's a nobrainer swap, avoiding Scheifele's next contract would be a huge win.

Avoiding Scheifele's next contract in 4 years? Getting rid of one of the best contracts in the league so that we can avoid the next contract in 4 years?

That seems awfully shortsighted. Especially since we'd be paying Eichel ~$4M per year for each of those 4 years. 3 of which will have a static salary cap.

 

[Hunter368]

Avoiding Scheifele's next contract in 4 years? Getting rid of one of the best contracts in the league so that we can avoid the next contract in 4 years?

That seems awfully shortsighted. Especially since we'd be paying Eichel ~$4M per year for each of those 4 years. 3 of which will have a static salary cap.

IMO

Eichel > Mark as far as skill.

If we're trying to win in the next four years, I'll gladly keep Mark due to his contract is built to win now.

Eichel > Laine as far as skill, I trade Laine for Eichel all day long and twice on Sunday. Laine next contract is going to closer to Eichel then Mark's. I would pack Laine, his PlayStation, sister, GF and Mother all in my truck and drive him all the way to Buffalo immediately if it meant getting Eichel.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

What made this one more complicated than usual is that we are talking about a trade that wouldn't happen until after a player proved his worth - those rarely get kicked around.
It's like me, for example, saying KC will be worth zillions next season because his D game will have a breakout this season sarcasm and he'd be the center pce of a trade for Eichel. I feel pretty strongly about that so it's worth considering
I'd get slaughtered

Well yeah - except it is nothing like that. Laine may never reach his potential, but it is quite a lot higher than KC's, or that of anyone else Jets 2.0 have ever had. With each year that goes by, reaching that potential becomes less likely and/or the estimation of just how high that potential is gets a little lower. But that is another story.

I had no interest in exploring what we would need to add to Laine in order to get Eichel because it would take too much. Not worth considering. That is unless Laine has that breakout year - and he needs to do it this year for the purposes of this discussion. So it becomes something interesting to speculate on just how big would the add have to be under those circumstances. Purely speculative, purely hypothetical, just for fun - and anyone who does not want to play is free to stay out of it.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

The Boston trade would be interesting (assuming Laine actually wants out) if we could include Studnicka. He was named to the AHL all rookie team and looks like he has top 6 C upside. Add in a top 6 wing replacement with some grit in DeBrusk and a big, young top 4 RHD that maybe has some untapped offensive potential, plus a pick.

Laine + Pionk for DeBrusk, Carlo, Studnicka, 1st.

2 late 1sts in the 2021 draft is never bad. Package them to trade up or take 2 picks.

Connor Scheif Wheels
DeBrusk Stats Ehlers
Harkins Studnicka Roslovic
Copp Lowry Appleton
Perreault

With high end depth still on the way in Vesalainen, Gus, Perfetti, etc.

JMo - Carlo
Samberg - DeMelo
Niku - Poolman
Forbert - Beaulieu

With Heinola still coming.

For the expansion draft Studnicka is exempt so protection wise it doesn't cause issues.

For the PP I'd go Wheeler down low in Connor's spot. Connor in Laine's spot. Ehlers on the other half wall in Wheelers' old spot. Scheif in the slot and then I'd have to see who ran the point best. JMO, Carlo or Niku. Without just trying to force feed Laine maybe it's less important having the RH shot on the point.

I'd actually be on board with this. Might actually make the team more well rounded by adding some grit to the top 6 and gives us a shot at a long term top pair RHD in Carlo. He's only 23 right now so there's likely still room to improve.

Definitely quantity for quality, but interesting.

I think you are optimistic with Niku in the lineup and Samberg on the 2nd pair. Unless you managed to trade PMo, Copp - Lowry - Roslovic is still the 3rd line. Harkins - Stud - Apples is the 4th. If that 4th line is really good, they might gradually get more TOI and become more of a 3b.

It does make for a more balanced team, both up front and on the blueline. It gives us some size and grit on every D pair.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

No real interest in that Bruins deal.... not really what we should be looking at for a Laine return... I think we could and should do much better.

Not the trade of my dreams but Studnicka is potentially more depth at C and if not that he falls back to RW. Could possibly play RW in the top 6. Carlo is not a blue-chip top pair RHD but I think he slots in above DeMelo. So both 1st and 2nd pairs improve. And Carlo still has the potential to develop into a true top pairing RHD.

We are less of a scoring threat but our top 6 is better defensively. Our bottom 6 is better and so is our D corps. The PP would need to be completely reworked, but the existing PP has become stale anyway.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Neither am I. Kind of doubt it actually, but I'm a homer like most around here though I do think I tend to the more realistic then some expectations I've read.

You are supposed to be the optimist around here, the anti @nobody imp0rtant .

Expecting less is not automatically more realistic. It is just easier to persuade yourself that it is achievable.

