HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   St. Louis Blues (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=32)
-   -   EJ (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=371348)

Gman7191 04-17-2007 09:56 PM

EJ
 
Im under the impression that EJ will most likely be put with either Jacman or McKee in his first season. After EJ has past the stage of getting used to the NHL and is a steady player on o-fence and d-fence. Should the Blues try and draft (or trade for) someone just as young to compliment EJ?

dao256 04-17-2007 10:33 PM

Hopefully not our first, but either our second or third pick in the first round will be used on a great 2 way dman to compliment EJ. Theres plenty ava.

sandbox 04-18-2007 01:02 AM

Is he even going to sign this year?

CuSa_1 04-18-2007 01:51 AM

i don't think he will, but who knows

Checker* 04-18-2007 11:55 AM

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...son/index.html

Here's an areicle on EJ, with cameo by Jay Barriball. I'm still not sold on him signing this year either, and am still puzzled why a player as gifted as Johnson is so worried about being "under the spotlight." He needs to realize that is where the great ones thrive.

funktasticblues93 04-18-2007 01:39 PM

Yeah that article doesn't sound like he's worried about coming to the nhl, just he's worried being in real life, which all 18 year olds are worried about that. People do need to understand he's young. If someone comes to you and tells you at 18 they have a good paying job for you, but you'll have to move thousands of miles away and be away from family and friends you're going to sit and think about it for awhile.

kimzey59 04-18-2007 01:49 PM

As much sense as it makes to put EJ with McKee or Jax for the "mentorship" aspect; I'd actually perfer it if EJ spent his 1st season on a pairing with Backman.

For all the talk of EJ's offensive potential, what people tend to forget is that EJ is primarily a shut-down defensive D man. IMO it would be better for EJ if he were put on the ice with an offensive player so he can concentrate on getting his defensive game to NHL level(pretty much the same thing we did with Jax only on a smaller level). Once the D game is solidified, the offense will come. Since Backman is the only real "offensive" D man we have right now it makes more sense IMO to put the two together.

WesternCollegeHockey 04-18-2007 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandbox (Post 8973241)
Is he even going to sign this year?

I think he'll be a Blue very soon.

Carl Racki 04-18-2007 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WesternCollegeHockey (Post 8978234)
I think he'll be a Blue very soon.

Says a guy with a screen-name that I would like to trust...

SIU LAW 04-18-2007 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WesternCollegeHockey (Post 8978234)
I think he'll be a Blue very soon.

99.9% chance you are right on the money. An announcement may be coming between now and Saturday about his signing.

Trouble 04-18-2007 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kimzey59 (Post 8978145)
Since Backman is the only real "offensive" D man we have right now it makes more sense IMO to put the two together.

I really do not see Backman as an "offensive" d man. To me his greatest strength is his positional play and using his size in the defensive zone. He thinks defense first and offense second. As evident by his +13 this year. His passing at times can be erractic especially out of our own zone and like many Blues defenseman struggles to get his shots on net from the point. I think the max potential he could reach would be a Mattias Ohlund type defender, which I think is fantastic (If only he had his shot). To label him as a offensive minded d man is a misnomer to me.

To me Backman is a "defensive" d man with the potential to put up 25-30 pts in a season while playing some really solid D. The Blues really need a PP QB on the point and I am hoping EJ can fill that void. I agree with you though Kimzey, with our current crop of defenders Backman probably has the best offensive skillset.

2ForRoughing* 04-18-2007 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trouble (Post 8979416)
I really do not see Backman as an "offensive" d man. To me his greatest strength is his positional play and using his size in the defensive zone. He thinks defense first and offense second. As evident by his +13 this year. His passing at times can be erractic especially out of our own zone and like many Blues defenseman struggles to get his shots on net from the point. I think the max potential he could reach would be a Mattias Ohlund type defender, which I think is fantastic (If only he had his shot). To label him as a offensive minded d man is a misnomer to me.

To me Backman is a "defensive" d man with the potential to put up 25-30 pts in a season while playing some really solid D. The Blues really need a PP QB on the point and I am hoping EJ can fill that void. I agree with you though Kimzey, with our current crop of defenders Backman probably has the best offensive skillset.

I think this is a really solid analysis of Backman and I agree with it. Backman doesn't have the high end offensive or defensive skills but is rather good at a number of areas with no one great, obvious skill like a wicked shot and great wheels. He's a smart player and I trust him to not make a lot of mistakes in his own zone. He's our most competent defensive dman simply because he moves the puck better than a guy like Jackman, who by the way had a great 2nd half last year and really made me rethink my belief that he's not fit for the "new NHL" - which I've noticed is slowly morphing into the "old NHL."

