Confirmed with Link: Vladislav Gavrikov To Sign with CBJ

[Madifer]

The goalie is supposed to play the shot (i.e. expect the puck carrier to shoot, and get a good angle on it).

I had a bigger problem with Bob betting on the pass on the 3rd goal (the 4 on 1).

The 1st and the 3rd goals were very stoppable yes. But I still cant really blame only Bob for the loss.

 

[Kshahdoo]

Overall, I'd say, he did well in those two games. A couple of turnovers (but nothing critical), a couple of good defensive plays and mostly simple responsible plays. He can play better, but not in his first two NHL games in the tough playoff series.

Almost 17 mins played in the last game, btw. Torts trusted him more, than Kukan and Harrington.

 

[AndBoomGoesTheCannon]

He reminds me a bit of Seth in how calm he plays. I think he’s gonna be a good one.

 

[absolute garbage]

He looked pretty good. Deceptively quick, looks a bit clunky but has good first step and and can close gaps efficiently. Strong stick and positioning.

The one downside is that since he played this season, he has to be protected in the expansion draft. At least Texier doesn't have to be protected; one more game and he would've needed to be too.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Overall, I'd say, he did well in those two games. A couple of turnovers (but nothing critical), a couple of good defensive plays and mostly simple responsible plays. He can play better, but not in his first two NHL games in the tough playoff series.

Almost 17 mins played in the last game, btw. Torts trusted him more, than Kukan and Harrington.

At minimum, he's going to be the #3 next year.

 

[GoJackets1]

Gav is going to be a staple from now on.

In case anyone forgot, Gabe Carlsson still exists.

 

[thebus88]

The goalie is supposed to play the shot (i.e. expect the puck carrier to shoot, and get a good angle on it).

I had a bigger problem with Bob betting on the pass on the 3rd goal (the 4 on 1).

The 3rd goal the 1 where he barely moved?? Serious question, but,......

Thanks for the 'hockey 101' lesson.

Tell me though, when does "play the shot", turn into something more??? This ain't peewee's.

Anyway, excited to see Gavrikov on the CBJ defense next year and into the future, along with a new CBJ goalie.

 

[LoneFunyan]

The one downside is that since he played this season, he has to be protected in the expansion draft. At least Texier doesn't have to be protected; one more game and he would've needed to be too.

I'm so confused - why does he have to be protected and Texier doesn't? Texier played more games didn't he?

 

[GoJackets1]

I'm so confused - why does he have to be protected and Texier doesn't? Texier played more games didn't he?

Gavrikov isn’t a teenager, which is apparently one of the important distinctions.

 

[Long Live Lyle]

He looked pretty good. Deceptively quick, looks a bit clunky but has good first step and and can close gaps efficiently. Strong stick and positioning.

The one downside is that since he played this season, he has to be protected in the expansion draft. At least Texier doesn't have to be protected; one more game and he would've needed to be too.

I’m pretty sure (like, 90+%) Texier now has to be protected because he played tonight.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

I’m pretty sure (like, 90+%) Texier now has to be protected because he played tonight.

Correct.

 

[Xoggz22]

He looked pretty good. Deceptively quick, looks a bit clunky but has good first step and and can close gaps efficiently. Strong stick and positioning.

The one downside is that since he played this season, he has to be protected in the expansion draft. At least Texier doesn't have to be protected; one more game and he would've needed to be too.

Tex will need protected. He's played 10 games. that's the cut off.

 

[absolute garbage]

Tex will need protected. He's played 10 games. that's the cut off.

Nope. 10 games is the cutoff for burning a year off his ELC. He burned a year (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, could even be beneficial for CBJ).

11 games is the cutoff for expansion draft eligibility. Exact same thing as happened with Comtois earlier in the season.

 

[Nanabijou]

Nope. 10 games is the cutoff for burning a year off his ELC. He burned a year (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, could even be beneficial for CBJ).

11 games is the cutoff for expansion draft eligibility. Exact same thing as happened with Comtois earlier in the season.

I hope you are right as that's good news.

 

[EspenK]

Unless the Jackets add a couple of highly skilled players protecting Tex is not an issue imo.
Cam-PLD-Andy-Bjork are 4 sure protectees. Duchene if he re-signs is 5. If Tex develops as expected he is 6. Jenner or Dzingel would be exposed. Foligno's deal is done and unless he is given a NMC in his next deal (which would be dumb) he should be exposed also.