It is possible that Debrusk, Carlo + 1st would be the best we could get - if we were negotiating from a position of weakness. It would be pretty disappointing though. That would still be a late 1st too.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I think people are starting to overrate Echel here a tad. He is a real nice young player but imo taking contracts into account he is not worth Scheifele.

By the looks of it he will get you an extra 5 points a year but that isn't worth an additional $4 plus million on the cap.

He is further ahead than that if you compare at = ages. And he is better defensively, I believe. His additional scoring has come on very weak teams, though he has usually had decent wingers.

Three and a half years younger and under contract for 2 years longer adds value. Instantly expands our window from 4 years to 6.

That said, I agree that some here might be overrating him a bit, just like some underrate Laine.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

That is very possible but not at all a guarantee. If I had a dollar for everytime someone said a great player on a bad team would score much more on a better team only for it not to happen I would have a decent amount of spare change.

Right now everything on his team goes through him so he gets his points regardless of who he plays with and its not like he doesn't play with some good talent on his roster. Rheinheart is a good first line forward and Skinner is plus goal scorer.

Sabre's fans can roast me all they want, I don't trade one for one especially in a flat cap world.

Eichel is likely a better player than Mark but he isn't a $4 plus million better player then Mark and that is something not enough people take into consideration.

Small correction. It is not 4 plus million. It is 4 minus, 3.875 cap hit, to be exact.

 

[surixon]

He is further ahead than that if you compare at = ages. And he is better defensively, I believe. His additional scoring has come on very weak teams, though he has usually had decent wingers.

Three and a half years younger and under contract for 2 years longer adds value. Instantly expands our window from 4 years to 6.

That said, I agree that some here might be overrating him a bit, just like some underrate Laine.

All good points, still don't do it myself but I can see why many would.

 

[LowLefty]

Well yeah - except it is nothing like that. Laine may never reach his potential, but it is quite a lot higher than KC's, or that of anyone else Jets 2.0 have ever had. With each year that goes by, reaching that potential becomes less likely and/or the estimation of just how high that potential is gets a little lower. But that is another story.

I had no interest in exploring what we would need to add to Laine in order to get Eichel because it would take too much. Not worth considering. That is unless Laine has that breakout year - and he needs to do it this year for the purposes of this discussion. So it becomes something interesting to speculate on just how big would the add have to be under those circumstances. Purely speculative, purely hypothetical, just for fun - and anyone who does not want to play is free to stay out of it.

Actually, you don't know that - it was exactly my point. You see all this potential with Laine but others may not. In fact, they may see it in other players that you don't. It's potential and nothing more - meaningless until it happens. I was throwing KC out there only as an example of how we may all see the future a little differently.

Yes, it's fun to speculate - but some might not agree with what is being speculated - at that point, it then becomes a debate like all others on this board - which can be fun if handled properly and we don't take ourselves to seriously. We all want to play - but we may not all agree.

 

[LowLefty]

He is further ahead than that if you compare at = ages. And he is better defensively, I believe. His additional scoring has come on very weak teams, though he has usually had decent wingers.

Three and a half years younger and under contract for 2 years longer adds value. Instantly expands our window from 4 years to 6.

That said, I agree that some here might be overrating him a bit, just like some underrate Laine.

I agree completely - or almost completely. I'd reverse your last sentence -

 

[LowLefty]

I dont see that in him personally. He had some good puck luck this year in which he had a career high shooting percentage and had a crazy high on ice shot percentage. I think his numbers will regress back to being an 85 to 90 point guy again.

We didn't see a player like Tavares magically score more playing with a winger like Marner I dont see a material change in his production

You need to be good to be lucky - and I wouldn't compare his game to Tavares. I think his numbers would explode playing for the Jets.

 

[surixon]

You need to be good to be lucky - and I wouldn't compare his game to Tavares. I think his numbers would explode playing for the Jets.

Sure but when a player shoots between 9.2 and 10.2% consistently for his first four years and has a fairly consistent and sustainable on ice shot % between 8 and 10% that sets a pretty long and solid track record of what can reasonably be expected from the player.

He shot nearly 50% better then his prior career average this year and shots went in when he was on the ice at almost a 30% greater clip then the average the 4 previous years.

That to me would indicate he had a career year this past year and the smart money would be on him regressing back to closer to what he was the four prior years.

I'm not sure why Tavares isn't a good comp. High end center drafted high that posted numerous years worth of good numbers on mediocre team that didn't see much of a difference in scoring when he joined a high powered offensive team in Toronto.

The only time you tend to see an explosion in points is when a players usage materially changes. That wouldn't be the case here as Jack already gets a tonne of minutes ans a tonne of PP time. I just don't see hi. Doing that much better here.