StLooFrenchy 04-18-2007 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trouble (Post 8979416)
I really do not see Backman as an "offensive" d man. To me his greatest strength is his positional play and using his size in the defensive zone. He thinks defense first and offense second. As evident by his +13 this year. His passing at times can be erractic especially out of our own zone and like many Blues defenseman struggles to get his shots on net from the point. I think the max potential he could reach would be a Mattias Ohlund type defender, which I think is fantastic (If only he had his shot). To label him as a offensive minded d man is a misnomer to me.

To me Backman is a "defensive" d man with the potential to put up 25-30 pts in a season while playing some really solid D. The Blues really need a PP QB on the point and I am hoping EJ can fill that void. I agree with you though Kimzey, with our current crop of defenders Backman probably has the best offensive skillset.

I agree. Bax is a containment type defensive player, in the mold of Kjell Samuellson if you will. He won't bowl anyone over, but he usually ties his man up with quiet efficiency. As far as his outlets, there has to be a recipient in position to recieve a pass; puck support, something that the Blues were really lacking all season long (under both coaches). But back to the post, I personally would like to see EJ with McKee, he has been in the battles, would be great mentor, and could cover up EJ's rookie mistakes (yes, he will make some). We have no legit PP blueliner, a need that should be addressed, or expect the PP woes to continue.

2ForRoughing* 04-18-2007 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StLooFrenchy (Post 8979938)
I agree. Bax is a containment type defensive player, in the mold of Kjell Samuellson if you will. He won't bowl anyone over, but he usually ties his man up with quiet efficiency. As far as his outlets, there has to be a recipient in position to recieve a pass; puck support, something that the Blues were really lacking all season long (under both coaches). But back to the post, I personally would like to see EJ with McKee, he has been in the battles, would be great mentor, and could cover up EJ's rookie mistakes (yes, he will make some). We have no legit PP blueliner, a need that should be addressed, or expect the PP woes to continue.

Puck support under Kitch was truly terrible. It improved under Murray considerably.

Stealth JD 04-18-2007 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2ForRoughing (Post 8979897)
He's our most competent defensive dman simply because he moves the puck better than a guy like Jackman, who by the way had a great 2nd half last year and really made me rethink my belief that he's not fit for the "new NHL" - which I've noticed is slowly morphing into the "old NHL."

I still think Jax is a better defensive D-man than Bax, not only because of the physicality but because of his passing. Jackman might be the most underrated passer on the Blues team, and he's definitely more consistent with his outlet passes than Backman, who seems to panic with the puck if he gets pressured. Jackmans 24 assists in 70 games blows away the more 'offensively gifted' Backman's 11 assists in 61 games....and I'd be willing to guess that Backman has more turnovers than Jax as well. Jackman did come on strong in the 2nd half of the season, and was by far the most effective D-man on the team as the season drew to a close. Offensively, defensively, 2-way, whatever.....I think Jackman proved to be more valuable than Brewer, Backman or any other D-man for that matter last year.

2ForRoughing* 04-18-2007 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackmans Domain (Post 8980200)
I still think Jax is a better defensive D-man than Bax, not only because of the physicality but because of his passing. Jackman might be the most underrated passer on the Blues team, and he's definitely more consistent with his outlet passes than Backman, who seems to panic with the puck if he gets pressured. Jackmans 24 assists in 70 games blows away the more 'offensively gifted' Backman's 11 assists in 61 games....and I'd be willing to guess that Backman has more turnovers than Jax as well. Jackman did come on strong in the 2nd half of the season, and was by far the most effective D-man on the team as the season drew to a close. Offensively, defensively, 2-way, whatever.....I think Jackman proved to be more valuable than Brewer, Backman or any other D-man for that matter last year.

I'd agree. Jackman had a great year and played a much better all around game than Backman.

StLooFrenchy 04-18-2007 04:42 PM

No doubt, as the team sits right now, Jax is the stud D-man.

CuSa_1 04-19-2007 12:46 AM

Maybe Backman is dealt at the draft?

DrVanntastic 04-19-2007 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuSa_1 (Post 8989093)
Maybe Backman is dealt at the draft?

That is absolutely what I expect to happen. Here's hoping we trade him for a soon to be UFA (read: Drury or Briere) so we can attempt to sign them long term, a mid-round pick, and a conditional second should soon to be UFA player (read: Drury or Briere) not sign.

