HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Notices

Trade Jackman and Grachev

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-22-2011, 11:08 PM
  #1
STLhockey91*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 280
vCash: 500
Trade Jackman and Grachev

What type of caliber player do you think we could get if we traded these 2 for someone? I don't care if Jackman wants to be a lifelong blue. He is a defensive liability and has no offensive upside what so ever. Nor is he standing up for our players as I watched (at the game) Russell and Oshie take a beating. Grachev is useless too.

STLhockey91* is offline  
Old
11-22-2011, 11:11 PM
  #2
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,797
vCash: 50
http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stati...24+25+26+27+28

Yeah lets trade Jackman, he is just awful.

bleedblue1223 is offline  
Old
11-22-2011, 11:37 PM
  #3
Kloparren
Hth
 
Kloparren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,449
vCash: 500
Grachev honestly looks pretty good to me. Be patient too, 6'4 guy I think and he's like 21? When he gets to his mid-20s and possibly becomes a 20-30 goals scorer and you get rid of him for nothing...it'd be wasteful. If he's on a 2 way and can be sent down to the AHL once Perron gets back then I'd probably see how he does there first, that's the next step for him I think.

Kloparren is offline  
Old
11-22-2011, 11:48 PM
  #4
SteenMachine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Fenton, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 4,142
vCash: 500
Clearly we'd get terrible players or 5th rounders back because they're so worthless... why even ask a rhetorical question if you're just scapegoating.

SteenMachine is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 12:27 AM
  #5
Mike Liut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 5,419
vCash: 50
Their trade value isn't high. Grachev is a guy you hold on to and see what he becomes. Huge potential.

Mike Liut is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 01:27 AM
  #6
kittensmasher
moe.ron
 
kittensmasher's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 524
vCash: 500
I've been pretty impressed with Grachev's ability to fulfill a bottom-six role. When we first made the trade, the admittedly little that I knew about him seemed to suggest a top-six-or-bust kind of guy. I don't know why he's a part of this discussion.

And Jackman...even as frustrating as his turnovers were tonight, he'd played pretty damn well up to this point.

kittensmasher is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 02:47 AM
  #7
Use the Schwartz*
****in' eh
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,514
vCash: 500
omg can we get rid of these Blues forum goof balls already?

Use the Schwartz* is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 07:03 AM
  #8
Parrish
Registered User
 
Parrish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Decatur; Indiana
Country: United States
Posts: 1,481
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Parrish
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stati...24+25+26+27+28

Yeah lets trade Jackman, he is just awful.
First of all stats can be misleading and +/- can be even more so.

For example Roman Polak's last on that list. I bet you cannot find one Blues fan from anywhere outside Oregon that believes Polak is bad defensively.

Grachev and Jackman would not be terrible guys to trade if there was a market and the return was good.

Jackman is better then most give him credit for and I certainly would not call him a defesive liability, but let's be honest he has not played with the fire he used to. He has taken on more of a leadership role. I don't think it matters though. Bottom line is our defense is not tough enough to handle the other 29 teams offense without him. He plays with grit. Unless we got some one really tough in return I just don't see it working.

Grachev is overated on these boards because of his size. With that said why on earth would we trade him already? I assume he could get anything more then a 4th he would have been traded to that team and not here for a 4th. It's way to early to give up on a guy who has had very little time to do anything productive on this roster. A rookie season in the NHL is a tough adjustment to most. Throw in the fact he's russian and this team has had 2 different head coaches already I'd say he is doing fine.

Since we have been winning how bout we just don't trade anyone right now?

Parrish is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 07:31 AM
  #9
Spektre
Registered User
 
Spektre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 264
vCash: 50
What NHL team in their right mind would want Jackman? At least Grachev has potential.

All the media ever says about Jackman is how he's a leader, and he blocks shots. Whooptie freakin doo. Who doesn't block shots in today's NHL?

The NHL game passed Jackman by when you could no longer mug offensive players and you actually had to skate. When they took wrestling/holding out of the NHL Jackman became next to useless. It's been obvious for years that Jackman is the weakest link on the Blues D.

Somehow management doesn't seem to get it though and is paying him $3,625,000. Brilliant. There's no other team that would take on that salary for a used up D who can't skate and never could.

