HFBoards

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

Making a Mockery of a Mock

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-19-2007, 11:20 AM
  #1
blueshead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 160
vCash: 500
Making a Mockery of a Mock

I don't know how many are paying attention to the mock drafts going on but Kimzey is running the table on one...He's just added Brandon Sutter to our first selection of Alexander Cherepanov, with only the disposal of one of surplue dman (Jackman).... and the mock is still in the first round and he still has a pic left on the board...I think he needs to pass the link on to Jarmo....

Link http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=368609

blueshead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 01:07 PM
  #2
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
If that's Backman instead of Jackman, I'd be happy.

CuSa_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 01:21 PM
  #3
DrVanntastic
Registered User
 
DrVanntastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wentzville, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,873
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuSa_1 View Post
If that's Backman instead of Jackman, I'd be happy.
I concur wholeheartedly.

DrVanntastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 01:28 PM
  #4
2ForRoughing*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 541
vCash: 500
By trading Jackman he moved our best dman last year.

2ForRoughing* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 02:16 PM
  #5
TrustInJarmo*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueshead View Post
I don't know how many are paying attention to the mock drafts going on but Kimzey is running the table on one...He's just added Brandon Sutter to our first selection of Alexander Cherepanov, with only the disposal of one of surplue dman (Jackman).... and the mock is still in the first round and he still has a pic left on the board...I think he needs to pass the link on to Jarmo....

Link http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=368609
Why are you so happy that he traded our best defensemen this year and a 25 year old that could be our future captain??

I agree, if it was Backman, I would be fine with it. But trading Jackman makes no sense.

TrustInJarmo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 02:52 PM
  #6
2ForRoughing*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 541
vCash: 500
well in reality nothing like this will come close to transpiring. No NHL team would make that many trades on draft day. This isn't NHL2007. But then again it is a MOCK draft.

2ForRoughing* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 02:53 PM
  #7
execwrite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peekskill, NY
Posts: 3,480
vCash: 500
Jackman goes nowhere.

execwrite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 03:35 PM
  #8
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
I'm curious how much of picking Sutter was "he was the BPA" (hopefully all of it) and how much of it was, "he's a Sutter, it's good PR" (hopefully none of it).

__________________
No promises this time.
Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 04:06 PM
  #9
blueshead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrustInJarmo View Post
Why are you so happy that he traded our best defensemen this year and a 25 year old that could be our future captain??

I agree, if it was Backman, I would be fine with it. But trading Jackman makes no sense.

You have to trade value to get value. I have to admit, I obviously don't have the same opinion of Jackman as you all do, sure he is good, he's 25 but no where near untouchable. He's a 3/4 defensemen in my mind, injury prone and we have significant depth. To get a guy like Cherepanov I would make that deal again and again...and I hope Jarmo would too...call me crazy.

Given the current situation I would say one or the other of Backman or Jackman are gone before the season starts...and a lot will depend on what is available on draft day...and the demands Jackman has in contract talks.

blueshead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 04:35 PM
  #10
2ForRoughing*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 541
vCash: 500
So we trade a proven commodity in Jackman (tough as nails, proven leader, very good defenseman, future captain) for a moody Russian who might never come over? yeah, great idea. Just what a team with a lousy history of getting it's Russians over needs. Brilliant.

2ForRoughing* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 04:39 PM
  #11
TrustInJarmo*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueshead View Post
You have to trade value to get value. I have to admit, I obviously don't have the same opinion of Jackman as you all do, sure he is good, he's 25 but no where near untouchable. He's a 3/4 defensemen in my mind, injury prone and we have significant depth. To get a guy like Cherepanov I would make that deal again and again...and I hope Jarmo would too...call me crazy.

Given the current situation I would say one or the other of Backman or Jackman are gone before the season starts...and a lot will depend on what is available on draft day...and the demands Jackman has in contract talks.
I disagree about injury prone. The biggest question mark with Jackman was his shoulder (that was questioned again by Bertuzzi a few years ago) that dates back to over 2003 and 2004. But outside of only the 3 games he missed in Oct 2005 (Almost 2 years ago...he has been fine with his shoulder).

He had only missed 10 games this year due to a knee injury. And in 2005-2006 missed 16 games due to a fractured jaw. (Not like these are sprained pinky fingers).

And if you are looking for a defensemen that won't get these types of injuries and not go into the boards and not challenge anyone very physically...than I guess Christian Backman is your woman that will play 82 games of injury free hockey.

But I will take Jackman and his injuries. Especially Since his shoulder has held up the test of time fine for almost 3 years now.

TrustInJarmo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 04:57 PM
  #12
2ForRoughing*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 541
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrustInJarmo View Post
I disagree about injury prone. The biggest question mark with Jackman was his shoulder (that was questioned again by Bertuzzi a few years ago) that dates back to over 2003 and 2004. But outside of only the 3 games he missed in Oct 2005 (Almost 2 years ago...he has been fine with his shoulder).