PocketNines 04-19-2007 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noteman (Post 8991332)
That is absolutely what I expect to happen. Here's hoping we trade him for a soon to be UFA (read: Drury or Briere) so we can attempt to sign them long term, a mid-round pick, and a conditional second should soon to be UFA player (read: Drury or Briere) not sign.

Backman and a fourth for a pick at the end of the second round? No thanks. We can get significantly better value than that.

The value of having the chance to appeal to Drury for an extra week or two is negligible - if he's open to signing in St. Louis, he's open and we will still have Backman as a potential trade asset in another deal. Remember, he is under no obligation to even answer the phone when the Blues call for those last two weeks of June when he will probably be on vacation anyway. Why would he arbitrarily give up the right to hear up to 30 offers? Some sense that he owes the Blues something? Because they threw away a D-man?

CuSa_1 04-19-2007 01:02 PM

Also agree, not a good trade. We can sign one of them AND deal Backman for much more than you have listed.

DrVanntastic 04-19-2007 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PocketNines (Post 8991899)
Backman and a fourth for a pick at the end of the second round? No thanks. We can get significantly better value than that.

The value of having the chance to appeal to Drury for an extra week or two is negligible - if he's open to signing in St. Louis, he's open and we will still have Backman as a potential trade asset in another deal. Remember, he is under no obligation to even answer the phone when the Blues call for those last two weeks of June when he will probably be on vacation anyway. Why would he arbitrarily give up the right to hear up to 30 offers? Some sense that he owes the Blues something? Because they threw away a D-man?

I think you need to go back and re-read my post. Let me make it more concise and to the point for you.

Blues get:
Drury or Briere
Fourth Rnd Pick 2007
Conditional 2nd round pick in 2008 depending on if Drury signs or not

Sabres get:
Backman

Nowhere in my post did I say that the Blues were giving up any picks. If you think Backman is worth more than a second and a fourth, then I would like some of the drugs you're on. :shakehead

coolhandluke2410 04-19-2007 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noteman (Post 8993727)
I think you need to go back and re-read my post. Let me make it more concise and to the point for you.

Blues get:
Drury or Briere
Fourth Rnd Pick 2007
Conditional 2nd round pick in 2008 depending on if Drury signs or not

Sabres get:
Backman

Nowhere in my post did I say that the Blues were giving up any picks. If you think Backman is worth more than a second and a fourth, then I would like some of the drugs you're on. :shakehead

I guess I'm on drugs then.. because I certainly think Backman is worth more than a 2nd and 4th

DrVanntastic 04-19-2007 01:32 PM

I should be more specific because he's probably worth a second and an upper level prospect. I still stand by my decision, because two weeks is more than enough time to woo Drury or Briere to wearing a Bluenote next season. Maybe we could talk Buffalo into a sign and trade? :dunno:

PocketNines 04-19-2007 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noteman (Post 8993727)
I think you need to go back and re-read my post. Let me make it more concise and to the point for you.

Blues get:
Drury or Briere
Fourth Rnd Pick 2007
Conditional 2nd round pick in 2008 depending on if Drury signs or not

Sabres get:
Backman

Nowhere in my post did I say that the Blues were giving up any picks. If you think Backman is worth more than a second and a fourth, then I would like some of the drugs you're on. :shakehead

You are right – I misread your post. My mistake.

However, your proposal is still a very, very, very bad idea. Talk about drugs. I wouldn’t trade Backman for a 56-60 and a 116-120 (which is where Buffalo will have a 2d and a 4th. Backman has developed into a top-4 Dman with some residual upside. He is basically a 7.5A. At worst he is a 7.0A. Would you trade a 7A or 7.5A for the 55-60 and the 115-120? I would never, ever do that. When you grab a guy around 25 overall, having that guy turn into a 7-7.5A is something you will take every day of the week and twice on Sunday. That is what happened with Backman.

Moreover, you are making a massive assumption that it would be this deal that would be the difference maker in having D/B sign a long-term deal with us. That is, he would go elsewhere in UFA but for the Blues technically owning his rights in the final two weeks of June. You have not explained why a guy (either one) who is looking at a huge bidding war for his services would arbitrarily limit his field to one team. These guys don’t get UFA all that often in their careers, so the default assumption has to be that there is NO reason for that player to artificially limit himself. The dollars will drive the deal. There will be a bidding war.

If he would be willing to sign a contract in UFA then all you’ve done is trade Backman for a pick no higher than 116 which would be a total unmitigated disaster in asset management.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:33 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.