My guess is we lose a D with Jones-Zach-Gav my 3 to protect.

 

[Long Live Lyle]

Nope. 10 games is the cutoff for burning a year off his ELC. He burned a year (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, could even be beneficial for CBJ).

11 games is the cutoff for expansion draft eligibility. Exact same thing as happened with Comtois earlier in the season.

Do you have a link to that? All I’m seeing is “first and second year players” are protected. I assumed that that’s based off your contract? I don’t know why they’d be different numbers of games. He’d be considered a third-year player from an ELC/RFA standpoint but only a second-year from expansion standpoint?

 

[Long Live Lyle]

Unless the Jackets add a couple of highly skilled players protecting Tex is not an issue imo.
Cam-PLD-Andy-Bjork are 4 sure protectees. Duchene if he re-signs is 5. If Tex develops as expected he is 6. Jenner or Dzingel would be exposed. Foligno's deal is done and unless he is given a NMC in his next deal (which would be dumb) he should be exposed also.

My guess is we lose a D with Jones-Zach-Gav my 3 to protect.

Hypothetically, if you didn’t have to protect Tex and aren’t able to re-sign Duchene, and didn’t play Gavrikov you could have protected those 4 plus 4 D (Z, Jones, Murray and Nuti), while keeping Tex and Gavrikov.

Ultimately, my guess (obviously if the roster stays the same, which it won’t) is we protect 6F, Jones, Z and one of Murray, Gav, and Nuti, and lose whichever one of the other two we don’t protect that Seattle wants more.

 

[Nordique]

For the sake of clarity, you realize that was a 4-1 right?

different goal, i'm referring to the game winning goal in game 5. The most clear threat for Gavrikov was Pasta on the back post from my vantage point, yet he drove in near post to tie up Bergeron who didn't really have a clear lane to receive a pass.

Again, I think he's going to be a very good addition to this team. My #1 beef with Torts was inserting him into round 2 of the NHL playoffs without a single NHL game under his belt. I'm really shocked Torts did that tbh, and I wonder if there wasn't pressure from upstairs on him. I don't think it changed the outcome of the series, but it may have cost us game 5.

 

[majormajor]

After all the Gavrikov and Texier humdrum I still think our most likely outcome in expansion is to lose our 4th best D-man. We'll have whole threads agonizing about it between now and then, yet that outcome will stay the same.

And at this point I don't know if Gavrikov will set himself apart from all the other second pair D we have. He's good but doesn't seem to have dynamic qualities, at least not yet.

Ultimately, my guess (obviously if the roster stays the same, which it won’t) is we protect 6F, Jones, Z and one of Murray, Gav, and Nuti, and lose whichever one of the other two we don’t protect that Seattle wants more.

Isn't it 7F-3D or 4F- 4D? I think those are the only two options.

 

[majormajor]

different goal, i'm referring to the game winning goal in game 5. The most clear threat for Gavrikov was Pasta on the back post from my vantage point, yet he drove in near post to tie up Bergeron who didn't really have a clear lane to receive a pass.

Again, I think he's going to be a very good addition to this team. My #1 beef with Torts was inserting him into round 2 of the NHL playoffs without a single NHL game under his belt. I'm really shocked Torts did that tbh, and I wonder if there wasn't pressure from upstairs on him. I don't think it changed the outcome of the series, but it may have cost us game 5.

Gavrikov was in a no-win situation on that play. He was clearly one of our best 6 D that could play, Torts should have put him in sooner.

 

[ViD]

The new Fedor Tyutin

 

[NotWendell]

It's two games. We really know NOTHING about Gavrikov's NHL career.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

It's two games. We really know NOTHING about Gavrikov's NHL career.

No. But he looked pretty good while being thrown directly into the mix. I have high hopes for him.

 

[Madifer]

Gavrikov was in a no-win situation on that play. He was clearly one of our best 6 D that could play, Torts should have put him in sooner.

Torts did the right thing imo. He only put him on the ice when things stopped going well with the old core.

 

[ViD]

Filatov had a hat trick in his fourth game, I believe

But let us hope