 

[scarbrow21]

Sure but when a player shoots between 9.2 and 10.2% consistently for his first four years and has a fairly consistent and sustainable on ice shot % between 8 and 10% that sets a pretty long and solid track record of what can reasonably be expected from the player.

He shot nearly 50% better then his prior career average this year and shots went in when he was on the ice at almost a 30% greater clip then the average the 4 previous years.

That to me would indicate he had a career year this past year and the smart money would be on him regressing back to closer to what he was the four prior years.

I'm not sure why Tavares isn't a good comp. High end center drafted high that posted numerous years worth of good numbers on mediocre team that didn't see much of a difference in scoring when he joined a high powered offensive team in Toronto.

The only time you tend to see an explosion in points is when a players usage materially changes. That wouldn't be the case here as Jack already gets a tonne of minutes ans a tonne of PP time. I just don't see hi. Doing that much better here.

Kind of like watching Laine on another teams TOP line full time how his scoring might explode!

 

[bennylundholm]

Actually, you don't know that - it was exactly my point. You see all this potential with Laine but others may not. In fact, they may see it in other players that you don't. It's potential and nothing more - meaningless until it happens. I was throwing KC out there only as an example of how we may all see the future a little differently.

Yes, it's fun to speculate - but some might not agree with what is being speculated - at that point, it then becomes a debate like all others on this board - which can be fun if handled properly and we don't take ourselves to seriously. We all want to play - but we may not all agree.

Ya, I agree. I'd venture to say there are a number of gm's who would take Connor over Laine if they had the choice.
I don't necessarily think projecting Connor to have a higher ceiling than Laine is improbable.

 

[KingBogo]

Actually, you don't know that - it was exactly my point. You see all this potential with Laine but others may not. In fact, they may see it in other players that you don't. It's potential and nothing more - meaningless until it happens. I was throwing KC out there only as an example of how we may all see the future a little differently.

Yes, it's fun to speculate - but some might not agree with what is being speculated - at that point, it then becomes a debate like all others on this board - which can be fun if handled properly and we don't take ourselves to seriously. We all want to play - but we may not all agree.

Actually I see Connor scoring more goals career wise than Laine. Goals are mostly scored in very close range to the net and this is were Connor scores goals. Laine scores long range and he would need to have somewhere in the 17-18% shooting % range unless he dramatically ups his shot total. For some reason the HFJets fan base has soured on their own Guy Lafleur. Not the most complete player but a guy who will likely have multiple 40-50 goal seasons and hit 500 by the time he retires.

 

[DRW204]

Ya, I agree. I'd venture to say there are a number of gm's who would take Connor over Laine if they had the choice.
I don't necessarily think projecting Connor to have a higher ceiling than Laine is improbable.

KC has been superior offensively than Laine the past couple years. He's better at generating shots and chances too. Both are terrible defensively. But then you consider the fact KC is signed to a pretty fair deal at 7.1M and Laine is (imo) likely angling for 9-10m?, I totally agree with you that there'd be several GMs are taking KC over him. Laine is a bit more "box-office" i think (he has bigger mainstream appeal i find) so maybe there's some allure there.

i think more conversations need to be had about KC's offensive & overall ceiling tbh. He's only a year older than Laine so it's not like there is a huge gap in age, and been progressing each year offensively, although we need some progression on the defensive side.

Actually I see Connor scoring more goals career wise than Laine. Goals are mostly scored in very close range to the net and this is were Connor scores goals. Laine scores long range and he would need to have somewhere in the 17-18% shooting % range unless he dramatically ups his shot total. For some reason the HFJets fan base has soured on their own Guy Lafleur. Not the most complete player but a guy who will likely have multiple 40-50 goal seasons and hit 500 by the time he retires.

been hammering this for a while.

if laine remains in the 12% range like he has for the last 2 seasons, he'll need Ovi type shot volume in order to hit 40-50 goals. I don't see him doing that. His shot volume and quality/distance has been virtually unchanged in 4 years. KC has already been a superior goal scorer the past 2 years, and is right there with him in career GPG.

 

[surixon]

Actually I see Connor scoring more goals career wise than Laine. Goals are mostly scored in very close range to the net and this is were Connor scores goals. Laine scores long range and he would need to have somewhere in the 17-18% shooting % range unless he dramatically ups his shot total. For some reason the HFJets fan base has soured on their own Guy Lafleur. Not the most complete player but a guy who will likely have multiple 40-50 goal seasons and hit 500 by the time he retires.

Laine needs to continue to get that power game going more consistently which imo will allow him to get the puck closer to the net more. I am curious how a more robust offensive scheme will help all of our shooters next year.

I think more offensive zone time will lead to a higher shot volume for Laine as well but we will just have to wait and see what happens.

I would like to see everyone produce strong results as that will mean the team is likely performing well.