He had only missed 10 games this year due to a knee injury. And in 2005-2006 missed 16 games due to a fractured jaw. (Not like these are sprained pinky fingers).

And if you are looking for a defensemen that won't get these types of injuries and not go into the boards and not challenge anyone very physically...than I guess Christian Backman is your woman that will play 82 games of injury free hockey.

But I will take Jackman and his injuries. Especially Since his shoulder has held up the test of time fine for almost 3 years now.
Don't be hating on Backman. He's a solid defenseman. Not every good dman has to be a physical presence. Not that I'm making comparisons but just look at Lidstrom.

2ForRoughing* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 05:00 PM
  #13
TrustInJarmo*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ForRoughing View Post
Don't be hating on Backman. He's a solid defenseman. Not every good dman has to be a physical presence. Not that I'm making comparisons but just look at Lidstrom.
If Backman was anywhere close to Lidstrom...we wouldn't be having this discussion.

His stock will never get any higher than it is now...Trade him!

TrustInJarmo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 06:28 PM
  #14
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
I'm inclined to give Backman a chance to step up in '07-08, with the warning that if he doesn't step up this year he won't be getting $3.4 million in '08-09 from us. This will be his 5th NHL season, and if he's going to "get it" we'll know this upcoming year. If he doesn't step up in '07-08, chances are he never will on any kind of a consistent basis.

Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 06:42 PM
  #15
TrustInJarmo*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues View Post
I'm inclined to give Backman a chance to step up in '07-08, with the warning that if he doesn't step up this year he won't be getting $3.4 million in '08-09 from us. This will be his 5th NHL season, and if he's going to "get it" we'll know this upcoming year. If he doesn't step up in '07-08, chances are he never will on any kind of a consistent basis.
My concern is that if we trade him this time next year (that means he isn't living up to his potential)...and what can we get as much for him than as we can now? Also, who is going to take a guy not performing up to par and making 3.4 million the next time he steps out on the ice??

Why not do it now,when you can get good value for him AND you don't have to pay him 2.2 million next year and that is 2.2 million more that can go to a Chris Drury.

TrustInJarmo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 06:54 PM
  #16
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
His cap hit is $2.3 million. Just for kicks I ran numbers to see what he'd count toward the cap if he slacked off this season and we bought him out after '07-08:

'08-09: $33,333
'09-10: $1,133,333

I can't explain why, but I think Backman steps up this year and has that breakthrough year we've been waiting for. If I'm wrong, I'll come back and admit it ... and push for buying him out if we can't find a taker.

Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 08:20 PM
  #17
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,623
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues View Post
I'm curious how much of picking Sutter was "he was the BPA" (hopefully all of it) and how much of it was, "he's a Sutter, it's good PR" (hopefully none of it).

Drafting Sutter was ALL BPA. I was planning to take Nick Petrecki or Alex Plante with the 13th pick; but I just couldn't pass up Sutter(I thought for sure that Carolina would take him at #11 to eventually replace Rod the Bod). Players with his size, skill, hockey sense, intangibles and Pedigree are EXTREMELY rare so for me it was a no brainer.

Edit: I'm starting to get the feeling that Sutter will be our choice at #9 if we don't trade up to grab JVR. I don't have anything truely "solid" to base this on; just a little "reading between the lines" from what Jarmo has been saying recently.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2007, 08:32 PM
  #18
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,623
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrustInJarmo View Post
Why are you so happy that he traded our best defensemen this year and a 25 year old that could be our future captain??

I agree, if it was Backman, I would be fine with it. But trading Jackman makes no sense.
1) Is our defense significantly worse after this trade?
We still have Brewer, McKee, Backman, Salvador, EJ, Woywitka, Polak and Walker for next year; so IMO it's not a "crippling" trade.

I like Jax as much as anybody else here; but he is NOT untouchable at this point. He may not be "surplus" but if the right deal came along he would absolutely be considered available(and "the right deal" isn't nearly as high as you think). I admit that I wanted to move Backman instead(the Washington GM wouldn't go for it); but I am comfortable with the trade I made. We will still have an extremely good Defensive unit next year even without Jax.

2) If I had to take ANY trade back; it would be the deal I made to move up to 13(I gave up the 25, 27 and 39 picks for the 13 pick and got back the #69 pick I had moved in the Jackman deal). I was a bit iffy on whether to make that trade; but I went ahead with it because it is just a Mock.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2007, 02:14 AM
  #19
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
I only wish that there not be trades in mock drafts. Just a 2-cents preference. That makes it less fun for the participants but also more realistic. I am really interested to see as many scenarios play out where we have the 9th pick and the 8 in front of us take who they think is their BPA rather than trade their picks. There is a good chance there will be a real tough decision at 9, and I'm curious to see that dry run more than the fun fan trades. It's not so important I'd start my own mock though.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2007, 03:33 AM
  #20
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines
I only wish that there not be trades in mock drafts. Just a 2-cents preference. That makes it less fun for the participants but also more realistic. I am really interested to see as many scenarios play out where we have the 9th pick and the 8 in front of us take who they think is their BPA rather than trade their picks. There is a good chance there will be a real tough decision at 9, and I'm curious to see that dry run more than the fun fan trades. It's not so important I'd start my own mock though.
In the mock draft I'm running, there are only pick-for-pick trades allowed, which makes it a little more realistic...