It's laughable how such a big deal is being made about Jackman's mistakes last night. He makes bonehead plays all the time in our own zone. If he has the puck and has time, lookout something bad is going to happen. It doesn't always result in goals like last night but it's usually a turnover and extended play by the opposition in our zone.

Hopefully Armstrong is paying attention and this is the last year we have to endure watching the highest paid shot blocker of all time.

Spektre is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 08:09 AM
  #10
The Grouch
Enraged
 
The Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre View Post
What NHL team in their right mind would want Jackman? At least Grachev has potential.

All the media ever says about Jackman is how he's a leader, and he blocks shots. Whooptie freakin doo. Who doesn't block shots in today's NHL?

The NHL game passed Jackman by when you could no longer mug offensive players and you actually had to skate. When they took wrestling/holding out of the NHL Jackman became next to useless. It's been obvious for years that Jackman is the weakest link on the Blues D.

Somehow management doesn't seem to get it though and is paying him $3,625,000. Brilliant. There's no other team that would take on that salary for a used up D who can't skate and never could.

It's laughable how such a big deal is being made about Jackman's mistakes last night. He makes bonehead plays all the time in our own zone. If he has the puck and has time, lookout something bad is going to happen. It doesn't always result in goals like last night but it's usually a turnover and extended play by the opposition in our zone.

One thing I've noticed about the Jackman haters(and Blues haters in general) is that they have a short fuse, and also display irrational judgement. Kevin Shattenkirk has committed more turnovers than Jackman and has also been on the ice for more even strength goals against while playing against weaker competition, however I bet I wouldn't be able to find one of your posts that rips into Shattenkirk. Jackman did have a bad game last night, but lets not kid ourselves, you hate Jackman because you want to hate Jackman.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre View Post
Hopefully Armstrong is paying attention and this is the last year we have to endure watching the highest paid shot blocker of all time.

I guess you're not old enough to remember Jay Mckee.

The Grouch is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 08:31 AM
  #11
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 19,797
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parrish View Post
First of all stats can be misleading and +/- can be even more so.

For example Roman Polak's last on that list. I bet you cannot find one Blues fan from anywhere outside Oregon that believes Polak is bad defensively.

Grachev and Jackman would not be terrible guys to trade if there was a market and the return was good.

Jackman is better then most give him credit for and I certainly would not call him a defesive liability, but let's be honest he has not played with the fire he used to. He has taken on more of a leadership role. I don't think it matters though. Bottom line is our defense is not tough enough to handle the other 29 teams offense without him. He plays with grit. Unless we got some one really tough in return I just don't see it working.

Grachev is overated on these boards because of his size. With that said why on earth would we trade him already? I assume he could get anything more then a 4th he would have been traded to that team and not here for a 4th. It's way to early to give up on a guy who has had very little time to do anything productive on this roster. A rookie season in the NHL is a tough adjustment to most. Throw in the fact he's russian and this team has had 2 different head coaches already I'd say he is doing fine.

Since we have been winning how bout we just don't trade anyone right now?
You are right about Polak, but at the same time you can't deny that Jackman has been arguably our best defenseman on the defensive side of the ice. When I looked up the stat, I was expecting him to be middle of the pack, but Jackman was tops with the lowest goals against while he is on the ice per 60 minutes.

bleedblue1223 is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 09:11 AM
  #12
Stealth JD
Drexel's dead!!!
 
Stealth JD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Safari Motor Motel
Country: United States
Posts: 6,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyman1707 View Post
What type of caliber player do you think we could get if we traded these 2 for someone? I don't care if Jackman wants to be a lifelong blue. He is a defensive liability and has no offensive upside what so ever. Nor is he standing up for our players as I watched (at the game) Russell and Oshie take a beating. Grachev is useless too.
There is a place for this type of non-sense. This forum isn't it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronnie Coleman View Post
omg can we get rid of these Blues forum goof balls already?
Agreed. Please take out the trash, mods.

Stealth JD is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 09:19 AM
  #13
Spektre
Registered User
 
Spektre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 264
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Grouch View Post
One thing I've noticed about the Jackman haters(and Blues haters in general) is that they have a short fuse, and also display irrational judgement. Kevin Shattenkirk has committed more turnovers than Jackman and has also been on the ice for more even strength goals against while playing against weaker competition, however I bet I wouldn't be able to find one of your posts that rips into Shattenkirk. Jackman did have a bad game last night, but lets not kid ourselves, you hate Jackman because you want to hate Jackman.