 

[Buffdog]

KC has been superior offensively than Laine the past couple years. He's better at generating shots and chances too. Both are terrible defensively. But then you consider the fact KC is signed to a pretty fair deal at 7.1M and Laine is (imo) likely angling for 9-10m?, I totally agree with you that there'd be several GMs are taking KC over him. Laine is a bit more "box-office" i think (he has bigger mainstream appeal i find) so maybe there's some allure there.

i think more conversations need to be had about KC's offensive & overall ceiling tbh. He's only a year older than Laine so it's not like there is a huge gap in age, and been progressing each year offensively, although we need some progression on the defensive side.



been hammering this for a while.

if laine remains in the 12% range like he has for the last 2 seasons, he'll need Ovi type shot volume in order to hit 40-50 goals. I don't see him doing that. His shot volume and quality/distance has been virtually unchanged in 4 years. KC has already been a superior goal scorer the past 2 years, and is right there with him in career GPG.

It's generally accepted that laine and connor (and for that matter shief and wheels as well) are bad defensively.

The stats back up that argument

But I've watched most jets games, and don't come away with my eye test going "ooooh, that a was terrible d by ________". Yes there are moments, but there will be for everyone.

Laine turns the puck over near both blue lines that I've seen result in goals against

Connor can be weak on the puck in his own end and struggles with zone exits resulting in turnovers

Shief cheats up too high in the zone at times

Wheeler blows the zone early

Is that what people are talking about? Also, when 4 of your top six are weak defensively, maybe it's the system? Or a bit of both?

I still think that these guys will have better shot metrics when there is a d corps that does a better job denying zone exits/entries, makes better outlet passes (and for that matter, regroup passes off of turnovers in the neutral zone).

I'm looking forward to a full season with de Melo, and eventually heinola

 

[KingBogo]

It's generally accepted that laine and connor (and for that matter shief and wheels as well) are bad defensively.

The stats back up that argument

But I've watched most jets games, and don't come away with my eye test going "ooooh, that a was terrible d by ________". Yes there are moments, but there will be for everyone.

Laine turns the puck over near both blue lines that I've seen result in goals against

Connor can be weak on the puck in his own end and struggles with zone exits resulting in turnovers

Shief cheats up too high in the zone at times

Wheeler blows the zone early

Is that what people are talking about? Also, when 4 of your top six are weak defensively, maybe it's the system? Or a bit of both?

I still think that these guys will have better shot metrics when there is a d corps that does a better job denying zone exits/entries, makes better outlet passes (and for that matter, regroup passes off of turnovers in the neutral zone).

I'm looking forward to a full season with de Melo, and eventually heinola

IMO anyway, I think the biggest problem was our top 6 never adjusted their play from playing with a strong defensive group to playing with our AHL caliber band of misfits last season. None of them seemed to be willing to give up offense to play more defensively sound in their own zone. You can get away playing up high or blowing the zone if you are always on the ice with either Buff or Trouba who were effective of eliminating the cycle. Your increased offense would more than make up for the times it cost you defensively.

 

[Roughneck1]

It's generally accepted that laine and connor (and for that matter shief and wheels as well) are bad defensively.

The stats back up that argument

But I've watched most jets games, and don't come away with my eye test going "ooooh, that a was terrible d by ________". Yes there are moments, but there will be for everyone.

Laine turns the puck over near both blue lines that I've seen result in goals against

Connor can be weak on the puck in his own end and struggles with zone exits resulting in turnovers

Shief cheats up too high in the zone at times

Wheeler blows the zone early

Is that what people are talking about? Also, when 4 of your top six are weak defensively, maybe it's the system? Or a bit of both?

I still think that these guys will have better shot metrics when there is a d corps that does a better job denying zone exits/entries, makes better outlet passes (and for that matter, regroup passes off of turnovers in the neutral zone).

I'm looking forward to a full season with de Melo, and eventually heinola

Last year it was the system in my mind. Maurice made the jets play conservative d in box out the opponents from in close and letting them shoot long range shots. Didn’t trust the d for a quick transition d to create turnovers and move the puck up ice so had players collapse in front of net. Let the opposition shoot away and show abysmal shot against totals. I don’t buy our forewords are that bad at defence.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I don't ever see Boston being a good trading partner. Laine might still be a 2nd line RW behind Pasternak. I'm not sure that's the team that would break the bank for Laine. I also don't think, as much as I see posted, that Chevy is looking to move Pionk. If you look at the defense we put together last year, the team is nowhere near contention without him. He might be the best skating defenseman Jets have had since Phil Housley.

I'm just hoping for a great season from Laine, and then a blockbuster with Carolina once it's over. Though Montreal might be a good trading partner too, with multiple draft picks and prospects.

I agree that Chevy is not looking to move Pionk - but if the return for Laine features a better RHD then he probably goes the other way. If it doesn't return a better 1st pair RHD then why we are moving Laine?