I don't plan on trading any of the Blues' picks in this mock, just to see what could be available at those selections.

With the 9th pick, I took Logan Couture from Ottawa (OHL), whom I think was the BPA at that point. I'd be tickled pink if he became a Blue in June.

In Cup's mock draft, I was able to get James van Riemsdyk, but the Blues had the seventh pick in that draft, and unless the Blues can trade up, there's no way van Riemsdyk will be a Blue after June 24th.

BTW, I think kimzey's doing a good job in the mock he's in.

P_B


Prussian_Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2007, 09:13 AM
  #21
2ForRoughing*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 541
vCash: 500
might as well have traded all the picks, Kimzey, for as much of a departure from reality as your mock was. What's the point of a mock where nothing even close to it will occur? Seems like even more of a waste of time than usual.


Last edited by 2ForRoughing*: 04-20-2007 at 10:04 AM. Reason: poorly chosen ending to the post as originally written.
2ForRoughing* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2007, 10:47 AM
  #22
blueshead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian_Blue View Post
...With the 9th pick, I took Logan Couture from Ottawa (OHL), whom I think was the BPA at that point. I'd be tickled pink if he became a Blue in June...

If we stay with the 9th pick I would be more than satisfied with picking Couture, as a matter of fact I would see that as the best case scenario...JVR would be beyond expectations...

blueshead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2007, 10:58 AM
  #23
blueshead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ForRoughing View Post
might as well have traded all the picks, Kimzey, for as much of a departure from reality as your mock was. What's the point of a mock where nothing even close to it will occur? Seems like even more of a waste of time than usual.
If there is a movement of a top eight pick this year you can bet that a roster player will be involved.

And as far as the reality of the Kimzey trade I would say it is the most realistic trade I've seen on the mock boards yet. Nobody is going to trade a high pick without lessening the risk associated with the uncertainty of draft prospects. And Washington has said it is interested in hearing offers for its pick and given the state of its defense the trade makes sense, unlike most mock trades.

blueshead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2007, 11:03 AM
  #24
TrustInJarmo*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
1) Is our defense significantly worse after this trade?
We still have Brewer, McKee, Backman, Salvador, EJ, Woywitka, Polak and Walker for next year; so IMO it's not a "crippling" trade.

I like Jax as much as anybody else here; but he is NOT untouchable at this point. He may not be "surplus" but if the right deal came along he would absolutely be considered available(and "the right deal" isn't nearly as high as you think). I admit that I wanted to move Backman instead(the Washington GM wouldn't go for it); but I am comfortable with the trade I made. We will still have an extremely good Defensive unit next year even without Jax.

2) If I had to take ANY trade back; it would be the deal I made to move up to 13(I gave up the 25, 27 and 39 picks for the 13 pick and got back the #69 pick I had moved in the Jackman deal). I was a bit iffy on whether to make that trade; but I went ahead with it because it is just a Mock.
Hmm, lets see...You traded a guy that was a +20 and leading the team in that category. Backman is suppose to be our "offensive defensmen", but yet Jackman had 9 more points than Backman (yes, Jax played 9 more games). But Backman hasn't lived up to the bill of our next offensive defensemen. And Jackman has done much better this year with his outlet passes. So much for Jackman "Not" being a very good defensemen in the "New" NHL, like so many thought.

"an extremely good defense"??? We have a defense that could be "good" down the road. But by no means is it solid. Woywitka, Johnson, Backman, and Polak still have a lot to prove in their youth.

It's amazing, how you and others have so much faith in this defense already. And that you would have no problem trading Jackman and putting a Brewer Salvador and or Walker into Jackman's spot to fill that void, considering none of these players are even close to the Defensemen Jackman has been for us.

And to answer your question. YES, I believe, our defense is significantly worse after this trade you made.

TrustInJarmo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2007, 01:19 PM
  #25
Checker*
 
Checker*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prussian_Blue View Post
In the mock draft I'm running, there are only pick-for-pick trades allowed, which makes it a little more realistic...

I don't plan on trading any of the Blues' picks in this mock, just to see what could be available at those selections.

With the 9th pick, I took Logan Couture from Ottawa (OHL), whom I think was the BPA at that point. I'd be tickled pink if he became a Blue in June.

In Cup's mock draft, I was able to get James van Riemsdyk, but the Blues had the seventh pick in that draft, and unless the Blues can trade up, there's no way van Riemsdyk will be a Blue after June 24th.

BTW, I think kimzey's doing a good job in the mock he's in.

P_B

After today's game I'm sold. Trade up and get JVR. He put on a clutch performance when it mattered most. I was teetering on the edge of the bandwagon of JVR and this finished swaying me.

Checker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 11:23 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.