I guess you're not old enough to remember Jay Mckee.
I remember Stephan Quintal too.

I don't hate Jackman. He seems like a good guy. The fact that the game passed his style by 7-8 years ago doesn't make me anything. It just makes him a unsuitable D in today's NHL.

Spektre is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 09:24 AM
  #14
SirPaste
Registered User
 
SirPaste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: STL
Posts: 6,639
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronnie Coleman View Post
omg can we get rid of these Blues forum goof balls already?
This, its pretty annoying.

SirPaste is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 10:33 AM
  #15
The Grouch
Enraged
 
The Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre View Post
It just makes him a unsuitable D in today's NHL.

Grossly unsuitable!

The Grouch is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 10:48 AM
  #16
STLhockey91*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Grouch View Post
One thing I've noticed about the Jackman haters(and Blues haters in general) is that they have a short fuse, and also display irrational judgement. Kevin Shattenkirk has committed more turnovers than Jackman and has also been on the ice for more even strength goals against while playing against weaker competition, however I bet I wouldn't be able to find one of your posts that rips into Shattenkirk. Jackman did have a bad game last night, but lets not kid ourselves, you hate Jackman because you want to hate Jackman.





I guess you're not old enough to remember Jay Mckee.
No, its not irrational. No one *****es at Shattenkirk because he is amazing offensively. He almost has twice as many points as pietrangelo. Jackman does absolutely nothing offensively. Also, Shattenkirk doesn't make UNNECESSARY turnovers like Jackman did last night. I was at the game and saw two easy plays 9 out of 10 other defensemen would have made, but he tried to be fancy and cost us the game on not one but two occasions.

STLhockey91* is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 11:22 AM
  #17
The Grouch
Enraged
 
The Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyman1707 View Post
No, its not irrational.

The following are examples of irrational hyperbole, I often see this type of "logic" from a fringe group of posters who frequent several of the Blues forums. I'll let you figure out why it is you don't deem it irrational...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre
What NHL team in their right mind would want Jackman?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre
Who doesn't block shots in today's NHL?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre
When they took wrestling/holding out of the NHL Jackman became next to useless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre
It's been obvious for years that Jackman is the weakest link on the Blues D.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre
There's no other team that would take on that salary for a used up D who can't skate and never could.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre
He makes bonehead plays all the time in our own zone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre
If he has the puck and has time, lookout something bad is going to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spektre
It doesn't always result in goals like last night but it's usually a turnover and extended play by the opposition in our zone.



Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyman1707 View Post
Also, Shattenkirk doesn't make UNNECESSARY turnovers like Jackman did last night.

Unnecessary? By that logic all turnovers are unnecessary. Every player always has an option available to them that will not result in a turnover. Fortunately that isn't the way the game is played, the excitement level would be a lot lower. Also, the game moves a lot faster for the ones making the decisions than it does for the ones who criticize those decisions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyman1707 View Post
I was at the game and saw two easy plays 9 out of 10 other defensemen would have made, but he tried to be fancy and cost us the game on not one but two occasions.

Another example of irrational hyperbole. "Two easy plays 9 out of 10 defensemen would have made"... Really? 9 out of 10, did you take a survey?

The truth is a lot of defensemen would have been flustered in that situation. Any decision that Jackman made in that position that didn't have a positive outcome would have still been derided by guys like you.

The Grouch is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 11:45 AM
  #18
BluesRiver
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 125
vCash: 500
And pointing out a hyperbolic argumentation style is indicative of an argumentation style of a certain subset of people in our society. It is a lame attempt to discredit someone. This is very typical of a certain subset of people in our society.

BluesRiver is offline  
Old
11-23-2011, 11:52 AM
  #19
BluesRiver
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 125
vCash: 500
The interesting thing, Groucho, is that you use the same hyperbolic argumentation style that you deride. Again, this is exactly the type of argumentation style that a certain subset utilize; pointing out things about themselves to discredit others.

Oh the irony!!

BluesRiver is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:12 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.